Hi, MVV and petermad,
I just came here in order to clarify things since I didn't want to leave just by making people dizzy with fuzzy info. Hence:
I have checked the FreeCommander forum, then the freecommander.ini file (which is long) (and after having reverted to the latest version of FC), and indeed, there is NO way to choose the behavior that is fixed in FC:
- F5 copies, F6 moves, something other links (all can be assigned otherwise), but now for copy n paste:
- control copies, shift moves, alt links
(I'll have to have a better look into those linking things, I'd do a lot of linking, instead of not doing at all at this time, weren't I afraid that those Win links wouldn't perhaps make it into the next version of Windows (I'm using XP but would like to have transferred those linkss / junctions / whatever into Win 8 next year... - can somebody who has knowledge on this subject comment on this problem?),
and, on top of that,
- normal drag and drop, just the left button:
-- shifts when the target directory is on the same DRIVE,
-- copies when the target directory is on a different drive.
There is no possibility in FC to tweak this, but it seems to be STANDARD Windows behavior - that's at least what people say. MWW, you're speaking of standards; I don't now, but then, this shifting within the same drive while copying when target was another drive, USB stick or whatever, seems to have been, and seems to be, exactly what I have been, and what I am happy with, so this is a standard I can perfectly live with.
Again MWW, you're right to point out unstable behavior of FC for special tasks, the forum is full of complaints with those, and indeed, a file commander should be able to differenciate between physical files and pointers, and treat them in the right way.
Directory Opus, e.g., deletes the physical file (= stored elsewhere) when you do a "delete" in a "virtual folder", which has driven many people crazy, and nothing has been done about it, notwithstanding the fact that it's logical to suppose that when you buy totally overpriced software, you don't want to lose your data on top of that.
Where you are erroneous, MWW, is where you state, "It is impossible to made any 'quasi-perfect file manager' that will be suitable for all users." since in fact, of course that's possible, and without creating non-responsive bloatware that is.
In fact, since TC's behavior is NON-Win-standard, but TC just CHOOSES to have it this way around (again, different from Win standard), and not the other, = normal = copy, shift = move/"shift", it is 100 p.c. CERTAIN that
a ) it's easy to turn it around = make it the opposite (which I didn't and don't ask for), and
b ) it's easy to make it an option, and then the option would turn it around.
All this would be just SOME lines of code then, and would NOT affect the responsiveness of TC in any way, and for some fine but complicated things that COULD have made it unresponsive bloatware, happily they didn't. So please, let's be honest with each other and let propaganda phrases to dumb third party consumers who love to take propaganda as Job's / God's word - and who even react to that as believers react to true religion (cf. those findings published recently).
But now to petermad:
You said,
"You can set up TC to select files the way Explorer does, "Configuration" -> "Operation" -> "Mouse selection mode" -> "Left mouse button (Windows standard)". That will also take away the the delay for right-click menu to appear."
And indeed, that is something I had completely overlooked, and even the developer didn't place a hint to this.
Since I said, above, that FC's behavior is perfectly acceptable for me, even if I didn't had understood it fully but had used it in some intuitive (but doing-it-for-me) way, what you state here, is nothing more than, with this option set, TC will do for you what does FC now, and much more!
I didn't try yet, but I'll try this same day, and it seems, petermad, you put me back here!
Thanks a lot, from Wallonia to Denmark, seems you do tremendous work here, and Mr. Ghisler should be grateful to you!
I'll report back!
Moving Files by Mouse
Moderators: Hacker, petermad, Stefan2, white
Sorry for being negative, but it only brings the context menu without the 1 sec delay, nothing more, it does NOT affect the drag and drop behavior, so the developer was right not to mention it.
I drag (without shift, control, alt or whatever) to a directory being on another drive: it copies: very good.
I do the same, target being a directory on the same drive: it copies:
VERY BAD.
I drag (without shift, control, alt or whatever) to a directory being on another drive: it copies: very good.
I do the same, target being a directory on the same drive: it copies:
VERY BAD.
Hello again, and thank you all for your kind responding to my questions and remarks.
TC isn't the one for me, that has become evident by now.
As said, it's not a question of who's right and who's wrong, so I understand that stance that TC doesn't "mess up things" as the "industry standard" can indeed do, but for me, that standard set up by MS was extremely intuitive, even when I didn't and do use any MS program (except for the operating system that is), except for exporting business, i.e. if I don't want to print out and send (! = that can be more expensive even than the printing out, then!) 100 pages to somebody, I prefer exporting my things into a MS Word file.
But the question, as I see it, that a "file manager" should be a "manager", and a manager isn't the owner of the business, he should manage the owner's business as the owner likes, within reasonable terms that is.
And that's exactly the point, the user having bought a program is the "owner", and any utility = "manager" should allow for options to do things the computer user needs them to have, in the latter's opinion.
TC is seriously hampering its customer base by all means, trying to impose means of proceeding, or just (as with the looks), giving options, yes, but somewhat hiding them, in order to make casual users bat off from the program... and the developer isn't that much criticised for his errors out there in the web and here in the forums, but he's mostly defended by his existing user base.
That's very well, but it's approaching cult, religious following, sectarian mind, and all this isn't for me. But then, "approaching", I said, I'm not stating TC users are sectarians... I'm just saying that the TC speciality would be well advised to not fall into the cult trap is has indeed been captured in with one leg yet.
And that's fact, but I seemingly needed this little voyage here in order to understand what's going on, and that it will not change, see the developer's "Why not doing it so-so and this-that-way", i.e. replicating what's in the handbook; it's in this style that many of his offerings here in the forum are styled.
That's the Job way: Take it or leave it.
And therefore, I never bought anything from Apple, and never will, and I won't buy TC either. But you see, I give reasons that can be valued, one way or the other.
Thanks again.
TC isn't the one for me, that has become evident by now.
As said, it's not a question of who's right and who's wrong, so I understand that stance that TC doesn't "mess up things" as the "industry standard" can indeed do, but for me, that standard set up by MS was extremely intuitive, even when I didn't and do use any MS program (except for the operating system that is), except for exporting business, i.e. if I don't want to print out and send (! = that can be more expensive even than the printing out, then!) 100 pages to somebody, I prefer exporting my things into a MS Word file.
But the question, as I see it, that a "file manager" should be a "manager", and a manager isn't the owner of the business, he should manage the owner's business as the owner likes, within reasonable terms that is.
And that's exactly the point, the user having bought a program is the "owner", and any utility = "manager" should allow for options to do things the computer user needs them to have, in the latter's opinion.
TC is seriously hampering its customer base by all means, trying to impose means of proceeding, or just (as with the looks), giving options, yes, but somewhat hiding them, in order to make casual users bat off from the program... and the developer isn't that much criticised for his errors out there in the web and here in the forums, but he's mostly defended by his existing user base.
That's very well, but it's approaching cult, religious following, sectarian mind, and all this isn't for me. But then, "approaching", I said, I'm not stating TC users are sectarians... I'm just saying that the TC speciality would be well advised to not fall into the cult trap is has indeed been captured in with one leg yet.
And that's fact, but I seemingly needed this little voyage here in order to understand what's going on, and that it will not change, see the developer's "Why not doing it so-so and this-that-way", i.e. replicating what's in the handbook; it's in this style that many of his offerings here in the forum are styled.
That's the Job way: Take it or leave it.
And therefore, I never bought anything from Apple, and never will, and I won't buy TC either. But you see, I give reasons that can be valued, one way or the other.
Thanks again.
frli,
Well, popular requests often get implemented, especially when they are easy to implement. On the other hand, the developer has a finite amount of time and your request was not requested very often on the forum so far.
Roman
Well, popular requests often get implemented, especially when they are easy to implement. On the other hand, the developer has a finite amount of time and your request was not requested very often on the forum so far.
Roman
Mal angenommen, du drückst Strg+F, wählst die FTP-Verbindung (mit gespeichertem Passwort), klickst aber nicht auf Verbinden, sondern fällst tot um.
frli, file managers had appeared in DOS times, much before Windows, so it is MS who ignores standards, while TC follows theese traditions. And for people who is familiar with file managers and not Windows Explorer theese standards have great cost. I don't use Explorer at all, TC is the very first program that I install on clean Windows. Maybe it is useful for someone to have switches for non-standard behaviour but for me current one is great.
It is my experience that if users are willing to spend a little time to adapt to the TC UI "methods", they will discover that the rewards of using TC as their file "manager" far (far!) out-weigh any initial inconvenience.
And if one pauses to think carefully about each TC behavioral "method" that differs from ones accustomed behavior (with Explorer, for instance), one will find solid logic and best practice hiding within.
And if one pauses to think carefully about each TC behavioral "method" that differs from ones accustomed behavior (with Explorer, for instance), one will find solid logic and best practice hiding within.
Licensed, Mouse-Centric, moving (slowly) toward Touch-centric
Apologies for replying to this on the TC forum, when it's about Opus and not TC, but I'm somewhat perplexed by this statement from earlier in the thread.frli wrote:Directory Opus, e.g., deletes the physical file (= stored elsewhere) when you do a "delete" in a "virtual folder", which has driven many people crazy, and nothing has been done about it, notwithstanding the fact that it's logical to suppose that when you buy totally overpriced software, you don't want to lose your data on top of that.
Assuming you mean file collections (e.g. Find Results) when you talk about virtual folders:
a) You say it has "driven many people crazy" but I can only think of one thread about it (mentioned in 'c' below) over the years. Maybe I can't remember them all but doesn't seem like many people, nor people being driven crazy. When you said "many people" did you really mean "me"?
b) There is a "remove from collection" command/button you can use for removing things from collections without deleting them.
c) You say "nothing has been done about it," but after someone asked for it recently (few weeks ago, I think), a "Delete REMOVECOLLECTION=auto" command was added to let you automatically delete in normal folders and remove in collections, so if you want a single button that changes meaning depending on context you can have it.
d) It's very useful to be able to delete files via a collection, and far more common than removing them from collections without deleting them. e.g. If you search for certain files because you want to delete them. Depends what you are using collections for, of course.
e) It's the same way find results, libraries, etc. work in most file managers that I've used, at least.
As I say, I am genuinely perplexed.
Very fine, nudel, tremendous alias.
a ) Just some complain, but many lose data, and that can be really harmful.
d ) "It's very useful to be able to delete files via a collection, and far more common than removing " - part 1, yes, could be for some uses ; part 2, you ain't serious, deleting from a collection might be 4 or 5 times more frequent than deleting by deleting it for good from within a collection ; you obviously see collections as mostly scrap boards, and then xplorer2 and SpeedCommander would do it for you ; DO's collection are far more serious tools than just scrap boards, they're real virtual collections, as stated by me ; you seem to mix up some things, and your tremendous error with regards to normal use of virtual folders compares badly with your wanting me to be precise up to the latest comma in my statements ; get rid, by accident, of a file you've been working 6 weeks on, and lose it for good, not even seeing what you've done, and your heart will go wild, no need to teach me my wording and better arithmetics.
b ) We know this, nothing new ; the problem is that you risk to trigger false commands, especially after 15 hours' work in a row, and without seeing what you've done to your work until it's too late.
c ) That's the only interesting part of your otherwise ridiculous post ; I tried DO some weeks ago and wasn't aware yet they changed this important point ; but for the 3 reasons given below, I cannot use DO even if it's then the best file manager available.
e ) This is the most ridiculous part of your post since "most file managers" simply don't have such features, and those that have, do it each in a VERY different way so there is room to analyze the different (and for some, really bad) concepts, but "the same way...in most", you simply have made this up.
Most people are genuinely perplexed by the licencing and pricing of DO, and especially by its incredible anti-pirate inconveniences for genuine (!) users, i.e. the trial is an incredible pain in the a**, and for paying users, the pain doesn't stop but goes on and on and on.
Or take it the other way round : If DO hadn't been developed by people greedy and aggressive and paranoid, it would be the industry standard since if they didn't defigurate it by these means, it would be the quality leader... and thus become the market leader also.
If you critizise people for not being a korinthenkacker like you are, better be one without faults.
To the other posters : In fact, you're repeating what I stated : The developer has it his way, which is his right, and you're accepting his ways, which you're free to do, but in order to have a bigger market share, he'd be well advised to make it optional instead of making it mandatory.
And back to noodle's scrap boards : Indeed, TC has such a thing, and then, do some searching, put the results into the scrap board, and then
a ) try to do a second search, just within the files in the scrap board = search results list : it's impossible ; search within search results (at least by this means) is impossible - perhaps there's another way to do it, I didn't find it
b ) try to click / double click on a file in those search results, in order to open the file : NADA ; it just brings you to the same file within the "normal" lists... and from then, you can click or double click (don't know anymore) in order to open the file in question... but that will take you away from the search results lists, for other clicks there.
I'm writing this from memory, my trial period having ended some weeks ago, so our DO-paid korinthenkacker here will certainly find some minor flaws within my descriptions.
a ) Just some complain, but many lose data, and that can be really harmful.
d ) "It's very useful to be able to delete files via a collection, and far more common than removing " - part 1, yes, could be for some uses ; part 2, you ain't serious, deleting from a collection might be 4 or 5 times more frequent than deleting by deleting it for good from within a collection ; you obviously see collections as mostly scrap boards, and then xplorer2 and SpeedCommander would do it for you ; DO's collection are far more serious tools than just scrap boards, they're real virtual collections, as stated by me ; you seem to mix up some things, and your tremendous error with regards to normal use of virtual folders compares badly with your wanting me to be precise up to the latest comma in my statements ; get rid, by accident, of a file you've been working 6 weeks on, and lose it for good, not even seeing what you've done, and your heart will go wild, no need to teach me my wording and better arithmetics.
b ) We know this, nothing new ; the problem is that you risk to trigger false commands, especially after 15 hours' work in a row, and without seeing what you've done to your work until it's too late.
c ) That's the only interesting part of your otherwise ridiculous post ; I tried DO some weeks ago and wasn't aware yet they changed this important point ; but for the 3 reasons given below, I cannot use DO even if it's then the best file manager available.
e ) This is the most ridiculous part of your post since "most file managers" simply don't have such features, and those that have, do it each in a VERY different way so there is room to analyze the different (and for some, really bad) concepts, but "the same way...in most", you simply have made this up.
Most people are genuinely perplexed by the licencing and pricing of DO, and especially by its incredible anti-pirate inconveniences for genuine (!) users, i.e. the trial is an incredible pain in the a**, and for paying users, the pain doesn't stop but goes on and on and on.
Or take it the other way round : If DO hadn't been developed by people greedy and aggressive and paranoid, it would be the industry standard since if they didn't defigurate it by these means, it would be the quality leader... and thus become the market leader also.
If you critizise people for not being a korinthenkacker like you are, better be one without faults.
To the other posters : In fact, you're repeating what I stated : The developer has it his way, which is his right, and you're accepting his ways, which you're free to do, but in order to have a bigger market share, he'd be well advised to make it optional instead of making it mandatory.
And back to noodle's scrap boards : Indeed, TC has such a thing, and then, do some searching, put the results into the scrap board, and then
a ) try to do a second search, just within the files in the scrap board = search results list : it's impossible ; search within search results (at least by this means) is impossible - perhaps there's another way to do it, I didn't find it
b ) try to click / double click on a file in those search results, in order to open the file : NADA ; it just brings you to the same file within the "normal" lists... and from then, you can click or double click (don't know anymore) in order to open the file in question... but that will take you away from the search results lists, for other clicks there.
I'm writing this from memory, my trial period having ended some weeks ago, so our DO-paid korinthenkacker here will certainly find some minor flaws within my descriptions.
Complete and utter nonsense, to be honest!
But I don't want to pollute the TC forum with further discussion of this here. I realise I should've posted my reply elsewhere and simply linked to it in the first place; I apologise to everyone else here for not doing that originally.
Feel free to take your points to the Opus forum if you want to continue.
But I don't want to pollute the TC forum with further discussion of this here. I realise I should've posted my reply elsewhere and simply linked to it in the first place; I apologise to everyone else here for not doing that originally.
Feel free to take your points to the Opus forum if you want to continue.
2frli
It is not perfectly clear to me whether you are talking about TC or DO here, but in TC you can just "Feed to listbox" and then do a new search from there.And back to noodle's scrap boards : Indeed, TC has such a thing, and then, do some searching, put the results into the scrap board, and then
a ) try to do a second search, just within the files in the scrap board = search results list : it's impossible ; search within search results (at least by this means) is impossible - perhaps there's another way to do it, I didn't find it
In TC's Search list (without even having to feed to listbox) you can either right click on each file and use the context menu to open the file, or just press F3 to open it in Lister.b ) try to click / double click on a file in those search results, in order to open the file : NADA ; it just brings you to the same file within the "normal" lists... and from then, you can click or double click (don't know anymore) in order to open the file in question... but that will take you away from the search results lists, for other clicks there.
License #524 (1994)
Danish Total Commander Translator
TC 11.51 32+64bit on Win XP 32bit & Win 7, 8.1 & 10 (22H2) 64bit, 'Everything' 1.5.0.1391a
TC 3.60b4 on Android 6, 13, 14
TC Extended Menus | TC Languagebar | TC Dark Help | PHSM-Calendar
Danish Total Commander Translator
TC 11.51 32+64bit on Win XP 32bit & Win 7, 8.1 & 10 (22H2) 64bit, 'Everything' 1.5.0.1391a
TC 3.60b4 on Android 6, 13, 14
TC Extended Menus | TC Languagebar | TC Dark Help | PHSM-Calendar