any replacement for the file explorer of 7?

[JekylHyde]

i really don't like it.
it can't even copy files right.
i wanted to copy a 300mb folder & after 20minutes i checked it & the destenation was 5Gb! :sarc:

i tried freecommander & classic shell but they are just a graphical thing. they still use the original win7 file explorer (the original copy window appears).

 

[Kirsch]

15 Windows Explorer Alternatives Compared and Reviewed

 

[DeaconFrost]

It sounds like you have some other issue that should be addressed, rather than cover it up.

 

[unifex]

i wanted to copy a 300mb folder & after 20minutes i checked it & the destenation was 5Gb! :sarc:

That does not sound right. I am not entirely happy with the way files are moved and copied in Windows (it's just too slow in my opinion, nowhere near the theoretical 3Gb/s hard drive transfer speed), but what you are saying has never happened to me.

In fact, I have tried a few "explorer replacements" and I was not happy with any of them. So I am using Explorer.

Finally, I believe that regardless of the shell you are using, it's the OS that ultimately copies files, and the speed of file transfer depends mostly on the OS. Thus it does not seem reasonable to expect one "explorer" to be faster than another, except that the developers could screw something up and the end product might be slow, so in that respect one can be faster than another. Your anti-virus software might also slow you down. But at the end of the day, you can't get faster than what the OS (and file system) is capable of.

 

[Mark Phelps]

If you're still interested in file explorer alternatives, I can highly recommend Directory Opus. It's not cheap, but I've used all the explorer alternatives out there and find it to be the best.