Anyone else think nautilus is slow?

[bastiegast]

Something that always somehow frustrated me is that nautilus seems slow on file browsing compared to kde's konqueror and windows explorer.

Im a full time ubuntu gnome user now, but before I used KDE and file browsing was much faster there, when I double click a directory in gnome with lots of files in it it really takes seconds to load(using amd64 processor in combination with SATA hard disk](*,) :-k ). In windows or kde it just shows up instantly which is much more comfortable.

I always wondered if it was just me and it had something to do with my setup so im asking if anyone else noticed this or if its a common complaint.

[PatrickMay16]

I hear you. Nautilus is indeed slow, especially with folders full of images. I have a large image collection sorted into different folders, mostly like 100 images per folder. Nautilus always freezes up for 10 or so seconds when you enter one of these folders. And this is in no way an old or slow computer; it was built in june of 2005, and it has an AMD Athlon64 3000+ 1.8GHZ CPU.

[Kateikyoushi]

I concur nautilus is slow when I use it to browse my photo collection, you could try the view as list mode.
I prefer two pane file commanders, like mc and gnome commander's greasy fast speed compared to nautilus.

[ComplexNumber]

bastiegast
create a new account on your computer, then run nautilus. do you see how fast it now runs?
both nautilus and konqueror become slow after a while.

[fuscia]

i use thunar as i've never liked nautilus.

[bastiegast]

Might try some alternative file manager. I actually never thought of it. And after all, the command line is fine too, super fast :)

[prizrak]

Nautilus is pretty slow, I used to use gnome-commander as a replacement. I haven't had much need to open files through a manager lately though.

[argie]

I prefer thunar. It seems faster.

[EdThaSlayer]

I have also noticed this massive slow down. Well, you know you can edit the nautalius settings so that only the file tag comes up, not a image preview of every file...

[SonicSteve]

I just noticed this bug today after running ubuntu for a week. After rebooting it's back to normal. Not a fix and most definately a bug.

[chrx]

i browse folders with a lot of photos with gThumb. its faster.

[chaosgeisterchen]

Konqueror indeed becomes dead slow as time goes by..

[raublekick]

browsing from my home directory / laptop hard drive seems fine to me, but browsing from my USB hard drives is pretty slow sometimes, but not all the time.

[lapsey]

i love it when it crashes thanks to my smbfs mounted shares. said bug has been known about for years but they still won't do anything about it.

The only thing I 'need' it for is the ability to resize desktop icons.

[SonicSteve]

said bug has been known about for years but they still won't do anything about it.

Surely they must have tried to do something about this. This doesn't seem like an insignificant issue.
I like Ubuntu but this is not the kind of thing I want from an OS. This is kind of like the Windows 98 bug that caused you to have to reboot your system every few days because it would become increasingly unstable.
The bug seems to be in Nautilus and has to be fixed for Ubuntu to be taken seriously.

[bonzodog]

Try Thunar- it's fast and light, and does all file manager tricks.

[raublekick]

is it possible to completely replace Nautilus with Thunar?

[NNois]

The same here.
edgy+nautilus is very very slow
It takes 5min to copy a 300Mo file in thunar 20sec !!!!

[ComplexNumber]

in Linux Format in issue 86(page 39), nautilus was compared against konqueror for speed. these are the speed ratings:

time taken to rename a file
konqueror = 17, nautilus = 18

time taken to create a new folder
konqueror = 60, nautilus = 10

time taken to change view and reload all files
konqueror = 15, nautilus = 11

[PapaWiskas]

i use thunar as i've never liked nautilus.

AMEN...Thunar is way better!!!

[bionnaki]

how do you make thunar the default over nautilus?

here's a trick I read on these forums:

boot from a live cd and run

sudo e2fsck -fD /dev/hdXY

XY being the name of your harddrive (i.e. hda1)

more tips on speeding up ubuntu: http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=206022&highlight=arch

[MedivhX]

My Nautilus works just fine, but when there some more images in the folder it loads them a bit slower then it should.

[kerry_s]

Oh oh, is this the start of the thunar revolution, will everyone try to oust nautilus? LOL ;)

Thunar is alot better now, i've even decided to use it in fluxbox instead of my usall rox. I'm finding it alot easier and faster to setup than rox. I love the simple custom actions. I even use the xfce4-panel since it comes with thunar.

[kerry_s]

ignore

[ice60]

in Linux Format in issue 86(page 39), nautilus was compared against konqueror for speed. these are the speed ratings:

time taken to rename a file
konqueror = 17, nautilus = 18

time taken to create a new folder
konqueror = 60, nautilus = 10

time taken to change view and reload all files
konqueror = 15, nautilus = 11
i think those are the usablity tests, tested by a beginner.

i just created a new folder alot faster then 10 seconds. (however, for some reason the pressure must have got to me because i right-clicked an exisiting directory first lol)

[ComplexNumber]

i think those are the usablity tests, tested by a beginner.

i just created a new folder alot faster then 10 seconds. (however, for some reason the pressure must have got to me because i right-clicked an exisiting directory first lol)
by a beginner? :confused:. they were tested by the staff at Linux Format. i wouldn't exactly call them beginners by any stretch of the imagination. :-D.

[ice60]

by a beginner? :confused:. they were tested by the staff at Linux Format. i wouldn't exactly call them beginners by any stretch of the imagination. :-D.

so how do you explain taking 60 seconds to create a new folder in Konq then?

[ComplexNumber]

so how do you explain taking 60 seconds to create a new folder in Konq then?
either:
a) write in and ask them.
b) ask on their forum
c) buy the magazine and make your own judgement.

[ice60]

either:
a) write in and ask them.
b) ask on their forum
c) buy the magazine and make your own judgement.

i've got the magazine right here, i read the whole thing while i was on the train the other day.

i'm asking you.

[ComplexNumber]

i've got the magazine right here, i read the whole thing while i was on the train the other day.

i'm asking you.
so what is your judgement? and why on earth are you asking me?

[ice60]

forget about it, it's not important anyway :)

[jameso]

Another vote here for Thunar!

[Nonno Bassotto]

Are you sure that the measure unit is seconds?

[pmj]

Yes, Nautilus is unacceptably slow. Opening a folder with a few thousand images takes a LONG time, and during this time every other Nautilus window is frozen, including the desktop. I don't see how it's possible that the Nautilus developers use Nautilus for file management. If they did, it wouldn't suck this bad after this long time.

That along with some pretty annoying bugs, and even serious file name corrupting bugs, makes Nautilus probably my least liked programs in Gnome. I've tried Thunar, but it didn't seem much better.

[thisllub]

Thunar is much faster.
Konqueror has far more capabilities.

I don't use Gnome but if I did I wouldn't use Nautilus.