File-managers: Nemo vs Thunar

Get Involved Research
1

I installed Nemo in Elive as for me, when I search for files.

I know people can install it if they like it better, for people used to linux, it's easy

But when someone try Elive for the 1st time and is not that familiar with Linux, I think we need to choose for them, our best guess of what will make their experience a good one

Is there something that Thunar is doing better than Nemo ?

Should we consider making Nemo the default File Manager ?

Yoda

2

NOTHING AT ALL

3

These things needs research, like:

  • consuming resources: how much resources (ram) uses in compared to the other FM?
  • bloat: similar to "resources", it does depend of many unneeded things? (like if you install a package that requires KDE libs)
  • features: it has at least the same features as the other option? (network browsing, thumbnails of videos.. .etc)
  • integration: it can be correctly integrated with elive? (open auto when X calls it, attach to elive features like the massive-images/audios reconversion, download movie subtitles, etc)
  • usability: how much "user-friendly" it is compared to the other option? it must be intuitive to use for anyone
  • betatesting: a deep betatesting of the candidate must be done, in order to know that it works stable and correctly
  • monkeys: it does has "bad things" that we don't want?

I did a fast test to the memo app:

  • monkey: if you run it (try from terminal) and close, the application never closes, it stalls running in the background, this is very bad because we don't want having resources consumed for something that we are not using
  • resources:
    • nemo: 16 mb ram (good!)
    • thunar: 12 mb (good!) - but it has some more dependencies too
    • pcmanfm: 8mb (w00t!)
  • features: about its features, it looks very similar to thunar (i dont know which one is better / has more, a bigger research will be needed)

Notes:

  • Nemo is the official file manager for the Cinnamon desktop.
  • Thunar is the file manager designed to be the default file manager for the Xfce desktop environment.
  • pcmanfm is a more agnostic FM using gtk

@yoda do you prefer nemo than thunar? or you know any feature it does it better?

4

No.
Later with e17 on 64bit then,
for the low memory running 32bit machines, mhm nah.....

5

not even thunar (if possible) for 32bit (low memory) machines, I would put pcmanfm for it (faster & lighter)

1 Like
6

ONe that I use everyday but I am ok not installing it by default.

  • Go in in a folder with a lot of files
  • Search by typing word ( could be middle word or rode at the end of the name of the file).

Nemo :
1- will show dynamically files corresponding to your criteria
2- better show / find what you're looking for

1 Like
7

Mhm, unfortunately yes.
It is the default for Mate, too.
I hate Thunar especially on a tiny screen!!!!

8

yes thunar actually has many good features and elive integrations

the question is more like "if nemo has at least the same features" (same question for any other FM)

9

BTW: Enlightenment features its OWN filemanager (did you know that? :slight_smile: ), and it could be in fact the best option (much MUCH lighter, more powerful, etc)

  • e16: it never existed a FM on these version
  • e17: it started to exist, but was a bit buggy and also was disabled by default for elive (you don't have it!)
  • e22: it is included by default and the development was much more forward today

question will be: is this FM including all the features that we need?

yes it has special features, for example you have animated previews of videos too lol

try it! live + e22 boom :slight_smile:

1 Like
10

Default should always prioritize stability so if Thunar is more stable and integrated, let's stick with it

People like me can simply install what they want, at their own risks.

11

Much more than Thunar has, but
Attention
It is optimized for GTK ...

12

btw if you want to play with more rare FM experiences, try:

  • tdfsb (3d file manager): YouTube
  • eaglemode (zoom-based file manager): included by default in elive 3.0
13

It is the worst choice,
@Thanatermesis is right with pcmanfm

14

e22 FM seems pretty cool, just tried it

I didn't played a lot yet with e22 as e16 was the priority, but I must admit, e22 could also steal my heart from e16 in the future...

1 Like
15

well, thunar is the -actual- good choice (by actual good choice i mean that it just work good as how we want it to be)

this of course opens the door to better possibilities :slight_smile: , but as a FM (since its one of the most important applications for the OS), needs to have a big research of its good/bad things and possibilities, this also means that if we want to consider X as a replacement option we must switch to it (by our own) entirely in our daily use, only using it every day we can see if we miss anything from the other ones

about lightness, yes pcmanfm is much better option, but it has the same features? (aparently you cannot have access to network shared files, hum!)

16

screen manager in e22 seems more modern / better

17

Have you seen this video? :slight_smile:

It's my first test with Cinelerra in 2006, featuring:

  • Elive 0.1
  • E16 (no e17 at all!)
  • amazing audio player (the one with "multipass" name)
  • gadgets in desktop like email boxes
  • a bar/dock in the e16 desktop
  • tdfsb appears a lot in the video
1 Like
18

As already mentioned earlier :face_with_monocle:
it needs its extensions implented.
For Thunar counts that's working oob,
but as said before, it is eating a lot of the available space of a Netbook display.

19

do you mean that it has already the possibility to implement / enable the feature?

  • does pcmanfm fits better?
  • is possible to configure thunar to make it fit correctly? (yes i can implement this to be auto in elive, fonts sizes configurations are already reduced for small screen, maybe you noticed that)
  • the best would E22 FM for that (much better sizes management), but that's another topic
20

Yes. It has bis own extensions ready for Download.

Yes.
Yes.