3 ms·

it's also using the exact same kernel, the only difference is explorer.exe and default apps funny enough. But I have to admit that the file explorer (not to be

it's also using the exact same kernel, the only difference is explorer.exe and default apps funny enough. But I have to admit that the file explorer (not to be confused with explorer.exe the desktop), is nicer with the new tab functionality.

mapontosevenths 11mo ago
I know it's subjective, but I care less about the tabs and more about the missing right click options. I'm also annoyed that 11's explorer uses literally double the memory to perform the same function with less options. I know you can add the missing right click options back. I just shouldn't have to.
- mapontosevenths 11mo ago
  Just to double check... I loaded the same folder in Windows 10 IOT LTSC and Windows 11 Pro retail. Explorer.exe used ~500Mb peak working memory. In Windows 10 it was less than 200Mb. In windows 10 it also loaded about 2x faster, despite the system I'm using being objectively worse hardware in every single measurable way. With Windows 11 you get less, and pay more.
  - vel0city 11mo ago
    Oh no, its going to use 1.8% more of my system's memory, what a nightmare, totally unusable. Why is 200MB acceptable but peaking to 500MB just totally unacceptable and problematic? The original Macintosh had a graphical desktop with 128KB of RAM, shouldn't anything more than 50KB be unacceptable? EDIT: Just checked on a couple of my Windows 11 machines, all of them have Explorer using <200MB of memory. So no, explorer.exe isn't necessarily using 500MB of memory. Something else is going on with that system.
    - kachapopopow 11mo ago
      because the same thing applies to the new terminal, new settings app, new everything, it slowly adds up.
    - hulitu 11mo ago
      > Why is 200MB acceptable but peaking to 500MB just totally unacceptable and problematic? Because only 200MB are reserved for this application. /s That 300MB may be taken from another app (CAD) which needs it badly.
      - vel0city 11mo ago
        Shouldn't you then also complain that explorer.exe is consuming 200MB when previous graphical desktops managed it in handfuls of kilobytes? Once again, why is 200MB OK, but 500MB, oh boy, that's just far too much. Couldn't that CAD software also make use of that other 200MB? Why not demand 20MB? Or 2MB? Or 20KB? How much of that extra 300MB is paged out and not actually in active memory? On both systems, how much of the total is actually paged out and not in current system memory? Are you trying to run a modern CAD system on a device with only 512MB of RAM or something?
        mapontosevenths 11mo ago
        What do I get out of it using double the memory? It has zero new features that a normal human would want. There's supposed to be a benefit in a cost/benefit comparison or you just get a divide by zero error. See my other comment in this thread for a list of the many, many, many ways Microsoft continues to chose not to improve.
        vel0city 11mo ago
        There's a number of new features to the Windows desktop experience, I'm not really interested in reenumerating all of Microsoft's marketing here. Personally I find the Windows 11 desktop experience far better than 10, despite it possibly using 1% more of my system memory at peak times. And FWIW, on my Windows 11 desktop explorer.exe is using 110MB, not even 200MB.
        mapontosevenths 11mo ago
        > There's a number of new features to the Windows desktop experience, I'm not really interested in reenumerating all of Microsoft's marketing here. I was speaking specifically about the file explorer in this context, though you'd have to go back to the grandparent post at least to see that.
    - mapontosevenths 11mo ago
      Keep in mind that explorer now uses 100% more resources than it did 5 years ago, but it still can not do basic things that Mac and open source competitors can do. It's almost 40 years old, and doesn't really do more than it did back then. I don't think MS cares to be competitive at all. Here is a small list of things other file managers can do that MS would never dream of (because it would require effort): * Batch rename files * File metadata/tag support * Sessions/saved layouts (sort of exists in a half finished state) * Fish/SSH Support * Builtin hash/checksum support * Native dual pane views * Customizable keyboard shortcuts * Built-in terminal * Handle compressed files (outside limited zip compatibility) * Search with advanced features (offers limited support) * File versioning * The ability to navigate entirely with the keyboard * File transfer queue management (think Terracopy) * Builtin Compare/Sync * A Preview Pane * User adjustable UI * etc
      - vel0city 11mo ago
        A number of those features do exist in Explorer, a number can be trivially added with PowerToys, but I take it you're not actually interested in truth or reality.
        mapontosevenths 11mo ago
        Which ones? Name it and I'll show you how broken or weak it is compared to free alternatives. Powertoys doesn't count anymore than just downloading a better file manager does. If I have to download something to replace or enhance it, you don't get credit.
        vel0city 11mo ago
        And the goalposts just keep moving... > Name it and I'll show you how broken or weak it is compared to free alternatives We've now gone from "these features can't possibly ever exist because M$ so bad" to "they're not the absolute best possible implementation that could ever exist". I'm sure you'll continue to move the goalposts. But sure, I'll name a few. Only having limited ZIP support for archives. Its not true, it supports tar and 7z archives natively now as well, supporting a number of different compression formats including Zstandard and xz. Are there other compression utilities out there that support more? Sure. But saying it only has limited zip support and that's it is just a lie. File versioning? File History has been a feature since Windows 8. I just tested and was able to navigate to any part of the File Explorer window with nothing but a keyboard. I've used it a number of times with only a keyboard, but I wasn't sure that every thing was selectable. But yes, can confirm, you can use the whole thing with only a keyboard. A Preview Pane? Really? Yes, File Explorer has a preview pane. Go to View > Preview Pane. This one really just gets me though. Are you truly this ignorant of extremely basic obvious features, or are you just making things up to complain about?
- kachapopopow 11mo ago
  the stupid right click menu is a single registry key (and i think it's also in settings now), but yah dumb new defaults.

mapontosevenths 11mo ago

I know it's subjective, but I care less about the tabs and more about the missing right click options. I'm also annoyed that 11's explorer uses literally double the memory to perform the same function with less options. I know you can add the missing right click options back. I just shouldn't have to.

mapontosevenths 11mo ago
Just to double check... I loaded the same folder in Windows 10 IOT LTSC and Windows 11 Pro retail. Explorer.exe used ~500Mb peak working memory. In Windows 10 it was less than 200Mb. In windows 10 it also loaded about 2x faster, despite the system I'm using being objectively worse hardware in every single measurable way. With Windows 11 you get less, and pay more.
- vel0city 11mo ago
  Oh no, its going to use 1.8% more of my system's memory, what a nightmare, totally unusable. Why is 200MB acceptable but peaking to 500MB just totally unacceptable and problematic? The original Macintosh had a graphical desktop with 128KB of RAM, shouldn't anything more than 50KB be unacceptable? EDIT: Just checked on a couple of my Windows 11 machines, all of them have Explorer using <200MB of memory. So no, explorer.exe isn't necessarily using 500MB of memory. Something else is going on with that system.
  - kachapopopow 11mo ago
    because the same thing applies to the new terminal, new settings app, new everything, it slowly adds up.
  - hulitu 11mo ago
    > Why is 200MB acceptable but peaking to 500MB just totally unacceptable and problematic? Because only 200MB are reserved for this application. /s That 300MB may be taken from another app (CAD) which needs it badly.
    - vel0city 11mo ago
      Shouldn't you then also complain that explorer.exe is consuming 200MB when previous graphical desktops managed it in handfuls of kilobytes? Once again, why is 200MB OK, but 500MB, oh boy, that's just far too much. Couldn't that CAD software also make use of that other 200MB? Why not demand 20MB? Or 2MB? Or 20KB? How much of that extra 300MB is paged out and not actually in active memory? On both systems, how much of the total is actually paged out and not in current system memory? Are you trying to run a modern CAD system on a device with only 512MB of RAM or something?
      - mapontosevenths 11mo ago
        What do I get out of it using double the memory? It has zero new features that a normal human would want. There's supposed to be a benefit in a cost/benefit comparison or you just get a divide by zero error. See my other comment in this thread for a list of the many, many, many ways Microsoft continues to chose not to improve.
        vel0city 11mo ago
        There's a number of new features to the Windows desktop experience, I'm not really interested in reenumerating all of Microsoft's marketing here. Personally I find the Windows 11 desktop experience far better than 10, despite it possibly using 1% more of my system memory at peak times. And FWIW, on my Windows 11 desktop explorer.exe is using 110MB, not even 200MB.
        mapontosevenths 11mo ago
        > There's a number of new features to the Windows desktop experience, I'm not really interested in reenumerating all of Microsoft's marketing here. I was speaking specifically about the file explorer in this context, though you'd have to go back to the grandparent post at least to see that.
  - mapontosevenths 11mo ago
    Keep in mind that explorer now uses 100% more resources than it did 5 years ago, but it still can not do basic things that Mac and open source competitors can do. It's almost 40 years old, and doesn't really do more than it did back then. I don't think MS cares to be competitive at all. Here is a small list of things other file managers can do that MS would never dream of (because it would require effort): * Batch rename files * File metadata/tag support * Sessions/saved layouts (sort of exists in a half finished state) * Fish/SSH Support * Builtin hash/checksum support * Native dual pane views * Customizable keyboard shortcuts * Built-in terminal * Handle compressed files (outside limited zip compatibility) * Search with advanced features (offers limited support) * File versioning * The ability to navigate entirely with the keyboard * File transfer queue management (think Terracopy) * Builtin Compare/Sync * A Preview Pane * User adjustable UI * etc
    - vel0city 11mo ago
      A number of those features do exist in Explorer, a number can be trivially added with PowerToys, but I take it you're not actually interested in truth or reality.
      - mapontosevenths 11mo ago
        Which ones? Name it and I'll show you how broken or weak it is compared to free alternatives. Powertoys doesn't count anymore than just downloading a better file manager does. If I have to download something to replace or enhance it, you don't get credit.
        vel0city 11mo ago
        And the goalposts just keep moving... > Name it and I'll show you how broken or weak it is compared to free alternatives We've now gone from "these features can't possibly ever exist because M$ so bad" to "they're not the absolute best possible implementation that could ever exist". I'm sure you'll continue to move the goalposts. But sure, I'll name a few. Only having limited ZIP support for archives. Its not true, it supports tar and 7z archives natively now as well, supporting a number of different compression formats including Zstandard and xz. Are there other compression utilities out there that support more? Sure. But saying it only has limited zip support and that's it is just a lie. File versioning? File History has been a feature since Windows 8. I just tested and was able to navigate to any part of the File Explorer window with nothing but a keyboard. I've used it a number of times with only a keyboard, but I wasn't sure that every thing was selectable. But yes, can confirm, you can use the whole thing with only a keyboard. A Preview Pane? Really? Yes, File Explorer has a preview pane. Go to View > Preview Pane. This one really just gets me though. Are you truly this ignorant of extremely basic obvious features, or are you just making things up to complain about?
kachapopopow 11mo ago
the stupid right click menu is a single registry key (and i think it's also in settings now), but yah dumb new defaults.