 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> I disagree. Icons are small and often hard to distinguish from each
> other, and it's difficult to view at a glance what type of file is
> being listed at a certain position. The icon is not any better than
> the file extension itself. You may as well look for the file extension.
> However, coloring makes it much easier to see the file types at a quick
> glance, without having to focus on a specific icon or extension.
Did they never make a Norton Commander that'll work with Windows
consoles? Or a similar app?
--
When everything's coming your way, you're in the wrong lane
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawaz org<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>
>> Next you'll need colored file listing.
>>
>> http://warp.povusers.org/snaps/ColoredListing.png
>>
>> You wouldn't believe how much easier it makes to visualize files by
>> type.
>
> What, with only 16 possible colours available? ;-)
...and 16 different backgrounds, so a theoretical 16^2 pssible
combinations (I am of course assuming you can change the default black
as you can on *nixes) though not all are usable
John
--
"Eppur si muove" - Galileo Galilei
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Doctor John wrote:
> ....and 16 different backgrounds, so a theoretical 16^2 pssible
> combinations
If you want to get really picky, subtract out at least 16 combinations.
I don't think you want too many files listed as blue on blue. :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
