Custom Copy: direct actions buttons on collisions

[DmFedorov]

[The idea for a on-hover dropdown on the OK button is also plausible in order to decrease the number of clicks.

You forget two things:
1. dialogue remembers choice. It is good to remember the main action. If you select a row from the list we miss temporary select another option.
2. Every time when you're pressing a keyboard shortcut - you'll see it as a hint in a string of list.
---------
From experience working with Opus I will say that it is convenient. You just know (if forgot) where to see the ToolTip.
And then: when we're talking about clicks, ultimately we're talking about time spent and about conveniences.

[tedy]

@eil, yes, the last choice is remembered but as I mentioned in my first posts, the point is when you need another option the next time you encounter a collision. If my next need is the same as last time then it's a best case scenario.
Out of all propositions I think the most feasible one that needs the least UI reorganization is the one with the shortcuts/modifiers with temporary feedback from the OK button or dropdown list.
In my opinion the Windows 7 way was invented right with the two major and big one-click options (Overwrite and Keep Both Files). After few months of using the Custom Copy I already realize that it (the Windows copy) was easier despite the somewhat less informative progress dialogs when copying/moving. That's why I posted this topic - as a hope to replicate the good from the Windows way. Most people need just that - overwrite OR keep both files, no matter what the new filename is - whatever suffix or prefix is added, the user will eventually rename the new file anyway (either afterwards or in the dialog itself if s/he has that opportunity (as in DOpus)).

[LittleBiG]

Probably the OK should go to the right of the dropdown. Not sure though:

my idea might be not popular judging that most people here try to bring even more buttons, but i will try.

i see it like this(probably less distance between buttons).
- check mark doesn't need that long description
- OK next in line after drop-down looks logical = you made a decision and approve it
- Cancel is on far left as it's the least used button
- only Overwrite and Skip 'cause eventually collision comes to 3 situations: need to overwrite, skip or custom variant = as i remember XYcopy keeps the last choice of drop-down as default on next appearance, so every user will have his custom variant intact, no reason to add lots of buttons.

I can agree with these. Especially the checkbox to the right, closer to the "OK". "Overwrite and Skip" is enough as separate buttons.

And please change the width of the buttons. The longer the caption is, the shorter the button width becomes. Strange.

[admin]

@tedy (or othe Win7 user): could you post a screenshot of the Win7 way?

[LittleBiG]

@tedy (or othe Win7 user): could you post a screenshot of the Win7 way?

[eil]

so eventually Win7 has same 3 variants: overwrite, skip and copy with prefix(where XY provides whole bunch of custom variants).

[LittleBiG]

so eventually Win7 has same 3 variants: overwrite, skip and copy with prefix(where XY provides whole bunch of custom variants).

It is probably for User v1.0.

[tedy]

Yes, Win7 has those 3 options but the idea was they are there for a single click. Their layout is not the best though but that's another point.
And Keep both files does not prefix the new name but suffix it - as a sensible default. Yes, XY has many other options (about 8-9) and it could have many other as well (I can think of another dozen or two). This doesn't change the point that the most commonly used are those three. Often I have to keep both files and a simple suffix like "-copy (01)" or "-01" to the name barely ever fits my need for the new name - I rename the new file anyway. That's why it could be better if it can be done in the dialog itself.
Look at the WinRAR implementation when decompressing a file to a folder where the same file exists - you are presented a bunch of buttons and a chance to rename the file right there. Simple and working very good for decade or so.

[admin]

Thanks for all the input. I need some time to digest this. I think the current dialog looks good, just the right amount of buttons in the right positions. And I did not hear many complaints in recent years. However, I see the point in adding an Overwrite button, and maybe even the other one (Rename to avoid collision). I just don't see how to make this look good at the moment. Just throwing more buttons onto the window is not a solution.

[LittleBiG]

Thanks for all the input. I need some time to digest this. I think the current dialog looks good, just the right amount of buttons in the right positions. And I did not hear many complaints in recent years.

Although XY is a great software it doesn't mean I am always perfectly content. Sometimes I am fuming in silence assuming I am the only one who doesn't like this or that. But when somebody raise the same problem I add my comment. I have never complained for example about having to switch back and forth between "Overwrite" and "Affix current date to existing" in Action, however it was very uncomfortable. (Hopefully it will be solved soon.) And I also didn't complain before how unprofessional the 3 buttons (OK, Skip, Cancel) look because of the gradually decreasing width. I know (or think) it reflects the usage frequency, but still...

[Filehero]

I just don't see how to make this look good at the moment. Just throwing more buttons onto the window is not a solution.

Are 2 dialogue versions (simple vs. advanced, where advanced can be triggered from simple) an - at least theoretical - option?

Or maybe something like?

CustomCopy_new.png (42.69 KiB) Viewed 2558 times

Cheers,
Filehero

[tedy]

The collision resolution might get a radically new solution.
I guess most people ever use 2 or 3 actions only in their life, different sets of 2-3-4 actions.
If the actions were customizable (add/delete/edit) and allowed for flexible (regex?!) definitions (with appropriate variables at hand, for dates etc.), combined with in-place rename of the new (or old) file, most people would just remove the unnecessary (for them) actions and leave/define only the ones they need. Then they could have the choice to use them as buttons for one click action.
I think this would make the custom copy feature drastically more useful. I really find the current resolution dialog confusing and hard to use with the dropdown and buttons layout, especially when I only use Overwrite and Keep Both Files (Suffix ... in XY's case) and have to find and switch between either choice from the many options almost every time - I never use the other options and they confuse me by adding clutter when I have to select one of 'my' two.
I wouldn't mind functionality over aesthetics (if both cannot coexist in a given layout).

For now I'm switching back to Windows 7 copy because it's easier for now, and telling the truth I can't think of something that I'll miss - except for the fact I always tend to expand the Windows copy progress to see the speed which is a pain. I liked Custom Copy for its always-on copy speed on display.

To sum up - this is not a critical feature or change, but those were my arguments how this Custom copy feature could get a considerable usefulness boost.
Another change could be the annoyong popping up of the copy dialog - the Windows way is to never show this dialog for fast operations (on small files or fast disks) - if the copy/move operation takes more than one second (or so), only then the progress window is shown. With Custom copy if I copy 10 byte file, the dialog flashes for an instant which is not helping (if it isn't set to persist after finishing). Again - not a real complaint but idea for improvement.

Edit: I like Filehero's layout in the case when no custom actions definitions would be implemented.
Having only Overwrite as a new button will be almost pointless for many people who switch often between 2 or 3 actions - one time they will hit the Overwrite button, the next time they'll have to use the dropdown to choose the other option anyway - not very friendly/consistent.

[eil]

just to make picture look not so solid, i'll state few thoughts.
apart from our company talking here, most of users don't really bother to customize every little moment in software they use, so full-cutomize of collision choices would be an overdo for majority of silent/having no complain users. still of course if Don decides so, customization may come.
yet i want to point out that for ex i'm one of users that use "keep both files"(suffix variants) only in 10-15% of operation, and i don't think that i'm so lonely. saying this i only mean that not Everybody use "keep" variants so heavily, 'cause by reading the topic it really seems so.

[admin]

Same here. When I want to keep renamed copies then I use the related XY commands right away (under menu File | Duplicate). When I use "Copy" then it's either Overwrite or Skip. 100%.

[LittleBiG]

When I copy something at work, many times I have to keep the last version. (because I do some test with a new file, and when it is ok, I copy it from the test folder to the real folder, keeping a copy of the previous version in the real folder.) I use "Affix current date to existing". If no need to keep, then overwrite. About 50-50% percent.