Nautilus Spatial Principle: share your views on how to use it

[henriquemaia]

Hi,

I'm starting this thread because I really like the spatial principle.

Conceptually, I think that it is very clever, but its every day application can be rather confusing. I would like to make a call to all spatial users (and others too) to share their views on how to take the best of this principle.

Example:

How to organize windows in the desktop? Do you think it must follow some kind of order or you just scatter them randomly across the screen?
How to deal with the huge amount of windows one can come across using this?
Do you think this is just a nuts idea without real usefulness?
etc.Thanks all for reading this.

[Wolki]

Conceptually, I think that it is very clever, but its every day application can be rather confusing. I would like to make a call to all spatial users (and others too) to share their views on how to take the best of this principle.


Well, It took me some time to get used to it, too... Good thread idea, thanks.


How to organize windows in the desktop? Do you think it must follow some kind of order or you just scatter them randomly across the screen?

More or less randomly, since I have a lot folders; some patterns emerge though - Stuff I use daily is more heavily customized (wrt size. position and content) than stuff I'll only need a few times. If I often need to drag something from one folder to another, I move them so they overlap as little as possible. Folders with few things in them I'll make smaller, folders with many things I'll make larger and/or reduce the icon size.


How to deal with the huge amount of windows one can come across using this?

1) Middle clicking/shift-enter. No need to keep windows open that I don't need anymore. Once you get into the habit spatial becomes a lot easier. Double-middle-clicking is an abomination though (ime), spatial really likes single-click mode. Or go ubuntu-spatial, which switches left and middle buttons.
(note that middle click for close-behind works on files. too!)
2) Flatten unecessary hierarchies. I love hierarchies, but many people go overboard with them. It'll not only make spatial easier, It'll also make it easier to find stuff. Don't forget nautilus' semi-find-as-you-type functionality. Emblems can be used to distinguish important things from the rest.
3) Workspaces. They generally make life better, and rock with spatial. Keyboard shortcuts for moving to/switching to workspaces are nice.
4) Use your desktop. With the default panel layout, the desktop is not only the biggest, but also the by far easiest to reach window. Home-is-desktop is one nifty trick, and will help lots in keeping your home clean.
5) Learn to live with having slightly more windows. Alt-tab and find-as-you-type window switchers are great for this. Note that drag&drop will not raise a background window you start to drag from if you hold a modifier key (like shift or ctrl), great for drag&drop between partially overlapping windows.
6) Remember thatyou can still use nautilus as browser if you really need it (I practically never do) and that you can directly access random folders by pressing crtl+l (will autocomplete) or by starting nautilus in a terminal (nautilus /path/to/directory; or nautilus . if you're already there)


Do you think this is just a nuts idea without real usefulness?

No, I cry when I can't do spatial. It rocks.

[fuscia]

what is it?

[ComplexNumber]

what is it? its basically where nautilus 'knows' where it is within the file system both in terms of location and position and other attributes (if that makes sense). therefore, if you are in a directory with lots of other directories, it knows where it last was before opening up any particular directory.....in terms of location and position and size etc.
thats my way of explaining and visualising it anyway. not too sure if i've confused things.

i love the spatial aspect of nautilus and find it extremely useful.

[Lovechild]

I really like Spatial, I don't think much about how I use it - it just seems to naturally conform to my filebrowsing habits.

[fuscia]

its basically where nautilus 'knows' where it is within the file system both in terms of location and position and other attributes (if that makes sense). therefore, if you are in a directory with lots of other directories, it knows where it last was before opening up any particular directory.....in terms of location and position and size etc.
thats my way of explaining and visualising it anyway. not too sure if i've confused things.

do you mean that daisy chain of how it got there looking thing at the top?

[henriquemaia]

what is it?

Spatial file manager (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_file_manager)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_file_manager#column-one), search (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_file_manager#searchInput)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0e/Nautilus-spatial.png/180px-Nautilus-spatial.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Nautilus-spatial.png) http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Nautilus-spatial.png)
Nautilus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nautilus_file_manager) is a file manager with a spatial mode. Each of these windows is an open folder.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/9f/Mac_OS_9_screenshot_2.jpg/180px-Mac_OS_9_screenshot_2.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mac_OS_9_screenshot_2.jpg) http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mac_OS_9_screenshot_2.jpg)
The Macintosh Finder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_Finder) was the first spatial file manager.


In computing, a spatial file manager is a file manager (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_manager) that uses a spatial metaphor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphor) to represent files (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Files) and folders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folders) as if they are real physical objects.



other links:
http://www.bytebot.net/geekdocs/spatial-nautilus.html
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/finder.ars/1
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=7548

[ComplexNumber]

do you mean that daisy chain of how it got there looking thing at the top? well, it keeps a 'memory' of where its at and where its been. does that clarify?

btw when browsing using nautilus, i open up each directory in the same window....but the spatial aspect still applies.

[helpme]

btw when browsing using nautilus, i open up each directory in the same window....but the spatial aspect still applies.
Well, then you are not using spatial nautilus.

[fuscia]

thanks, henrique. that cleared it up (i think).

it seems to me that tabbed browsing is preferable to opening up new windows for each file. but, it is nice, either way, to be able to jump back and forth anywhere in the chain.

[ComplexNumber]

Well, then you are not using spatial nautilus.
yes i am.

[helpme]

The base requirements of a spatial file manager are:

1. Each folder is represented by a single window.
2. Each window is unambiguously and irrevocably tied to a particular folder.
3. Stability: files, folders, and windows go where you move them, stay where you put them ("preserve their spatial state"), and retain all their other "physical" characteristics (like size, shape, color and location).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_file_manager

[henriquemaia]

Quote:
The base requirements of a spatial file manager are:

1. Each folder is represented by a single window.
2. Each window is unambiguously and irrevocably tied to a particular folder.
3. Stability: files, folders, and windows go where you move them, stay where you put them ("preserve their spatial state"), and retain all their other "physical" characteristics (like size, shape, color and location).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_file_manager


Yes, this is very important, otherwise it will break the analogy with real objects.

[ComplexNumber]

helpme
its still the same basic underlying principle that i've already stated in post 4 and 8 whether directories open in a new window or the same window.
if you don't think so, then thats tough luck. we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[helpme]

helpme
its still the same basic underlying principle that i've already stated in post 4 and 8 whether directories open in a new window or the same window.
if you don't think so, then thats tough luck. we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Then we'll have to agree to disagree here.
What you discribed was simply the back button working as it should (that it, actually taking you back to where you came from), not a spatial file manager.

[Jucato]

If you open a folder in the same window, but will be able to open the same folder in another instance of the file manager (different window), wouldn't that break the spatial file management?

I think Spatial File Management is good because it's really logical (you can only open one folder once, and it remembers its last state), if you really want to stick to the desktop metaphor used in computers. However, don't you think it's a bit inefficient, especially if you start opening one window/tab per folder? (Come to think of it, if you really stick to the desktop metaphor, you're also going to have to throw away some multitasking aspects, right?)

The only benefit I see in this system is what Complex Number has experienced, that the file manager remembers the settings/location/properties for each folder. That I would love to have. :D

@helpme: I think Complex Number means that what he described follow the #3 principle of Spatial File Management.

[henriquemaia]

helpme
its still the same basic underlying principle that i've already stated in post 4 and 8 whether directories open in a new window or the same window.
if you don't think so, then thats tough luck. we'll just have to agree to disagree.

If the windows open on the same window, there is no spatiality. It's an object converting into another, not an object leading to other object.

Is like you to have a ball in your hands that converts to a cube.

Spatial is to open the ball and find the cube inside it, and you still have the ball.

[ComplexNumber]

If the windows open on the same window, there is no spatiality. how did you come to that conclusion? whichever way you're browsing, the manifestation of the spatial browsing is still the same whether you're opening into a new window or a different one. it 'remembers' the attributes and has a sense of where it is within the file system. the only difference between what you're referring to and what i's refering to is that one opens up into a new window and the other uses the same window. like i say, the underlying principle is the same....that of keeping a history of the attributes no matter where it is within the filesystem.

[Jucato]

how did you come to that conclusion? whichever way you're browsing, the manifestation of the spatial browsing is still the same whether you're opening into a new window or a different one. it 'remembers' the attributes and has a sense of where it is within the file system.

Maybe because you are only focusing on one aspect of spatial file management, the part that it "remembers" the attributes, while probably neglecting other aspects, such as the analogy to "desktop" and to "space".

From what I understand, the spatial file management is basically an analogy to what happens on a real-life physical desktop table. The logic is that when you open a physical folder on a physical desktop, you don't/can't have another instance of the exact same physical folder open or closed. It's just illogical and physically impossible. The thing is, when you open another physical folder that's located within the previous physical folder, you have another opened object. Now, what you have are three physical objects: the desktop/table, the first folder (open), and the second folder (also open). That's why in a strict spatial file management system, each folder should open its own window for consistency.

However, what you do is you force the file manager to open the folder in the same window as the parent folder. In real-life situation, you would be opening the 2nd folder, and the 1st folder suddenly vanishes, only to reappear when you close the 2nd folder. Again, illogical and physically impossible.

That's how I have come to understand spatial file management. That's how I have also come to understand how they arrived to that conclusion.

[ComplexNumber]

Maybe because you are only focusing on one aspect of spatial file management, the part that it "remembers" the attributes, while probably neglecting other aspects, such as the analogy to "desktop" and to "space".

From what I understand, the spatial file management is basically an analogy to what happens on a real-life physical desktop table. The logic is that when you open a physical folder on a physical desktop, you don't/can't have another instance of the exact same physical folder open or closed. It's just illogical and physically impossible. The thing is, when you open another physical folder that's located within the previous physical folder, you have another opened object. Now, what you have are three physical objects: the desktop/table, the first folder (open), and the second folder (also open). That's why in a strict spatial file management system, each folder should open its own window for consistency.

However, what you do is you force the file manager to open the folder in the same window as the parent folder. In real-life situation, you would be opening the 2nd folder, and the 1st folder suddenly vanishes, only to reappear when you close the 2nd folder. Again, illogical and physically impossible.

That's how I have come to understand spatial file management. That's how I have also come to understand how they arrived to that conclusion. thats what it means to me.
here's a further example to explain what i mean. start at /usr/share/themes/bluecurve. selct to list as "list" rather than "icons". open /usr/share/themes/bluecurve/gtk-2.0. select list as "icons". open /usr/share/themes/bluecurve/gtk-2.0/icons (it doesn't have this directory, but i'm just using it for this example). then go "up". notice that the files/directories are listed as "icons". go "up" again. notice that they're now listed as a "list". its remembered the attributes. other attributes may be the position of where it is within the directory (ie it will still show the bluecurve directory part way down), etc. the only attribute that it won't remember is folder size because of the fact that the same window is being used, so it has no need to. the 'spatiality' is still the same. therefore, its still spatial browsing in my book.

[mcduck]

I love spatial nautilus :)

I have different views, window sizes, icon sizes and background colors for different kinds of directories. For example all image dirs have large previews on a black background, music dir is in list mode, network directories have blue background, music dir is a tall window in list mode, work files are in directories with dull grey background and so on..

Spatial mode also requires uses less screen space when there's only one window (or couple of small windows) open. That's why I first selected it as my default.

But I also often use the browser mode, I have a launcher for it in my panel as it's more efficient when I need to browse around my file system and with spatial mode I'd have 100 windows open.. ;)

[egon spengler]

I gave it a go but I found it really not suited to the way I have my files arranged and I wasn't prepared to rearrange everything to fit to it.

I do like the concept of each directory representing a real physical object though

[Jucato]

thats what it means to me.
here's a further example to explain what i mean. start at /usr/share/themes/bluecurve. selct to list as "list" rather than "icons". open /usr/share/themes/bluecurve/gtk-2.0. select list as "icons". open /usr/share/themes/bluecurve/gtk-2.0/icons (it doesn't have this directory, but i'm just using it for this example). then go "up". notice that the files/directories are listed as "icons". go "up" again. notice that they're now listed as a "list". its remembered the attributes. other attributes may be the position of where it is within the directory (ie it will still show the bluecurve directory part way down), etc. the only attribute that it won't remember is folder size because of the fact that the same window is being used, so it has no need to. the 'spatiality' is still the same. therefore, its still spatial browsing in my book.

Ok, here I go again. As I've said, you keep on focusing only on one aspect, that the file manager remembers attributes. But you keep on neglecting the other, probably more important, aspects of the spatial file management concept, the concept of "space". The consistency of attributes are just a by-product of the concept of space.

Taking your example, here's how it would go:
1. I have a table (destkop).
2. On that table, there's Folder A (/usr/share/themes/bluecurve). I open it and re-arrange the contents alphabetically.
3. One of the contents of Folder A is Folder B (/usr/share/themes/bluecurve/gtk-2.0). I take it from folder A, open that and re-arrange things chronologically.
Here we pause: Folder A is still open and still exists. It's may or may not be covered by Folder B but is still there, existing, and can be accessed anytime without closing Folder B. Also, it doesn't disturb the alphabetical arrangement of the other contents of Folder A (that's your favorite part right?). But also, you can't have another Folder B open (just physically impossible).
4. One of the contents of Folder B is Folder C (pen /usr/share/themes/bluecurve/gtk-2.0/icons). Again, I take that and open it, rearranging the contents according to width (just an example...).
Pause again: Both Folder A and Folder B still exist and are open, whether or not they are covered by Folder C. Anytime, I can pull out either Folder A or Folder B and access them, without closing any of the other 2 folders. Also, the arrangement of the other contents of either folders are untouched (again, your favorite feature). And again, you can only have Folder C open at a time.

As you can see, the "remember the attributes/settings" feature is only a part of the whole spatial file management concept (which just emphasizes on the desktop metaphor, btw). Just because attributes/settings are saved per folder doesn't automatically mean it's a spatial file management system. MS Windows Explorer has that feature, too, but, as the wiki states, it is not a spatial file manager.

[henriquemaia]

[...]

As you can see, the "remember the attributes/settings" feature is only a part of the whole spatial file management concept (which just emphasizes on the desktop metaphor, btw). Just because attributes/settings are saved per folder doesn't automatically mean it's a spatial file management system. MS Windows Explorer has that feature, too, but, as the wiki states, it is not a spatial file manager.

Exactly.

[3rdalbum]

I use the classic Mac OS on my other computer, yet it just felt strange to use Spatial mode in Ubuntu. Maybe it's because it feels so Windowsy?

[Jucato]

I have a question for you "spatial users" (Konqi doesn't have that feature :D):

Is spatial file management practical and still applicable?

Actually, this related to a more basic question: is the desktop metaphor still practical and applicable. True the desktop metaphor has given us concepts like "desktop" and "folders" to work with, and it will be very confusing to make a drastic change to it, but is it really advantageous to stick to the metaphor/concept in the way that the spatial file management does?

AFAIK, the spatial file management is based on the analogy of space, by imitating what is done/possible in physical space. In the wiki, I think it says that it is less confusing. But is it really so? Is the mind incapable of adapting new ways of thinking and is only limited by what is physically possible?

Just wondering really.

(And if you're worried about "remembering folder settings/attributes", it's a feature than can be implemented, without using a spatial file manager, right?)

[aysiu]

AFAIK, the spatial file management is based on the analogy of space, by imitating what is done/possible in physical space. In the wiki, I think it says that it is less confusing. But is it really so? Is the mind incapable of adapting new ways of thinking and is only limited by what is physically possible? I can't speak for others (if spatial works for you, good on you), but I don't need a physical space metaphor for everything I do on a computer.

I have smart playlists and drag-and-drop of songs and keyboard shortcuts for AmaroK.

I don't need a virtual remote control whose buttons I need to click with my mouse. I don't need virtual CDs I have to keep ejecting and changing every time I want to listen to a song from a different album.

Likewise, I don't want to have to travel a virtual road to go to a different webpage--middle-clicking a link to have it open in a new tab is fine for me.

Spatial file browsing annoys me (again, I'm speaking only for me--if it works for you, then great) because I often am trying to get to a destination that's four folders deep. All I care about is the file inside of that fourth folder. I don't need three other folders open and cluttering my desktop just because I want one file.

[ComplexNumber]

Ok, here I go again. As I've said, you keep on focusing only on one aspect, that the file manager remembers attributes. But you keep on neglecting the other, probably more important, aspects of the spatial file management concept, the concept of "space". The consistency of attributes are just a by-product of the concept of space.

Taking your example, here's how it would go:
1. I have a table (destkop).
2. On that table, there's Folder A (/usr/share/themes/bluecurve). I open it and re-arrange the contents alphabetically.
3. One of the contents of Folder A is Folder B (/usr/share/themes/bluecurve/gtk-2.0). I take it from folder A, open that and re-arrange things chronologically.
Here we pause: Folder A is still open and still exists. It's may or may not be covered by Folder B but is still there, existing, and can be accessed anytime without closing Folder B. Also, it doesn't disturb the alphabetical arrangement of the other contents of Folder A (that's your favorite part right?). But also, you can't have another Folder B open (just physically impossible).
4. One of the contents of Folder B is Folder C (pen /usr/share/themes/bluecurve/gtk-2.0/icons). Again, I take that and open it, rearranging the contents according to width (just an example...).
Pause again: Both Folder A and Folder B still exist and are open, whether or not they are covered by Folder C. Anytime, I can pull out either Folder A or Folder B and access them, without closing any of the other 2 folders. Also, the arrangement of the other contents of either folders are untouched (again, your favorite feature). And again, you can only have Folder C open at a time.

As you can see, the "remember the attributes/settings" feature is only a part of the whole spatial file management concept (which just emphasizes on the desktop metaphor, btw). Just because attributes/settings are saved per folder doesn't automatically mean it's a spatial file management system. MS Windows Explorer has that feature, too, but, as the wiki states, it is not a spatial file manager. the physical state of the folders is still maintained when browsing using the same folder. just because you can't physically see them AT ANY TIME(one can easily bookmark each 'state') doesn't mean that they cease to exist (just access the bookmark). you seem to think that thats what i'm saying. they are still there. the only difference between what you're referring to and i'm referring to is the method of browsing. think about and you will see.

[helpme]

I have a question for you "spatial users" (Konqi doesn't have that feature :D):

Is spatial file management practical and still applicable?


All I can say is that it works for me.
I remember, I really hated it when nautilus went spatial, but now I really like to use the spatial interface. Especially now with the new list view, that let's you easily expand folder without openenig a new window (maybe not 100% true to the metaphor, but works for me).

For me it's a quick and clean way to access the folders and files in my home dir. I think where it breaks down is if you really want to dig deep into the file system, but then again, one can always use nautilus in browser mode or simply the command line for this.

[henriquemaia]

I can't speak for others (if spatial works for you, good on you), but I don't need a physical space metaphor for everything I do on a computer.

I have smart playlists and drag-and-drop of songs and keyboard shortcuts for AmaroK.

I don't need a virtual remote control whose buttons I need to click with my mouse. I don't need virtual CDs I have to keep ejecting and changing every time I want to listen to a song from a different album.

Likewise, I don't want to have to travel a virtual road to go to a different webpage--middle-clicking a link to have it open in a new tab is fine for me.

Spatial file browsing annoys me (again, I'm speaking only for me--if it works for you, then great) because I often am trying to get to a destination that's four folders deep. All I care about is the file inside of that fourth folder. I don't need three other folders open and cluttering my desktop just because I want one file.
I understand perfectly what you mean. That last paragraph points out a true limitation on the spatial principle. The reverse can also be true when you are dragging and dropping a lot, where spatial can be more intuitive.

You can bypass this by pressing ctrl+2 on the parent folder, and that will make nautilus arrange things in a list manner, easily finding your way to the file four folders deep (even twenty). You can reverse that by pressing ctrl+1. A nice compromise.

Or, if the file is accessed a lot, a shortcut to a very accessible place, like the panel, but that you already know.

[Jucato]

the physical state of the folders is still maintained when browsing using the same folder. just because you can't physically see them AT ANY TIME(one can easily bookmark each 'state') doesn't mean that they cease to exist (just access the bookmark). you seem to think that thats what i'm saying. they are still there. the only difference between what you're referring to and i'm referring to are the same thing.

That's not what I think you are saying. What I'm saying is that the feature you love so much is not the be-all and end-all of spatial file management, and that spatial file management, strictly speaking, will open up a window for each folder. Of course the folder state will still exist even if you open another folder in the same window. The point is, that is not spatial file management. Neither is opening a new folder in a new window tantamount to spatial file management. All, and I mean all, the basic concepts of spatial file management must be present in order for it to be considered spatial file management.


think about and you will see.
Do you presume that I don't?

-----------------------------------------------

@henriquemaia:

when you are dragging and dropping a lot, where spatial can be more intuitive.
But what if you drag/drop a lot, but you also have deep levels of sub-directories? Of course, there could be a directory tree side bar or something, but wouldn't that go against spatial principles? You would practically have multiple instances of the same folder open: one for the folder window, and one for each directory tree.

I don't know, I just find that the spatial analogy and desktop metaphor are quite inadequate today and probably goes against advancements in technology like multitasking, filesystem journalling, even linking (how do you reconcile spatial analogy and linking to a folder 5 directories deep, without opening the parent folders?).

Oh well, I'm blabbering again. Sorry that it has gone off-topic a bit. :p

[aysiu]

A couple of interesting links:
http://www.bytebot.net/geekdocs/spatial-nautilus.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_file_manager

[bored2k]

Do you think this is just a nuts idea without real usefulness?
For spatial nautilus to ever become useful I'd have to have to need to cover up pr0n/et_al really quickly. Spatial is just nuts.

[henriquemaia]

For spatial nautilus to ever become useful I'd have to have to need to cover up pr0n/et_al really quickly. Spatial is just nuts.

ctrl+d?

[bored2k]

ctrl+d?
No, that's the bookmark link.

[henriquemaia]

No, that's the bookmark link.

hehe. Here is show the desktop. My bad. What is the default?

[bored2k]

A couple of interesting links:
http://www.bytebot.net/geekdocs/spatial-nautilus.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_file_manager

Update.
Fifteen minutes later I expressed how useless and insane spatial mode was, but after reading the links on aysiu's post, I finally understood the advantages/reason of its existence, for I am giving it another shot (the wiki's explanation is wicked good). I don't promise I'll stick to it, but I'll try liking it.

Edit: By the way, Spatial makes a lot more sense to me with the single-click behaviour on.

[aysiu]

hehe. Here is show the desktop. My bad. What is the default? Control-Alt-D.

[bored2k]

hehe. Here is show the desktop. My bad. What is the default?
Ctrl+Alt+D.

Show desktop is fishy, so I usually tab to another window ;). You can't trick anyone into believing you're staring at a blank desktop..

[henriquemaia]

Control-Alt-D.

Thanks a lot! Here it is that too, but I have it so mechanicaly memorized that I forgot the alt. Thanks anyway.

[henriquemaia]

Ctrl+Alt+D.

Show desktop is fishy, so I usually tab to another window ;). You can't trick anyone into believing you're staring at a blank desktop..

That's true. A «boss key» would be very helpful in some situations.

[aysiu]

Alt-Tab, then.

[henriquemaia]

Alt-Tab, then.

Alt-tab won't work if you have 3 or more windows (imagine 20). A better way is to have a shortcut to a virtual desktop that you keep with an application window opened for that purpose.

Back on topic:
One can get really a lot of windows opened in spatial, but one can also close them all quicly by right clicking on the taskbar (Always group windows option enabled) over the nautilus group and choose the close all option.

[bored2k]

Alt-tab won't work if you have 3 or more windows (imagine 20). A better way is to have a shortcut to a virtual desktop that you keep with an application window opened for that purpose.

Back on topic:
One can get really a lot of windows opened in spatial, but one can also close them all quicly by right clicking on the taskbar (Always group windows option enabled) over the nautilus group and choose the close all option.
Or using two marvelous shortcuts I just found out about: Shift+Left_Click and/or Shift+Backspace. Those two alone make spatial feel a whole lot better. Also, Shift+Ctrl+W does the job.

[bored2k]

Bummer, ****+click doesn't work with the one click behaviour.

[henriquemaia]

Or using two marvelous shortcuts I just found out about: Shift+Left_Click and/or Shift+Backspace. Those two alone make spatial feel a whole lot better. Also, Shift+Ctrl+W does the job.

Thanks. The shift+backspace is very useful. The shift+ctrl+w is for closing all, isn't it? Here is ctrl+w, but I think I'm getting the picture.

[bored2k]

Ctrl+Shift+W = Close all parent folders
Ctrl+Q = Close all folders
Ctrl+W = Close current window

[bored2k]

Whoooa... spatial's shortcuts rule!. Shift+Enter or Shift+Double_Click on a file opens the file AND ditches nautilus!

Do I hear a collective bye bye "browser mode"?

[henriquemaia]

Whoooa... spatial's shortcuts rule!. Shift+Enter or Shift+Double_Click on a file opens the file AND ditches nautilus!

Do I hear a collective bye bye "browser mode"?

Hey hey hey, this is getting even better than I could imagine! Thanks.

Middle click on a folder and you have the Ubuntu Spatial... it opens the new folder and closes the parent.

[Wolki]

Bummer, ****+click doesn't work with the one click behaviour.

Seems to work fine here. It definitely can be a little tricky with list mode though, since that won't allow you to rubberband the first file; there's a workaround with double right-click.

[henriquemaia]

Just trying to list out all the available shortcuts that make spatial file browsing so wonderful:

Ctrl+Shift+W ................ Close all parent folders
Ctrl+Q .......................... Close all folders
Ctrl+W ......................... Close current window
Shift+Backspace .......... Close current window, returning to parent
Alt+Up .......................... Open parent
Alt+Down ..................... Open selected file or folder
Up, Down, Left, Right ... Select/browse files or folders
Ctrl+2 ........................... Switch to list view
Ctrl+1 ........................... Switch to icon viewIs there is some nice shortcut missing, point out.

[nocturn]

Edit: By the way, Spatial makes a lot more sense to me with the single-click behaviour on.

I never got why Gnome default to double clicking anyway. It's so annoying.

That is the first change I make when I see a Gnome desktop.

[nocturn]

Ok, I switched spatial off very quickly after it got introduced (gave it a couple of days).

But this thread got me reconsidering it. I will revert back to spatial and try it for at least a month.

[henriquemaia]

Ok, I switched spatial off very quickly after it got introduced (gave it a couple of days).

But this thread got me reconsidering it. I will revert back to spatial and try it for at least a month.

One has to give it a try with some patience. A moment ago, I started nautilus as root where it is using browser mode and it looked so much less intuitive.

[henriquemaia]

Just trying to list out all the available shortcuts that make spatial file browsing so wonderful:
Ctrl+Shift+W ................ Close all parent folders
Ctrl+Q .......................... Close all folders
Ctrl+W ......................... Close current window
Shift+Backspace .......... Close current window, returning to parent
Alt+Up .......................... Open parent
Alt+Down ..................... Open selected file or folder
Up, Down, Left, Right ... Select/browse files or folders
Ctrl+2 ........................... Switch to list view
Ctrl+1 ........................... Switch to icon viewIs there is some nice shortcut missing, point out.

Another interesting one:

ctrl+shift+o ................................. browse folders in browser mode

Very practical, no?

[henriquemaia]

The updated list:

Ctrl+Shift+W ................ Close all parent folders
Ctrl+Q .......................... Close all folders
Ctrl+W ......................... Close current window
Shift+Backspace .......... Close current window, returning to parent
Alt+Up .......................... Open parent
Alt+Down ..................... Open selected file or folder
Up, Down, Left, Right ... Select/browse files or folders
Ctrl+2 ........................... Switch to list view
Ctrl+1 ........................... Switch to icon view
Ctrl+Shift+O ................. Browse folder in Browser Mode