Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
12 Windows Explorer Alternatives Compared
JavaJones:
TotalCommander = FireFox, xPlorer^2 = Opera? :D
- Oshyan
wasker:
I'm another one for Xplorer2. I was completely sold on it when saw how it utilizes all underlying power of usual Explorer and adds tons of useful things on top. And, boy, it's really cute out-of-the-box and ergonomic.
I was using FAR Manager before switching to X2, BTW.
gussan:
TotalCommander = FireFox, xPlorer^2 = Opera?
JavaJones, what a great comparisson (alsmot an equation), I just was thinking the same yesterday (but just the part TotalCommander = FireFox), and I was going to write it today.
FireFox, its extensions and speed beats Opera, even though Opera for most users is good enough. The same happens with TC versus Xplorer2 (limited for me, I repeat for me). Anyway, each person has the right to choose their file manager depending on their needs.
JavaJones:
Well, the way the "equation" worked in my head was this:
Total Commander: starts out limited in functionality and you wonder "what's so special?", but then you find out there are many, many plugins that can do almost anything you want.
Result: If you are willing to customize, it can be "the best".
Xplorer2 (or XYplorer, or others): starts out ready-to-use with lots of built-in functions (that TC may require a plugin for), but less expandable.
Result: If you don't like having to customize and/or the default configuration "out of the box" is good for you, this is a faster, easier approach than TC.
You could replace TC and Xplorer2 in those sentences above with Firefox and Opera respectively, and it would make perfect sense to me. Now mind you I haven't tried TC yet, so I don't know just how limited it may be in default configuration. I feel Firefox is pretty limited without extensions though. Also Opera is demonstrably faster than FF, but I don't know if TC is slower than Xplorer2. ;)
- Oshyan
wasker:
Xplorer2 (or XYplorer, or others): starts out ready-to-use with lots of built-in functions (that TC may require a plugin for), but less expandable.-JavaJones (October 24, 2006, 11:59 AM)
--- End quote ---
I don't want to have a religious war here, but this statement doesn't reflect the whole reality. X2 IS expandable, but does it in Explorer's way - i.e. you can implement standard Explorer's shell extensions which will work (mostly) in X2. So, in fact, it's not "less expandable", it's simply the question of numbers: TC has way bigger audience which writes plug-ins for it. The abilities for add-ons functionality in X2 is not less than in TC from developer's point of view.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version