Size Doesn't Matter, She Said Sesquipedalianistically...

[Kilmatead]

I like obscure post-titles.  The world needs more of this sort of thing to annoy the straight laced behaviour Nazi's who believe moderation is not only for wine.  Men were not born to grow up to be concise automatons.

I'm unsure if this is related to x86, x64, x86 on x64, 11th century theology or mashed potatoes, but since there isn't a thread for obscure theologies (why is this, I solipsistically wonder)...

However, I digress...

By the most circuitous route, I discovered a hitherto unknown benefit to Registration.  Even though I have all the settings to "Show Folder Size" turned on, for some unknown reason the root C:\ folder just refuses to be subjugated to my bidding.  Witness the first pane:



A little forum searching reveals that calculating folder sizes "may be time consuming", and thus may not appear immediately.  However, for all other folders (including the terra obscura of System32 and SysWOW64) respond perfectly, and more-or-less immediately, so the technology of a Raptor negates those suspicions with painless alacrity.

Those partaking in the x64 trials (with x86 X2 concurrently installed) will be familiar with having to re-register when switching betwixt the two ad nauseam.  However, upon re-registering the x86 flavour the initial view behaves properly, showing the full folder details:



I say 'initially', as - if one peruses the folder structure, as one does - the folder sizes are expectedly clear... except when one returns to the root C:\, wherein one finds everything hidden again.

Indeed C:\ sizes will remain stubbornly hidden, unless re-registered again, and then they will only appear as of a first fleeting glance - lost with young love to mortgages, social folly, and other spurious things.

This is, by an odd turn of phrase, a repeatable offence.  :D

P.S. The picture sizes are intentionally wide to rebel against the Twiggy-esque website that has not seen the widescreen revolution.

And for those who missed it (and wasted much of their short lives reading this far), the writing style used here is an intentionally abstruse joke.

The subject matter, however, is real.

For those wondering, the current malfeasant x64 beta behaves exactly the same, so I don't think it's an OS culpability issue.

[snakebyte]

Kilmatead, you should post more often.  Do you blog? I would love to read it

[fgagnon]

@ picture sizes are intentionally wide to rebel ...
Just because you have a wide screen does not mean the rest of the world should follow. Web sites limit width so the majority of folks can display the content easily.

@ abstruse joke -
The joke's on you if you fail to communicate your point.

@ She Said Sesquipedalianistically...
So what IS the topic?
i.e. other than entertainment -- what's your point?

guessing ...
Ctrl+D should display folder sizes on demand, but it takes time.  That they are not calculated automatically nor cached for future reference was a design choice, discussed elsewhere on the board (use search, if interested).

[narayan]

Generally C contains Windows and other programs. Now these programs keep changing some files, which changes the folder sizes.

Now when one of the subfolders is changing size rapidly, the calculated sizes are reset. Since the size is calculated only once, you do not even realize that it was done.

What you have seen in C drive can be easily seen in smaller folders also.
Repeat the experiment where sustained size-changing operations are already under way:
1. You are downloading some content to a folder.
2. Converters (e.g. SUPER) are transforming a video file

Try calculating the size of any higher level folder. You will see the same effect.

[nikos]

tersely speaking, xplorer2 doesn't calculate folder sizes automatically for root drives, unless you forcely press Ctrl+D twice in there. Most of the time roots have so much stuff in them that you wait half an hour to get the sizes anyway

[Kilmatead]

...tersely speaking... unless you forcely press Ctrl+D twice...

Ah ha, indeed true (it was the twice bit that had me flummoxed).  Why twice?

Though again it's seems a case of rules formulated for antiquated hardware rather than practical use.  I understand the intent behind the limitation (and I eternally hear the ghosts in the background saying "not everyone has good hardware, so stop complaining" ), however in a programme that actually has a whole other programme dedicated to it's own registry options, it seems odd certain things can't be enabled "at one's own risk."  (As, when it is computed, it happens virtually instantaneously.  Yes, that's a case of hardware, but I think you overestimate the threat to civility in the provinces.)

Very strange that it is computed automatically upon 'Registration' though.  I found that odd.

@ fgagnon: I actually did scale the images down from the original, to be polite.  And all formulaic web design should always be rebelled against.  Always.  That's a given.  Applies to contemporary understanding of linguistic semantics as well.  :D  Everything is a form of rebellion, even conformity, oddy enough, in nature's eyes.