When comparing GNOME Files (Nautilus) vs Krusader, the Slant community recommends Krusader for most people. In the question“What are the best Linux file managers?” Krusader is ranked 7th while GNOME Files (Nautilus) is ranked 12th.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Allows you to access remote or local locations
On recent versions of GNOME, you can click the Files entry in the panel to access a specific location (remote or local), connect to a certain server (FTP, SFTP, SAMBA, etc.), access your bookmarks, open a new window, as well as to change its default functionality.
Pro Widely supported
The program is distributed as a single source archive, which can be configured, compiled and installed on almost any Linux flavor. There are no binary files for a specific Linux distribution, but you can install it directly from the default software channels of your operating system.
Pro Minimalistic looking
It does what it is supposed to do, and leaves a lot of screen space to look for a file.
Pro Easy to use and familiar user interface for Ubuntu users
The user interface of Files is very familiar to Ubuntu users, most probably because Canonical still uses Nautilus (an old version of it) as the default file manager for its world’s most popular free operating system, Ubuntu Linux.
It split into two parts, a sidebar and the main file viewer. While you already know what the latter can do for you, the sidebar offers quick access to Places, Devices and Network locations, as well as any other bookmarks that you can add whenever you want.
Pro Nautilus action configuration tool can configure systems in ways no other FM can
It can configure popup menu depending on file type.
Pro Great two-pane interface
Pro Folder synchronization
Pro Virtual file systems
Search results as example saved into virtual folder and can be accessed later. All file operations may be performed on items in search results as if they were files in single folder.
Pro SFTP support
Pro Handles most archives. There is little difference in behaviour between an archive file and a regular folder.
Pro Searching capabilities and copying/deleting/moving in background
Pro All common operations can be done with keyboard efficiently
In addition, shortcuts can be easily renamed.
Unlike Dolphin and many others.
Pro Many operations like copying and moving files can be queued
Long running operations can be queued.
There is no point in doing them in a parallel way, as speed decreases dramatically.
Pro Can view and edit many files
Even editing a file inside a .zip file.
Has hexadecimal viewer embedded for binary files.
Pro Filename association and instant console availability
Pro Multi-rename tool
Pro Custom commands can be added to the menu easily
And they can use the current folder, the selected files....
Con It has lost so much functionality
As already stated, this is not well configurable anymore. One can not even start in dual pane mode for cut/copy and paste. Just a ridiculous transgression. It was great just 1-2 years ago, but over-simplification in this case is detrimental to functionality.
Con Mostly unconfigurable
There are not many ways to configure Nautilus to fit your needs. Besides what can be seen in the settings button you can't configure it further.
Con Slow at moving picture folders
A move, even to the same disk, can take a minute for a folder containing a hundred images.
It is not updated frequently and Ubuntu could stop using Nautilus and switch to Nemo.
Con Forces you to constantly swap between mouse and keyboard
Con Has too many bugs
There are too many bugs at the current state for this file browser to be usable.
Con KDE dependencies
If you don't use KDE, you'll be forced to install quite a large amount of KDE libraries.
Con Interface can be overwhelming
Con New releases are infrequent
It can be seen in https://quickgit.kde.org/?p=krusader.git that maintenance work is done in a continous fashion, but no new releases are provided.
Even though it is perhaps the more feature-rich file manager.