Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • December 10, 2016, 08:47:02 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: Directory Opus 10  (Read 52432 times)

4wd

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 4,477
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #100 on: September 18, 2011, 06:46:41 AM »
That does indeed sound strange, just tried 10.0.1.x here and it never went above 10% - usually around 5-6%.

This on a Athlon 235e XP system, (CPU didn't even change up from it's 800MHz lowest frequency stepping).

J-Mac

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 2,913
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #101 on: September 18, 2011, 12:04:22 PM »
Windows 7 Home Premium. I understand that a lot of little glitches could very well be related to people's individual systems, and Lord knows that the combo of this Asus MoBo and nVidia Graphics card has given me fits the whole time I have owned this box. However I would not expect DOpus 10 to behave this much differently than DOpus 9 did on this same exact box. "All things being equal..." does apply here; and DOpus 10 definitely takes longer and uses a lot more of my machine's resources than DOpus 9 ever did on the same computer, with the same software and tweaks. They must have changed something that is causing it to behave poorly here.

Thanks!

Jim

superboyac

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,070
  • Is your software in my list?
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #102 on: September 19, 2011, 08:54:18 AM »
I'm calling it:  DOpus is my favorite program of all time.  There's only one program that gets used as much as DOpus, and that would be Firefox.  But firefox is boring compared to DOpus.

J-Mac

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 2,913
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #103 on: September 19, 2011, 01:33:55 PM »
It is one of my favorites also - but DOpus 10 is still a major pain, especially given all the time they had to get it ready. DOpus 10 was released more than four years after DOpus 9, yet it has not much in the way of new features; mostly improvements in its existing features.

Now I actually appreciate the fact that the last major upgrade, DO9, was good for four years with plenty of great and useful "minor" updates over those years. I read people's complaints about the cost of DOpus all the time but four years?!?! It is worth every cent I have ever spent on it! And though I also have lifetime licenses for both Total Commander and XYPlorer, DOpus is light years ahead of them IMO (and I do realize my opinion is mine alone and that many may disagree with me on that point). I use TC and XY at times for special tasks, but DOpus is a true Windows Explorer replacement for me.

However the number of bugs in DOpus 10 - and I am speaking of more than just my own recent rants here - seems disproportionate with the time they had to get this version ready. I don’t know, maybe the timing of Windows 7 messed them up. All I know is that this version is still giving me fits and taking up hours on some days to try and get something done, and I purchased and installed the DO10 upgrade on 1-May-2011! That's almost five months and for the most part the advice I get is "try installing the newest beta and see if that helps". Grrr...

Thanks for listening!

Jim

superboyac

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,070
  • Is your software in my list?
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #104 on: September 19, 2011, 05:49:14 PM »
It is one of my favorites also - but DOpus 10 is still a major pain, especially given all the time they had to get it ready. DOpus 10 was released more than four years after DOpus 9, yet it has not much in the way of new features; mostly improvements in its existing features.

Now I actually appreciate the fact that the last major upgrade, DO9, was good for four years with plenty of great and useful "minor" updates over those years. I read people's complaints about the cost of DOpus all the time but four years?!?! It is worth every cent I have ever spent on it! And though I also have lifetime licenses for both Total Commander and XYPlorer, DOpus is light years ahead of them IMO (and I do realize my opinion is mine alone and that many may disagree with me on that point). I use TC and XY at times for special tasks, but DOpus is a true Windows Explorer replacement for me.

However the number of bugs in DOpus 10 - and I am speaking of more than just my own recent rants here - seems disproportionate with the time they had to get this version ready. I don’t know, maybe the timing of Windows 7 messed them up. All I know is that this version is still giving me fits and taking up hours on some days to try and get something done, and I purchased and installed the DO10 upgrade on 1-May-2011! That's almost five months and for the most part the advice I get is "try installing the newest beta and see if that helps". Grrr...

Thanks for listening!

Jim
Interesting.  Well, at least they are active with bug fixes.  I've only noticed one glitch (which has remained from v9), an it's this:
Create a new collection and add some files/folders to it
Now, while in the collection, select everything and delete it (the real delete, not just remove it from the collection).
So now the items are actually deleted off the hard drive.  But if you refresh the collection, the items reappear.  Now, to get rid of it (since they don't exist anymore), you have to remove the items from the collection (using the other delete button).  I have to do this every time I need to hard delete items from a collection.  I should submit a bug fix...so lazy...

Nudel

  • Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 74
    • View Profile
    • << Pretentious Name >>
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #105 on: September 19, 2011, 11:55:42 PM »
DOpus 10 was released more than four years after DOpus 9, yet it has not much in the way of new features; mostly improvements in its existing features.

Have we read the same release notes? :-)

My opinion is obviously not unbiased (given that my name is in the About dialog these days :)), but I can't think of much other software where updates add the amount of changes that Opus 10 added.

Of course, if all the changes happen to be things that don't really interest you then it won't seem like a big update, but I think there are a lot of changes in Opus 10, many of which a lot of people had asked for. I think there has been a positive response to the update.


Quote
However the number of bugs in DOpus 10 - and I am speaking of more than just my own recent rants here - seems disproportionate with the time they had to get this version ready.

I guess we need better beta testers. :) I don't think there are many bugs left now, though.


Quote
All I know is that this version is still giving me fits and taking up hours on some days to try and get something done

Can you point me to the support or forum threads about that?


Quote
and I purchased and installed the DO10 upgrade on 1-May-2011! That's almost five months and for the most part the advice I get is "try installing the newest beta and see if that helps". Grrr...

I can only apologise if the issue you've been seeing hasn't been investigated properly, but without knowing which issue/thread we're talking about I can't investigate (or explain) further. Let me know and I'll look into it.

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,341
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #106 on: February 08, 2013, 05:42:42 AM »
Dopus 10.5 has been released.
These are the things that stood out for me:

  • Interface improvements, in particular tabs & tab groups -
    I dont use tab groups but might give them a go now (use lister layouts myself).
  • Some options to make tabs act more customisable (like in browsers)
  • I can add custom names to lister layouts
  • Tree highlighted to show where you're at
  • Control + mouse wheel can now be used to change font and thumbnail size
    In Thumbnails mode, turning the mouse wheel while holding the Control key down lets you adjust the size of the thumbnails. [doesnt work here yet (will report)]
  • Win 8 fixes

I'm always happy to see interface improvments, and there's some interesting ones here. Unfortunatley no viewer improvements.

full details:
http://gpsoft.com.au/help/opus10/default.htm#!Documents/Changes/10500.htm
Tom

clean

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2012
  • *
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #107 on: February 08, 2013, 09:12:05 AM »
I know many people here like DO a lot, and I see that both it's "pretty", and that you can do a lot with it. But then, I have never ever understood why there isn't one single of these "big shots" in file M (= DO, FB, SC, TC, X2, XY - these are in alphabetic order here) to offer more than just two panes in one screen / instance / "window" / whatever. To my knowledge, there isn't but that ugly, MS-like free thing (I looked it up for you, it's "Q-Dir", with up to 4 panes), without any serious functionality that offers 3 or even more than 3, but the combination "good functionality, professional offering, and more than just 2 panes" isn't available anywhere.

Why would this be so important? Because many users (= me included, but it's far from an "exotic" wish) often do a lot of "distribution" of files, from a "source" directory, into several other, target, folders, often with photos (if it had correct functionality here, XY would be ideal for that because of its rather new photo preview pane) and doing this by mouse is very stressing to any developing or outgrown "mouse arm".

So, "put selected item into pane 2/3/4", by respective key-assigned commands, would be a big relief (and would be a much faster workflow even for people who don't have any "mouse problems" (yet)) for lots of actual use of a file manager, but this would imply the intro of a third and fourth pane to begin with.

And yes, you could do it in a similar way with tabs, so additional panes ain't really necessary, for this (while coming certainly very handy for multi-source-mult-target shifting around of files), but then, commands for copying and / or moving the selected file in the active pane or tab, to the directory in tab 2/3/4 (let alone further ones) are NOT AVAILABLE in any of these more or less expensive (and otherwise, quite good) "major" file commanders.

So we have LACKING CORE FUNCTIONALITY in any of those, and that means, why should you buy the most expensive of them, when even that one isn't any better in this very important respect, even dozens of years after its creation?

So there's room for big improvement here, with DO, and with more reasonably priced competitors.

Let me add that of course I asked for such features, in vain, before complaining to third parties.

Or then, explain to me why I'd be totally wrong again, by asking for features that should have been available for the last 15 years.

Dormouse

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 1,044
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #108 on: February 08, 2013, 10:12:42 AM »
ShellLess Explorer lets you have as many open panels as you want (though I've not checked recent versions, it always used to advertise this as a major feature).

I liked it and do like being able to have multiple panes open, though none of the main file manager developers seem to like the idea. In practice, I found I was quite happy with Q-Dir for quick and easy portable use and liked having the power & configurability of DO for everything else. With Actual Windows 'Keep on top' option, it is easy to make any file manager work for me as if it has multi-pane options - but then I only want to use it manually using a mouse.

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #109 on: February 08, 2013, 10:29:52 AM »
Or then, explain to me why I'd be totally wrong again, by asking for features that should have been available for the last 15 years.

The features are available. But apparently it was the people that wrote Directory Opus who saw the potential and put in the time to write a program that provides them. And they (correctly IMO) guessed that those people who truly wanted - or actually needed - those features would be willing to buy D-Opus. Everybody else would just make do with whatever else they could get.

And so far, it looks like they were right about that.

I admire D-Opus. I would love to own a copy. But I really can't justify paying $69 for the amount of use I'd get out of it - or for those rare times when I definitely could benefit from some of the unique "power user" features it supports. That's just the way it goes sometimes. YMMV.

So in answer to your question why should you buy something like that - the simple answer is because it seems to be the only way you're going to be able to get it. Nobody is under any obligation to write software just because somebody else wants it. Most programs are born out of a personal desire or need for something that doesn't exist. When that happens to somebody with sufficient coding skills, a new app sometimes gets written. But that doesn't obligate the coder to share, or even sell it, if they don't want to.

C'est la vie. Try not to let it get you too frustrated. :)

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,341
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #110 on: February 08, 2013, 11:09:00 AM »
@clean, I've gotten used to using multiple (vertical) panes in InfoQube and have often thought it could be of great help in a file manager.

Screenshot - 2013-02-08 , 18_09_31.pngDirectory Opus 10

Let me add that of course I asked for such features, in vain, before complaining to third parties.

Or then, explain to me why I'd be totally wrong again, by asking for features that should have been available for the last 15 years.
There's no harm in asking :up:

All developers have their ways of deciding and at the end of the day 40 is right in saying (more or less) take it or leave it. Dopus -to me- make some weird decisions, hiding a lot of the power and capability, thereby forcing the user to look up help or go on forum and invest a lot of time in figuring out how to do things. It's almost like they're trying to make it easy looking. But end up making it more complicated than necessary. (Let's face it people dont drop that kind of money unless they want more capability.) XY let's you see a lot of it's power very quickly.
My peeve with Dopus is the viewer has a couple of minor flaws that really hinder usage of Dopus for working with images. Maybe they think that's for specialist software, I strongly disagree (as do others - but probably not 'enough') and it's their call at the end of the day...

I still use it every day and like it.
Tom
« Last Edit: February 08, 2013, 11:16:45 AM by tomos, Reason: minor - trying to phrase things clearer »

superboyac

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 6,070
  • Is your software in my list?
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #111 on: February 08, 2013, 11:37:37 AM »
^^that's cool, what you've done with IQ.

40hz

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2007
  • **
  • Posts: 11,768
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #112 on: February 08, 2013, 12:13:05 PM »
@tomos +1 w/SB. Very cool! :Thmbsup:

(That program never ceases to amaze me when I see what clever people do with it.)

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,341
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #113 on: February 08, 2013, 12:44:27 PM »
thanks guys :-[
wasnt me that done it though ;D
dunno was it even Pierre - I believe that functionality is made by someone else - it's partly the same as what File Hamster use in their interface - you have very flexible positioning options if you drag a tab or panel:

Screenshot - 2013-02-08 , 19_41_36.pngDirectory Opus 10

In IQ, I usually only use three panes at the most - just set up 4 for emphasis (I'm not sure how many you can open - just tried six but run out of screen space then).

The file manager could definitely take a lot from outliners and browsers in terms of ease of use and flexibility. I suggested tab functionality/options like in FF (with tabmixplus) years ago (in the dopus forum).
Also in FF I love the flexibility of the Session Manager addon. This is reflected in a limited way in Dopus with their saved lister layouts (I always hoped they would make them more accessible via an 'open' dialogue). I'm curious to check out their new tab group features.
Tom

clean

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2012
  • *
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #114 on: February 08, 2013, 01:21:27 PM »
Tomos, allow my joining in for giving kudos, and indeed, I should have a much more thorough look into IQ than I have had in the past! And I think your analysis of DO is spot-on.

40hz, you say, "Nobody is under any obligation to write software just because somebody else wants it." - You're so right, and that's why I insist on repeating what I'm asking for is not "exotic" in any way, but should be available from ANY of these paid file commanders (from which I own three).

Also, when you say, the features are available, you're not entirely wrong since with "sending to tabs" at least, you could do something, by programming; prob is, almost any such file commanders asks for its own special programming language, or terminology, and what the developers easily could implement as code into their respective file manager, you're bound to program first, as a user, and then run / trigger macros every time. It's this way I highly spiced up my IMS, with an outliner, AHK scripts and lots of additional keys, "from the outside", but I don't have enough knowledge and time to do the same for such file manager scripting.

And again, these should be basic functions, so why ain't they available to programmers, i.e. to people able to do such scripts in reasonable time?

Tomos, since you speak of images, I should have added - in fact, I had searched for this, some months ago, in two dozen or so image "viewers" and such - that not a single such image "viewer", i.e. file managers specialized in pictures, has got such functionality either, and I finally wrote some very basic ahk scripts in order to facilitate their respective "copy / move to folder xyz" functionality, which is very un-elegant and time-consuming since in any case, it implies flashing dialog boxes and such.

Dormouse, thank you for the hint to ShellLess Explorer - I had trialled about 20 such file commanders (and bought three of them), but this one had been unknown to me. (Is 30 bucks, no prob, could buy a fourth one.) Will have to trial.

As for Q-Dir, there is no functionality for copying / moving files around between its four panes, except by mouse, of course.

And finally, since there's also this thread about the difficulties of finding a decent image browser, let me say that for viewing images, there's nothing better than "Fast Picture Viewer", but there are several flaws:

- It's in version 1.95 or such, and major upgrades are paid, so for some time now, it's definitely not been the ideal moment for buying

- With XP, you only see the one big picture displayed, since for the strip of previews on the top of the screen, the prog relies upon some Windows functionality not available before Vista

- The tree component of this prog (for determining the source, and the target folders) is abysmal, never ever found something that bad.

But as said, as a viewer, its a class of its own (and I also own Lightroom - with which I'm very unhappy btw).

40hz, again, "Nobody is under any obligation to write software just because somebody else wants it." - I've got a slight problem with that stance, "I want this feature, another one wants that feature, and the developer will implement a third one."

In fact, when it's not exotic features, it would be really helpful that users back up their respective feature wishes; it's "divide et impera" that enables developers to work on irrelevant features, when at the same time they never do the work that'd be needed.

Then, let me add that FB (FileBoss) is even more expensive than DO, for professional use! (I'm waiting for their new version, in order to check if "distribution functionality", other than by mouse, has been introduced there.

40hz, re-reading your passage, "The features are available. But apparently it was the people that wrote Directory Opus who saw the potential and put in the time to write a program that provides them. And they (correctly IMO) guessed that those people who truly wanted - or actually needed - those features would be willing to buy D-Opus. Everybody else would just make do with whatever else they could get."

- ??? From my trialling, these features are NOT available! "Distribution", perhaps, by scripting, but they won't script it for you. And for more than two panes (= "listers" in their terminology), neither: It'd be more than one "window" as they call it, that'd be something like several instances of a file commander - now write some script juggling around files between those.

That's not slick, that's not professional.

No, the fact is simple: Even if you are willing to pay 120 bucks for a fast file "distribution" feature, it's not on offer, anywhere, and shifting around files is CORE functionality of a file manager, so it should be assisted, and it isn't.

In any sw category, I can give you examples of missing core functionality: It's a shame, 25 years within the pc. These developers are just too lazy to implement some 80 lines of rather simple code: It's insulting. (We're not speaking of cloning and hoisting, let alone multiple tree re-arrangements in outliners (cf. Bonsai): there, you'd need real good programming capabilities for. We're speaking of core functionality and of implementation taking 2 hours of these developers' time, make it 4 incl. debugging. Njet. Not for 100 bucks apiece. And then, as tomos says, and as others have said before, DO seems to have got some probs with images, anyway.)

Shades

  • Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 2,100
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #115 on: February 08, 2013, 01:45:40 PM »
For most intents and purposes more than 2 panes are not interesting. PC/Windows supports only one source and one destination.

Directory Opus originated on the Amiga home computer and version 5.x was the last one before they moved to PC. The Amiga did support "multiple sources-one destination" and "one source-multiple destinations" scenarios. Dopus 5 supported that without any problem. Open up as many windows as you liked/memory permitted, tag each one as as SOURCE or DESTINATION and initiate the copy functionality. Worked like a charm.

With the limits that Windows has regarding file-management I understand completely why GP Software made the choice to limit the amount of panes to 2.

Never really used the image viewer in DOpus though (Irfanview, all the way!!), so I can't help with that one.

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,341
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #116 on: February 08, 2013, 02:36:21 PM »
Yeah, good point Shades. And if I do really want a third pane I can open another window and use gridmove or whatever to line them up.


Tomos, since you speak of images, I should have added - in fact, I had searched for this, some months ago, in two dozen or so image "viewers" and such - that not a single such image "viewer", i.e. file managers specialized in pictures, has got such functionality either, and I finally wrote some very basic ahk scripts in order to facilitate their respective "copy / move to folder xyz" functionality, which is very un-elegant and time-consuming since in any case, it implies flashing dialog boxes and such.

Sorry, I didnt explain my Dopus image viewer comments, see dopus forum thread Request for Viewer: copy filepath + open in external editor for more details.
Tom

clean

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2012
  • *
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #117 on: February 08, 2013, 03:23:55 PM »
"tag each one as as SOURCE or DESTINATION"

Ok, the source would be a single lister then, this will make 4 (instead of 5) possible targets within 2 more "windows" (or 6 in 3 more "windows"). Very good. Now please tell me how, between these 4 target "listers", within "windows" 2 and 3, I could switch the target, but without clicking the mouse all over the screen. Key assignment? Which command(s)? And no, you can't find this in the "help" file:

http://www.gpsoft.co..._and_Destination.htm

And neither do they answer you if you kindly ask them for that info; I did, in vain.

And with all due respect, Window's inability to copy / move the same file to more than one target directory AT THE SAME TIME has nothing to do with my wish of being able to switch the target directory in an easy way. "Worked like a charm." - yes, for people who like to move their mouse on screen the extra mile each work day, right? - or is there a COMMAND behind it that I could assign to keys: "make lister 5 the target lister" (= even split up between several commands, then to be combined into a macro).

And yes, I know their command reference, but I don't find the commands needed.

So please tell me how it could "work like a charm" for me, too.

(Sorry, but an illogic point can't be a good point by definition.)

"and use gridmove or whatever to line them up" - that's what I call unprofessional indeed.

tomos

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,341
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #118 on: February 08, 2013, 04:02:42 PM »
"and use gridmove or whatever to line them up" - that's what I call unprofessional indeed.
whoa  :tellme:
I use the keyboard a lot but I'm no whiz - and I didnt grow up using computers. So calling me (or anyone else) 'unprofessional' is uncalled for imo. We're not *all* experts here... (I guess your response was directed less at my post but seeing as you quote me....)

I'd love to actually have started using computers in the keyboard age but I missed that. I was actually thinking earlier of asking people if they thought that the early keyboard orientated file managers were actually more user friendly (once learned) than newer managers.
Tom

clean

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2012
  • *
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #119 on: February 08, 2013, 06:16:50 PM »
I

tomos, I'm sorry there's been a misunderstanding.

You do the best you can, with underwhelming sw; I have used window managers in order to glue frames together, and I finished by having set up a two screen combination (cf. my description of it here: http://www.donationc...ex.php?topic=32735.0 ), and I would like to add here, re this setting, that a relevant part of my system is wndhop.exe, a small, free utility that by pressing Win+Enter will shift your current window into the other screen.

What I meant was, it's totally unprofessional, on the part of developers (!), to force your users to employ such mean means: Instead of providing 3 or 4 "listers" for those who would like to use them, you "offer" several "windows" that then will not even automatically glue together but will "flow" on your screen and cause endless trouble there: This is all ridiculous and inacceptable - and the fact that you can maximize both windows to two different screens, isn't any good since your file commander is a TOOL, and should be considered secondary to your main applications. So there is no real excuse for this, and the price of this thing only adds to this total unprofessionalism. (see below)

I hadn't been aware you could take my criticism that was entirely directed to gpsoft's product, personally; if I had foreseen this possibility, I would have worded otherwise. Sorry again, has never been even my intention to insinuate something like this.

II

As for the ostensible irrelevance of my wanting 3 or 4 panes, I'll try again.

Very often, I rearrange not just some files, but rather big groups of files that are categorized into some 2 or 3 sub-folders, and I re-arrange them into different groupings.

Then, this re-arrangement, most of time, isn't into brand-new sub-folders, but partly into existing ones, i.e. some that have some content yet. And here, I then see files that, with the new content from those other sub-folders, would not be at their right place here in the future, so my re-arrangements are not really from one source folder into more than one target folders, but rather crosswise, from folder a into b, from a into c, from c into d, from c into b, from b into d.

Now, with the usual arrangement of just two panes, you'll DEFER all these moves that ain't readily available, and you try to GROUP them, i.e. you do what you easily CAN do, and then you open another sub-folder within the second pane, and you try to do a max here, shifting around, between these two specific folders, as many files as you can get for this task. Then again, another "combi" of just two panes, and so on and on and on.

Now, with four such panes visible at the same time, it's much more easy to shuffle all these files around, one by one, without having to "form groups for further processing", etc., you just work "naturally": this file doesn't belong in pane 2, so you press the key that will move it to pane 4, etc., with any such file, as long as it doesn't belong into a fifth or sixth pane: In my scenario, it's only for these files that you'll need "further processing".

It's clear as day that for re-arranging files within a group of similar sub-folders, such a more-than-just-2-panes setting comes extremely handy, and in practice, most of the time, it's just the THIRD pane that I'm missing: it's rare that I'd need a fourth, let alone a fifth or sixth pane.

And this means, this Norton Commander DOS style, 20 years after DOS, is RIDICULOUS and UNPROFESSIONAL, all the more so for 100-bucks sw, since much better solutions would come extremely handy for everyone, and would not be difficult to implement.

And now, with the mouse, with drag-n-drop, and with several windows (or even just run two competing file commanders concurrently and do the drag and drop between them), this is technically possible, but it's unprofessional, and it's a big pain in my arm...

and younger people here that don't have such medical probs should be warned: Today's web pages force you to do a tremendous amount of mouse shifting (and clicking, theoretically, so I bought (the overpriced) "Nib" sw years ago, and without it, I would probably not be able to even type anymore) -

so, you do your lot of mouse shifting (and clicking) on web pages alone: No need whatsoever to do heavy drag n drop in any other prog since here, those developers could perfectly do otherwise than forcing you to endless mouse abuse.

Mice are harmful to your health, that's a proven fact. Are you sure you won't get probs, next year or in ten years? Ok, a truck could roll over you in the meantime, but that'd be fate. Problems in your right arm would be pure silliness (of yours, and the developers laugh all their way to the bank (since your "mouse preference" gives them the opportunity to go swim, instead of implementing some keyboard shortcuts, at their office, when outside the sun's shining).

Think again about mouse use whenever you could avoid it.

Have a look into the web: There are special keyboards used in news agencies like Reuters and such, with many additional keys: They are professionals: They know what they do.

And no, it's NOT because their offices ain't big enough, and there'd be no space for a mouse pad ;-)
« Last Edit: February 08, 2013, 06:29:41 PM by clean »

cthorpe

  • Discount Coordinator
  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 728
  • c++thorpe
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #120 on: February 08, 2013, 06:29:33 PM »
If you need four panes simply to have targets to drop files into when sorting them, why not use the folder tree views?  You can lock the each tree to show whatever folder you want, and then you can drag and drop whatever you want from either pane.

Horizontal

2-8-2013 7-27-42 PM.jpg


Vertical

2-8-2013 7-31-56 PM.jpg

clean

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2012
  • *
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #121 on: February 08, 2013, 06:58:53 PM »
"and then you can drag and drop whatever you want from either pane"

OMG !

No, thank you, cthorpe, I see you try to be helpful, and I know I mix up two things here: More than just two panes, AND keyboard functionality. But then, I explain in detail why drag and drop is to be avoided, and then this (I'm sure our posts crossed by some seconds, which explains this)...

But on a more serious level, your solution isn't that practical even for drag and drop afficionados, since, as said, this "moving around files" is NOT done from one source to several target, but from "anywhere in the lot to anywhere in the lot", and that's why, e.g., tabs ain't a solution either, even with (missing!) commands like "move selection to tab 1/2/3..." - it's, as said, all about "natural working", picking this file here, moving it there, then picking another another one and moving that around. With tree views, instead of folder views, that's not possible. Thus, thanks, but no, thanks. No, it's up to these developers to have some second thoughts about what they make us miss: 2 panes only, as in Norton Commander of the Ancient Age, that's almost incredible, in view of what could easily be done instead.

cthorpe

  • Discount Coordinator
  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 728
  • c++thorpe
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #122 on: February 09, 2013, 12:00:50 AM »
So you want to have a graphical interface to use keyboard shortcuts?  Why the insistence on more than 2 panes if you aren't going to utilize them in any real way?

If you want to input keyboard commands to move files into your sorting system, then create scripts in the program of your choice to do so.

Heck, you can even create the scripts inside of DO and call them via key sequences.

You clearly have a ridged set of requirements for how you are going to work with your files.  Why would you expect a file manager to understand your system and work with it, when your system is yours alone?

And if you want to move from "anywhere in the lot" to "anywhere in the lot," how many panes do you need?  At some point you are going to have to manipulate the panes to show where you want to move the files.  Once again, why demand more panes when you will just have to find the correct destination?

Quote
These developers are just too lazy to implement some 80 lines of rather simple code: It's insulting. (We're not speaking of cloning and hoisting, let alone multiple tree re-arrangements in outliners (cf. Bonsai): there, you'd need real good programming capabilities for. We're speaking of core functionality and of implementation taking 2 hours of these developers' time, make it 4 incl. debugging. Njet. Not for 100 bucks apiece. And then, as tomos says, and as others have said before, DO seems to have got some probs with images, anyway.)

80 lines of simple code?

This thread is many, many times that number of lines, and I still don't think we are all clear about what we are even arguing about.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2013, 01:06:24 AM by cthorpe »

tomos away

  • Participant
  • Joined in 2011
  • *
  • default avatar
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #123 on: February 09, 2013, 03:52:29 AM »
tomos, I'm sorry there's been a misunderstanding.

sorry to you too clean! I probably read your post too quickly
Tom (tomos)

(ps the 'away' tag is from forgetting my password when not on my own pc - & then only having saved the 'away' account in lastpass. Have to fix that...)

Shades

  • Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 2,100
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Directory Opus 10
« Reply #124 on: February 09, 2013, 04:42:06 AM »
Although the NTFS file-system is fast, reliable, journalled, etc., it is also limited with the one source - one destination scenario. The Amiga home computer did this better. Likely there were more yesteryear operating systems capable of this, but I only have first hand experience with the Amiga, so I'll keep referencing to that.

Whenever you give windows the command to copy/move files by keyboard or mouse, Windows passes the job to the filesystem to do the actual work. No amount of code is going to fix that. Or GPSoftware should write their own file-system. And that is not likely going to happen or even be allowed by Microsoft. Although there might be options with multi-threading nowadays, that still means a huge revision of the existing codebase.

All I want to say is that it is most definitely not a simple case of 80 lines of code to conquer this limitation. I think that GPSoftware is doing a great job with the imposed limits that exist in the Windows operating system. Then again, you could consider me a DOpus fanboy.

Each and any Operating System has limits designed into it, there will always be someone smart to find some tricks to be as efficiently as possible with the given limits, but in the end of the day, the limits are what they are and the only solution left to the user is to work around them.