kdesktop's new device links

[Ryan Cumming]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On May 11, 2002 13:59, Shawn Gordon wrote:
> well let's see, there were a variety of architectures that used/use it like
> cp/m, all versions of dos like MS DOS/DR DOS/IBM DOS etc, windows (all
> versions), the various window managers that use to exist on dos, gem,
> amigados, os/2 to name a few.
Er, so basically CP/M and all of its clones? Every OS you've listed is either 
a CP/M derivative, or has to be compatible with one. I could list off every 
version of Unix, Multics, VMS, MacOS, and Plan9 for examples of non-letter 
based operating systems.

BTW, AmigaDOS used device identifiers such as "DF0" and "DF1". This seems much 
more Unix-like to me, especially because devices had to be "mounted".

> then you have the mini/mainframe model which treats disk as disk, add 20
> drives and you have more disk space in general without having to assign it
> here or there or having drive letters.
You can do the same thing with LVM. It has very little to do with device 
naming. It also doesn't help much at all with removable media.

Now for the non-nitpicking part.

Letter-based naming schemes were dreamed up for one reason: to make things 
quickly accessible from the command line. In this respect, each letter is 
basically a "shortcut" to a drive. This works well for CLI operating 
environments without a concept of mounting, such as CP/M. However, the needs 
of a CLI in the '80s and a GUI in 2002 are very different.

IMHO, MacOS does it right. A simple, descriptive icon conveys the device type. 
The icon's label is completely human readable, and doesn't try to confuse the 
user by exposing computer's internal naming scheme. The user doesn't care 
that his 18gig harddrive is the slave device on his second IDE channel, he 
can just label it "Storage" and have a quick, intuitive way of identifying 
it.

Should we completely hide the device name from the user? Of course not, but 
that sort of information belongs in the "Properties" dialog, not right in the 
label.

- -Ryan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAjzdmIcACgkQLGMzRzbJfbQ5swCePfg7O45p4G4G916R/3o9d/TQ
eAkAnjKGt9dzVn6GYpu9BgUbefJ4Mhxf
=b9Sc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----