How does one get Vista to calculate time remaining on a file copy?

I've been doing a lot of copying of a 15 MB file onto a network drive, and
every time it is at least 3 times as long as it takes on XP, but also, the
dialog spends 90% of the time showing no progress while it calculates time
remaining. However, once the progress bar finally does start making
progress, it still will not estimate time. Just says it's calculating the
entire time.
Is there some issue here besides explorer.exe that I'm seeing or is that
just the way shell is (I don't recall the thing really working well since
Win95, and even then, it wasn't particular great at estimating, but at least
it did estimate)?

On Sun, 1 Apr 2007 17:53:56 -0500, "Keith Patrick"
<richard_keith_patrick@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:

>I've been doing a lot of copying of a 15 MB file onto a network drive, and
>every time it is at least 3 times as long as it takes on XP, but also, the
>dialog spends 90% of the time showing no progress while it calculates time
>remaining. However, once the progress bar finally does start making
>progress, it still will not estimate time. Just says it's calculating the
>entire time.
>Is there some issue here besides explorer.exe that I'm seeing or is that
>just the way shell is (I don't recall the thing really working well since
>Win95, and even then, it wasn't particular great at estimating, but at least
>it did estimate)?

This is one of the 500 admitted bugs Microsoft admits to in Vista and
its a beauty. <grin>

I hate to keep harping on the same point, but it makes absolutely no
sense to me how such a basic function not just gets screwed up, but
WHY Microsoft would ship Vista with such a obvious bug in it. It
totally trashes their reputation. Oh wait, we're talking Microsoft. We
know their reputation. Ship and fix later. Everybody knows whatever
version of Windows we're talking about WAIT for the service pack
before most of the bugs are out.

All this stuff got to be related. Vista does a poor job of file
handling. It opens files needlessly to make thumbnails it already has.
It downloads codeces it already has and keeps trying to install new
copies. Beta tested? Not very well obviously.

Now something interesting. As I've mentioned before in other threads I
use Bounce Back for backup. Not only does this blow right past every
phony roadbock UAC tries to put up and totally overides EVERY nag
screen without me doing anything or even seeing them, it copies and
moves files just as fast if not faster then what it did under XP.

So what's going on? Again the same answer. Vista's file handling
system is screwed up big time. Microsoft has to know it, and shipped
Vista anyway. Shame on Microsoft.

By the way, next time you move a big enough file when the moving
window comes up click on the details arrow and you'll see a time
estimate and time remaining, it will be way off, but at least it
shows.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks Vista is an embarrassment. I recall
MS employees ripping on VS2005 for being released in its sorry state & the
impact it would have on their reputation, but Vista is so much worse, I am
just flabbergasted. This OS has a serious problem refreshing UIs, whether
it's the time calculation or the VPN tray tool (1 out of every 3 times I
connect to my work's VPN, the thing actually updates to reflect I am
connected. And the Connect to a Network screen is the same f'n way)
And on the beta testing part...I'm getting a suspicion that Microsoft
expected MSDN subscribers to QA this thing for them.

I rant and rave on this OS. Part of it is how much this installation has
negatively impacted my job (Vista is NOT developer-friendly...the hoops it
takes just to enable ASP.Net is shameful. Shouldn't the UI simplify things?
Yes, but - wait for it - the Windows Features UI doesn't catch it. Caching
and file locks are crap, but they'ves always been crap in Visual Studio, so
I'm not surprised). But the other part is that Vista is so frustratingly bad
that I genuinely believe that word of mouth needs to spread about how
half-baked it is (I'm doing the same for the Xbox 360, and word of
persistant hardware failures is all over the place there, too. Who runs
Quality Control over there?). Microsoft simply deserves to lose money on
this OS, plain and simple. They released something to paying customers that
is horribly, horribly broken (Paul Thurott was right about it being a "train
wreck"), and either they knew it when it shipped (negligence) or they tested
a ridiculously small amount of user scenarios (incompetance).

Harsh words, yes, but Vista really is that bad. I just hope they don't
string us along with the service pack like they did with VS2005.

Here's the link I mentioned (but didn't include):
http://minimsft.blogspot.com/2005/11...fantastic.html
There are MSers who care about the quality of their products, but it seems
like they get overridden.

poor MADAM albright still get her knickers twisted.
we are supposed to believe anything you say when you cannot even dress yourself properly.


oh and pull that skirt down. be a proper little lady



mikeyhsd@comcast.net



"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message news:e9n013tpj4b34r4kq87c6sumtrk2qaqcfj@4ax.com...
On Sun, 1 Apr 2007 17:53:56 -0500, "Keith Patrick"
<richard_keith_patrick@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote:

>I've been doing a lot of copying of a 15 MB file onto a network drive, and
>every time it is at least 3 times as long as it takes on XP, but also, the
>dialog spends 90% of the time showing no progress while it calculates time
>remaining. However, once the progress bar finally does start making
>progress, it still will not estimate time. Just says it's calculating the
>entire time.
>Is there some issue here besides explorer.exe that I'm seeing or is that
>just the way shell is (I don't recall the thing really working well since
>Win95, and even then, it wasn't particular great at estimating, but at least
>it did estimate)?

This is one of the 500 admitted bugs Microsoft admits to in Vista and
its a beauty. <grin>

I hate to keep harping on the same point, but it makes absolutely no
sense to me how such a basic function not just gets screwed up, but
WHY Microsoft would ship Vista with such a obvious bug in it. It
totally trashes their reputation. Oh wait, we're talking Microsoft. We
know their reputation. Ship and fix later. Everybody knows whatever
version of Windows we're talking about WAIT for the service pack
before most of the bugs are out.

All this stuff got to be related. Vista does a poor job of file
handling. It opens files needlessly to make thumbnails it already has.
It downloads codeces it already has and keeps trying to install new
copies. Beta tested? Not very well obviously.

Now something interesting. As I've mentioned before in other threads I
use Bounce Back for backup. Not only does this blow right past every
phony roadbock UAC tries to put up and totally overides EVERY nag
screen without me doing anything or even seeing them, it copies and
moves files just as fast if not faster then what it did under XP.

So what's going on? Again the same answer. Vista's file handling
system is screwed up big time. Microsoft has to know it, and shipped
Vista anyway. Shame on Microsoft.

By the way, next time you move a big enough file when the moving
window comes up click on the details arrow and you'll see a time
estimate and time remaining, it will be way off, but at least it
shows.