Coolest. Windows. Feature. Ever.
I have to say - the Windows feature that I love the most is the one where - you want to copy about 50 gigs of files so you start the process at night and then you wake up in the morning with Windows asking you if you want to move a read only file, because, I mean, lord forbid you move a read only file, that would be like, crazy, and then you say "Ok", check back a few hours later and see that it has done about 5 more files and is now asking you if you want to move a system file.
Yeah, I love that.
(Ok, rant over.)
Comments
# Posted By Kyle Hayes
| 5/15/07 8:27 AM
# Posted By Lola LB
| 5/15/07 8:40 AM
xcopy /S /Q /R /H /Y c:\source d:\destination
# Posted By Damien McKenna
| 5/15/07 8:46 AM
# Posted By Joel Cox
| 5/15/07 9:30 AM
Try supercopier... great tool... you can even suspend your file transfer... save it... and come back to it later..
http://supercopier.sfxteam.org/modules/mydownloads...
# Posted By Steini Jonsson
| 5/15/07 9:34 AM
# Posted By Steini Jonsson
| 5/15/07 9:36 AM
# Posted By robs
| 5/15/07 10:11 AM
So one has to ask, what was the 20 mins of preparing to copy for?
Not a bit John C. Dvorak fan but he does have a good rant on this very topic.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2123848,00.as...
# Posted By Mark W. Breneman
| 5/15/07 10:20 AM
# Posted By Will
| 5/15/07 10:22 AM
# Posted By John Allen
| 5/15/07 10:39 AM
When you can replace the text of a button with "Do you want to work today?" and the click rate would be the same, then you most likely don't need the button.
# Posted By Kris Brixon
| 5/15/07 10:57 AM
It can copy open files, encrypt your data, versioning, compression, high performance FTP, throttling, incremental backups and works with Vista.
http://www.2brightsparks.com/syncback/syncback-hub...
# Posted By James Moberg
| 5/15/07 11:02 AM
# Posted By Mick
| 5/15/07 11:07 AM
# Posted By hibiscusroto
| 5/15/07 11:07 AM
# Posted By Rob
| 5/15/07 11:19 AM
# Posted By Damien McKenna
| 5/15/07 12:10 PM
As Scott P said, xcopy is the way to copy large file sets without needing to respond to prompts.
Mick, I am guessing you are using USB 1.1? try this http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?am...
Frankly, every complaint here has a fairly simple solution, and probably takes less time to research than it does to complain about it.
# Posted By Raymond Camden
| 5/15/07 12:39 PM
So basically, it's frustrating to see so many folks making a what is a pretty decent product out to be such a piece of shit when it really isn't.
I think what a lot of poeple (myself included) are complaining about is that these simple things have not been fixed, in many revisions of windows. Instead of re-writing core windows functions for speed / usability, they plop on more eye-candy and a host of new incompatabilities. This leaves their long time user base in the lurch with many of the same problems the software always had. I think if we make enough noise, maybe they will get fixed.
Chris
Apple User to Windows User: "What OS do you use?"
Windows User to Apple User: "Windows"
Apple User to Windows User: "Are you sure?"
...I'm always surprised how many people don't get that...
# Posted By David Harris
| 5/15/07 3:54 PM
# Posted By Raymond Camden
| 5/15/07 3:58 PM
...when you are copying a read only file, what does windows ask?
...when you attempt to delete an EXE file, what does windows ask?
...OK, I admit it, is a lame joke, but talk to ANYONE you knows me, and they'll tell you it's the only sort I know!
# Posted By David Harris
| 5/15/07 4:09 PM
... or Linux
(it had to be said)
:)
# Posted By Dave Shuck
| 5/15/07 4:12 PM
# Posted By mr. closets
| 5/15/07 4:18 PM
Prompts are necessary before read-only files are moved because moving a read-only file is just as potentially disastrous as changing it. Same goes with system files. Same goes with files that are in use, or files that already exist at the destination location! Blindly moving files in those situations and having the OS pick the right answer every time is impossible! It Ray's case, yeah it's annoying if the prompts are spread out across a file operation that takes hours, but I have a feeling Vista has addressed this somewhat, particularly where a file is in use and cannot be moved you can now skip the file and the whole move operation won't crap out like it did in XP.
Windows XP's start menu can be sorted by right clicking on it and choosing 'Sort by name'. Windows Vista's start menu always stays sorted by name (as are folder views on the local file system).
'No to all' can be done by shift-left clicking on 'No'.
There needs to be some kind of super wiki so that every time someone has a "Stupid Windows can't do X" they can look it up and get a real answer, rather than spreading more misinformation (like the No to All one which has been around for almost 10 years, since Windows 98).
Instead of flaming the other OS (not pointing at you Ray), I like to see solutions or workarounds, or at least civil discussion which so far this thread has almost provided :)
# Posted By Justin Carter
| 5/15/07 6:49 PM
Does Windows Me II (vista) have a threaded explorer yet?
# Posted By zac spitzer
| 5/15/07 8:47 PM
http://www.pctools.com/guides/registry/detail/950/...
http://www.pctools.com/guides/registry/detail/769/...
Unless by "threaded" you mean that multi-pane view that Finder has? No great loss there, haha.
And FAT32 file size limit is ~4GiB, so a 3GB file should be perfectly OK ;)
# Posted By Justin Carter
| 5/15/07 9:24 PM
# Posted By Matt Osbun
| 5/16/07 7:13 AM
It's very poorly documented, but the functionality isn't missing. ;)
# Posted By James Edmunds
| 5/16/07 9:30 AM
# Posted By Dave Shuck
| 5/16/07 9:34 AM
>;-D
# Posted By Joshua Curtiss
| 5/17/07 1:09 PM
