TC 6.50 has been released!

Post by *ghisler(Author) » 2005-01-19, 00:07 UTC

2Sir_SiLvA
No, a time traveller brought me the final 6.5 version, otherwise you would still be waiting for the release.

DRP535 · Post by *DRP535 » 2005-01-19, 01:42 UTC

2Ghisler:

Thanks for making the final installer a conventional packed SFX archive like before so I can make a version that'll fit on floppy again without the extra languages.

pdavit · Post by *pdavit » 2005-01-19, 02:42 UTC

DRP535 wrote:Thanks for making the final installer a conventional packed SFX archive like before so I can make a version that'll fit on floppy again without the extra languages.

Yes, that was a welcoming change at the very last moment!

Post by *Hacker » 2005-01-19, 12:43 UTC

Official versions are always normal SFX archives, AFAIK.

Roman

pdavit · Post by *pdavit » 2005-01-19, 13:33 UTC

Hacker wrote:Official versions are always normal SFX archives, AFAIK.

Then I cannot remember the reason for having it differently for betas.

Sir_SiLvA · Post by *Sir_SiLvA » 2005-01-19, 16:11 UTC

2ghisler: that explains why is http://www.ahasoft.com.tw/wincmd/ still at v6.02

Time travels always have sideeffects

Albegor · Post by *Albegor » 2005-01-20, 10:02 UTC

Great work on the new release Christian!
I still have to browse through the huge list of fixes and improvements but I wanted to stop by and send you my congrats.

Keep up the good work.

JohnFredC · Post by *JohnFredC » 2005-01-20, 13:54 UTC

TC 6.5 is wonderful!

Thank you, Christian. You addressed MANY of my specific requests (not that I was the only one who had those requests, but nevertheless...)!

So much new stuff!

Post by *ghisler(Author) » 2005-01-20, 20:29 UTC

Thanks for the many requests! I'm trying to implement those which are wished the most, but unfortunately I cannot implement them all, it would make TC huge and slow...

JohnFredC · Post by *JohnFredC » 2005-01-20, 22:28 UTC

I cannot implement them all, it would make TC huge and slow...

Probably not from my perspective.

As far as speed goes... well, I am the slowest component of my systems. Accessing network drives comes next. For local drives, TC is essentially instantaneous for file sizes less than, oh, 100 Mb or so. On my systems, the TC display updates so fast, I can't even see it happen. Plenty of "time" available for additional processing before I would detect a slowdown. (Pentium 2.8c with 1GB)

As far as size goes... on disk TC is tiny for a modern app. My smallest USB pocket drive is 32Mb. TC fits easily on that and would still fit easily if it were twice its current size. I am amazed at the new functionality you pack into it every upgrade and the file size barely changes.

My requests are usually about enhancements to the interface... icons, buttons, menus, panels, and tools to manage those. Perhaps, if the user interface was "pluggable", then TC could stay its svelt, speedy self, but then those of us who wished the GUI "bells and whistles" that make such a difference to our productivity, could have them, too!

In the meantime, thanks again for TC. It is my most important tool. And the additions to 6.5 are stunning.

pdavit · Post by *pdavit » 2005-01-20, 23:57 UTC

Speaking about the interface, one addition that has been previously suggested and I really like is a vertical
button bar between the two file panels. I find it very functional since you can have there TC related commands
and emphasize on the left to right panel actions while the one we currently have can be for launching applications.
Currently the button bar holds all types of actions and although it can flexibly accept sub-bars it's still
hard not to become messy and less productive due to variety of contents.

Clo · Post by *Clo » 2005-01-21, 00:06 UTC

2pdavit

Hi Panos !
¤ Personally, I'm quite against a vertical button-bar between the windows.
- This needs a very large screen, even two monitors (for rich users, and I'm not).
- I would much prefer (an)alternative specialized button-bar(s) "sticked" at the bottom of the main window.
- Just my opinion, indeed…

F R
Claude
Clo

CoMiKe · Post by *CoMiKe » 2005-01-21, 00:13 UTC

pdavit wrote:Speaking about the interface, one addition that has been previously suggested and I really like is a vertical
button bar between the two file panels.

I would use it if it were added, and I think it would be even more useful if fs plugins could have an interface to show buttons on the middle-bar.

Sir_SiLvA · Post by *Sir_SiLvA » 2005-01-21, 00:43 UTC

Clo said just what i think about a vertical button-bar...
if it should ever be invented it should be on-/off-turnable...

DRP535 · Post by *DRP535 » 2005-01-21, 00:46 UTC

Gotta agree with Clo on this one. I don't have the room for a button bar between the windows. All it would do is increase the amount of scrolling I'd have to continually do to see the file I want to access in the browser windows. I can't see that it would be necessary anyway. There is already a completely user configurable button bar above and another below. How many button bars does one person need?

What I would like to see is a way of nesting button bars within button bars within buttons. You can nest a new button bar in a button using the TCMenu plugin but only to one level. It would be really cool if you could have a button expand to create a new bar and then have a button on that bar expand again to create another new bar, but sadly I don't think that's possible.

Total Commander

TC 6.50 has been released!

No, I don't wish that