Is XY U3 smart?

[admin]

From http://www.u3.com/developers/ :

What is a U3 smart solution?
A U3 smart solution is one that travels with the user on a U3 smart USB flash drive. Once installed on the drive, the application can run on any computer—without further installation!

Ok, XY is portable, mobile, stand-alone... so it should also be a U3 smart application. I don't have a U3 drive. So if any of you happens to have one, I'd like a feedback whether XY actually is that smart.

Thanks!
Don

PS: This one might be missing: "... the “appstop,” feature needed to close the application when a user ejects the U3 smart drive."

[phatmankerr]

I am not U3 either, but I do use XY from a flash drive without any issues - the seperate .ini files is a real help.

Although seperate catalog files would also be useful as I have different shortcuts depending on what site I am on - and some way to link these to the ini file - so they are loaded with the chosen ini would be useful).

Always trying to come up with more work for you

Would be a plus for U3 if XY was compliant as their current crop of compliant apps is fairly lacklustre.

Could also help to get XY out there as I can see U3 becoming more popular (although you may want to re-consider your folder checking strategy - I have a number of colleagues who are very impressed by XY but are put off by the pauses when accessing drives with multiple folders or .exe stores - these are just network areas where we store .exe files for installation on client PC's) - Understand the reasoning but all they see is the pause (which as they point out is not present in Explorer).

[admin]

Could also help to get XY out there as I can see U3 becoming more popular (although you may want to re-consider your folder checking strategy - I have a number of colleagues who are very impressed by XY but are put off by the pauses when accessing drives with multiple folders or .exe stores - these are just network areas where we store .exe files for installation on client PC's) - Understand the reasoning but all they see is the pause (which as they point out is not present in Explorer).

How multi is multiple?

[phatmankerr]

These are shared drives, so we are talking a lot of folders - 200+ folders each with multiple nested sub folders (some users have 200+ subfolders).

Don't ask why - it's basically because they are shared, the users feel it neccessary to create a new subfolder for the simplest thing (some of these subfolders only have one item in them ! Others have multiple levels of nesting to the n'th degree - I think the record so far is 30+ levels of nesting !! for one users files).

Not sure if there is a nesting limit in Windows, but at some point am sure some of our users will hit it and then be puzzled as to why windows won't let them add a new folder.

We try to educate, but it never works...

[admin]

... but are put off by the pauses when accessing drives with multiple folders or .exe stores ...

You seem to have a theory why XY delays here. Help me. I only see a possible source of delay in large folders with *no* subfolders. Is that the case with you?

[phatmankerr]

Sorry have just realised it's me being an idiot, thought the fact that XY Checks for the presence of sub folders under each folder may be slowing it down, but this doesn't apply here as there are subfolders ?

[admin]

Sorry have just realised it's me being an idiot, thought the fact that XY Checks for the presence of sub folders under each folder may be slowing it down, but this doesn't apply here as there are subfolders ?

If there are a LOT (1000s) of files and only very few subfolders, it can apply as well.
Fact is that Explorer does no checking for the presence of sub folders on network drives at all. This, of course, gains speed -- to what degree depends on a lot of other factors.
Of course, I could mimic that behavior, i.e. add an option à la "Check for the presence of sub folders on network drives."

[phatmankerr]

Would be interesting to see what effect this has on speed ?

Also is there any particular reason why XY Struggles with folders that have numerous exe file - I realise it is an issue with pulling out icons for the various files, but it can be very slow (Explorer is lightning fast) - assume Explorer cache these icons between sessions?

XY is fine once the files have been viewed once - so I assume it caches per session. Anyway of caching as per thumbnails.

Sorry Don, I kinda hijacked this thread - maybe I should open a new thread

Andy

[admin]

Also is there any particular reason why XY Struggles with folders that have numerous exe file - I realise it is an issue with pulling out icons for the various files, but it can be very slow (Explorer is lightning fast) - assume Explorer cache these icons between sessions?

Yep, EXEs have individual specific icons embedded in the file. To extract them the files have to be accessed (loaded into memory) and data travels through the network. Takes time. I guess Explorer does caching here.
Try checking "Use generic icons..." (conf/advanced). That should speed it up!

[j_c_hallgren]

I guess Explorer does caching here.

That's what I learned back on my W98SE system...On occasion, my file icons would get totally wacky, and wrong ones would appear on some files...to solve it, I had to make a Registry tweak to increase the size of the icon cache...not sure if that was Explorer only or entire Windows...haven't run into that on W2K system, but I suspect it may do something similar...

[spoirier]

So are there any plans for a U3 version?

[allen]

I'm not trying to sound critical, I'm curious -- what would be the advantage to a "U3 version" when XY is already fully portable immediately? I've never used U3, so portability for me is in black and white -- portable or not portable :)

[spoirier]

The best explanation of the avantages of U3 come from their FAQ:

http://www.u3.com/support/faq.aspx#General24

I find the U3 LaunchPad gives a not only a good way to access my apps but also an easy way to manage them.

[admin]

The best explanation of the avantages of U3 come from their FAQ:

http://www.u3.com/support/faq.aspx#General24

I find the U3 LaunchPad gives a not only a good way to access my apps but also an easy way to manage them.

Hmm, a long list. Why don't they get XY-smart!?

[lukescammell]

The best explanation of the avantages of U3 come from their FAQ:

http://www.u3.com/support/faq.aspx#General24

I find the U3 LaunchPad gives a not only a good way to access my apps but also an easy way to manage them.

I've found that PStart and the range of apps on portableapps.com does launching pretty well without the U3 premium...

It certainly wouldn't hurt to be U3 compatible though I guess, as it's another selling point no?