Bug 6184 - konqueror: "File Already Exists" is not extremely clear as to which file is the source file, and which file is the destination file.
Summary: konqueror: "File Already Exists" is not extremely clear as to which file is t...
Status: CONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: konqueror
Classification: Applications
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Platform: unspecified Other
: NOR wishlist with 95 votes (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Konqueror Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2000-07-10 14:03 UTC by Unknown
Modified: 2013-04-23 07:36 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Linux Qa 2000-07-09 23:17:12 UTC
(*** This bug was imported into bugs.kde.org ***)

Package: konqueror
Build: KDE beta 1.91 20000704
Severity: wishlist

When you copy a file with the same filename from one location to
another location with a file of the same name the error message is
somewhat obscure.  I'll type it below:

File Already Exists
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A newer file $DESTPATH/$DESTFILENAME already exists
  Size $DSIZE
  Created on $DDATECRE
  Modified on $DDATEMOD

The original file is $SOURCEPATH/$SOURCEFILENAME
    Size $SSIZE
    Created on $SDATECRE
    Modified on $SDATEMOD

<Insert textfield here with filename>

[Rename] [Skip] [Auto Skip] [Overwrite] [Overwrite All] [Cancel]




The reason I found the above error message a little obscure is that
it's easy to mix up which file is the source and which file is the
destination.  It's not a big deal on the command line where you have
to actually type in what the source and destination names are but in
a Windowed environment I tend to often forget where I'm copying FROM
and TO because it's a drag-and-drop operation.

Therefore when a message pops up that does not mark the source file
and the destination file I get a little flustered and end up
squinting to read the $FILE and the $DATE.

Finally you're not quite sure what the dialog box is asking you to
do.  You see a textfield and only when you look at the bottom row of
buttons do you have the idea that you may actually be overwriting
files here.

In Windows I never had as much of a problem because it said "Are you
sure you want to overwrite this file?"  (The problem with Windows
though is that it didn't give you the option to rename files.

~~

The second problem I had with this box was the textfield.  It's not
labelled.  Now it's not difficult to identify what the box might be
for but it's a bit of an oversight to leave it unlabelled in my
opinion.

~~

The last problem is the "Auto Skip" button.  Auto Skip?  Is that like
"Skip All"?  (It turns out that it is).  Well why don't we just use
"Skip All" then?

~~

As a small addition I also placed colons after "Size" "Created on"
and "Modified on".

~~

Here's an alternate "File Already Exists" dialog box.

-------------------------------------------------------

File Already Exists
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You are about to overwrite

$DESTPATH/$DESTFILENAME
  Size: $DSIZE
  Created on: $DDATECRE
  Modified on: $DDATEMOD

with

$SOURCEPATH/$SOURCEFILENAME
    Size: $SSIZE
    Created on: $SDATECRE
    Modified on: $SDATEMOD

Rename $SOURCEFILENAME to:
<Insert textfield here with filename>

[Rename] [Skip] [Skip All] [Overwrite] [Overwrite All] [Cancel]

-----------------------------------------------------------

By clearly stating that you are about to overwrite a file the user
understands exactly what is going on and is less likely to make a
mistake.
Comment 1 Nick Shaforostoff 2003-12-09 20:46:44 UTC
and make please [Overwrite] default action (to user could just press enter and live on edge :-)

or just remember what button used last time and make it default
Comment 2 Michael Jahn 2004-07-07 12:52:30 UTC
Valid with 3.2.3.
Although the dialog changed a little bit since then, I still think that the proposed dialog layout is better. Should be easy to implement. 
Comment 3 Michael Jahn 2004-07-10 13:35:26 UTC
Related: bug 26346.
Comment 4 Becheru Petru-Ioan 2005-04-25 18:41:36 UTC
I like the alternative.
My vote is here :)
Comment 5 Jonas Vejlin 2009-06-26 08:46:03 UTC
does this whis still valid in konq 4?
Comment 6 FiNeX 2009-08-16 15:12:29 UTC
The dialog has been improved a lot since then. The only issue left out is the "auto skip" button which doesn't have been renamed to "skip all". There is "overwrite all" and it could be ok having "skip all" too.

@David: what do you think about?
Comment 7 Kai Uwe Broulik 2010-08-31 01:56:06 UTC
I still hate the term „A newer file xyz is already present in xyz“ or „This operation will overwrite xyz with abc“. It’s still not as clear as it is in explorer since Windows 95!