What I hate in TC is...

[sangahm]

snip
....this time I installed it and changed the UI to resemble Windows Eplorer...

How did you do that?

[Sir_SiLvA]

I absolutely agree that TC needs a graphic makeover so it looks in line with other programs of its kind.

With wich PRG for example? like SC ie? (god beware )

Apart from that, I'm getting the impression that Christian is sticking with an outdated development tool for the wrong reasons. It's great that the version of Delphi he's using is better at compiling small fast Win 3.11 compatible executables, but if that also means a lacking unicode support and an outdated interface, I'd say: upgrade and give us more features! I stopped caring about 16 support since the introduction of Windows 95 (I'd rather see 64 bit support) and I can live very well with a larger exe file that is a bit slower. I've long abandoned floppies and IMO any PC that's good enough for Windows 2000/XP should have no problem with a more resource hungry version of TC.

Yes, that is how the world is in your eyes and for you but
among us are people that have to deal with "outdated"
systems. So if your system is fast enoigh than why dont
you use stuff stuff like winblind and get some other icons for tc?
2nd: if you compile a simple nothing doing exe
in delphi 3 its ca. 300kb big in delphi 7 the same prg is 500kb bigger!
not mentioning the bad update policy of borland....

And something about Icons in Menus:
That would mean Christian had to implement
>350 icons in TC or an extra-DLL and for what?
I mean how often do you guys look at the menus?

[ymmv]

Yes, that is how the world is in your eyes and for you but
among us are people that have to deal with "outdated"
systems. So if your system is fast enoigh than why dont
you use stuff stuff like winblind and get some other icons for tc?

What's outdated in this case? Total Commander is such a lightweight application that it still runs perfectly fine on a 10 year old 133 mhz Pentium. The thing is that no one is using 133 Mhz Pentiums anymore. 99.95% of all TC users will have PCs that are a _lot_ faster than that. I don't see the point of holding back the development of a program because a tiny minority of users with completely outdated systems will complain. I think complete unicode support is a lot more important than compatibility with a 16-bit Windows version that no one is using anymore. Folks who don't have the money to upgrade to a PC or OS that can handle Windows 95 or better also don't have the money to buy a brandnew licenso for Total Commander. And the Windows 3.11 fans can still use TC 6.5 when a future 7.0 version increases the hardware demands slightly.

2nd: if you compile a simple nothing doing exe
in delphi 3 its ca. 300kb big in delphi 7 the same prg is 500kb bigger!
not mentioning the bad update policy of borland....

But Borland still issues regular updates for Delphi 2? As I said before, what's the deal with a larger excutable? It's not like people are suddenly stiumped when TC doesn't fit on a floppy anymore when you have CD(R)s, DVD(R)s, memory sticks, zip drives, jazz drives, etc. etc.

[Sheepdog]

The thing is that no one is using 133 Mhz Pentiums anymore. 99.95% of all TC users will have PCs that are a _lot_ faster than that.

I think here you perfectly wrong. I personally have two PCs running with Pentium 133Mhz. And I know many people who have the same.

I don't like to throw away my PC for it is 10 years old - as long as I can do most things I need with it (e.g. word processing, picture editing and so on). And I need a filemanager that fits in this environment.

I don't see the point of holding back the development of a program because a tiny minority of users with completely outdated systems will complain.

I don't know where you come from but maybe in other regions most people use these 'completely outdated systems'. I am from Germany. And I know that 2 years ago an acquaintance of mine, who worked for the german criminal investigation department still used a 80386 machine at work.

I just made a poll to get more info about it.

I think complete unicode support is a lot more important than compatibility with a 16-bit Windows version that no one is using anymore. Folks who don't have the money to upgrade to a PC or OS that can handle Windows 95 or better also don't have the money to buy a brandnew licenso for Total Commander. And the Windows 3.11 fans can still use TC 6.5 when a future 7.0 version increases the hardware demands slightly.

I do not agree. Even if those people may have not the money to upgrade their hardware, they have already paid for the TC and made the development up to Versin 6.50 possible.

And why should @ghisler provide something that isn't completely provided by the OS?

I mean that there should be some OS-calls that make it unnessecary to let the program decide if there is a unicode support needed or not. When there is a folder with unicode the OS should make all operations use unicode. And when I rename a unicode filename the OS should do the appropriate renaming.

But Borland still issues regular updates for Delphi 2? As I said before, what's the deal with a larger excutable? It's not like people are suddenly stiumped when TC doesn't fit on a floppy anymore when you have CD(R)s, DVD(R)s, memory sticks, zip drives, jazz drives, etc. etc.

As I said: there are still enough computers with small resources where it counts to have the program ready to use on a floppy.
Sometimes older Windows versions refuse to recognie CD-Rom drives. Than it's handy to have a floppy version of TC.

sheepdog

[ymmv]

There's no reason at all why people with obsolete PC hardware can't go on using past and current versions of TC. I just don't think it makes sense to limit the future development of this program to appease a very small group of stubborn users who are stuck in 1994 computerwise and want to keep everyone else in 94 too. And yes, a P133 is completely obsolete piece of equipment. Where I work we replace PCs after four, sometimes five years of service. We threw away a whole batch of Penium 2/3 300-800 Mhz Dell PCs because it was just too much trouble selling and/or repairing them. Another batch was given away to employees. That's how much these PCs are worth.

[Norbert]

And why should @ghisler provide something that isn't completely provided by the OS?

The Operating Systems WinNT, Win200x and WinXP fully support unicode.
They work internally with unicode strings. All file name and dialog strings use unicode. There is a layer that translate these strings to/from ANSI for old programs. So old programs run slower on these OS because every string that is handed to the OS has to be converted to/from unicode. Windows NT is now 10 years old, enough time to learn to use the right functions. There is also a layer (MSLU) available for older windows versions (graphic addon for MS-DOS) that emulate unicode functions.

Regards
Norbert

[Sir_SiLvA]

<something>

Sure our way of seein the world is wrong and yours is the only one
that is right... (why does it sound familiar? )

Dont know where you live but here in Germany we have nearly
5 Millions of People without work....

[Derek Cornish]

Groan! Groan!

PLEASE don't make TC more like Windows Explorer. I spent ages trying to find a decent file manager along the lines of Norton Commander and Laplink. I was just about ready to go back to DOS when I found TC. (ok - slight exaggeration )

And now some people seem to be talking about loading it down with yet more clunky icons, and pointless bloat.

Every time I fire up TC I get a sense of joy. It's a powerful, clever, helpful, subtle, decently respectful program. It reminds me of what computing could have been like...

Derek

[Jon Canale]

I agree, I don't need TC to look like a program that's worthless to use.

I also don't want to see the bloat that all of these new XP programs seem to have. WHO CARES how "pretty" the program looks!

The first thing I do when setting up a new machine, it to turn off ALL of the crap, get back to classic mode, plain blue background, no fluff enhancements. It just amazes me how even a new 2+ gHz machine with lots of memory slows down from all this junk!

Frankly, I think TC is just right! (But that's only my opinion!)