Fix for long, long, long deleting and copying of files?

Will there EVER be a fix for this in Vista??? There have been complaints
since the betas about this.
I spent 2 afternoons trying to delete Opera cache files which had been
backed up to a USB drive. They totaled over 1 GB and thousands and thousands
of individual files. I had to take 18 files at a time and delete them
otherwise the computer seized up (I let it run for 45 minutes one time and so
had to resort to this method to get the job done). Next time I'll use a
suggestion I found on the 'Net....use Dos to delete or copy large files.
Since the first time I booted up Vista, I have been annoyed at how long it
takes to COPY files or DELETE files. What is going on here? This is slower
than Windows 3.1 - how is this possible??
The scuttlebutt on the internet is that each individual file is being
checked for DRM; is this true?? If so, why is Microsoft POLICEMAN of the
world?? The people interested in DRMing their wares should police this
themselves, no? Am I wrong here?
I like Vista EXCEPT for this problem, the "not responding" message which
appears when the software really IS responding, the horrible search feature
(I use a free utility called "Cathy" so that I can just take a few SECONDS to
scan my hard drives, CD's, external drives when I want to and retrieve
ANYTHING far faster than the Vista search which makes you sit there for half
an hour waiting for a green bar to fill in.) and the irritating UAC which I
got rid of within a week.
Isn't it time Microsoft fixed this?

"Hope" <Hope@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A490956F-7DFC-4705-BA0D-16B373956AEB@microsoft.com...
> Will there EVER be a fix for this in Vista??? There have been complaints
> since the betas about this.
> I spent 2 afternoons trying to delete Opera cache files which had been
> backed up to a USB drive. They totaled over 1 GB and thousands and
thousands
> of individual files. I had to take 18 files at a time and delete them
> otherwise the computer seized up (I let it run for 45 minutes one time and
so
> had to resort to this method to get the job done). Next time I'll use a
> suggestion I found on the 'Net....use Dos to delete or copy large files.
> Since the first time I booted up Vista, I have been annoyed at how long
it
> takes to COPY files or DELETE files. What is going on here? This is
slower
> than Windows 3.1 - how is this possible??
> The scuttlebutt on the internet is that each individual file is being
> checked for DRM; is this true?? If so, why is Microsoft POLICEMAN of
the
> world?? The people interested in DRMing their wares should police this
> themselves, no? Am I wrong here?
> I like Vista EXCEPT for this problem, the "not responding" message which
> appears when the software really IS responding, the horrible search
feature
> (I use a free utility called "Cathy" so that I can just take a few SECONDS
to
> scan my hard drives, CD's, external drives when I want to and retrieve
> ANYTHING far faster than the Vista search which makes you sit there for
half
> an hour waiting for a green bar to fill in.) and the irritating UAC which
I
> got rid of within a week.
> Isn't it time Microsoft fixed this?


It would be totally illogical for the OS to have to check DRM for a file
being *deleted*...
but of course...what does logic have to do with anything.

I think SP1 has now come out of testing...
so the problem may now be solved.

OTOH: I've seen a few posts that SP1 breaks some drivers

"Hope" <Hope@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A490956F-7DFC-4705-BA0D-16B373956AEB@microsoft.com...
> Will there EVER be a fix for this in Vista??? There have been complaints
> since the betas about this.

Disk performance is noticeably improved in SP1.

> The scuttlebutt on the internet is that each individual file is being
> checked for DRM; is this true??

Checked for DRM? That doesn't even make sense.

> If so, why is Microsoft POLICEMAN of the
> world?? The people interested in DRMing their wares should police this
> themselves, no? Am I wrong here?

Irrelevant as built on a false premise.

> and the irritating UAC which I got rid of within a week.

I hope for you sake you didn't. That's the one feature people like me have
been demanding since the move to NT.

--
Paul Smith,
Yeovil, UK.
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
http://www.windowsresource.net/

*Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*

"Hope" <Hope@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:A490956F-7DFC-4705-BA0D-16B373956AEB@microsoft.com...
> Will there EVER be a fix for this in Vista??? There have been complaints
> since the betas about this.
> I spent 2 afternoons trying to delete Opera cache files which had been
> backed up to a USB drive. They totaled over 1 GB and thousands and
> thousands
> of individual files. I had to take 18 files at a time and delete them
> otherwise the computer seized up (I let it run for 45 minutes one time and
> so
> had to resort to this method to get the job done). Next time I'll use a
> suggestion I found on the 'Net....use Dos to delete or copy large files.
> Since the first time I booted up Vista, I have been annoyed at how long
> it
> takes to COPY files or DELETE files. What is going on here? This is
> slower
> than Windows 3.1 - how is this possible??
> The scuttlebutt on the internet is that each individual file is being
> checked for DRM; is this true?? If so, why is Microsoft POLICEMAN of
> the
> world?? The people interested in DRMing their wares should police this
> themselves, no? Am I wrong here?
> I like Vista EXCEPT for this problem, the "not responding" message which
> appears when the software really IS responding, the horrible search
> feature
> (I use a free utility called "Cathy" so that I can just take a few SECONDS
> to
> scan my hard drives, CD's, external drives when I want to and retrieve
> ANYTHING far faster than the Vista search which makes you sit there for
> half
> an hour waiting for a green bar to fill in.) and the irritating UAC which
> I
> got rid of within a week.
> Isn't it time Microsoft fixed this?


SP1 which is due out around Mid-March addresses this issue.

"Checked for DRM? That doesn't even make sense." from Paul Smith

Then what IS Vista doing when it takes unconscionable lengths of time to
copy or delete large groups of files?

"Paul Smith" wrote:

> "Hope" <Hope@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:A490956F-7DFC-4705-BA0D-16B373956AEB@microsoft.com...
> > Will there EVER be a fix for this in Vista??? There have been complaints
> > since the betas about this.
>
> Disk performance is noticeably improved in SP1.
>
> > The scuttlebutt on the internet is that each individual file is being
> > checked for DRM; is this true??
>
> Checked for DRM? That doesn't even make sense.
>
> > If so, why is Microsoft POLICEMAN of the
> > world?? The people interested in DRMing their wares should police this
> > themselves, no? Am I wrong here?
>
> Irrelevant as built on a false premise.
>
> > and the irritating UAC which I got rid of within a week.
>
> I hope for you sake you didn't. That's the one feature people like me have
> been demanding since the move to NT.
>
> --
> Paul Smith,
> Yeovil, UK.
> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
> http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
> http://www.windowsresource.net/
>
> *Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
>
>

If you want a detailed technical explanation of how file copy
in Vista works, see the following: http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/

"Hope" <Hope@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:81126929-FBF1-460E-9C3E-5D143753BCC6@microsoft.com...
> "Checked for DRM? That doesn't even make sense." from Paul Smith
>
> Then what IS Vista doing when it takes unconscionable lengths of time to
> copy or delete large groups of files?
>
> "Paul Smith" wrote:
>
>> "Hope" <Hope@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> news:A490956F-7DFC-4705-BA0D-16B373956AEB@microsoft.com...
>> > Will there EVER be a fix for this in Vista??? There have been
>> > complaints
>> > since the betas about this.
>>
>> Disk performance is noticeably improved in SP1.
>>
>> > The scuttlebutt on the internet is that each individual file is being
>> > checked for DRM; is this true??
>>
>> Checked for DRM? That doesn't even make sense.
>>
>> > If so, why is Microsoft POLICEMAN of the
>> > world?? The people interested in DRMing their wares should police this
>> > themselves, no? Am I wrong here?
>>
>> Irrelevant as built on a false premise.
>>
>> > and the irritating UAC which I got rid of within a week.
>>
>> I hope for you sake you didn't. That's the one feature people like me
>> have
>> been demanding since the move to NT.
>>
>> --
>> Paul Smith,
>> Yeovil, UK.
>> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
>> http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
>> http://www.windowsresource.net/
>>
>> *Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
>>
>>

Paul, take a look at this article from your own countrymen before you say
disparagingly that what I say "doesn't even make sense":
wwwdottheregisterdotcodotuk/2007/05/15/vistas_long_goodbye_continues/

"Paul Smith" wrote:

> "Hope" <Hope@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:A490956F-7DFC-4705-BA0D-16B373956AEB@microsoft.com...
> > Will there EVER be a fix for this in Vista??? There have been complaints
> > since the betas about this.
>
> Disk performance is noticeably improved in SP1.
>
> > The scuttlebutt on the internet is that each individual file is being
> > checked for DRM; is this true??
>
> Checked for DRM? That doesn't even make sense.
>
> > If so, why is Microsoft POLICEMAN of the
> > world?? The people interested in DRMing their wares should police this
> > themselves, no? Am I wrong here?
>
> Irrelevant as built on a false premise.
>
> > and the irritating UAC which I got rid of within a week.
>
> I hope for you sake you didn't. That's the one feature people like me have
> been demanding since the move to NT.
>
> --
> Paul Smith,
> Yeovil, UK.
> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
> http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
> http://www.windowsresource.net/
>
> *Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
>
>

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05...bye_continues/
(sorry, thought I could not post urls)
Quote from article:
"Microsoft's inability to fix a defect in such a basic feature has led to
its share of conspiracy theories that would be quickly dismissed as kooky,
were it not for the company's steadfast refusal to provide any details about
what's causing the problem. The top contender: The inability to copy files
without stalling isn't a bug at all, but rather the result of a digital
rights management feature designed to protect Hollywood (even if the rest of
us have to cuss our way through four hours deleting a few gigs worth of
crap)."
"Hope" wrote:

> Paul, take a look at this article from your own countrymen before you say
> disparagingly that what I say "doesn't even make sense":
> wwwdottheregisterdotcodotuk/2007/05/15/vistas_long_goodbye_continues/
>
> "Paul Smith" wrote:
>
> > "Hope" <Hope@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > news:A490956F-7DFC-4705-BA0D-16B373956AEB@microsoft.com...
> > > Will there EVER be a fix for this in Vista??? There have been complaints
> > > since the betas about this.
> >
> > Disk performance is noticeably improved in SP1.
> >
> > > The scuttlebutt on the internet is that each individual file is being
> > > checked for DRM; is this true??
> >
> > Checked for DRM? That doesn't even make sense.
> >
> > > If so, why is Microsoft POLICEMAN of the
> > > world?? The people interested in DRMing their wares should police this
> > > themselves, no? Am I wrong here?
> >
> > Irrelevant as built on a false premise.
> >
> > > and the irritating UAC which I got rid of within a week.
> >
> > I hope for you sake you didn't. That's the one feature people like me have
> > been demanding since the move to NT.
> >
> > --
> > Paul Smith,
> > Yeovil, UK.
> > Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User.
> > http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/
> > http://www.windowsresource.net/
> >
> > *Remove nospam. to reply by e-mail*
> >
> >

"R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:%23em8lmyaIHA.5976@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> If you want a detailed technical explanation of how file copy
> in Vista works, see the following:
http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/
>
<snip>

LOL

According to that article...Vista uses an improved "copy" algorithm as
compared to XP...
it's just slower

LOL

Agree. I have been looking for a way to make the copy 'half-duplex' but so
far I haven't found anything available. My reason for this is that often an
ethernet connection will show slowness just like that in Vista, and the fix
is to use half-duplex.

I tried getting MS to listen to that, but I think probably you have filed a
few suggestions yourself :/

--
Was this helpful? Then click the "Yes" button below. Voting helps the web
interface.
http://www.microsoft.com/wn3/locales....htm#RateAPost

Mark L. Ferguson

..
"philo" <philo@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:us1cHtyaIHA.3572@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
> "R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:%23em8lmyaIHA.5976@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> If you want a detailed technical explanation of how file copy
>> in Vista works, see the following:
> http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/
>>
> <snip>
>
> LOL
>
> According to that article...Vista uses an improved "copy" algorithm as
> compared to XP...
> it's just slower
>
> LOL
>
>