2nd pane, anyone?

[jacky]

Example - I have two folders, one containing BMP files and the other JPG's...they have obviously different sizes but also the dates differ...and the names differ slightly even ignoring the extension...but, I can visually tell which pairs match up as the names when sorted are similar...maybe that's an extreme case, but there is no real way that can be sync'd programatically IMO.

Yeah.. but this one is a pretty special case and maybe it could fall into picture management, not file management.
I'd agree that having 2 panes could be usefull when it comes to the thumbs views, but maybe for such task we're not really in the domain of XY anymore...

2) Ok, so in X2 when I do a sync, it shows which ones match...fine...then I typically use the unmatched ones to manually process those, by either copying or renaming or deleting or moving, etc...and often my actions differ for each file, so there is no way to automate this task...I'm not counter-checking, but acting on the results...

Well, depends on how the synch feature is done Imagine it gets you with a list of all files & their actions preselected by default (that is, copy new/modified files from source to dest, remove "old" files from destination (no more found in source), etc) BUT it lets you choose/change what action will be done for each & every file individually: check/uncheck to do something or not, and/or use a combo list to change the action to do; I mean a list with all actions (copy/move/delte/rename/etc) so you can actually do whatever you want, but the first part (comparing) was done by XY, so probably faster than you could, and still no need for dual pane

[j_c_hallgren]

Yeah.. but this one is a pretty special case and maybe it could fall into picture management, not file management.
I'd agree that having 2 panes could be usefull when it comes to the thumbs views, but maybe for such task we're not really in the domain of XY anymore...

I'll just comment on this now...and address your other portion later:
When I was doing this, I used details view (I rarely use thumbs) so I'm in this mode 99% of the time...and this task, to me, falls into file management, because I was attempting to locate the "orphan" files.

As did another case, when I was matching up some HTML files with the TXT files that were extracted from the HTML....the conditions were similar, in that file size was of no use to sync, nor were the dates as they were totally different, nor were the file names as they were variants of base HTML file names, but sorting both panes by name, I could easily visually match up the files via dual pane and locate the unmatched ones, which needed more work done.

[jacky]

As did another case, when I was matching up some HTML files with the TXT files that were extracted from the HTML....

Well, that might just be different ways of approaching/doing thinsg, but while I'd see the interest of having 2 thumbs views, if you're in details mode, or for that case with HTML/TXT files, I don't really see the need of dual pane, I mean I'd do it as easy using 2 tabs I think.

That could be also because I got my gestures that are real quick to use for me: left to move to the tab on the left, right to the one on the right. That way, little gestures with my mouse and I'm switching back & forth from one tab to the other!
And since I beleive you're not a mouse guy, you could actually do the same using F7! So all you'll need is F7 (to switch back & forth between the 2 tabs) and the Up/Down keys (to change the previewed file), honestly seems as cool as a dual pane (even better actually, you only have one list so more space here!) ; I mean how would you switch from one pane to the other, since there would only be one Info Panel, aka one preview, etc ? By pressing a key, like F7 ? Guess what...

And on that suject: I'm not sure the keyboard shortcuts are at best here, cause moving tabs around is very easy (Ctrl+Shift+Left/Right) while switching between them ain't so easy (Ctrl+[Shift+]Tab), I'd suggest to switch them (or as default maybe, since you plan to have them customizable)

[j_c_hallgren]

Well, that might just be different ways of approaching/doing thinsg, but while I'd see the interest of having 2 thumbs views, if you're in details mode, or for that case with HTML/TXT files, I don't really see the need of dual pane, I mean I'd do it as easy using 2 tabs I think.

I'll definitely agree that we seem to have different ways of doing things! But you then said "I think" when saying how easy it would be! I've tried it...it's not easy! Having to make a mental snapshot of how screen looks each time tabs are switched and then trying to operate on/recall that snapshot is much harder than seeing both tabs at same time.

That could be also because I got my gestures that are real quick to use for me: left to move to the tab on the left, right to the one on the right. That way, little gestures with my mouse and I'm switching back & forth from one tab to the other!
And since I beleive you're not a mouse guy, you could actually do the same using F7! ; I mean how would you switch from one pane to the other, since there would only be one Info Panel, aka one preview, etc ?

True, I use my touchpad as much as possible! And even though X2 swaps pane focus via the TAB key, I mostly use the t-pad...X2 has a single preview that is based on whatever item has is selected, so that would be similar in XY...

And...the lack of space to see entire entry is completely offset by the ability to see both files data at same time...
Did you see the screenshot I posted earlier of my X2 session? There's enough showing to be able to do most all the tasks I've needed to...most of file name, size, dates, etc.

BTW, I have to resort to using X2 about twice a month usually...so it's not a frequent task that I need it for..but I use XY daily, so not having to switch to another program would be very helpful!

[jacky]

Having to make a mental snapshot of how screen looks each time tabs are switched and then trying to operate on/recall that snapshot is much harder than seeing both tabs at same time.

hmm I just realized that I may have misunderstand you a bit. I thought you had to "match" files according to their content (eg the picture itself, or the text from the HTML/TXT files) and not their names.
That's why I thought the most important would be the preview area, as it would be (almost) the only part that matters here (hence the interest of having a preview area larger also, and the fact that there's only one preview even with 2 panes).

Now if it rely only/mostly on filenames, it could still be done with 2 tabs and switching back&forth (F7) I beleive, but there might also be some other factors that count, such as the habbit of using dual pane. It is obviously a different approach, as you don't get to see the 2 list at the same time, but...
Actually, just a little while ago I had to check a couple of folders to make sure some files were "in synch" (based on their names & sizes only); and so I set up a VF in both tabs to only show the files I was interested in, then switch back&forth to check if it was allright or not. Not what you wanna do I know, but this was pretty easy to do that way, even faster than with a dual pane I think as my columns didn't change when switching tabs, so I only had to make sure the data stayed still when switching!

[admin]

And...the lack of space to see entire entry is completely offset by the ability to see both files data at same time...

Not sure if I fully understood what you are after (man, everytime the term "dual pane" is popped, threads are growing like mutant mushrooms), but have you thought of this:
- do a 2-location find-all search of the dirs you want to compare (location field: "dir1; dir2")
- sort search results by name
Now you got pairs in the list and you can visually compare the data.
(Only meaningful of the 2 dirs contain the same file(name)s, of course)

[j_c_hallgren]

And...the lack of space to see entire entry is completely offset by the ability to see both files data at same time...

Meaning that even though on X2 display there is not enough horizontal room to see entire filename and dates and attributes and such, I can see at same time the same fields in both panes, like filename, and horizontally scroll as needed.

In order to do a two location search, it appears to me that I would need to type in at least one of the locations, as opposed to clicking on a tree entry...in my case, that could mean typing a quite long path, in some cases in excess of 80 chars...not exactly what I'm quickest at!

In addition, when I would then have the merged results, the portion of the path name that would often be needed to tell which of the two folders that particular file is in would be WAY off the "end" of the screen (only room to show about 25 chars of path in my setup), so I'd have to be constantly horizontally scrolling left/right to swap between file name/dates and path...again, not condusive to speedy work...maybe I'm missing something obvious that would assist? But setting it up very quickly as also part of the consideration....BTW, I tried this once, and the time it took to do the task was at least 5 times what it took using X2.

And as you pointed out, this works only when file names are same...in the examples I gave, the file names resemble each other but are not at all the same.

[admin]

Using latest beta vers 99% of the time.

BTW, I can live with that 1% using another file manager for a specific task. I could even live with 50% (okay, 49% ), as long as you come back to XY afterwards.
I know and you know, that XY has a lot to offer in usability, productivity enhancement, time-saving, ease-of-work-flow etc. that no other file manager comes even near to. OTOH, I do not claim nor aspire to develop the last & ultimate software you need. Just as I have several knives for several jobs, it's totally okay to have several file managers (as long as XYplorer is the main one, of course! ).

[admin]

Yes, I have gotten very accustomed to two panes through using Total Commander for years. I'm working on losing the habit, so to speak. But maybe I shouldn't have to "work" on it. I would bet there are a lot of potential purchasers of XY who love the catalog, love the great preview functions, and love a number of features..... but just wish the dang thing had (at least the option of) a second pane. Yeah, we can all go over to Total Commander, Xplorer2, Directory Opus, Servant Salamander, Frigate, etc., etc. But imagine wowing people by providing the exclusive & hot XY-only features plus, by golly, a second pane.

If I'm not wrong, the dual-pane paradigm stems from Win3.1 (copied from Mac/Atari??) and then was copied from Norton (they all probably copied it from Xerox Labs). Whatever, the all have/had one thing in common: there was no tree. After the invention of the tree (by whom?) the dual-pane paradigm was obsolete for most tasks, apart from very specific synch jobs that cannot be automated because human intelligence/experience is needed for evualation of similarity.
However, the dual-pane has not gone away but enjoys a fanatic usership. Why? I (and others) said it repeatedly: I think it's a mixture of cult and habit.
Therefore I'm not sure whether the wowing would be so big, as I see a little rational force behind the dual-pane myth. I'm not referring to you, Orson, but my impression is that many dual-pane advocates are obsessed rather than convinced by that concept, and project this obsession to specific cultware like TC. The relationships to such cultware appear so emotional that I find it hard to imagine that these folks seriously work on something with their computer; looks more like spending time with a machine... If I'm right, then XYplorer is not made for them. As I said somewhere else: XYplorer is a tool, not a toy.

That's my expand-your-market argument. I'd also argue that there is genuine functional value in the ability to simultaneously view two folders' content. It's not merely a feel-good factor (although for software, I believe feel-good is a valid UI design factor). It's functional, it's convenient to be able to work with two different directories at a glance, not by clicking a tab--just by looking.

I tried to play around with x2 for some time, and I found it confusing and overloading my screen with useless info most of the time. Yes, I can compare to folders without switching tabs, but then the tree is only good for one of them. And the lists are so small that I have to scroll all the time to see all columns. Nope, I'm not convinced at all. It only strengthened my conviction: Dual pane was historically replaced by the tree, and only keeps on being useful when it comes to brain-dependent synchronization tasks.

I think Donald has introduced some great innovations in the design of a file manager. I'm suggesting that one non-innovative feature would augment both the marketability and practical value of this very cool tool.

Who knows? When you add a pick-up to a Porsche you will win some farmers but lose some speedniks.

[j_c_hallgren]

Using latest beta vers 99% of the time.

BTW, I can live with that 1% using another file manager for a specific task.
Just as I have several knives for several jobs, it's totally okay to have several file managers (as long as XYplorer is the main one, of course! ).

The 99% refers to the fact that sometimes I fall behind on installing betas!

But I also have XY running on my system 99% of the time, as well as Win Expl...I only use X2 on those specific occasions when I need dual pane.

the dual-pane paradigm was obsolete for most tasks, apart from very specific synch jobs that cannot be automated because human intelligence/experience is needed for evualation of similarity.

Dual pane was historically replaced by the tree, and only keeps on being useful when it comes to brain-dependent synchronization tasks.

And that has been my point! It's those times when I feel that I must have a dual pane setup, and so resort to X2...and should XY provide the basic features that I use in X2, then I wouldn't ever need X2...others may feel more dependant on dual based on their present product, and usage, but I can work just fine with single pane almost all of the time.

[Gandolf]

I'll just "stir things up" a little more!!

One major problem with XY (and tree based file managers in general) is the time it takes to expand a branch. My archive directories are virtually unusable - one in particular with 300+ sub-directories each containing between 100 and 2000 files now takes nearly 4 minutes to open in XY. I only want to see the files in one or two of the sub-directories. In x², I open the base directory, all sub-directories are displayed instantly, select the sub-directory I want and open it. I see the files I require, and the job is done.

[admin]

I'll just "stir things up" a little more!!

One major problem with XY (and tree based file managers in general) is the time it takes to expand a branch. My archive directories are virtually unusable - one in particular with 300+ sub-directories each containing between 100 and 2000 files now takes nearly 4 minutes to open in XY. I only want to see the files in one or two of the sub-directories. In x², I open the base directory, all sub-directories are displayed instantly, select the sub-directory I want and open it. I see the files I require, and the job is done.

Yep. I'm aware of it. But did not know it was so bad!
I see several possibilites, one of them is "logging the leafs" (as you proposed). Leafs are nodes with no subnodes.
There's something better still, ultra-revolutionary, which I'm planning for XYplorer 6.0 (the "black belt file management" edition!).
But I understand you want it now... I make a note...

[Gandolf]

... But I understand you want it now... I make a note...

Not necessarily.

I'm happy to use whichever program suits my needs best for the task I want to perform. The directory, with many sub-directories, is a very extreme example because almost all the sub-directories only contain files.

The leaf idea I think is an excellent one (XTree used something similar many years ago) but from my previous mention of it I understood it would mean a radical re-write of very basic code in XY. I'd be interested to know what your "black belt file management" involves (very appropriate term since we were watching some Martial Arts yesterday at a Japanese centre!)

I've been using XY and x² for about the same number of years (TrackerV3.50.0022, x2alpha 0.0.0.12) so I know both programs reasonably well, and don't feel I'm biased towards either of them.

[lukescammell]

one in particular with 300+ sub-directories each containing between 100 and 2000 files now takes nearly 4 minutes to open in XY.

Is this over a network? I've not been able to get anything to list this slowly. Something around half of all the sizes you mentioned above takes me around 1-2secs over a crappy gigabit windows network...

Kinda related, but kinda not, I tried TC the other day and noticed that not only did it display the files on a sharepoint server just like any other network resource (XY just shows a blank screen, no directories at all), but it did so at the same speed as my local drives. The speed for local browsing between XY and TC was the same, but as soon as you get to a network share, TC remains at the same speed and XY takes0.5-1.5seconds to display the next directory (in list view). I don't suppose any of this is related?

[Gandolf]

... Is this over a network? ...

No, we're talking sheer numbers of files. Donald's discussion previously explains the reason. Basically, every directory in the branch has to be checked to see if it contains a sub-directory. If XY finds a sub-directory then it stops checking that directory. Since almost all the directories only contain files, XY has to check something of the order of 250,000 files!! (I hope I got the explanation correct Donald).

As I said, this is a very extreme situation but I have several other similar large directories.