with copy speed, time, from - to
copy/move progress bar for TC6 :)
Moderators: white, Hacker, petermad, Stefan2
copy/move progress bar for TC6 :)
like this from FileMaster
with copy speed, time, from - to
with copy speed, time, from - to
Even if he didn't he will still have to see THE plug-ins special place www.clubtotal.tk former maxwish.tk
There he will find another "copy" app.
But beeing an external app the speed will be like you guessed, not so fast(even if it has a lot of useful functions like changing buffer's size) comparing to a internal one.
Continuing to let useful functions out of TC's interests wouldn't be a good thing.
Perhaps the best solution would be to implement some of the SlowCopy functions, but since not any of us would like to have a slower TC(me too) maybe a function would appear in the Configuration -> Options menu to check/uncheck these feature
There he will find another "copy" app.
But beeing an external app the speed will be like you guessed, not so fast(even if it has a lot of useful functions like changing buffer's size) comparing to a internal one.
Continuing to let useful functions out of TC's interests wouldn't be a good thing.
Perhaps the best solution would be to implement some of the SlowCopy functions, but since not any of us would like to have a slower TC(me too) maybe a function would appear in the Configuration -> Options menu to check/uncheck these feature
Trust in Christian...that's all I can say.
When he says "no" to a feature, sometimes that means, "Hey, I don't see a use for it, but convince me otherwise and it will go in."
Sometimes when he says "no" it just means "Hey, not right now, but maybe later."
People hounded him for months (years?) for multiple file panes and he refused stating that he saw no use for it. Now multiple file panes are going to be in TC 6.0 so a "no" right now doesn't mean "never."
I like to think my huge thesis in this very forum was the straw that broke poor Christian's resolve against multiple file panes. I covered every conceivable advantage for such a feature and presented it in such a way that adding such would not negatively impact the philosophy that TC is all about.
Christian's very sharp & he listens to everything everyone says even if he doesn't reply. If you want/need something badly enough put forth your argument. Logically lay out in a methodical manner why TC owners would love to have this feature and why it'd be a horrendous impact on productivity to leave it out of the next version of TC.
Don't just say, "Ooo! Gimme this! It'd be so cool!" Gotta do better than that, my friend.
He's not draconian in his stance against anything. Put forth a good argument & he'll happily change his mind. He did a turnabout with multiple file panes as mentioned above and he also reversed his long stance against descript.ion files as well.
When he says "no" to a feature, sometimes that means, "Hey, I don't see a use for it, but convince me otherwise and it will go in."
Sometimes when he says "no" it just means "Hey, not right now, but maybe later."
People hounded him for months (years?) for multiple file panes and he refused stating that he saw no use for it. Now multiple file panes are going to be in TC 6.0 so a "no" right now doesn't mean "never."
I like to think my huge thesis in this very forum was the straw that broke poor Christian's resolve against multiple file panes. I covered every conceivable advantage for such a feature and presented it in such a way that adding such would not negatively impact the philosophy that TC is all about.
Christian's very sharp & he listens to everything everyone says even if he doesn't reply. If you want/need something badly enough put forth your argument. Logically lay out in a methodical manner why TC owners would love to have this feature and why it'd be a horrendous impact on productivity to leave it out of the next version of TC.
Don't just say, "Ooo! Gimme this! It'd be so cool!" Gotta do better than that, my friend.
He's not draconian in his stance against anything. Put forth a good argument & he'll happily change his mind. He did a turnabout with multiple file panes as mentioned above and he also reversed his long stance against descript.ion files as well.
-
pdavit
- Power Member
- Posts: 1529
- Joined: 2003-02-05, 21:41 UTC
- Location: Kavala -> Greece -> Europe -> Earth -> Solar System -> Milky Way -> Space
- Contact:
2 Innuendo
Yes, I agree with your comments here. I'm tired of posting in this forum how open-minded Christian is. This displays a quality in his character and his professionalism. By observing his reactions in users' wishes throughout the past 3-4 years I can assure you (all) that he has implemented everything necessary, useful, widely accepted, and most important of all, possible on his development environment (Delphi v2).
We just have to respect two key elements that Christian is fighting for throughout the development history of TotalCmd. One is speed and performance overhead and the other is size. Every feature implemented for TC must satisfy the above two conditions otherwise they are rejected. Not everyone agrees to that but I personally respect that more than anything else in the IT world!
Yes, I agree with your comments here. I'm tired of posting in this forum how open-minded Christian is. This displays a quality in his character and his professionalism. By observing his reactions in users' wishes throughout the past 3-4 years I can assure you (all) that he has implemented everything necessary, useful, widely accepted, and most important of all, possible on his development environment (Delphi v2).
We just have to respect two key elements that Christian is fighting for throughout the development history of TotalCmd. One is speed and performance overhead and the other is size. Every feature implemented for TC must satisfy the above two conditions otherwise they are rejected. Not everyone agrees to that but I personally respect that more than anything else in the IT world!
"My only reason for still using M$ Window$ as an OS is the existence of Total Commander!"
Christian Ghisler Rules!!!
Christian Ghisler Rules!!!
I'm wondering what Unix/Windows/Linux ... would be today if they would apply the rule above ...pdavit wrote:2 Innuendo
One is speed and performance overhead and the other is size. Every feature implemented for TC must satisfy the above two conditions otherwise they are rejected. Not everyone agrees to that but I personally respect that more than anything else in the IT world!
What if they said: Well, why supporting hdd bigger than 1 Mb in our software? I mean, who would possible require such a HUGE quantity of data and by the way why we would possibly need video cards anyway and those soundcards? useless ... we can do better with the pc speaker! And a rule would be no support for hardware unless they are Ibm ...
Well, OS evolve, hardware too so it's very dangerous not to keep with the above ... And also, like we all know, users requests evolve(and if they don't they HAVE TO)
-
pdavit
- Power Member
- Posts: 1529
- Joined: 2003-02-05, 21:41 UTC
- Location: Kavala -> Greece -> Europe -> Earth -> Solar System -> Milky Way -> Space
- Contact:
Sam York wrote:I'm wondering what Unix/Windows/Linux ... would be today if they would apply the rule above ...
Yeah, me too! But I should stick to dreaming...
I do support the IT evolution as well. I never said we should stick to DOS for example but I support those people that provide the DOS speed on a WinXP application.
If you install version 2 of TC for example on your machine you won't be able to do much and that proves that TC has evolved over the years. If you then compare the speed of v2 with v5.51 you won't see much of a deference and it's there where quality in software engineering can be seen.
"My only reason for still using M$ Window$ as an OS is the existence of Total Commander!"
Christian Ghisler Rules!!!
Christian Ghisler Rules!!!
pdavit,
I understand that Christian wants to keep the size down & the speed up, but what I don't understand is everyone's insistence on keeping TC small enough to fit on a floppy.
It's very hard to find a new computer that comes with a floppy drive anymore.
I can only help but wonder that if everyone is so concerned about the speed and size of TC that maybe it's time for Christian to crack open the books and learn assembler. Every feature including the kitchen sink could be included & the size would be half of what the current size is now.
I understand that Christian wants to keep the size down & the speed up, but what I don't understand is everyone's insistence on keeping TC small enough to fit on a floppy.
It's very hard to find a new computer that comes with a floppy drive anymore.
I can only help but wonder that if everyone is so concerned about the speed and size of TC that maybe it's time for Christian to crack open the books and learn assembler. Every feature including the kitchen sink could be included & the size would be half of what the current size is now.
-
pdavit
- Power Member
- Posts: 1529
- Joined: 2003-02-05, 21:41 UTC
- Location: Kavala -> Greece -> Europe -> Earth -> Solar System -> Milky Way -> Space
- Contact:
2 Innuendo
Christian is not closed-minded by all means. He does follow "side-methods" (i.e. compression) to keep the size down. If he was using another compression system/method the installation exe file would have been probably bigger, so it's just a positive result but not a coding goal.
And if the size of the file exceeds the floppy disk size then Christian will have to send a CD to newly registered users, which will increase a bit the registration cost. Some users are willing to pay the extra cost but for some users/countries the ridiculously low price of TC is considered to be high. I can clearly remember a user mentioning that the cost for registering TC is approx. half of his monthly income! For some other users it's an hour of work!
Of course we have the internet for file distribution and although the price of TC goes mostly for the license itself there's still some amount directly affected by the file's size.
In my humble opinion, users do not concern about TC's file size in terms of media storage capabilities but subconsciously (or consciously) think that for the sake of size we have features' cut-down. Well, this is totally wrong and the development history of TC proves the exact opposite and rewords Christian's efforts.
Christian is not closed-minded by all means. He does follow "side-methods" (i.e. compression) to keep the size down. If he was using another compression system/method the installation exe file would have been probably bigger, so it's just a positive result but not a coding goal.
And if the size of the file exceeds the floppy disk size then Christian will have to send a CD to newly registered users, which will increase a bit the registration cost. Some users are willing to pay the extra cost but for some users/countries the ridiculously low price of TC is considered to be high. I can clearly remember a user mentioning that the cost for registering TC is approx. half of his monthly income! For some other users it's an hour of work!
Of course we have the internet for file distribution and although the price of TC goes mostly for the license itself there's still some amount directly affected by the file's size.
In my humble opinion, users do not concern about TC's file size in terms of media storage capabilities but subconsciously (or consciously) think that for the sake of size we have features' cut-down. Well, this is totally wrong and the development history of TC proves the exact opposite and rewords Christian's efforts.
"My only reason for still using M$ Window$ as an OS is the existence of Total Commander!"
Christian Ghisler Rules!!!
Christian Ghisler Rules!!!
pdavit,
I know that Christian uses compression, but that wasn't my point. I was merely saying that if everyone is so obsessed with the speed being as fast as possible & the size being as small as possible then Delphi is not the language to be programming in.
As for distribution costs of CDs, and I can't speak for anywhere else in the world, but here in the U.S. the prices of blank floppy disks and blank CD-Rs are roughly equal. Weight for mailing is roughly equal as well. If anything, I'd think that registration costs would go down as everyone knows a floppy disk can/will go bad if you just look at it wrong sometimes. Something burned to CD-R is much more "permanent" so there'd be less chance of someone requesting a replacement due to bad media.
And again, I know full well that program size is not in direct proportion to amount of features. I also know that the development history of TC proves that big things come in small packages. My point continues to be that added features, if programmed correctly and in the correct programming language, won't add anything to program size or contribute to the slowing down in execution speed.
Christian is phenomenal...he has taken what started out to be a basic file manager and turned it into one of the most feature-packed programs on the planet.
You know TC is something special if even the Linux and Mac users are lamenting that there's nothing remotely like it on their respective operating systems.
I know that Christian uses compression, but that wasn't my point. I was merely saying that if everyone is so obsessed with the speed being as fast as possible & the size being as small as possible then Delphi is not the language to be programming in.
As for distribution costs of CDs, and I can't speak for anywhere else in the world, but here in the U.S. the prices of blank floppy disks and blank CD-Rs are roughly equal. Weight for mailing is roughly equal as well. If anything, I'd think that registration costs would go down as everyone knows a floppy disk can/will go bad if you just look at it wrong sometimes. Something burned to CD-R is much more "permanent" so there'd be less chance of someone requesting a replacement due to bad media.
And again, I know full well that program size is not in direct proportion to amount of features. I also know that the development history of TC proves that big things come in small packages. My point continues to be that added features, if programmed correctly and in the correct programming language, won't add anything to program size or contribute to the slowing down in execution speed.
Christian is phenomenal...he has taken what started out to be a basic file manager and turned it into one of the most feature-packed programs on the planet.
You know TC is something special if even the Linux and Mac users are lamenting that there's nothing remotely like it on their respective operating systems.
-
pdavit
- Power Member
- Posts: 1529
- Joined: 2003-02-05, 21:41 UTC
- Location: Kavala -> Greece -> Europe -> Earth -> Solar System -> Milky Way -> Space
- Contact:
2 Innuendo
You are right and I do not oppose to your thoughts. I just respect Christian's goals. You said in your previous post that "what I don't understand is everyone's insistence on keeping TC small enough to fit on a floppy." Well, it's not everyone's insistence. There was a poll on the old forum about that which proved that users (the majority) don't really case about TC size but Christian does and I guess he is the one that can solve your riddle!
You are right and I do not oppose to your thoughts. I just respect Christian's goals. You said in your previous post that "what I don't understand is everyone's insistence on keeping TC small enough to fit on a floppy." Well, it's not everyone's insistence. There was a poll on the old forum about that which proved that users (the majority) don't really case about TC size but Christian does and I guess he is the one that can solve your riddle!
"My only reason for still using M$ Window$ as an OS is the existence of Total Commander!"
Christian Ghisler Rules!!!
Christian Ghisler Rules!!!
Referring back to one of the other comments in this thread:
I for one very much need a MUCH slower copying facility. My CD-RW is miserable and cannot handle files at any normal copying pace. TC is too fast, Explorer is too fast, SlowCopy is too fast. I've tried all sorts of copy settings in the TC ini and none of them seem to work, crashing the CD-RW after a few files.
That's why I wrote a very crude little Delphi utility to delay copying. It reads the %L file and works by waiting a user specified number of seconds before copying the next file. I have found that 30-45 seconds delay between files gives my CD-RW a chance to flush its buffer, at least for the 2Mb-4Mb JPGs I am archiving.
Solved my immediate problem.
I have plans to fix it up, offer variable copy block sizes with variable delays between those (it currently uses the "canned" Delphi FileCopy routine), etc, but since the first iteration works great for my needs I haven't allocated the time.
So... here is an example where the ability to s l o w d o w n Copy would be a useful TC function for me.
I for one very much need a MUCH slower copying facility. My CD-RW is miserable and cannot handle files at any normal copying pace. TC is too fast, Explorer is too fast, SlowCopy is too fast. I've tried all sorts of copy settings in the TC ini and none of them seem to work, crashing the CD-RW after a few files.
That's why I wrote a very crude little Delphi utility to delay copying. It reads the %L file and works by waiting a user specified number of seconds before copying the next file. I have found that 30-45 seconds delay between files gives my CD-RW a chance to flush its buffer, at least for the 2Mb-4Mb JPGs I am archiving.
Solved my immediate problem.
I have plans to fix it up, offer variable copy block sizes with variable delays between those (it currently uses the "canned" Delphi FileCopy routine), etc, but since the first iteration works great for my needs I haven't allocated the time.
So... here is an example where the ability to s l o w d o w n Copy would be a useful TC function for me.
Licensed, Mouse-Centric, moving (slowly) toward Touch-centric
What packet software are you using? Here with my Plextor drive that handles RWs at 4x using PacketCD all files are copied and only afterwards the "session" is "closed" (or how to call in in the world of packet writing) - no need to wait after each file.
Roman
Roman
Mal angenommen, du drückst Strg+F, wählst die FTP-Verbindung (mit gespeichertem Passwort), klickst aber nicht auf Verbinden, sondern fällst tot um.