Prodoc
You have put forward some interesting ideas, some of them impractical but interesting nonetheless.
You said:
Quote:
|
As an intermediate solution I would like to propose a change of behaviour. Instead of copying the files when they are dragged from the download window I think they should actually be moved (optional or not but at least default). This makes much more sense from a handling perspective.
|
Copying and Moving is governed by the O/S you are using and if you want your app to work with windows then you have to follow it's rules. Therefore changing how "Copying and Moving" works is beyond the scope of Limewire and is strictly down to how MS wants the O/S to work.
Saying that, maybe if your showed your girlfriend's dad how to use "Cut & Paste (Move & Copy)" within Windows Explorer then he would not create unnecessary copies of his MP3 files.
You also said:
Quote:
From a sharing perspective it's a different ball game though. When the files are moved they won't be available for sharing anymore in the current situation. To overcome this problem a feature could be implemented to automatically let LimeWire handle the organisation of the files by placing the files in subfolders based on the users criteria:
- Organise all files in one download folder
- Organise files by artist subfolder
- Organise files by artist subfolder containing an album subfolder
With this, all subfolders can automatically be shared again and users won't have a need to move files after downloading.
|
This is a very good idea but it would go on to introduce an extra layer of complexity with the LW app and, as you look through the various postings, you will find that many, many people already find LW complex enough. And to be honest, although you, myself and other experienced users would use this facility I fear than many others would not, they would simply leave it unused.
On balance, I am in favour of additional extra facilities, such as auto sorting from the Incomplete folder to a predestined sub-folders of my choosing. However, I would imagine that the LW programmers would weigh up what is required now (urgent) as opposed to something that would be “nice to have” before writing and implementing something this big. And, unfortunately, your suggestion though good, in my book, would fall under "nice to have" category.
UK Bob