Where is Ploum?

Commentaires

1. Le lundi, janvier 5 2009, 21:47 par Lorenz

I really love Marie's background image, can you tell me where you got it from and perhaps send it to me by email? Thanks in advance!

2. Le lundi, janvier 5 2009, 21:52 par ploum

Lorenz > This come from www.vladstudio.com/fr/wal...

3. Le lundi, janvier 5 2009, 21:54 par Lorenz

That was quick, thank you and thanks for the blog, I read it regularly :)

4. Le lundi, janvier 5 2009, 22:23 par j-c

Is the "/home/user/Desktop" directory redefined as home, or is it the desktop that shows what's in "/home/user" instead of "/home/user/Desktop" ?

5. Le lundi, janvier 5 2009, 22:26 par ploum

j-c > the /home/use is used as the desktop. The /home/user/Desktop folder can be removed. (and that's why it's easy : one thing less at no cost)

6. Le lundi, janvier 5 2009, 22:50 par fvdsn

that nautilus option is awesome ! It should clearly be the default behaviour. I had similar experiences trying to explain the desktop folder to relatives, usually they don't get it, and I can't see it's purpose.

Thanks for showing us this :)

7. Le lundi, janvier 5 2009, 22:58 par Flimm

That is a really cool idea, I need to try this with my (relative) sometime.
Another idea that I've considered enabling for my (relative) is spatial mode in Nautilus.

8. Le lundi, janvier 5 2009, 23:10 par ploum

Flimm > Spatial nautilus will be the subject of the fourth post. But I should write it quickier this time ;-)

9. Le lundi, janvier 5 2009, 23:29 par Michaël Delhaye

I'm among those who disagree ;)
I think it's important to maintain analogies between concepts of computers and real life, especially for begginers. In real life we have an office with a desk(top), next a trash and we have several places in the room to store our folders. Could you imagine putting all your documents on your desktop ? I think that in real life as well as on your computer, the desktop has to be the place where you can work. Files aren't supposed to stay there for a long time. When you have finish with them you have to put them somewhere else in the room (/home/user/...). By default the Ubuntu Desktop is empty and it is very cool. The trash doesn't appear on the desktop either and it is logical (would you like it in real life ?)

10. Le lundi, janvier 5 2009, 23:52 par ploum

Michaël > I think that the computer is so different from real life that it doesn't make sense to be "a bit more like real life".

11. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 00:41 par Wolki

Ploum, I completely agree. I started using this about Hoary-ish and never stopped - once you get used to it it's just so much better. After some time I started setting this up for other users who I noticed had problems with file organization, and in general it seems to have helped.

The difference between Desktop and Home is surprisingly difficult to grasp for users. I actually had that "delete the desktop folder" thing happen to a relative of mine with little computer experience, after months of using her computer and putting many important documents there. The problem was fixable because the folder was still in the trash when she noticed that all her stuff was gone, but it still was a bad experience, and could have well ended up in a disaster.

I'm really looking forward to the rest of your articles.

P.S.: Where's the funny picture of the guy on the bicycle? Don't leave us hanging like that :)

12. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 01:26 par Cameron

Thanks for pointing this out - I am trying it out, and so far really like it.

13. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 01:57 par RainCT

Great post! I'll try this out, too. And I'm waiting for your next post :).

14. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 02:32 par Jak-o

I do exactly the opposite: I have a clean desktop, without any icons, and use only my /home/user.

I must set the preferences of my firefox and options of my desktop. To access to my files, just open my filemanager from shortcut on the panel.

Perhaps could be usefull something like Apple Stack to me, but I do not know whether it would be for the new.

15. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 10:53 par nqullo

That's exactly the same problem I can see for many people that do not have a technical view on the computer. They do not understand where all the files are going (Desktop, home, or Documents) when they are downloading, for example, mail atachements. Also sometimes it is a problem for them to find the documents they have been working on a while ago.

16. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 11:37 par lhb

This is indeed a great option, except for people who cares about hidden files ;)
But if you don't know well computers, it doesn't matter.

17. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 14:57 par Dean

I've used desktop_is_home_dir for a few years now. It's definitely the most logical way to work, and is obviously easier on the brain.

spatial nautilus and shallow folder structures ftw too.

18. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 16:56 par ReinoutS

Thanks for the nice article! Looking forward to your piece about spatial Nautilus. ;)

19. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 21:58 par Dread Knight

My mother has Ubuntu on her pc. She never gets the home folder concept and keeps all of her stuff right on her desktop.

I use Kubuntu Intrepid with KDE 4.2 and deleted the desktop folder as well, i have a folder view applet on my desktop with the home folder.

20. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 22:39 par antistress

i don't like the common idea that the desktop can be filled with files or folders.
it's not as convenient as a real Nautilus window if i want to handle files and folders
that's why Ubuntu Netbook Remix Launcher is my desktop and files/folders are handled through Nautilus windows only
libre-et-ouvert.blogspot....

21. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 22:41 par antistress

(and i agree with Jak-o)

22. Le mardi, janvier 6 2009, 22:58 par ploum

Antistress > If the desktop is not a folder, things are different. I've used Fvwm for a long time without any icon on the desktop.

But as soon as you can put "files" on your "desktop", I see "home_is_desktop" as the only usable solution.

Trying to keep something "where you can put file but not too much" is definitely the worst of both world, IMHO.

23. Le samedi, janvier 10 2009, 04:16 par kiddo

And the next logical step, after that, is to tell them that there is no such thing as a desktop. They want to access any data they received or created? Go in Places->Home (or one of the other XDG shortcuts) ;)

Yes, it sounds radical. But surprisingly, I had computer newbies telling me that the clutter was nonsense and wondering if I could disable it. Which is part of the reasons that lead me to write open-source.ecchi.ca/?voi...

But as I say there, this might not be for everyone. I, for one, know that I've been happy without a desktop for about a year now. The only drawback is that the user must go in the "Computer" shortcut to unmount drives.

24. Le samedi, janvier 10 2009, 11:23 par ploum

kiddo > it's indeed logical. But from my experience with real users, the always forgot where the "places" menu is. (and how is it called). With the desktop methaphor, they can see all at first glance. But I admit that the "no-desktop" can be useful (I've myself used no desktop for years with fvwm)

25. Le samedi, janvier 10 2009, 17:20 par Thibauld Favre

Even if I agree with your conclusions, I'm even more happy to see this kind of user experience thinking happening! I find this of uttermost importance if we want Ubuntu to succeed on the desktop!

26. Le mardi, janvier 13 2009, 21:46 par mongolito404

IMHO, the whole desktop metaphor is flawed and the file/folders abstraction leaks. Unfortunately, most people still think they can be fixed with some 'small' tweaking. Actually, we need to accept that no abstraction is perfect and that none can please all users...

27. Le mercredi, janvier 14 2009, 11:17 par Katchina404

Mongolito404 : so you are saying that the desktop metaphor is not perfect and does not please you, but that you still accept it being used because anything else would not be perfect either.

I find that the facilities offered in a desktop environment (search engine, ease of use of the files explorer/navigator) as well as the kind of works I do with a given computer affect the way I manage my files.

I remember under Windows (NT, 2000 and XP) I hated storing documents on the desktop which I used mostly as an application launcher (dumb, I know). I would clean up my desktop of all the documents and software packages as soon as possible.

Under Gnome, I find myself using the desktop as my home and having almost nothing in my actual home folder, except for a few rarely used archive directories. My desktop is a real mess but I'm OK with that. I do create directories for archival, older stuff, previous projects, etc... As hinted in previous comments or in the article, having the physical limitation of your desktop "real estate" means you end up sorting your files every now and then. Of course this is my work computer so any important project file is always copied on the file server in the appropriate location. Local copies do not have much value, it's more a convenience thing.

Under Mac OS X, I tend to use the desktop as a temporary workspace. Anything that I'm pretty much done with, I move into the documents subdirectory of my home directory. That documents subdirectory is a real real mess, because it's never being taken care of. The facts that it's hidden from direct view, that I used sensible filenames most of the time, and that most files contents is indexed means I never actually have to think about it. This is my home computer and I hate sharing it, so having all files mixed up like that is not a big issue.

As far as you're OK with storing documents on your desktop, I indeed don't see any reason not to merge the desktop dir with the user's home dir. It makes sense if you think about it this way : the home dir is the "root" of all your files when using a computer with a CLI, hence it's the place you first see and you start from when first logging in the CLI. Why do we suddently need a second home if we replace CLI with GUI ? And for those who don't want to use the desktop as storage but consider it makes more sense to use a dedicated files manager, I don't think you'd ever consider using a specific subdirectroy (i.e. different from the home dir) just because you're using a specific GUI instead of the CLI.

Am I making any sense ?

NB : Forgive me for using the terms dir, directory and folder while always referring to the same concept. Old habits, you know...

28. Le mercredi, janvier 14 2009, 12:09 par mongolito404

To be clear, my point was ''about having a sensible default''. Without clear and objective studies on what fit the needs of most of your target audience it would be hard to define any definitive "sensible default".

And that whatever your "sensible default" is, at some point any user will hit the limit of the metaphor, have to learn how to system works and adapt to the system. The later it comes, the harder it would be for the user to learn and adapt. The sooner he/she becomes aware of the limitations of the system and the options he/she can change to influence its behavior, the easier his/her life would be.

29. Le mercredi, janvier 14 2009, 12:42 par Katchina404

I've always thought that dealing with a tree structure as a kid, using the CLI (albeit under DOS and not Unix/Linux) for about 6-8 years before using GUIs helped a lot. Not only was I told about the tree structure, but I had to have a practical understanding of it before being able to do anything useful with my computer.

Nowadays it's just click-click-click and the complexity of the filesystem is hidden from new users. They dont' need to have any understanding of this in order to launch ans use their applications. So how will they learn ? Do they really need to learn (mongolito seems to say that they'll have to at some point) ? And do we actually need a tree structure for user-accessible files ?

30. Le mercredi, janvier 14 2009, 13:33 par mongolito404

As long as we have a tree structure exposed to the users (in a way or another), they will have to learn it or will they will end being frustrated by a computer they don't understand and cannot use effectively.

But we don't need a tree structure. Just like we didn't need a tree structure to store our mail. But we had to wait for GMail to finally free the mass from this rigidity.

31. Le mercredi, février 4 2009, 17:56 par Josti

Is there a new part coming?

32. Le dimanche, février 8 2009, 17:12 par gray-hair-user

This idea of "desktop is home" is quite interesting but what happens if you want to access the hidden files? Do they spill all over your screen? Granted, the normal user doesn't need to access them. But a few suspicious old folks, like me, may get extremely frustrated if they have the impression that someone is hiding something from them, especially if this "something" is supposed to belong to them. Imagine the shock if Jean or Marie finds the "display hidden files" button!

In fact, the occasional intrusion of hidden files in my personal files is what bothers me most with the default setup. To keep them separated, I ended up mounting an empty partition in /home/user/Documents. After a lot of googling, I was able to rename the "90GB Media" into "Documents". I also got rid of "Images", "Music", "Videos" and "Downloads" folders (and created suitable folders into "Documents", but that is optional). Now I have a nice icon sitting on my desktop, the equivalent of Marie's "Archive" folder. Next to it sits the icon of my usb key. It makes sense that they would look alike because both media contain files. For a beginner, it is certainly easier to visualize a hard disk or a usb key than to conceptualize a folder.

I wish this setup was offered as default. All it takes is a /home/user/Documents mount point option and a disk partition renaming option in the Ubuntu liveCD install. (Quite possibly those options exist, but I haven't found them.) With this setup, beginners could forget about the tree structure, throw their files into Documents and retrieve them at will.

Thank you for trying to make Ubuntu easier for us.

33. Le mardi, février 24 2009, 14:42 par PomCompot

I have been a user of the desktop_is_home_dir option for a long time. But, I get rapidly a problem with hidden files. What a mess with those regular data merged with configuration ones !

Now, I have switched to show-desktop none. But, it's not convenient to.

The key is in my mind to have a separation between true data and settings data. The home folder either must contain only settings and be hidden of the regular user with another folder for data (like a data one), either (and it's the option I prefer) only true data and settings must be in a another place. Those two idea are quite the same seen from the opposite point.

Another great thing would be to have the concept of drawer sliding from the edge of the desktop. It would be another way to have a clean desktop with quick access to important data.

I also think to a concept of tag and metatag instead of just folder organization to find save data. Would post on my blog about thaht when get some free time and think to implement it in an app.

34. Le dimanche, mars 1 2009, 16:35 par Florent V.

Vivement la suite. ;)

Je suis en train de tester desktop_is_home_dir, et c'est plutôt convaincant. Je ne suis pas sûr que ça soit la meilleure solution (pour peu qu'il y en ait une), cependant.

Une autre solution, plus «légère», serait d'utiliser un fichier .hidden dans le home pour masquer le dossier Bureau. Ainsi ce dossier ne serait pas visible de l'utilisateur novice, ce qui limiterait les risques de suppression intempestive du contenu du bureau.

En passant, j'utilise des fichiers .hidden de ce type pour masquer des répertoires comme /home/me/Modèles, /home/me/vmware (dossier recréé à chaque lancement de VMWare et sans utilité pour moi), les dossiers lost+found à la racine de chaque volume, et aussi tout ce qui n'est pas directement utile pour une utilisation courante (donc pas développement ou administration système) à la racine. Voilà ce que ça donne pour la racine, justement: dl.getdropbox.com/u/14574...

Un petit problème à l'heure actuelle avec desktop_is_home_dir: certaines applications ont un sélecteur d'emplacement avec des entrées pré-remplies, dont souvent le répertoire de l'utilisateur et le bureau. On se retrouve avec une entrée «Bureau» non utilisable (message d'erreur).

35. Le mercredi, avril 15 2009, 03:02 par Grey-hair-user

I agree that the mix of configs, settings and personal data in the home folder is a nuisance. Not in Nautilus where hidden files are usually not listed, but when browsing within applications. Looking for the proper folder to save my first OpenOffice document, I was shocked to find out that /home/user was crowded by an army of strange files and folders with funny dots in their names. "Documents", "Music", "Videos"... were nowhere in sight. Hiding in a corner to avoid being stepped on? Poor things. (Is there a way to set Oo preferences to avoid that?)

To get around the problem, much later, I made /home/user/Documents a mounting point for a separate partition which contains all my personal data. This is how my desktop looks like :

dl.free.fr/jZ0FM65O2

Simple enough, isn't it? Most applications can be trained to save in ~/Documents, so that hidden files don't get in the way.
"Documents" has survived several system reinstall with various distribs. I just wish that mail, contacts, calendar and Firefox settings were saved automatically to that partition at regular intervals.

36. Le mercredi, avril 15 2009, 09:44 par Grey-hair-user

Oops... forgot the http://

dl.free.fr/jZ0FM65O2

Sorry.

37. Le mardi, août 25 2009, 18:12 par MW

I also thought that desktop_is_home_dir was a good idea when I set up a computer for my parents. Now I'm not quite as sure anymore.

I agree that having a Desktop folder within the home folder is an unintuitive concept. Windows takes it even further by actually presenting the desktop as the root of the folder tree -- but of course the actual folder in the filesystem is not located there, an the contents shown on the actual desktop have to be stored in an actual folder, which is within the very same tree the desktop is supposed to be the root of!

However, in my opinion the conceptual problem is not quite as severe in Gnome, for two reasons: first, the desktop is not presented as the root of the folder structure as it is in Windows; and second, you can hide the Desktop folder so that it doesn't appear in the listing of your home folder.

You can do the latter quite easily when you're setting up a new desktop for someone. See library.gnome.org/users/u... for information on how to hide files in a folder. That way the dual nature of the desktop folder won't be visible to bother the novice user.

I believe having the Desktop folder hidden that way should perhaps be the default on Ubuntu; I agree that having Desktop shown as a subfolder of Home is unnecessary and confusing. However, while desktop_is_home_dir is one way of overcoming that (with other possible benefits), it's a pretty heavyweight way of doing that and affects the entire workflow of the user, and thus may not come exactly "at no cost". Just hiding the desktop folder, on the other hand, really bears almost no cost.

38. Le jeudi, septembre 24 2009, 23:16 par Florent V.

Reporting after months of use of desktop_is_home_dir: i used it for a few months and quite liked it. Then i wanted to try the default way again, because i like to stay close to the default setup and it was okay. After a few weeks of default setup, i missed the direct access to my main folders (i put them on the right of the desktop), and i missed seeing files i downloaded (to my home folder) on the desktop, saying “hey, i’m here if you need me” or “hey, i’m here, deal with me already”.

And seeing a Desktop folder in my home folder was kinda strange and confusing (even though i’m definitely not a novice user). (Hiding it in Nautilus is an interesting option. But it will be visible on file browser dialogs in other applications — filed it as a Gtk+ bug.)

So i went back to home_is_desktop_dir, and i'm very happy with it. :)