Eazel wasn't a complete scam

Posted Jan 22, 2008 3:33 UTC (Tue) by louie (guest, #3285)
Parent article: Ten-year timeline, part 2: the bubble days

I'm not sure Eazel were competent, but they did have a plan, and not even a completely insane
one- .mac-like services, which Apple seems to find economically viable these days, and which
others (Ubuntu, Fedora) have been rumored to be looking into. Nautilus was to be part of the
front end for those services, and hence had to be written (especially given how terrible the
old file manager was.)

Now, they were completely crazy to have thought they could do get to profitability, given
their burn rate, but... I don't think the core idea was a scam.

Eazel wasn't a complete scam

Posted Jan 22, 2008 18:45 UTC (Tue) by wilck (guest, #29844) [Link] (1 responses)

>Nautilus was to be part of the front end for those services, and hence had 
> to be written (especially given how terrible the old file manager was.)

Disagree. gmc was the best file manager GNOME ever had. When Nautilus replaced gmc, I switched
to KDE.

Eazel wasn't a complete scam

Posted Jan 23, 2008 3:59 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]

Agreed.  Other than massively more memory usage, I don't really see what Nautilus brings to
the kitchen.  That whole spatial gaffe was downright embarrassing.

In the past, I've been tempted to propose Thunar for inclusion in Gnome.  It is getting quite
complete, feels 3X faster, and takes less than 1/6 of the memory.  I expect it wouldn't be too
hard to add any missing features and it would certainly be much easier than trying to clean up
the Nautilus code base.  If only I had free time...