I am looking for a file browser that is optimized especially for networks

[kartal]

Hi

Due to my job I need to use Vpns and network browsing alot. I am wondering if there is any epxlorer replacement that can browse files faster. All the things I had tried lterally hangs once in awhile when I try to get file listing and I do hate that.

I tried

Freecommander, Ultra explorer, Xyplorer, Nexus etc These are all fine file browsers but they are not that good when it comes to network browsing.


ideas?

[Darwin]

I've used DOpus 9 over my home network and it's nice and quick.

[kartal]

Does it have network caching?

Home network is probably fast, but I am espeically interested in vpn and over the internet browsing.

[Darwin]

Does it have network caching?

Home network is probably fast, but I am espeically interested in vpn and over the internet browsing.

-kartal (November 10, 2008, 03:27 PM)

I supports FTP Directory Caching... but I doubt that is the same thing. I've used it to connect to webdav folders on other servers and it was reasonably quick (though not blazing fast). I couldn't a concrete answer in the help file (Caveat: most likely because I'm unfamilar with the concept). I'll check the users forum and resource centre as well - the answer is either there awaiting discovery or to be answered!

[kartal]

Thanks Darwin, I knew you were a nice guy!


THe thing I am looking for is an app that can cache the directory and files while it is not in use. I mean all the modern web browsers do file and link caching to speed up, why not file browsers? It should be possible!

[Darwin]

I checked the users resource centre and there are thousands of hits on various combinations and iterations of network, directory, and cache/caching. Nothing jumped out at me. Sadly, I have no way of testing this for you as I don't have access to any network other than the one I run at home.

The concept is reasonable and you're right, it should be possible! But has it been "realised"? I have MANY file managers installed on my other system. Sometime this evening or tomorrow I'll try to read through the documentation for them and see if I strike gold. In the meantime, you could look at Altap Salamander (can use TC's plugi-ns), Total Commander (the plug-in system may yield something), Frigate 3 (has a fully featured web browser built-in), V the File Viewer, FileBoss (might be a strong candidate), FileQuest (though development has been stagnant for over a year), and DiskJockey File Viewer (also with built-in web browsing but also stalled development-wise for over a year). You could also check out AccelMan, which is now freeware. It, too, features web browsing (I think) and has a bunch of interesting features, if it is a bit quirky and in need of updating.

Sorry for the stream of consciousness response - good luck!

UPDATE: just checked and Altap Salamander has an option (enabled by default) Cache visited remote directories

[Darwin]

OK, I'm out of my depth. I went through each of the file managers mentioned above and couldn't find much of anything out. Only clear possibility seems to be Altap Salamander, but I suspect that I am simply not looking at the right options/searching for the right help topics. So... you'll probably need to check these out yourself to be sure 

[kartal]

Thanks Darwin! I will try A. Salamander

[kartal]

A.Salamander does not feel any faster to me. Probably Xyplorer is faster than AS thou.

[Shades]

Although it will sound very strange coming from me, but did you try TotalCommander already.

My linux friends use that one all the time when they have to use a Windows system. My own experience of navigating/copying etc. between two Linux PC's over a WAN is that it goes really, really fast. True, it works in a DOS-like environment but if that is no problem you could create a similar setup using specific software for Windows (in case your machine and the WAN machine are both using Windows).

Less is more...especially over a WAN  

[kartal]

Shades, I cannot say if it is faster but it definetely is snappier than others when browsing over VPN.

[Shades]

Ah well, at least you gained the "snappiness"   

Now for the speed:
On my system I have installed a piece of software that really increases the speed with which I copy big files over the LAN network. The name of that piece of software is Total Copy (or something similar). This software will embed itself in your system, so that when you copy using the right-click context menu you get two extra options to either 'Total copy' or 'Total move'.

I assume it uses the maximal packet size that the LAN will sustain (without breaking), so that is also a way to go for you.
When the connection between the systems is very dependable, you could definitely try it.

[city_zen]

Shades, do you mean this Total Copy?

[Shades]

That is indeed the one I am using. 

When I copy/move files over the (100Mbit) LAN it reports speeds of 12000 kbps. Normally you would be happy to get anything around 9000kbps using the standard Windows explorer and the default settings (because of network traffic overhead/congestion etc.)

As far as I know, you can "push" more data through the LAN (per cycle) when the size of the packages that contain the actual data is increased. The ideal setting is mostly found by trial and error, the default Microsoft settings err on the safe side giving the impression that it is (reasonably) robust and fast.

Having good and properly shielded cabling together with matching hardware (switch/router) you do have some "room" to play with package sizes.

[f0dder]

Packet size doesn't help you much on 100mbit, as it should be set to the ethernet MTU... the size of buffer read/writes and whether you do async og synchronous I/O can matter somewhat, though. Once you move to gigabit and beyond, packet size (jumbo frames) means a lot, and so does things like IRQ moderation (reduces CPU strain, but can also mean dramatically reduced performance).

[psionics]

you might like to turn off your Netbios IPX or any network service your not using.. they scream to networks and it may cost lag performance. even the IPv6 is not yet even used yet.

[yksyks]

Maybe I didn't understand your requirements properly, but how about different approach, which I'm using successfully: Everything's HTTP server? I cannot imagine anything faster. (There's also FTP server included in Everything, but so far I was not able to set it up properly.

[kartal]

Well you cannot expect your company clients to use unofficial unsecure practices. Also they might have very sctrict rules regarding what ports and apps can be open on their networks. Vpns are mainly used by companies.

[yksyks]

Sure. I did not understand you're speaking about computers that are not under your management. It's a pity, it works quite well. Do they consider VPN official and secure, though?