Xplorer2 & TeraCopy

[mrgenie]

Unfortunately those 2 don't work together, at least not over a WLAN.

I've been using Teracopy for quite some time now. All the advantages I won't list here, google it if you want to know more about it, but the sad thing is, although I like Xplorer2 (testing it now on my 2nd day of trial)
it simply doesn't cooperate with TeraCopy.

Main Problem, when I use Windows Explorer with Teracopy, I copy files up to 2-3MB/s over my WLAN(very bad connection through several walls)
But when I start a copy process using Xplorer2, my transfer rate is around 150-200kB/s  .. around 8% of my usual copy bandwidth in the room I'm now copying..

So, unfortunately, even after 1 day, I can already throw this piece of software in the trash can. A real bummer, because everything else looks great on the software. Layout, functionality, etc.. But with such performance loss, it's definitely not something I'm going to buy.

Also, may I point out, it's a shame I must register first, give up my privacy rights granted to me by the 27Member states of the European Union, before I can give any comments or feedback on the software in this forum for other potential buyers, so they know in advance they will be buying a piece of software with bad performance.

Anyway. Giving up my rights granted to me by the EU, is well worth it to make sure others won't fall into the trap of buying this software and then find out it has awful performance over WLAN, that is, bad compatibility with other software..

I won't mention the other software packages competing with Xplorer2 by name, but they don't have this performance/compatibility issue.

[nikos]

teracopy and xplorer2 are completely separate. I don't understand why teracopy would be slower with xplorer2. I hope you are not doing any simultaneous copy within xplorer2?

another possibility is that teracopy doesn't like if you have the 64 bit xplorer2, so try the 32 bit version

also, did you check the robust copy features inside xplorer2?
www.zabkat.com/tour3a.htm

[BRX]

Actually I've been using Teracopy with X2 for some time now, since I'm not entirely happy with the performance of robustcopy and some minor things like its progress bar. I can confirm Teracopy works just fine with the 32-bit version.

I've set it up like that the Windows copy/cut/paste works with Ctrl-C/X/V, and I use robustcopy usually for minor transfer jobs from pane to pane and for large transfers or many single files Teracopy using the mouse or the context menu.

[wperkins99]

@mrgenie: It appears from your post that you have other issues than just TeraCopy's performance.

And, it is probably premature to condemn xplorer² as forcefully as you do after just one day's use...

FWIW, Nikos is correct (and he should know..) when he says that TeraCopy and xplorer² are two separate processes and xplorer² should not natively degrade the performance of TeraCopy. I know that it doesn't for me after more than two years with TeraCopy configured as my default handler for Copy/Move operations and many more years than that with xplorer².

And, I have found that xplorer²'s Robust Copy/Move is a viable alternative to TeraCopy for most daily Copy/Move operations.

[Tuxman]

I found CopyHandler to work fine when transferring stuff between my local and my external HDD, and it works fine with x².
Anyway, (technically) there is no actual relation between TeraCopy working slower and xplorer².

[Gary M. Mugford]

I also used TeraCopy. And that was before coming to xplorer2. But even before switching to x2, I found TeraCopy, circa v2.02 to be too buggy for my liking and switched to Fast Copy. It can be downloaded at http://ipmsg.org/tools/fastcopy.html.en.

How Fast Copy 2.03 compares to the latest version of Tera Copy I can't tell you. But like TeraCopy, it's a standalone process integrated through the right-click menu. Doesn't matter whether you call it from x2, PowerDesk or Windows Explorer. You can demonstrate as such by starting a Fast Copy session, moving the progress dialog off to one side, and then using x2 to drag and drop files using it's own internal file movement process. Both proceed (somewhat slower than usual) independently.

GM

[Kilmatead]

Call me a sucker for a pretty girl, but TeraCopy suits my coloured progress-bar fetish, where Fast Copy is a bit... dry.  Functional, technical, and feature-rich to be sure, but not pretty.  TeraCopy also conveniently replaces the default windows drag/drop automatically which, if nothing else, provides a comforting visual regularity to things when you wake up with blurry eyes and the girl ain't so pretty in the morning.

To topic though, TeraCopy can (as of the latest beta, at least) sometimes choke on itself for no reason, and cut its previous transfer speeds in half.  Can't seem to reproduce it reliably, but a system restart clears the bug.  Completely unrelated to x2, of course, but I can see where the OP might get confused.

Just for fun, I did a little trial (with a few GB files) and x2 Robust averaged 39 MB/s, Fast Copy 42 MB/s, and TeraCopy a boring 38 MB/s.  Personally I think these minor discrepancies are down to the way the application counts its transfer data, much like FireFox and IE display different download speeds depending on whether you count actual packet-data checksums as downloaded data or not.  But I could be wrong - it's just a guess.

CopyHandler seems rather buggy in Win7 x64 with modals all over the garden and integration that just doesn't seem right, so I just don't trust that one.

[sallam_ah]

Hello sir,

i used Teracopy under winxp sp3, in two machinese (desktop and laptob)
in both machine the progress bar vanish when moving between copy from file to the following

for ex. if i'm copy 5 files with one copy process, after the 1st file the progress bar color vanish and start from 3% then , again after the second copy and start again from 15% and so on

teracopy 1.22 have no problem with me before

any one have the same problem ?

thanks in advance