[wish] Next Gen file manager - how it should look like?

English support forum

Moderators: white, Hacker, petermad, Stefan2

Kevlar
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 32
Joined: 2009-03-30, 13:11 UTC

[wish] Next Gen file manager - how it should look like?

Post by *Kevlar »

Hi. The goal of this topic is to find the concept of the more convenient interface for modern file manager (e.g. all-in-one-window, or search results availability while you keep working with manager etc.) SO PLEASE, DO NOT POST YOUR PROTESTS AGAINST GUI CHANGES TO MODERN DESIGN, SHINY ICONS, GLOSSY BUTTONS OR ELSE. This is the wrong place for that.

The best way to make others to understand you is to show some sketches, so feel free to post your ideas (wishes) here. Who knows, maybe we will help developer(s) to free theirs masterpieces from the inconvenient 'old times' heritage.

Links to my sketches:
(year 2009)
approach #1 - interface concept v1.0 - (no link, file lost)
approach #2 - interface concept v1.2a
approach #3 - interface concept v2.0
(year 2011)
approach #4 - interface concept v3.0 (I think I am still happy with this result and will not search further :) )

User fenix_productions posted links:
fig.1
fig.2
fig.3

User schmock posted link.

User Herr Mann posted link.

User purple posted link.

User Offline posted links:
fig.1
fig.2
fig.3
Last edited by Kevlar on 2011-10-14, 18:02 UTC, edited 14 times in total.
Kevlar
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 32
Joined: 2009-03-30, 13:11 UTC

Post by *Kevlar »

The user often has to wait until the copying of large files over. Besides working with background copying windows is uncomfortable: they're too small on large screens, they are less informative than the main copy window.

In this sketch I tried to provide a more convenient interface. It would be always in a queue mode in a background, and "always-in-touch" for modify.

Yes, current concept does not allow simultaneous copy/move processes within a single TC window and may have other defects, but if these thoughts will be noticed by prog's authors, it could be updated...

Another annoying moment is when user switches to LAN addressed tab, while LAN PC is turned off. User forced to wait until LAN scanning is done, because TC hangs. Is it possible, so each tab is a separate process, for user would be able to switch to another tab immediately, while LAN is scanning?

And tabs bar must be enabled by default (and to be larger, as in Firefox, for example). This is a very handy part of the interface.

One more wish: quick access search interface.

I understand that these changes are too radical for the current version. I hope that such innovations will appear in future versions.
User avatar
JohnFredC
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 886
Joined: 2003-03-14, 13:37 UTC
Location: Sarasota Florida

Post by *JohnFredC »

I like the idea of a "blue sky" ideas thread and hope others will contribute. Maybe someone's good idea will "stick" on the TC wall, someday.

2Kevlar

The example you created in your sketch for a "background based copy/move interface" is very similar to the way that a TC competitor already does it: See here.

Each group of background activities (including compression) gets a tabbed panel, a priority slider, progress bars, pause and cancel.

Some other commanders do something similar.
Licensed, Mouse-Centric, moving (slowly) toward Touch-centric
User avatar
Hacker
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 13073
Joined: 2003-02-06, 14:56 UTC
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia

Post by *Hacker »

Kevlar,
Is it possible, so each tab is a separate process, for user would be able to switch to another tab immediately, while LAN is scanning?
wincmd.ini
[Configuration]
ThreadFindFirst=1
quick access search interface
Define hotkey for cm_ShowQuickSearch?

HTH
Roman
Mal angenommen, du drückst Strg+F, wählst die FTP-Verbindung (mit gespeichertem Passwort), klickst aber nicht auf Verbinden, sondern fällst tot um.
User avatar
fenix_productions
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 1979
Joined: 2005-08-07, 13:23 UTC
Location: Poland
Contact:

Post by *fenix_productions »

Many ideas even similar has been discussed here before so I think it would be better if someone who is not lazy could gather them all here :)

2Kevlar
You've got nice ideas I like copy part because it's similar to my idea from here) but "search one" is completely unusable IMHO. I think you took it from web browser :)

In the case of i.e. Firefox it is understandable that this control can be placed away of the viewed content because it works more link link / button to other site.

In TC such control could be used for filtering the content so it it should be as close to it as it possible. Why? the answer is simple - it's less time consuming to keep your eyes focused in one place. It can decrease your productivity if you have to take a look on top-right corner of your screen for typing and back to file list to check the files, back to corner, back to files... I think you've got an idea :)
"When we created the poke, we thought it would be cool to have a feature without any specific purpose." Facebook...

#128099
Kevlar
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 32
Joined: 2009-03-30, 13:11 UTC

Post by *Kevlar »

Hi. All this time I thought 'bout more comfortible interface)) Here is my second try.

In this version you can always see a queue box in two lines, or toggle it to large size (and change it dynamically).
You can start any queued process manually, change order by drag'n'drop, pause, cancel (via right mouse button).
Left panel progress field shows status of a selected process on the right.
Speed, elapsed time, or time left - through tooltips on each progress.

PS: Thanks to all for approval

PPS: 2Hacker, thanks for ini command, but it hangs TC too(

PPS: I would like to know Mr. Ghisler opinion on this "blue sky" dream) Should I forget it? :?
User avatar
fenix_productions
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 1979
Joined: 2005-08-07, 13:23 UTC
Location: Poland
Contact:

Post by *fenix_productions »

2Kevlar
I am still against search box on top right corner but I like an idea of merging many operations into one control but I would rather like to have BTM extended with delete / move / copy actions. Matter of personal taste IMHO.
"When we created the poke, we thought it would be cool to have a feature without any specific purpose." Facebook...

#128099
Kevlar
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 32
Joined: 2009-03-30, 13:11 UTC

Post by *Kevlar »

2fenix_productions
Actually the search box is not the point for now. I'm really anxious to get single-window copy/move interface, which allows keep working with TC.
C/M/Del buttons bar - you can turn on/off even now. And they really need to be seen always (while queue box closed).

Here is the 1.2 version. I think, I satisfied my blue sky dream)) I hope, my thoughts will be noticed by file managers authors.

This occupies only one line in closed mode, opens with a single click, where you can see full info on each process, available for modify. The queue box is large for now: good for long addresses, there is a space for additional info in table style.

This queue concept needs special logic behavior, ideas on which should be discussed after accepting final version of the interface.
User avatar
schmock
Member
Member
Posts: 154
Joined: 2009-03-18, 01:50 UTC

Post by *schmock »

JohnFredC wrote:... very similar to the way that a TC competitor already does it: See here.

Each group of background activities (including compression) gets a tabbed panel, a priority slider, progress bars, pause and cancel.
yes, thats what i also liked in SC.
Kevlar wrote: I'm really anxious to get single-window copy/move interface, which allows keep working with TC.
C/M/Del buttons bar - you can turn on/off even now. And they really need to be seen always (while queue box closed).
...
This occupies only one line in closed mode, opens with a single click, where you can see full info on each process, available for modify. The queue box is large for now: good for long addresses, there is a space for additional info in table style.
i suggested this a little shorter also before: http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=21640 .
so you totally have my vote!

as for your v1.2 i would not want the speedlimit inside this bar,
this should be seperate. the majority of users are not using ftp, for them this space is wasted. maybe i would use the space for a pause & cancel button.

another suggestion would be to config this bar with variables,
so you could define which information you want to see there,
like the whole path of the file thats being copied for example.
alm
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 59
Joined: 2006-06-23, 17:25 UTC

Post by *alm »

I don't like the ideas of having the copy progress bars part of the main interface, I like it the way it is (seperate that is). I agree on the background copy window though, it lacks the options or information provided by the normal copy window.
User avatar
schmock
Member
Member
Posts: 154
Joined: 2009-03-18, 01:50 UTC

Post by *schmock »

i dont see any advantage with a floating window.
its just a little bar that would be so useful.

this would be my aproach: Image: http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/3946/41559118.jpg

one could enter some variables to show over the progress bar like rest MB/total etc..
hovering over the copy/filename could evoke a tooltip with more info like full path + destination etc.

+ pause/cancel buttons on the right.
User avatar
schmock
Member
Member
Posts: 154
Joined: 2009-03-18, 01:50 UTC

Post by *schmock »

@kevlar: maybe you should change the title into something more specific like "interface changes" so the thread will not get lost..
Kevlar
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 32
Joined: 2009-03-30, 13:11 UTC

v1.2a

Post by *Kevlar »

schmock wrote:this would be my aproach: Image: http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/3946/41559118.jpg
I really like it, it is easy, but.. what about multiple operations at the same time?
schmock wrote:i would not want the speedlimit inside this bar
I agree, but this is a nuance already and does not change interface concept as a whole.

I think, v1.2a really represents what I want (and I guess most others too).

The structure is the same (and best, I think). I'll sum up a conception:

mini mode
always visible single line in bottom, which indicates selected by user process in queue box (or process #1, if nothing selected).
The "from/to" info - via tooltip upon this line. The line is unactive, if there are no operations.

expanded mode (toggles with a single click, dynamically scaling)
it is a table style interface, supports drag'n'drop (for order change) and double clicks (for modify parameters like speed limit/priority, or destination - if not started yet).
The file manager should not allow user to drag "delete/move" operations with defined files/folders before any other operations with it.

This table gives us full info about each process at ones in one TC window.

User should be able to customize content of the table (columns) to his needs.

User can start/pause any queued process manually (by clicking on icon to the left in the box), but ONLY end of 1st process automatically starts next. The deletion of an operation - delete key/"delete" button on function key tab with a conformation window (optional).

Users should no longer be confused with multiple interpretations of copy/move windows with the lack of process info and not forced to decide each time to start operation, or send it to queue.

PS: I used some graphics from other great progs such as Firefox, XnView, Excel and Explorer:) (and of course TC) and do not mean it must look its way, I just used it to get a sketch of a concept.
Last edited by Kevlar on 2009-04-23, 07:06 UTC, edited 6 times in total.
Kevlar
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 32
Joined: 2009-03-30, 13:11 UTC

Post by *Kevlar »

schmock wrote:@kevlar: maybe you should change the title into something more specific like "interface changes" so the thread will not get lost..
I can't and won't.. because some questions are the matter of code, not of interface.. like:
kevlar wrote:Another annoying moment is when user switches to LAN addressed tab, while LAN PC is turned off. User forced to wait until LAN scanning is done, because TC hangs. Is it possible, so each tab is a separate process, for user would be able to switch to another tab immediately, while LAN is scanning?
And by the way, one more wish (or two)... there is an unpleasant heritage of the past:
"Exit" button on the function keys bar in TC, it is an outdated need (hello to DOS).. there is an "X" button for it. It creates one more unnecessary decision - press "Exit" or "X"?! ...it's discomfort((( I think, it should be removed in next gen TC...
..and "Help" should be next to "Start" in Menu line, as in all modern progs.
User avatar
schmock
Member
Member
Posts: 154
Joined: 2009-03-18, 01:50 UTC

Re: v1.2a

Post by *schmock »

Kevlar wrote:
schmock wrote:this would be my aproach: Image: http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/3946/41559118.jpg
I really like it, it is easy, but.. what about multiple operations at the same time?
oh, i totally agree with your expandable window.
my suggestion would only be the bar. the "pending operations" window of yours is fine.

@your 1.2a: i think you waste to much space here. when the filename is longer its more important to show this than the big buttons or a second "total %" bar. would be better to have more info inside the bar.
Kevlar wrote:
schmock wrote:@kevlar: maybe you should change the title into something more specific like "interface changes" so the thread will not get lost..
I can't and won't.. because some questions are the matter of code, not of interface.. like:
would be better if you make one seperate thread for every issue like the author suggested. otherwise it ill be to mixed up everything!
and yes, you can ;) (edit your 1st post).
Post Reply