![]() I suggest you to improve user experience in DC and to use smaller icon size by default.Using ForkLift will come very easily. But let the most users be productive in their work and keep the small icon size by default. If somebody really needs huge icons, add a toolbar button for them, so that they can see huge icons per single mouse click. But it destroys the layout in the "Columns View" mode. What was the motivation behind changing the default size to such a huge size? It would be normal, if such huge size was used in the "Thumbnails View" mode. Why do you make DC worse than all these File Managers? User gets much more information at _one_ glance. But even Windows Explorer uses small icons in the directory tree. DC is in many aspects better than Windows Explorer, Thunar, Dolphin etc. Use small icons by default in the whole application. Currently it looks like absolutely different developers with absolutely different design concepts worked on the file list and on options dialog. Then why do you use 32x32 or 40x40 in the file list? Be consistent, use same rules across the whole application. Why don't you use 32x32 also there? I think you understand this would be bad. Look at the Configuration -> Options dialog in DC: The icons have same size as texts. Where as DC now _hides_ 50% of information because of huge icon size. They want that user gets as much information as possible at _one_ glance. The lists of file names are very condensed in all these IDEs. But icons' height is the same as text height. Look at IDEs like IntelliJ IDEA, NetBeans, Eclipse, Atom, Sublime: All of them use icons intensively. Colors help much more than icons to distinguish file types.Įvery tool that has focus on user's productivity uses white space very efficiently. The easiest way to distinguish file types is to use different colours, like red for. Who cares about icons? Does anybody look at them at all? if yes, they use normally Windows Explorer, not DC. I don't understand the purpose of such huge icons. Even Windows Explorer is in this respect better than DC, because it uses small icons like DC 0.7. So we can change severity to a normal or minor.īut I still find that it is bad that the default size is so huge. But 20x20 in the version 0.8.1 is fine to me. Where as in the version 0.7 there is really 16x16, 22x22, 32x32. I use DC since 2014 and have never looked at these settings. Linux Mint 17.3, Cinnamon, GTK2 version of Double CommanderĬool. ![]() ![]() Linux Mint 17.3, Cinnamon, QT version of Double Commander open directory where Double Commander is installed. Just open any directory containing 10-20 files, e.g. ![]() May be incorrect icon representation causes this problem? In 0.8.1 the font size is the same as it was in the version 0.7, only icon size is in 0.8.1 much bigger than in 0.7. In the versions 0.6 and 0.7 file list was displayed correct. ![]() But this bug makes usability essentially worse. The main reason why Double Commander exists is to provide better usability than Total Commander, Windows Explorer, Nemo, Thunar, Dolphin and other file managers. The file list is hard to use because users are forced now to scroll file list twice more often. User feels uncomfortable because a lot of place is wasted instead of displaying more information (more files).Ģ. Essentially less files are displayed at once. This causes following problems with usability:ġ. The row height is in the file list twice bigger than it should be. 0002004: File list: Row height in file view is twice bigger than it should be ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |