PDA

View Full Version : Ubuntu... organization and simplicity?



NoTiG
July 14th, 2005, 12:55 PM
I was looking at this: http://browserbookapp.sourceforge.net/topaz/ .... and i Really like it... it seems more elegant than having the applications menu and all...

but also i wanted to bring up an idea to see what you guys thought.... When you first install ubuntu you are pretty much left with no organization... no folder.... just the /home/user folder. Wouldnt it be harmless to have an empty file structure already in place ?

FOr instance... Microsoft uses My documents, my pictures , my music... But... as i was thinking about it , it occurred to me that all files on your computer get there by one of three methods... Downloads, Uploads, and User created files. For the most elegant solution, wouldnt it be to separate them, but also have a folder that showed all from each of these automatically ?

FOr instance... ALl files are either a document, a picture (jpg, png etc....) , audio (mp3, ogg etc.....) and video (mpeg, avi etc........), and programs

SO basically in the Downloads folder you have:

documents, pictures, audio, and video, programs

In uploads you have

documents, pictures, audio and video, programs

And user created you have

Documents, pictures, audio and video, programs

ANd another folder that shows ALL together and is automatically updated .

THen have the default programs configured to represent these... for instance the save feature in gimp could automatically point to the usercreated/pictures file. If you had a camera, when you uploaded the pictures, you could point them to upload/pictures.... or a scanning program for instance could point to upload documents or pictures. When you download porn it could automatically point to downloads/video and such.... etc.

Now I can easily do this myself for my own computer and preferences... and if someone doesnt like it they can easily change it... or modify it by adding folders or wahtever to suit their needs.. for instance in the audio they can add folders for ogg, mp3.. the different formats and stuff. ANyways what do you guys think ? Does anyone like this organization and think it might be helpful to help people stay organized? Criticisms welcome!

Kvark
July 14th, 2005, 01:13 PM
but also i wanted to bring up an idea to see what you guys thought.... When you first install ubuntu you are pretty much left with no organization... no folder.... just the /home/user folder. Wouldnt it be harmless to have an empty file structure already in place ?

FOr instance... Microsoft uses My documents, my pictures , my music... But... as i was thinking about it , it occurred to me that all files on your computer get there by one of three methods... Downloads, Uploads, and User created files. For the most elegant solution, wouldnt it be to separate them, but also have a folder that showed all from each of these automatically ?
I hate it when there is junk in my home folder from the start. Whatever you guess on what I want in my home folder. Your guess will be wrong and I will end up deleting your pre made folders and then repopulate home as I want it done.

The first thing I did when opening home for the first time was remove the Desktop folder. (I almost never see the desktop and thus have no files there, and thus need no folder for it.)

NoTiG
July 14th, 2005, 01:18 PM
How do you organize your files? DO you think there is a better way? or are you saying there should be no files at all and let the user create his own organization from the start?

Kvark
July 14th, 2005, 01:24 PM
How I organize my files wouldn't make sence to you since it is in swedish.

What I'm saying is that there is no one way that fits all purposes. What the "best way" is depends on how, for what and why you use the computer. As well as your previous experiences and habits.

And thus if you pre-populate home with a guess. The guess may be right for a portion of the users but it will be wrong for most users. Even worse, some users may keep your guess out of laziness even if it is wrong for the way they use the computer.



Worst of all, the Desktop folder comes back every time I delete it ](*,)

NoTiG
July 14th, 2005, 01:31 PM
How I organize my files wouldn't make sence to you since it is in swedish.

What I'm saying is that there is no one way that fits all purposes. What the "best way" is depends on how, for what and why you use the computer. As well as your previous experiences and habits.

And thus if you pre-populate home with a guess. The guess may be right for a portion of the users but it will be wrong for most users. Even worse, some users may keep your guess out of laziness even if it is wrong for the way they use the computer.


](*,)

So your saying that its impossible to have a file organization that suits the needs of the majority of users, and your also saying that its to inconvenient to make one because dragging the folders to the trash is to redundant?

I simply disagree :P

Your file organization is in swedish.. but your speaking english fine now. *doesnt understand his logic*

Kvark
July 14th, 2005, 02:09 PM
So your saying that its impossible to have a file organization that suits the needs of the majority of users, and your also saying that its to inconvenient to make one because dragging the folders to the trash is to redundant?

I simply disagree :P
Dragging the folders to trash or pushing "Ctrl+A, Del" is not hard. The real damage is done when a lazy user keeps your guess even if it is not optimized for his/her personal needs.


Your file organization is in swedish.. but your speaking english fine now. *doesnt understand his logic*
Ok, it may be hard for you to understand the logic in this but it is possible for people to speak more then one language. Most of my documents are in swedish, so my folder names are in swedish too. This forum is in english, so I use english to post here.

Adrenal
July 14th, 2005, 03:04 PM
While you do have a point, I'm gonna have to make the claim that, if I wanted Windows XP, I would boot into Windows XP.
Ubuntu, and indeed Linux, is renown for customization. While it may work for you, you can't expect others to move through the same size hole.
Instead, I think it is much more prudent to allow a user to devolope his own style, or to continue the one he is used to, then to 'force' one upon him.
However, the piece does have a point. At Christmas last year, I asked my cousin if he had adsl. He said 'All I know is I click on the blue 'e', and it goes'
After beating with a baseball bat(entirely different matter, he got me baseball cards. I mean, really, baseball cards) I began to relise something. People will happily download music, perhaps even movies, but they will not download programs. 'Installing stuff' is hard they say. 'Installing stuff is for nerds'. As such, most people use, and begin to enjoy, the stock environment.
Now to point (you thought I was off on some random tangent, didn't you?) Perhaps the best way is not one type of file system, but multiple. That when we first log into our Ubuntu systems after a fresh install, we get an install wizard(which can be disabled and uninstalled for those that dislike it, like I would) which asks questions. 'What are you using this for, how do u access, etc'. From this, it would extrapolate the data and formulate a filing system that stereotypically best suited the user.
In that sense, the user would not be confined to one way of doing things, but the computer would be tailored to the users needs and wants, on a literal case by case basis.
We could call it Wizaulus

NoTiG
July 14th, 2005, 03:31 PM
I think you guys are missing the point.... Was there a type of file i didnt list? then you can simply add it. Was there one there that you dont need? then you can simply remove it. The point was to separate them from user created, uploaded , and downloaded. Nobody is forcing you to move through a "same size hole" . FOr instance... user created progams would be largely unnecessary... unless your a programmer. And to think that no organization whatsoever is better than a barebones skeleton for a guide? I guess thats what microsoft found out when they spent millions of research into their desktop and decided to put a "my documents" folder in there? Now criticizing this... and saying that separating downloaded from user created from uploaded is not necessary and doesnt add to organization... now that might be possible... but telling me that its harmful to have a couple of preset folders ? I dont buy that...... Useless? possibly. Harmful? No... Copying windows? I dont see windows as being organized.....

NoTiG
July 14th, 2005, 03:43 PM
[QUOTE=Kvark]


Ok, it may be hard for you to understand the logic in this but it is possible for people to speak more then one language. Most of my documents are in swedish, so my folder names are in swedish too. This forum is in english, so I use english to post here.[/QUOTE


I think you missed my point. I perfectly understood that your files are in swedish. BUt your speaking perfect english now... so the reason why i dont understand your logic is because your being rude and purposefully acting like an ******.


ANyways... most people didnt care enough to reply, and those that did are against... so i guess it doesnt matter anyway.

*slips back into the void*

sonny
July 14th, 2005, 04:13 PM
Perhaps not a pre-configure folder tree... but the installer might ask you a few question to create the folder's you need. Example:

Do you want a music Library? Yes No --------> Yes
Then the installer crates the /home/user/Music folder

It can help to optimize the folder tree.

Do you have a windows NTFS (read only) partition? Yes No ---------> Yes
Then it creates /home/user/WindowsFiles (And writes to the fstab so it can be automounted at log in)
Perhaps it can display a folder tree so you can chose in wich folder you have your files.

There's many ways you can do that.

poofyhairguy
July 14th, 2005, 06:09 PM
Wouldnt it be harmless to have an empty file structure already in place ?

I would not harm. But as you found out....the kind of person that would use Linux does not usually like such hand holding.

NoTiG
July 14th, 2005, 06:15 PM
I would not harm. But as you found out....the kind of person that would use Linux does not usually like such hand holding.

I see your point. But that is the equivalent of saying that the applications , places and other menus should be empty on a new install... so that the user can fill them since "you couldnt possibly guess what applications they might want or how they would arrange it differently by using the menu editor" .

poofyhairguy
July 14th, 2005, 06:27 PM
But that is the equivalent of saying that the applications , places and other menus should be empty on a new install... so that the user can fill them since "you couldnt possibly guess what applications they might want or how they would arrange it differently by using the menu editor" .

You joke about that, but if you install many programs from the Universe they will have no Icon in the program menu, expecting a nerd to add this in themselves.

I'm not really against the idea. But I don't know how to get the devs onboard with it.

poptones
July 14th, 2005, 07:33 PM
Most "average users" I know don't use a single folder until they run out of space on their desktop! Adding all those folders just makes more work for the developers and more work for the users who want nothing more thna to be rid of them but have to fight with changing the defaults of every application on their system because they were configured for whatever the devloper thought was a logical file structure.

Kvark
July 14th, 2005, 07:44 PM
I see your point. But that is the equivalent of saying that the applications , places and other menus should be empty on a new install... so that the user can fill them since "you couldnt possibly guess what applications they might want or how they would arrange it differently by using the menu editor" .
Yes, definately, the menues should also be optimized for each user's individual needs.

The way windows does it is good. Add all programs to the menu but hide the ones that are rarely used. The result is a small menu where the user can find his/her favourite programs fast without searching through a lot of extra junk. This small menu is based on each user's personal habbits and not a one-size-fits-all.

But all programs, even rarely used ones, needs to be reachable from the menu. There is no situation more confusing then when you can't find the program/directory/setting you are looking for. Again, window's way of expanding to a large menu with everything in it is an easy way to find the rest of the programs.

PS. I'm sorry about that smartass comment earlier. It seemed like the only logical reply so I couln't resist. :-|

Adrenal
July 15th, 2005, 01:30 AM
I think you guys are missing the point.... Was there a type of file i didnt list? then you can simply add it. Was there one there that you dont need? then you can simply remove it. The point was to separate them from user created, uploaded , and downloaded. Nobody is forcing you to move through a "same size hole" . FOr instance... user created progams would be largely unnecessary... unless your a programmer. And to think that no organization whatsoever is better than a barebones skeleton for a guide? I guess thats what microsoft found out when they spent millions of research into their desktop and decided to put a "my documents" folder in there? Now criticizing this... and saying that separating downloaded from user created from uploaded is not necessary and doesnt add to organization... now that might be possible... but telling me that its harmful to have a couple of preset folders ? I dont buy that...... Useless? possibly. Harmful? No... Copying windows? I dont see windows as being organized.....
Microsoft spent millions of dollars to decide to add a 'My documents', 'my pictures' and 'my music'?
They got gyped

gil-galad
July 15th, 2005, 01:51 AM
Its not a bad idea. I use similiar folders myself. But as someone mentioned before, most people that use linux would rather add such folders themselves as they see fit.

Wolki
July 15th, 2005, 01:52 AM
Wouldnt it be harmless to have an empty file structure already in place ?

It would be harmless. That's why it is a Breezy release goal: http://udu.wiki.ubuntu.com/FileManagerImprovement




For BreezyBadger, we will decide on a number of folders included in /etc/skel, so users have a lovely set of work areas in their home folder by default. These will be shipped in a separate package which ubuntu-desktop depends on. The most important folders we will do immediately are "Desktop", "Documents" and "Templates". A number of other folders have been suggested, including "Music", "Videos" and the difficult choice between "Pictures", "Photos" and "Graphics".


You joke about that, but if you install many programs from the Universe they will have no Icon in the program menu, expecting a nerd to add this in themselves.

Yeah, that is annoying. However, having everything in the same menu makes them really large which ism't really better. You can enable the Debian Menu (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=32220) and have everything in there automatically; not a beautiful solution, but a working one.

[Edit] About the Topaz stuff... at first I was a bit disappointed, but after reading the whole page I'm really looking forward to it. I think i could really get used to this system.

Oh, and I knew that Gnome will get to the point where even with two panels there's no room for a task list :)

gil-galad
July 15th, 2005, 02:00 AM
The biggest problem with the windows "My Documents" folder is that it is basically the home folder. Everything gets tossed in there.

aysiu
July 15th, 2005, 02:32 AM
I don't agree with this suggestion at all.
Sure, you need some basic apps to get started, but I don't even go with the Ubuntu default apps most of the time. You do need some apps just for basic functions. I don't think it's too much to assume there has to be at least one web browser and Synaptic Package Manager. Most people who start in on Linux, though, have no idea what apps to pick, which is why it's great that Ubuntu picks them for you. No newbie is going to see the Rhythmbox Music Player and say, "Damn. No AmaroK? Where's my XMMS? Why do these choose such lousy defaults?"

However, plenty a new user can say, "Why do they assume I want to put my music here?" I'm not a Microsoft basher. I happen to like a lot of things Microsoft has implemented in Windows. The My Documents, My eBooks, My Music, etc. scheme is not one of them. Of course, a lot of the annoyance comes from the fact that when you delete these folders, they "magically" reappear, especially My eBooks.

It's not presumptuous to think people want their stuff organized. It is presumptuous to assume where they want things organized, though.

I, for example, keep all my documents on the FAT partition I use to share files between my dual-booting Windows and Ubuntu. Some people want their folders on the desktop. Some people don't have that many things and want to lump them all together.

And apps you cannot compare to data. Think about real life. If someone came into my apartment, left a brand-new computer and plasma screen TV, I wouldn't mind. It may not be the computer or TV I wanted, but that's not bad. If someone, however, came to my apartment, rearranged all my clothes and books and kitchenware into what they thought "made sense," I'd be enraged! Organization and applications are not the same things and should not follow the same principles.

I like that you can start your Ubuntu folder organization from scratch. People don't need to be told where to put things. Geez.

UbuWu
July 15th, 2005, 10:41 AM
I like that you can start your Ubuntu folder organization from scratch. People don't need to be told where to put things. Geez.

I would like it if the basic framework for my home folder organisation is already in place. Otherwise there is a big chance I will only start organising things when there are already too many items there. And then it will take quite some times to get everything organised.

aysiu
July 15th, 2005, 02:45 PM
To each her own, but it's just as easy to create a folder as it is to delete it. At least if you create it, you know it's the folder you want.

Wolki
July 15th, 2005, 03:19 PM
To each her own, but it's just as easy to create a folder as it is to delete it. At least if you create it, you know it's the folder you want.

Yes, but there are People who don't know anything about file organization. If they already have a skeleton of a file organisation they might use it. Those who have their own ideas for a file stucture are those who know how to add/delete directories, so it's better to make it a little harder for them than making it harder for those who don't.

davahmet
July 15th, 2005, 04:13 PM
Hopefully this is never implemented in any Linux distro, simply because it runs counter to a basic tenet of the Linux approach to users.

One of my main criticisms of Windows is that Microsoft implies that users are lazy incompetants who should barely be trusted enough to touch a mouse, but not much more than that. As aresult, Microsoft has basically told its user-base, "We will tell you how to organize your work and processes based on how we think you should do it, not on what you think is valuable. You cannot be trusted to do things correctly so we will not allow you to change how you use the computer you bought. You may not like it initially, but you'll get use to it eventually."

Linux, on the other hand, has implied and assumed that users are competant and fairly capable of either customizing the system for their own optimizations or at least of learning how to do so. The message here is, "We don't know how you do your processes on your computer, but we'll give you the tools so that you can do it the best way possible. If you don't know how to optimize and customize, we'll give you the tools and information to learn."

Default hand-holding by installing "My Documents", "My Music", etc, is IMO a step in teh wrong direction. The installer creates a /home/user directory by default through necessity. If you want your users to have additional directories in their default installation, that is easily done through editting the /etc/skel file. That would be an administrator's right to do so as it works optimally for his or her process, but not so in the default distro installion.

umount /dev/soapbox

NoTiG
July 15th, 2005, 04:26 PM
Yes, but there are People who don't know anything about file organization. If they already have a skeleton of a file organisation they might use it. Those who have their own ideas for a file stucture are those who know how to add/delete directories, so it's better to make it a little harder for them than making it harder for those who don't.

Nice logic :P


Hopefully this is never implemented in any Linux distro, simply because it runs counter to a basic tenet of the Linux approach to users.

One of my main criticisms of Windows is that Microsoft implies that users are lazy incompetants who should barely be trusted enough to touch a mouse, but not much more than that. As aresult, Microsoft has basically told its user-base, "We will tell you how to organize your work and processes based on how we think you should do it, not on what you think is valuable. You cannot be trusted to do things correctly so we will not allow you to change how you use the computer you bought. You may not like it initially, but you'll get use to it eventually."

Linux, on the other hand, has implied and assumed that users are competant and fairly capable of either customizing the system for their own optimizations or at least of learning how to do so. The message here is, "We don't know how you do your processes on your computer, but we'll give you the tools so that you can do it the best way possible. If you don't know how to optimize and customize, we'll give you the tools and information to learn."

Default hand-holding by installing "My Documents", "My Music", etc, is IMO a step in teh wrong direction. The installer creates a /home/user directory by default through necessity. If you want your users to have additional directories in their default installation, that is easily done through editting the /etc/skel file. That would be an administrator's right to do so as it works optimally for his or her process, but not so in the default distro installion.

You are being overzealous... Why have a distro at all ? I mean, using your tenet theory, having LFS linux from scratch should be the only distro since any other one is making some amount of choice for the user. When you use microsoft... if , as someone earlier in this thread said for example, you have an ebook folder but try to delete it, yet it wont let you... now that is forcing something on the user and of course I would disagree with that.

It is simply a matter of polish. Having a couple of folders there , ready for you to organize isnt going to hurt anything, and in fact it is one of breezys goals, as posted earlier in this thread. Nobody has commented on organizing based on User created, downloads and uploads though. I see some advantages... but people might not even understand the difference between an upload and a download. For instance any peripheral you would connect to your computer, like a camera or something would go to uploads... and downloads would be saving things from the internet , or local network etc.... Just thought it was interesting and thought someone might be interseted, because its different than the default microsoft way of organizing things :P

SKLP
July 15th, 2005, 05:09 PM
Interesting...

Wolki
July 15th, 2005, 05:15 PM
Linux, on the other hand, has implied and assumed that users are competant and fairly capable of either customizing the system for their own optimizations or at least of learning how to do so. The message here is, "We don't know how you do your processes on your computer, but we'll give you the tools so that you can do it the best way possible. If you don't know how to optimize and customize, we'll give you the tools and information to learn."

There are lots of things to learn when using linux. Don't forget, there are people using ubuntu who have never before used a computer and hardly understand the concepts of files and directories. File management and structuring is easy for people who are used to it, especially if they have an analytical way of thinking. That is probably most of the current linux users. However, it does not have to stay ths way, some linux distros are moving towards being easily useable by a majority of people and having a flat learning curve. Being preconfigured in a sensible way greatly helps that. Most people *willl* want to have a place for their music, and for their documents. Why not have them from the start, so that those who don't know more can use them?

It's the same as with panel applets. Some people won't need a window list, or a Firefox quick launcher, or a volume control applet. Should Gnome come preconfigured with an empty panel so that everyone can just add what he wants? I don't think so. Those who know how can configure everything how they like it, those who don't can learn how to change it, or simply use it as is if they're happy with it. That's the purpose of having default settings.


f you want your users to have additional directories in their default installation, that is easily done through editting the /etc/skel file. That would be an administrator's right to do so as it works optimally for his or her process, but not so in the default distro installion.

Except that probably most boxes only have one user. If you're admin of a multiuser box, you'll of course have to edit the system to make it best suited to the task. But why can't a disrto maker suggest some folders in /etc/skel?

Kvark
July 15th, 2005, 06:03 PM
Ahh well, I'll just create another directory /kvark/ and use it instead of /home/kvark/ .Then I get away from the Desktop folder that friggin pops back(?!?) when you delete it and all the .hiddenJunk . The escape plan worked well on windows, it'll work well here too. Mess all you want with MY documents or /home/ I'm not living there anymore :-P

Lagiv
July 15th, 2005, 06:25 PM
Wow, that Project Topaz link you got there is just awesome! Mac Style menu and no title bars either, nice! Also love the idea of global scrolling with middle mouse button and moving windows with right mouse button. Also the three Fitt's corners are perfectly used imo.

aysiu
July 15th, 2005, 06:30 PM
Okay, I realize it's almost a pointless debate, since this is planned for Breezy, anyway, but I still don't think it's worth doing. I frequent these forums and the Linux Questions forums a lot. I see newbie questions all the time--I can't network my printer. My screen resolution's messed up. How do I dual-boot? X won't start. How do you install a .tar.gz?

Never, never, never have I seen someone post "I have a home directory, but I have no idea where to put my music. In Windows I had a folder called My Music. How do I create this folder? Help?"

But I can assure you if you got rid of the apps in the panel and Gnome menu, you'd be barraged with posts, "Does Ubuntu have apps? How do I go to the internet with no browser? Who thought of putting a blank toolbar in Ubuntu?"

Well, if it's in Breezy, I guess I'll just have to add "delete stupid directory structure" to my list of post-install things to do in Ubuntu.