Calculating time remaining...continued

[Frank Rizzo]

Like many people, my system (vista home premium) takes a century to copy
large files. First, the File Copy dialog just sits there with title
"Calculating time remaining". Then, it gets going and copies the file in
about 10-20 times what it had taken XP.

I've taken the time to debug the problem a little bit, but haven't found
a solution. Using process monitor from sysinternals.com, I've looked at
the explorer.exe process and in particular, what files it was accessing.

For whatever reason, it was scanning files on the USB drive (e.g. drive
I am trying to copy files to) like mad (maybe it was indexing, it's hard
to tell.

Then I tried it again and this time, explorer.exe was not touching my
USB drive and the file copy went pretty fast.

However, it all seems random.

 

[Richard Urban]

Allow me to state that I understand that users want to utilize that which
came with the computer, namely Explorer. But "you" must understand that
Explorer is an inferior way, in every respect, to handle files.

I use a competent file manager program. I can copy multi gig files or
thousands of small files from one drive to another. After I highlight the
files I wish to copy, and initiate the copy process, the file copying
commences immediately. There is no delay what-so-ever.

I honestly do not know why so many people have a hang-up for Explorer. It is
so poor and inefficient for file system maintenance.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Neil Harley]

Allow me to state that I understand that users want to utilize that
which came with the computer, namely Explorer. But "you" must understand
that Explorer is an inferior way, in every respect, to handle files.

I use a competent file manager program. I can copy multi gig files or
thousands of small files from one drive to another. After I highlight
the files I wish to copy, and initiate the copy process, the file
copying commences immediately. There is no delay what-so-ever.

I honestly do not know why so many people have a hang-up for Explorer.
It is so poor and inefficient for file system maintenance.

Richard

While I agree with you people stick with what comes out of the box and
should there be any reason to not do so?

Explorer should be a fully functional product by now and given the
length of time Vista was in beta this kind of thing should have been
dealt with. I know I sent bugs in back in 2005 which were regarding poor
results copying files across my LAN and the bug reports were closed as
'Not reproducible'.

 

[Richard Urban]

There are so many functions included within the operating systems that are
improved upon by 3rd party developers.

1. Defrag utilities

2. Undelete utilities

3. Email clients

4. Browsers (maybe)

5. Anti spyware utilities

6. etc.

So, why not file manager utilities. These have been around since the days of
PC Tools in the early 90's. There was a DOS version and a Windows version
that worked within Windows 3.11.

They were better for managing the file system then. They are better now for
doing the same thing.

As to why Microsoft doesn't release better utilities? How many more times
would you like to see them brought before the courts on monopoly charges.
They have to leave room for the small guys or face the consequences.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Telstar]

There are so many functions included within the operating systems that are
improved upon by 3rd party developers.

1. Defrag utilities

2. Undelete utilities

3. Email clients

4. Browsers (maybe)

5. Anti spyware utilities

6. etc.

So, why not file manager utilities. These have been around since the days
of PC Tools in the early 90's. There was a DOS version and a Windows
version that worked within Windows 3.11.

They were better for managing the file system then. They are better now
for doing the same thing.

As to why Microsoft doesn't release better utilities? How many more times
would you like to see them brought before the courts on monopoly charges.
They have to leave room for the small guys or face the consequences.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

Lame answer.

 

[Stephan Rose]

There are so many functions included within the operating systems that are
improved upon by 3rd party developers.

1. Defrag utilities

2. Undelete utilities

3. Email clients

4. Browsers (maybe)

5. Anti spyware utilities

6. Operating System

7. etc

=)

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Stephan Rose]

There are so many functions included within the operating systems that are
improved upon by 3rd party developers.

1. Defrag utilities

2. Undelete utilities

3. Email clients

4. Browsers (maybe)

5. Anti spyware utilities

6. etc.

So, why not file manager utilities. These have been around since the days
of PC Tools in the early 90's. There was a DOS version and a Windows
version that worked within Windows 3.11.

They were better for managing the file system then. They are better now
for doing the same thing.

As to why Microsoft doesn't release better utilities? How many more times
would you like to see them brought before the courts on monopoly charges.
They have to leave room for the small guys or face the consequences.

So this is the reason why MS produces inferior software: So that I can go to
the competition and use their products instead!

Ahh, gotcha. I understand now. =)

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Lee]

There are so many functions included within the operating systems that are
improved upon by 3rd party developers.

1. Defrag utilities

2. Undelete utilities

3. Email clients

4. Browsers (maybe)

5. Anti spyware utilities

6. etc.

So, why not file manager utilities. These have been around since the days
of PC Tools in the early 90's. There was a DOS version and a Windows
version that worked within Windows 3.11.

They were better for managing the file system then. They are better now
for doing the same thing.

As to why Microsoft doesn't release better utilities? How many more times
would you like to see them brought before the courts on monopoly charges.
They have to leave room for the small guys or face the consequences.

That's absurd, if the courts allow Microsoft to include a particular
functionality in Windows they are not stipulating that it must be inferior.
They could not and would not make such a ruling. Microsoft does they best
they can considering that they do almost EVERYTHING, while small companies
can focus on just a few apps.

 

[Richard Urban]

The courts aren't allowing them to include anything. The courts specifically
disallow certain things. Therefore, Microsoft includes just enough to fly
under the radar by giving "basic" functionality, without actually tromping
on anyone.

When they tromp on someone (remember Internet Explorer vs.: Netscape) they
end up in court. Explorer isn't tromping on anyone as far as file management
goes. Other small competitors still have a superior product.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!

 

[Mike Brannigan]

Like many people, my system (vista home premium) takes a century to copy
large files. First, the File Copy dialog just sits there with title
"Calculating time remaining". Then, it gets going and copies the file in
about 10-20 times what it had taken XP.

I've taken the time to debug the problem a little bit, but haven't found a
solution. Using process monitor from sysinternals.com, I've looked at the
explorer.exe process and in particular, what files it was accessing.

For whatever reason, it was scanning files on the USB drive (e.g. drive I
am trying to copy files to) like mad (maybe it was indexing, it's hard to
tell.

Then I tried it again and this time, explorer.exe was not touching my USB
drive and the file copy went pretty fast.

However, it all seems random.

The scan of the target is being done to allow for remote differential
compression to improve the transfer speed.
Just turn off the feature in the Programs and Features Control Panel applet.

As an aside - also ensure you have disabled IPv6

 

[Adam Albright]

That's absurd, if the courts allow Microsoft to include a particular
functionality in Windows they are not stipulating that it must be inferior.
They could not and would not make such a ruling. Microsoft does they best
they can considering that they do almost EVERYTHING, while small companies
can focus on just a few apps.

Indeed it's absurd, but pure Richard Urban fanboy double talk.
Imagine, trying to justify why Microsoft's Vista can't move files
around under it's own power without taking forever or in some way
messing up such a simplistic task, one of the core features of any
OS... oh we left that for somebody else to figure out. LOL!

The fanboy way:

1. First deny there is a problem.
2. Next blame it on a third party hardware or software vendor.
3. Attempt to blame the end user, saying it works for me.
4. Try to sell it as a feature.
5. Finally admit it is a bug.
6. Say wait for the service pack.

 

[Adam Albright]

The scan of the target is being done to allow for remote differential
compression to improve the transfer speed.
Just turn off the feature in the Programs and Features Control Panel applet.

As an aside - also ensure you have disabled IPv6

Well guess what... Remote Differential Compression is TURNED OFF on my
system and it at times still takes forever to copy/move/delete files
even between TWO INTERNAL drives, even with the so-called "hot-fix"
installed.

It's classic Microsoft sloppy programming. If you set the target to
show thumbnails you can watch Vista fu*cking it up as it goes.

Lets say you have a dozen files already on the target drive you're
moving to and you want to move 20 new files to this drive. You'll see
the green status bar at the top of Explorer's window OVER AND OVER
return to the beginning (far left) and start to scan contents again
as it tries to reorder the icons shuffling them around to try to put
them in order DURING the move.

This obviously is half ass mind numbing stupid design to attempt to
resort a drive's contents while a copy or move is in progress since it
is obviously going to keep changing rather than waiting until the job
is finished. Vista should be smart enough to WAIT and not either
redraw icons or attempt to resort file listings in mid stream. Doing
so is totally absurd and this is just one of the things the file
system does under Vista that's totally crazy that adds to how
painfully slow copy and move operations can be.

 

[Adam Albright]

Allow me to state that I understand that users want to utilize that which
came with the computer, namely Explorer. But "you" must understand that
Explorer is an inferior way, in every respect, to handle files.

Why? Since Microsoft made Explorer a core feature of Windows and you
can't remove the damn thing, why doesn't it perform like it should?

Geez man, just once wake up and realize what you're saying. Copying,
moving, deleting, renaming... anything to do with files is a CORE
feature of any operating system. Something that should be and can be
easily programmed to work smoothly, quickly and easily. All you're
doing is acknowledging that Microsoft even after 21 years and billions
of dollars spent on "developing" Windows, still can manage to do these
simple tasks, so your advice is use something else other than the tool
that build-in to the OS?

That's laughable!

I use a competent file manager program. I can copy multi gig files or
thousands of small files from one drive to another. After I highlight the
files I wish to copy, and initiate the copy process, the file copying
commences immediately. There is no delay what-so-ever.

I honestly do not know why so many people have a hang-up for Explorer. It is
so poor and inefficient for file system maintenance.

Hint: I like most everybody else paid $$$$ for a upgrade little
Richie, while you and other MVPs got your copy FREE. Why shouldn't I
expect the damn thing to work?

 

[Adam Albright]

There are so many functions included within the operating systems that are
improved upon by 3rd party developers.

1. Defrag utilities

2. Undelete utilities

3. Email clients

4. Browsers (maybe)

5. Anti spyware utilities

6. etc.

So, why not file manager utilities. These have been around since the days of
PC Tools in the early 90's. There was a DOS version and a Windows version
that worked within Windows 3.11.

Your "logic" is so flawed I don't know where to begin. Microsoft
IMPOSES it's poorly designed crap on end users. It forces it's
browser, it's media player, and it forces it's file manager on you.
Microsoft makes it hard if not next to impossible to remove these core
elements.

You're suggestion is similar to somebody spending $25K to buy a new
car, then upon driving it home pulling off all the tires, replacing
the headlights and steering wheel because somebody makes better ones.
While true, the included tires, steering wheel and headlights WORK as
advertised. You may install better ones if you like.

With Microsoft their included stuff which is forced on you often DOES
NOT WORK AT ALL half the time the other half of the time it works
poorly. See the difference?

 

[Adam Albright]

The courts aren't allowing them to include anything. The courts specifically
disallow certain things. Therefore, Microsoft includes just enough to fly
under the radar by giving "basic" functionality, without actually tromping
on anyone.

When they tromp on someone (remember Internet Explorer vs.: Netscape) they
end up in court. Explorer isn't tromping on anyone as far as file management
goes. Other small competitors still have a superior product.

So you're asking us to believe that Microsoft on purpose designs it's
software poorly just to give third party vendors a change?

ROTFLAMO!

 

[Adam Albright]

Lame answer.

You expected something other than lame from a MVP?

 

[-Draino-]

That's because the problem is not from one drive to another. The problem
exists on the LAN. I have tried every possible solution available on Google
and nothing worked.

D

 

[-Draino-]

One of the MANY proposed solutions that I tried..........and it didn't work.

D

 

[MICHAEL]

Frank,

The answer to your problems is Directory Opus 9.
http://www.gpsoft.com.au/

It's not free, but it sure is worth every single penny,
and then some. It has a free 60 day test drive.


-Michael

* Frank Rizzo:

 

[Adam Albright]

Frank,

The answer to your problems is Directory Opus 9.
http://www.gpsoft.com.au/

As always, things just zoom right past Frank. Most everyone knows
there are WAY BETTER file managers, viewers, etc. available, the point
is you shouldn't have to buy one when you've already paid $200 to
upgrade Vista like I did to get the Vista business version.

Let us know when it pent rates your thick skull Frank. The point lost
on Frank and other Microsoft fanboys is even if you install a better
shell or whatever Windows Explorer is still eating up resources
because you can never totally shut the damn crap off. If only you
could turn the damn thing off! Microsoft won't let you disable core
components.

Get it yet Frank? No? Well duh, you never do.