Ubuntu QA:
BlogBrainstormPackage status
Log in
Ubuntu QA
The Ubuntu community has contributed 21986 ideas, 135057 comments, 2615221 votes
Idea sandbox Idea sandbox
Popular ideas Popular ideas
Ideas in development Ideas in development
Implemented ideas Implemented ideas
Idea #21205: make file browsers faster

bug This idea is a duplicate of Idea #1521: Speed-up File Managers.
Written by xubaj the 27 Aug 09 at 01:18. Related project: Nautilus. Status: New
Rationale
being a gamer and heavy Windows XP user i think that the file browsers in Linux are terribly slow. if you click on "My Computer" (Windows Explorer) it pops up immediately and if you're in the flow you notice even small loading times like 0.5sec. if you open a folder in Linux it can sometimes take a few seconds.

i don't know what Windows does different to respond so quickly but even lightweight file browsers like Thunar are slow compared to Windows Explorer.

22
votes
closed
Solution #1: cache application and folders and fake folder contents
Written by xubaj the 27 Aug 09 at 01:18.
i don't know if Linux does this already but applications that are used frequently like Nautilus should be in RAM all the time.

the folder contents should be cached. the content may be changed by other applications (terminal) and Nautilus will loose track of the current content. either Nautilus should keep track of folder content even when closed or just fake the content based on the previous cache and already allow user interaction while streaming the current content in background.

an example:
content of /tmp is 100 files
Nautilus gets closed
in terminal i add 50 files
reopen Nautilus and navigate to /tmp
show old cache of 100 files and stream current state in background
if i click another folder (/tmp/test) or file while streaming, the current streaming is stopped and the new folder opened and thus wasting no time with folder updating when i already know where i want to go (/tmp/test)
4
votes
closed
Solution #2: Option to keep applications in memory after opening them
Written by Zatara214 the 9 Sep 09 at 23:14.
As per my comment below, I think OSX does something similar. To take it even further, maybe AWN could develop integration for this if implemented. This would be the optimal way of using this idea while still appealing to both sides of the argument.
-1
votes
closed
Solution #3: Implement this idea, but for Firefox
Written by Zatara214 the 10 Sep 09 at 05:56.
Come on, Firefox loads REALLY slowly and we all know it. Even with Preload installed, it's definitely one of the slowest loading programs installed by default (along with OpenOffice). If it was kept in memory, I think many more people would be willing to switch to Ubuntu based solely on the speed of the browser. Again, this should be optional, as it wouldn't help on older machines or machines with limited RAM.
3
votes
closed
Solution #4: Add option for disable MIME detection. Detect MIME on click only
Written by adisk the 16 Sep 09 at 16:09.
Add option for disable MIME detection.
File type detection is very slow? because need open and read most files.
Detect MIME on click only. (on left-click and on right-click)

Option like "Disable MIME detection (for slow PC)"

Propose your solution

Attachments
No attachments.


Duplicates


Comments
cheesehead (Brainstorm admin) wrote on the 27 Aug 09 at 12:18
Have there been any useful comparisons with real, useful numbers attached? Why is one OS appreciably faster than the other? Has anyone compared different file managers in Ubuntu with useful numbers?

coolen wrote on the 5 Sep 09 at 15:02
I agree. I want to see numbers. For me, opening Computer in Nautilus takes about a second, and it's ready to go. From memory, on Windows, it would take several seconds to open, and it'd still take a while to load (especially if you've plugged in some removable media).

As for the caching idea, as you describe it, I don't think that's a good idea. I'd rather wait a while and see what's really in a directory than jump in and be instantly presented with an outdated set of files.

Shady3D wrote on the 5 Sep 09 at 20:16
i agree that Nautilus is slow, but caching is not the answer for every thing, memory is precious.

Brutan Gaster wrote on the 8 Sep 09 at 19:13
the only time nautilus opens slowly on my system is when my external drive has gone into power save mode, and needs to spin up. I don't know how fixable that is, but it is annoying. It can take several seconds before nautilus will display anything, even if I just want to see the contents of my home folder.

BM

Zatara214 wrote on the 9 Sep 09 at 22:57
I agree with everyone here that caching is a bad idea. However, I would like to see an option for this implemented. I'm not absolutely sure, but I believe OSX does something like this by default. When the computer starts, it starts just like Linux, loading only what it needs. Afterwards, if a person clicks on, say, file browser, it will open, and then keep itself in memory for the next use. I think that this would be extremely useful, and users would only have in memory what they've used. Obviously, this would need to be optional. Not everyone has 4 GB of RAM like I do.

xubaj wrote on the 11 Sep 09 at 18:05
i will give you real numbers, if someone tells me how to count the time. the problem is i think that neither Nautilus nor Windows Explorer sends any signals when the directory has been loaded. another option would be make a 100Hz screen capture video and count the frames.

@Zatara214: "I agree with everyone here that caching is a bad idea". btw., as far as i know, Linux loads driver and commands which may be used sometime until all the memory is consumed. this part of the memory however can be deallocated anytime. the idea behind this is "unused memory is wasted memory" even if it is possible trash data.

adisk wrote on the 16 Sep 09 at 16:13
Nautilus already cache directories.



Post your comment