PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
Forum rules
Before you post read how to get help. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
Before you post read how to get help. Topics in this forum are automatically closed 6 months after creation.
PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
I'm really unsatisfied with the deafault Thunar file manager because of:
- lack of tabs or dual panel
- no chance to disable trash bin
- lack of details in detailed view
I vote for a change of Thunar for PCmanFM and you?
- lack of tabs or dual panel
- no chance to disable trash bin
- lack of details in detailed view
I vote for a change of Thunar for PCmanFM and you?
Last edited by LockBot on Wed Dec 28, 2022 7:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Topic automatically closed 6 months after creation. New replies are no longer allowed.
Reason: Topic automatically closed 6 months after creation. New replies are no longer allowed.
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
For me the advantages of PCManFM:
- Lower memory footprint
- tabs
- the treeview
- the batch renamer
- custom actions
- plugins(thunar-shares, thunar-thumbnailers, thunar-vcs ...)
- Gigolo
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
I agreeju1ius wrote:For me the advantages of PCManFM:the advantages of Thunar:
- Lower memory footprint
- tabs
Well... +1 for Thunar
- the treeview
- the batch renamer
- custom actions
- plugins(thunar-shares, thunar-thumbnailers, thunar-vcs ...)
- Gigolo
Thunar
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
I've had issues with PCmanFM supporting image thumbnails in the past. I had not taken the time to troubleshoot that as Thunar worked fine for me, you can always open multiple instances and drag & drop across.
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
you can always open multiple instances and drag & drop across.
It's all about speed and comfort. It's like saying that you don't need tabs in your favorite web browser. of course you don't really need them but it makes the experience better and faster.I agree that you can use the window tabbing provided by fluxbox. But you are wasting your time by doing something which is somewhere else by default. Initially I'm Ubuntu user, but I realized that by using Mint I don't spent that much time by customizing and tweaking thinks.
Actually since I removed Thunar and all plugins my problem with Opera described here http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?f=165&t=55329 vanished, so I'm biased a bit, I changed some settings on freenas side also, so I'm not sure if removing Thunar has to do anything with that.
I can't confirm your trouble with thumbs, everything is fine with PCmanFM so far.
VCS and batch renamer I don't need , shares I don't need since I'm using NFS share by default, which is much quicker when using linux. Gigolo and custom actions are great though, Thumbs are in PCmanFm by default.For me the advantages of PCManFM:
Lower memory footprint
tabs
the advantages of Thunar:
the treeview
the batch renamer
custom actions
plugins(thunar-shares, thunar-thumbnailers, thunar-vcs ...)
Gigolo
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
Thunar is more compatible with conky than PCmanFM.
PCmanFM will run the desktop like Nautilus.
I am more comfortable with Thunar.
If you want something else it is easy to change.
PCmanFM will run the desktop like Nautilus.
I am more comfortable with Thunar.
If you want something else it is easy to change.
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
How do you mean it more compatible with conky?
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
For me I prefer Pcmanfm. Thunar wont show all my other partitions either mounted or not. That is irritating to me. It seems very light weight and fast on my Mint 9 Fluxbox install. If I wanted to use Thunar I would use XFCE.
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
What I mean by less compatible with conky is that (like nautilus) PCmanFM is designed to run the desktop and interferes with conky. Yes, you can change it so it does not (see the LXDE forums for more on that) but for me it is not worth the trouble. You are free to choose and so am I.
-
- Level 2
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 7:51 pm
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
Personally I don't like pcmanfm nor thunar. Rox does it for me.
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
I tried Rox yesterday but for me it lacks most of basic functions. It seems to be very very light though.anticapitalista wrote:Personally I don't like pcmanfm nor thunar. Rox does it for me.
I read the forums on that topic, but non of these issues appear when using Mint 9 Fluxbox. Since we are in Fluxbox section, it's little bit offtopicjeffreyC wrote:PCmanFM is designed to run the desktop and interferes with conky
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
I read the forums on that topic, but non of these issues appear when using Mint 9 Fluxbox. Since we are in Fluxbox section, it's little bit offtopic[/quote]
I did not know if it was or not an issue. I have not tried PCmanFM in Fluxbox.
If you want tabs fluxbox is a tabbing window manager.
I did not know if it was or not an issue. I have not tried PCmanFM in Fluxbox.
If you want tabs fluxbox is a tabbing window manager.
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
Another reason why to make a change is, that thunar doesn't automount/show other ext4 partitions..
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
Recently I started using pcmanfm2 from the Lubuntu repository, which is completely rewritten and the experience is even better than with the previous version, since it has integrated support for SMB and FTP. It claims to be as resource efficient as the previous version. So i really recommend switching to this version.
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
As was previously mentioned Thunar has custom actions.
Basically anything that can be done with a CLI can be made into a custom action.
And with Fluxbox you can group windows, so tabs are no real advantage.
Basically anything that can be done with a CLI can be made into a custom action.
And with Fluxbox you can group windows, so tabs are no real advantage.
- linuxviolin
- Level 8
- Posts: 2081
- Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:55 pm
- Location: France
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
Both have problems. PCmanFM is not bad but I prefer Xfe.
About Rox, it has one of the most stupid interface... although it is not bad itself.
About Rox, it has one of the most stupid interface... although it is not bad itself.
K.I.S.S. ===> "Keep It Simple, Stupid"
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." (Leonardo da Vinci)
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Albert Einstein)
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
In PCmanFM2 there's custom command line action option, you should really try it before blind posting. PCmanFM2 differs bigtime from PCmanFM, native support for FTP and SMB is huge advantage for me.jeffreyC wrote:As was previously mentioned Thunar has custom actions.
Basically anything that can be done with a CLI can be made into a custom action.
And with Fluxbox you can group windows, so tabs are no real advantage.
Native tabbing (pressing ctrl+t) is 10 times faster than opening single windows and than merging them together, so it is advantage using it.
Try adding this repo
deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/lubuntu-desktop/ppa/ubuntu lucid main
then install pcmanfm2
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
But with the apps file you can have Fluxbox group the windows for you which is what I meant
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
Apps file? I must have missed something, what is that?
Re: PCmanFM vs Thunar - which one do you prefer?
http://fluxbox-wiki.org/index.php?title ... _apps_file
The last subject at the bottom Grouping apps via the apps file
The last subject at the bottom Grouping apps via the apps file