XYplorer Beta Club

How did I miss this "defect by design"?

Vista Slow To Copy, Delete Files:
Bruce Schneier has said that trying to make digital files uncopyable is like trying to make water not wet. With Vista, Microsoft seems to have done a pretty good job of making premium content files not copyable. Now a few readers have tipped us to a new wrinkle: Vista also makes it very, very slow to copy, rename, or delete ordinary files. Here is a Microsoft TechNet thread on the problem. The Reg reports that Microsoft has a hotfix for what sounds like a subset of the more general problem complained about on TechNet; but they will only give it to customers who ask nicely. And a hotfix is fussier to install than a proper patch.

I should add that I presume this was included in an automatic update since I don't have this problem with XYplorer.

If ever you needed a prompt to get your own file manipulation routines sorted out Don, this is it.

lukescammell wrote:If ever you needed a prompt to get your own file manipulation routines sorted out Don, this is it.

Yeah. Although I don't know where they have put in the brake. Ultimately I have to use OS functions for everything, there is nothing like pure stand-alone on a Windows machine. The questions is at what level I plug into the system. Currently I use the Shell functions for file operations, as most file managers do. With one exception: XY's "Backup (To)" functions use raw file copy API. This is one level closer to the hard-disk. So when XYplorer copies slow under Vista, then a good test would be: use XYplorer's Backup function for the same job (major difference: it won't overwrite newer files and you get a little report when done). Now if Backup is clearly faster than Copy then we know: yes, it is time to say bye-bye to the Shell and re-write Copy and Move.

I'll see if I can borrow a mate's vista install and run some stop watch tests.

admin wrote:Now if Backup is clearly faster than Copy then we know: yes, it is time to say bye-bye to the Shell and re-write Copy and Move.

Well, either way, XY having it's own routines for this instead of relying to the crappy Windows ones would not only benefit there. I'm running XP (and have no intention to upgrade to the big crap) and I know I would see a lot more improvements if XY did his own file operations. You know, things like speeds, control, reports, queue, error management, etc