|
Dirhael
|
 |
« Reply #125 on: October 20, 2007, 07:09:15 AM » |
|
Correct me if I'm wrong but, your definition of a virtual folder sounds like a folder filled with hard-links?
Must be. I wonder how it can work otherwise... unless it's using the NTFS Alternate data Streams + a database, or something similar, like the tag2find software. In DOpus: It's definitely not hardlinks - cause the folder doesnt actually exist anywhere - you cant create subfolders - e.g. say you have a virtual folder "ABC", containing folders 1, 2, & 3: you cant make a new folder in ABC & drag 1 2 & 3 into it. Cant make the subfolder atall. It's more comparable to a tagging system really  Also you cant add files to the root collection(virtual) folder it's just a virtual containing folder I feel the need to correct you a bit, as you are not correct in all of what you are saying. You can create as many subfolders as you'd like in a virtual folder, and move them around as you see fit. The only thing that could prevent you from handling them pretty much like folders on a real filesystem is if you create them as "members" instead of "sub-collections" (see picture)  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Registered nurse by day, hobby programmer by night.
|
|
|
|
urlwolf
|
|
« Reply #126 on: October 20, 2007, 07:44:40 AM » |
|
Tc ultima prime 3.1 released.
Now it makes breakfast too.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tomos
|
|
« Reply #127 on: October 20, 2007, 09:37:30 AM » |
|
In DOpus: It's definitely not hardlinks - cause the folder doesnt actually exist anywhere - you cant create subfolders - e.g. say you have a virtual folder "ABC", containing folders 1, 2, & 3: you cant make a new folder in ABC & drag 1 2 & 3 into it. Cant make the subfolder atall. It's more comparable to a tagging system really Also you cant add files to the root collection(virtual) folder it's just a virtual containing folder I feel the need to correct you a bit, as you are not correct in all of what you are saying. You can create as many subfolders as you'd like in a virtual folder, and move them around as you see fit. The only thing that could prevent you from handling them pretty much like folders on a real filesystem is if you create them as "members" instead of "sub-collections" ah, Dirhael, is that an Opus 9 thing? - I've never gotten asked that in Version 8 at any rate.  When I rethink it - I'm not definite about whether they are hard-links or not I was thinking about junction points  still think they not hard links Breakfast sounds good urlwolf.. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dirhael
|
|
« Reply #128 on: October 20, 2007, 11:19:47 AM » |
|
In DOpus: It's definitely not hardlinks - cause the folder doesnt actually exist anywhere - you cant create subfolders - e.g. say you have a virtual folder "ABC", containing folders 1, 2, & 3: you cant make a new folder in ABC & drag 1 2 & 3 into it. Cant make the subfolder atall. It's more comparable to a tagging system really Also you cant add files to the root collection(virtual) folder it's just a virtual containing folder I feel the need to correct you a bit, as you are not correct in all of what you are saying. You can create as many subfolders as you'd like in a virtual folder, and move them around as you see fit. The only thing that could prevent you from handling them pretty much like folders on a real filesystem is if you create them as "members" instead of "sub-collections" ah, Dirhael, is that an Opus 9 thing? - I've never gotten asked that in Version 8 at any rate. When I rethink it - I'm not definite about whether they are hard-links or not I was thinking about junction points still think they not hard links Breakfast sounds good urlwolf.. Hmm...you know, I'm not sure. Been so long since I last used v8 that I just don't remember. You are correct in that they aren't hardlinks/junctions, even if you can create those as well in Dopus (though not in collections) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Registered nurse by day, hobby programmer by night.
|
|
|
|
kalos
|
|
« Reply #129 on: November 21, 2007, 06:29:46 PM » |
|
xplorer2 is supposed to be the best file manager
but it doesn't display the size of the folders or I miss something?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nosh
|
|
« Reply #130 on: November 21, 2007, 07:44:27 PM » |
|
Go to details view and press Ctrl D, it'll start listing the folder sizes starting from the selected folder. You can also enable folder sizes to be shown at all times in the program options but this will slow things down.
If you haven't read the manual you're only scratching the surface of what X2 can do, BTW.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Darwin
|
|
« Reply #131 on: December 04, 2007, 10:34:26 PM » |
|
Funny - I'd like to change my vote but as the "architect" of the poll all I can do is edit it or lock it, but not change my vote  I'm now using multiple file managers, although still use Dopus 9 as my Windows Explorer replacement. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Some people have a way with words, other people,... oh... have not way" - Steve Martin
|
|
|
|
JohnFredC
|
|
« Reply #132 on: December 05, 2007, 06:27:51 AM » |
|
If you haven't read the manual you're only scratching the surface of what X2 can do, BTW.
This is my basic complaint about most software: "hidden" behaviors, INI settings completely missing from the interface, etc. If I need to read the manual, then the user interface has not been optimally designed. Ideally, the interface should be completely transparent for a user familiar with the functional domain to which the software applies. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tomos
|
|
« Reply #133 on: December 05, 2007, 06:48:18 AM » |
|
If I need to read the manual, then the user interface has not been optimally designed. Ideally, the interface should be completely transparent for a user familiar with the functional domain to which the software applies.
you can forget about DOpus then too... in fairness when I got DOpus I wasnt "familiar with the functional domain to which the software applies" but I still think you'd need to read a good bit in order to be really able to use the programme or to configure it (I havent used DOpus9 but certainly with 8 they could have made a lot of stuff a lot more accessible - on the other hand I think over 2 years it has easily repaid any time invested to figure it out)... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
nosh
|
|
« Reply #134 on: December 05, 2007, 09:15:23 AM » |
|
If I need to read the manual, then the user interface has not been optimally designed. Ideally, the interface should be completely transparent for a user familiar with the functional domain to which the software applies.
I agree with you to the extent that there are a few apps that made hitherto straightforward tasks unnecessarily complex or change something familiar for an unjustifiably small or no boost in performance. A learning curve to square one. If you made that statement with regard to Office 2007 and the ghastly ribbon interface I'd agree with you whole-heartedly. You don't need to read the X2 manual for ordinary tasks, however. It emulates Windows Explorer pretty well in that sense. For the more advanced functionality you obviously have to put in the necessary effort to get the benefits. I wouldn't say Photoshop or MS Word (2003) are not optimally designed apps just coz a Notepad user needs to read up about mail merge or an MS Paint user needs to read up about layers to start using them. The reason I mentioned the manual is ironically enough, because X2 is one of those file managers that comes across as very familiar to the Windows Explorer user. The downside to this is that most people tend not to realise the amazing functionality the lies beneath the unassuming interface... till they actually bother reading about it. I think the amount of transparency that an app can have depends on the level of power/complexity involved. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 05, 2007, 09:22:51 AM by nosh »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
zridling
|
|
« Reply #135 on: December 05, 2007, 10:44:07 AM » |
|
It's XYplorer for me, too. Small, tightly-coded, portable, affordable (Lifetime license!), fully customizable, customizable keyboard shortcuts throughout, including of folders, files, and places like the recycle bin or other system components. You get the drift. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Curt
|
|
« Reply #136 on: December 05, 2007, 11:43:02 AM » |
|
My commanders at the moment are Commander, FreeCommander and Unreal Commander- all gratis dual pane types, and all worth a try. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Remember what you said, because in a day or two, I'll have a witty and blistering retort! You'll be devastated THEN!
|
|
|
|
roady
|
|
« Reply #137 on: December 05, 2007, 02:03:16 PM » |
|
My choice is Total Commander,embedded in the Ultima Prime package......TC UP is the 1st program I open after booting my system.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
enginer
|
|
« Reply #138 on: December 14, 2007, 07:39:07 AM » |
|
 I picked Xplorer2 after searching many chat groups, but found it didn't solve my problems with Windows Explorer: Even with FastFind turned off, with only my eMail handler running, and no web activity, my system was frequently bogged down and slow. Process Manager usually shows Windows Explorer using 92 to 97 % of the CPU cycles. One reply hints at this, but what file manager is better as a resource hog? What are the issues that I can investigate to set a correct install/priority to keep a file manager from slowing other applications down? TIA
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tomos
|
|
« Reply #139 on: December 14, 2007, 07:46:31 AM » |
|
@ enginer:
sounds like your problem is with win explorer -
I mean getting another file manager isnt going to solve that problem cause explorer still runs - as to what will maybe someone else could help...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
enginer
|
|
« Reply #141 on: December 14, 2007, 09:06:15 AM » |
|
Ah, ....
Tomos: There is a registry option in some of the file managers that allow substitution of , for example, Xplorer2 as the default file manager. I believe in that case (haven't tried it yet) Win Explorer never runs.
I have noticed that Xplorer2 chews up a lot of CPU at times; that >could< be because it is using some Win Wxplorer DLL's if Win Explorer is not turned off
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
tomos
|
|
« Reply #142 on: December 14, 2007, 09:41:51 AM » |
|
Tomos: There is a registry option in some of the file managers that allow substitution of , for example, Xplorer2 as the default file manager. I believe in that case (haven't tried it yet) Win Explorer never runs. I could well be wrong but I believe all the file managers that "replace" explorer dont actually completely replace it e.g. Dopus: you can "replace" explorer with it but explorer still runs in the background doing various other (mysterious) things that explorer does I never used them but is it the case that "shell" replacements actually replace explorer? which are something else alltogether I think so, hopefully someone else might chime in there. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
rjbull
|
|
« Reply #143 on: December 14, 2007, 10:31:35 AM » |
|
what file manager is better as a resource hog? What are the issues that I can investigate to set a correct install/priority to keep a file manager from slowing other applications down?
You might consider a bit of lateral thinking, and try out Mouser's Process Tamer here at Donation Coder:
Process Tamer is a tiny (140k) and super efficient utility for Microsoft Windows XP/2K/NT that runs in your system tray and constantly monitors the cpu usage of other processes. When it sees a process that is overloading your cpu, it reduces the priority of that process temporarily, until its cpu usage returns to a reasonable level.
I use Total Commander all the time, including my Win98SE laptop, and don't find problems with it. From what little I've used Ztree Win (which is console mode) and XYplorer, the new kid on the block, a no-install program with free version as well as a payware one, I haven't seen problems with them either. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
a_lunatic
|
|
« Reply #144 on: December 14, 2007, 10:59:00 AM » |
|
but explorer still runs in the background doing various other (mysterious) things that explorer does I know explorer runs your taskbar as I kill it sometimes & taskbar disappears & run 3Dmark06 tests |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
iphigenie
|
|
« Reply #145 on: December 16, 2007, 05:46:15 AM » |
|
I have had total commander for years and it does the basics really well and fast. I am a bit overwhelmed by the plugins and customisation options, in the sense that they are not friendly enough for me to know how to make a good smooth tool out of it. I use some but I find the fact that most add ons appear in "network locations" quite unsettling and confusing. I tooked at the TC UP package and it shows what can be done, although I would only want maybe 1/3 of the components... I should spend more time figuring this out, but there is one thing that really irks me in TC and makes me use powerdesk regularly, and that is: sorting never applies to directories. Never has. WHY???  Anyway, I have started trying a few others, although it seems to me none of them do the basics (browse, copy) as fast and efficiently as I can get them done in TC - I dont want to drag-and-drop files, reaching for the mouse is slow :S |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
iphigenie
|
|
« Reply #146 on: December 16, 2007, 07:59:14 AM » |
|
never mind i found the option. phew. Cant figure out how i missed it before so many times. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 16, 2007, 08:01:50 AM by iphigenie »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Armando
|
|
« Reply #148 on: December 19, 2007, 08:39:30 PM » |
|
I briefly looked through the documentation: looks interesting. Unusual interface (well, to me)... Anybody actually tried it?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"I suppose it can be said that I'm an absent-minded driver. It's true that I've driven through a number of red lights on occasion, but on the other hand, I've stopped at a lot of green ones but never gotten credit for it."
Glenn Gould
|
|
|
|
rjbull
|
|
« Reply #149 on: December 20, 2007, 04:28:53 AM » |
|
There is also this kind of special file manager: SurF (freeware).
Humpf. Needs .NET Framework. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
