Which of the following features do you never use? - II

[admin]

Another 10 features you don't need.

[Linkaday]

Network Server Cache was my first thought. Jumped the gun: if i think XY portable, having a cut down version that would start even faster from a stick than it does now (compared to startup time so many portable softwares take) would make me easily doing w/o Autosize columns and Hotlist but Network Server Cache would contradict. So it's just those two.

[jacky]

Autosize Columns + Drop-Messages-To-File. Never.

[j_c_hallgren]

Autosize Columns + Drop-Messages-To-File. Never.

Same here..plus Network Server Cache as this is a stand-alone sys.

[admin]

For me Autosize Columns as well. I wonder why it's not used by us. The basic idea is okay and it works well. Maybe this feature needs some kind of improvement?

For me, it's the occasional very long filename that makes it unattractive: pushes all other columns out of sight.

[jacky]

For me Autosize Columns as well. I wonder why it's not used by us. The basic idea is okay and it works well. Maybe this feature needs some kind of improvement?

For me, it's the occasional very long filename that makes it unattractive: pushes all other columns out of sight.

Well, for me it's the feature, the basic idea, I simply don't want it. I have only the columns I need visible, and I have made it so they all show the most info possible (dates have fixed widths obviously, size as well, just needs to be wide enough to show all the size I might need, thus giving the most space to the Name column which does indeed show the full names about all the time). I don't want any wasted space on the right, and I would hate it even more to have H-scrolling!

Besides, I like that when i want to know, say, the Created date of an item, I know exactly where to look -- I can't see what would benefit me in having to search each time where that damn column went depending on what files are listed... just seems "inefficient" to me...

[j_c_hallgren]

For me Autosize Columns as well. I wonder why it's not used by us. The basic idea is okay and it works well. Maybe this feature needs some kind of improvement?

Well, for me it's the feature, the basic idea, I simply don't want it. I have only the columns I need visible, and I have made it so they all show the most info possible

... just seems "inefficient" to me...

I don't think it needs improvement, as I agree with jacky here...I believe I may have used it once to initially set things up but then customized my sizes from there...if there is a time when I can't see enough, I'll move it myself just as far as I need/want which likely isn't same as Autosize would do.

I use this type of command all the time in Excel, but that's totally different as there one is dealing with a totally varying set of data and it's length is typically unknown when you start with a blank sheet.

I'd leave the command as is...some users may like it, but I can't think of why one would use it on regular basis.

[graham]

I double checked to why I use the autosize cols and think maybe this is down to the window size used for XY - if you have XY full sized then this feature is not of much use, excepting very long file names plus having all cols visible.

I wonder if an option to auto resize (up from a user set ideal size) the XY window is useful for those who prefer the XY window to be visually as compact as possible. If I had this then I would probably not use auto size cols.

[jacky]

Autosize XY window sounds like an awful thing to me, but that's me, and I have to admit I am indeed a fullscreen guy. Not sure where it comes from, but about every app I use I do fullscreen, and the only ones I don't it's because they don't support it...

[graham]

Yes it does sound awful but if you try it out by having an XY window say 50% full size and emulate the action by just making the RH side window move horizontally it isn't all that bad plus when appropriate it would revert back to the 'normal' user preferred size.

[Pagat]

I use this type of command all the time in Excel, but that's totally different as there one is dealing with a totally varying set of data and it's length is typically unknown when you start with a blank sheet.

That's SO true!

From the above list, the features i never use are: Autosize Columns, Drop-Messages-To-File, Network Server Cache

[noir]

autosize columns is nice, but i think it could use improvements for example instead of going the max length of the biggest file name maybe do max length for the overall filenames so

ie.

if filenames are
everultimate_build_1588_cja2yi5spvn.1223423423472783462356489sfdhyugysterygbsuihgvyxgbernuiewyugsbyvbxygernjkxvyugejknk.txt
everest_build_1588_cja2yi5spvn
evereste_build_1582_cja2yi5spvn
everestultimate_build_1588_cja2yi5spvn
fdddddddddddddddddddddddddddvcbdfrytrydcf.exe

it would adjust to the common file names rather then just doing the biggest one., maybe can have a setable option for a max percent (or adjust until it doesn't hide other columns.)

[admin]

autosize columns is nice, but i think it could use improvements for example instead of going the max length of the biggest file name maybe do max length for the overall filenames so

ie.

if filenames are
everultimate_build_1588_cja2yi5spvn.1223423423472783462356489sfdhyugysterygbsuihgvyxgbernuiewyugsbyvbxygernjkxvyugejknk.txt
everest_build_1588_cja2yi5spvn
evereste_build_1582_cja2yi5spvn
everestultimate_build_1588_cja2yi5spvn
fdddddddddddddddddddddddddddvcbdfrytrydcf.exe

it would adjust to the common file names rather then just doing the biggest one., maybe can have a setable option for a max percent (or adjust until it doesn't hide other columns.)

I had sth like this years ago but it was confusing to users, so I dropped it. Sometimes "simple + not perfect" is the better solution than "complex + trying to be perfect".

[calvin]

I use Autosize columns all the time. LUV IT! It ain't broke so don't fix it.

[sweety]

Portable Fileassosiation is the MAIN REASON why i bought xyplorer