Help for a newbie

[CarlB]

Forget about the .ini file, I don't use it.
My background is not the default colour, but dark blue. This colour is persistent, but only for the list. (see the video).
Why do you not get the same result with the reg file?

After more experiments I think I can now see what is wrong:

1) Xplorer2 do not save "inactive background colour" info between sessions, and it does not work with the list.. (see the video).
2) The "active background colour" (under advanced settings) is always used for the list (active or inactive), but works correctly for the tree. (see the video).

And yes, I know that I use what you call a single pane view, but it should of course work anyway, since I have both an active and an inactive section.

Notice that my window standard background colour is changed from the absurd glaring white M$ invented with Win7, to some green/blue colour,
so this will be the standard background colour in Xplorer2.

This video should explain what i mean:
https://e1.pcloud.link/publink/show?cod ... bUXLI6WQK7

[nikos]

i did warn you about the black color...
try setting the background color to say, red, does it stick?

[CarlB]

You are right, i just made a custom blue colour closest to black, and it sticks
Maybe you should add this black/white info to the user guide.

So, how do i now get the list pane to use the inactive colour, when inactive, and is there a registry hack to change the font colour?

[nikos]

the list pane is always active, unless in dual pane mode

[CarlB]

Well, I can see on your answers that X2 can not have exactly the look that I wish, but very close, so I will probably buy it anyway, and hope that you in the future will consider to implement the features i point out.

And now to your question:
>Coming from a competitor, what would you say is the top thing you're missing? (Probably it's available somewhere in xplorer2 too)<

What I miss most is the possibility to tweak the GUI to look as I wish. People who buy a file manager are sick and tired of M$ and their crippled Windows explorer. All 3'rd party file managers have plenty of fancy features but only one of them really addresses the total lack of interface customization that Windows explorer has

[Tuxman]

I have been using XyPlorer for many years and try to find an alternative because it is now clear that XyPlorer will never come in a 64 bit version.

Which specific 64-bit feature do you need?

[CarlB]

Which specific 64-bit feature do you need?

It is not features I need but correct behaviour.
A 32 bit file manager will have a 32 bit context menu where 64 bit program context is not shown. Rather useless nowadays where most programs are available as 64bit. The XyPlorer developer has made a workaround, but it is not very handy.
Another problem is the double click function. Doubleclicking files to obtain action by a Windows build in program will then select the 32 bit version of the programs (cmd,regeditor ect.). This can give unpredictable results with for example .reg files.
The context menu mess should be addressed by M$, but they do not care about correcting any of their stupid mistakes.

[nikos]

it's all about integration, all shell extensions need to match the "bitness" of the program. Otherwise you have problems with preview, text search etc

[CarlB]

I have bought a license, so now it is safe for you to say that you don't give a s* about my wishes

[nikos]

usually when users ask of useful things, they get implemented sooner or later

[pj]

usually when users ask of useful things, they get implemented sooner or later

[FrizzleFry]

usually when users ask of useful things, they get implemented sooner or later

That is if Nikos considers them useful

[Tuxman]

The problem is that some users don't really request useful features.