"Richard Campbell" eek2121@comcast.net wrote:
- Too many 'ways' to browse a users computer. You have all those
buttons at the toolbar, why not just make those features into shell extensions or at the very LEAST compiletime options. Explorer needs only 1 way to browse directories/files. (Which should be whichever way that closely resembles microsoft's windows, and by all means winefile and explorer should be seperate applications.) Among the features that need to go are: The web support, Registry browser, NT Object File System or whatever the hell it's called, The 'shell browser' or whatever it is, The little bar above the Status bar should go. The Interface shouldn't be MDI, as microsoft's is not.
I absolutely agree with you. Registry and object tree do _not_ belong into the hands of the average user.
- The toolbar has nothing useful. The windows explorer toolbar has
back, forward, and up buttons for example, to browse the users computer. Our explorer has none of these.
IMO, back, forward and up buttons should be implemented because they provide useful features.
- The web support needs to go. I don't know what all was done, but
web support causes alot of potential vulnerabilities. Just look at microsoft's windows, and even IF it didn't, loading IE/mozilla every time explorer starts is a WASTE.
Yep!!
Solution: I really think we should clone the Windows NT 4.0 explorer, with quicklaunch, but nothing more. Make everything else addins or compiletime options. The interface really should be more similar to the windows version of explorer, with nothing new to confuse users, etc. This will make explorer less buggy and faster, it will also consume less RAM. Currently explorer is even slower then microsoft's own explorer. Granted it is an alpha version, but still, these 'new features' are still getting injected every once and a while, making things even worse, when time/energy would be better spent working on shell32 or fixing bugs/optimizing explorer and code cleanup.
Agreed!
Regards, Eric