Very much missing
-
Hi,
Glad to join the forum :D
I think these features should be on PA so please explain me why the don’t and if they can/will be added:
1. Using PA’s virtual-drive I cannot unmount an image file using shellex. It should be as simple as right click on the virtual drive icon -> “unmount this drive”
2. While selecting multiple archives I cannot extract each file to a separate folder using right click and shellex
3. extract & delete or compress & delete (for safety reasons delete can be configured either to the recycle bin or permanently) are not shellex options.
4. I cannot easily distinguish between archive icons in medium or less icon view size (common), different icons (or at least colors) are much needed for different file types along with the name banner on the icon (as it today).
THNX ALOT
:) -
Hi,
Glad to join the forum :D
I think these features should be on PA so please explain me why the don’t and if they can/will be added:
1. Using PA’s virtual-drive I cannot unmount an image file using shellex. It should be as simple as right click on the virtual drive icon -> “unmount this drive”
It has been asked before. one example
There is an option available when you use the PASTARTER option in the systray. Right click on that for an unmount option.2. While selecting multiple archives I cannot extract each file to a separate folder using right click and shellex
Similar already wished for. thread
3. extract & delete or compress & delete (for safety reasons delete can be configured either to the recycle bin or permanently) are not shellex options.
Similar thread (but not exactly the same) here
4. I cannot easily distinguish between archive icons in medium or less icon view size (common), different icons (or at least colors) are much needed for different file types along with the name banner on the icon (as it today).
Don’t have a problem distinguishing them myself.
It has also been wished for before here Took me ages to find that last one. ;) -
4. You can use skins to change icons to something that you might prefer better :).
3. Delete we hate with passion - for instance recycle bin might not keep the file if not enough space in disk.
2. Can be done already if you look at options.
1. I agree!
-
3. Delete we hate with passion - for instance recycle bin might not keep the file if not enough space in disk.
Hate for no reason , much needed property.
A)If the recycle bin cannot keep the content let him warn the user like he does already and then the user decides completely delete or not to delete at all the content (yes,no in the dialog box)
B)Don’t put it in the default shellex after installation , let the user add it manually in this case you can also put complete deletion and for both cases warn the user when adding them to his shellex menus.
1)Shellex for unmounting ISO is on the way ?
2)Is every algorithm suited better for compressing different file types ? e.g. CAB for documents TAR for music and 7Z for movies ? If not and 7Z e.g. beats them all on all files then why putting shellex for other compression algorithms ? :rolleyes:
3)Compressiom prediction (size and time) will be also is a nice feature to add.
PS the ReCaptcha is annoying I hate it , in forums moderators are anyway tracking the posts and can kick spammers so why us it……:confused:
THNX GUYS
:cool: -
as to the 7zip, using our optimized 7z is going to be the best, but we people use other formats for reasons to - for compatibility or some other requirements. By far, most people use just plan deflate zip (which is readable by anything).
If you have any other wishes, one thread per wish :).
-
Hate for no reason , much needed property.
Well, my reasons have been posted before. But I am unable to convince those who want it as an option.
@rpz79:2)Is every algorithm suited better for compressing different file types ? e.g. CAB for documents TAR for music and 7Z for movies ? If not and 7Z e.g. beats them all on all files then why putting shellex for other compression algorithms ?
Different algorithms have different advantages. Pick one for speed; another for archive size; another for multiple similar files; another for multiple different file types etc.
@rpz79:3)Compressiom prediction (size and time) will be also is a nice feature to add.
This would only be useful if accurate; but with multiple files/folders the cost in time to produce the prediction could be a significant portion of the overall running time.
To spend 30% of the run time producing the prediction is not a good idea (e.g. Multi-gigabyte multi- folders). -
i upgraded you to senior member status so no issues with posting anymore :)
-
Well, my reasons have been posted before. But I am unable to convince those who want it as an option).
I hope you’ll win this battle :)
Different algorithms have different advantages. Pick one for speed; another for archive size; another for multiple similar files; another for multiple different file types etc.
The simple users doesn’t know the difference so instead of giving them multiple algorhitm choice give them multiple speed , size and cpu usage choices.
This would only be useful if accurate; but with multiple files/folders the cost in time to produce the prediction could be a significant portion of the overall running time.
To spend 30% of the run time producing the prediction is not a good idea (e.g. Multi-gigabyte multi- foldersI recall in WinRAR it worked fine even for several gigas.
The prediction is primarily meant for large amounts of data .The more size you want to compress the more deviation you’ll get in your prediction. Nevertheless this kind of feature could be very useful. -
well users do know the difference and they should know it… if they are sending archive to someone, they have to use zip with deflate and actually thats what they do :).
