If anyone wants to vote for Opus, feel free 
I've voted
3 Likes
Of course I voted.
1 Like
Only 10 upvotes yet? Please guys, this is our chance to speak out for our beloved Directory Opus. Think about how many hours it saved you and how many excitement it gave you customizing all this stuff to your taste. 
2 Likes
Oh alright, I was reluctant to bother with their requirement for account but I've seen some stuff I wanted to reply to there, so I've registered and voted and replied etc.
2 Likes
Also voted.
Though, same as bytespiller, I was also a litle little reluctant: yet another account registration.
Often this is just a one-off thing.
=
2 Likes
Voted for TotalCommander!
Just kidding! o) Even added a "PRO", most people don't know the Pros of Directory Opus Pro. o)
Voted and, shortly after, DOpus is #1. Let's keep it up, people! 
Slant has an interesting method for calculating the position (first, second, etc.). They use a combination of pros and cons votes.
So, even though DOpus is in the lead with 37 votes compared to XYplorer's 34 votes on the pros side, DOpus also has the highest cons vote: 9 compared to 4.
Sadly, some people got overly creative or were inattentive enough to add pros and cons that are virtual duplicates of another.
Here's their "Compare View":
Note that you do not have to vote for a con (or a pro). You can also modify your vote(s). If you feel comfortable doing so, take a look at your vote(s) and see if you'd like to change any of them.
In addition to extra "Don't Recommend" votes (which smell like they mostly got pressed just for the sake of it), Opus also got spammed with several (obviously fake) bull**it "cons". This artificially demoted it to the second place.
But anyway, look how far ahead Opus and XY are above all others. Votes correctly reflect the fact that the Opus' only realistic competitor is XY -- other file managers aren't even trying!
The fact that the XY is technologically inferior and suffers from a VB6 "curse" (which will only get worse with time) makes me respect it even more for being the only file manager today that in spite of its unfixable core shortcoming manages to be meaningfully compared to Opus.
Such is the nature of comparison sites, but it's silly if all cons are weighted equally.
e.g. XY being still being written in VisualBasic6 and thus restricted to 32-bit is a huge issue for a file manager.
(Not because a file manager needs the memory space of being 64-bit, but because it needs to talk to the rest of the OS, talk to installed shell extensions, and see the real file system, all of which are either problematic or impossible from a 32-bit app written in a language that died a decade ago (and was last updated two decades ago). You can kludge around some issues that result from it, but not all.)
Interesting comments.
I don't believe anything competes with Directory Opus in terms of functionality, but they could have added some other file managers to the list. There must be better ones than they included towards the bottom. Explorer++, CubicExplorer etc.
I'm not saying they compete with Directory Opus, but some on the list are crap. 
I think the price would sway people to vote for XYplorer.
I feel a bit bad for xplorer2. It's pretty funny though since I do own a license for it. Unfortunately there was very little I liked about it. But yes, I don't mind that XYplorer and DOpus are the top two as these two are so freaking good. I love both of them very much. It's weird to use two file managers but that's how I roll at home haha.
@ bytespiller
Very much so. The fact that XYplorer, written in VB6, can still be so well done really makes you admire the developer. The funny thing is, XYplorer started out not even as a file manager. It was merely a file searching tool.
Anyway, go go XYPlorer and DOpus!!
There's a reason why VB6 was so popular - because it made programming very easy, and a lot of things (e.g. image viewing) are built-in as part of the language.
I'd say it's not the VB6 itself as a language that is the problem for XY today. The problem is the fact that VB6 applications are ran inside a tiny virtual machine: msvbvm60.dll (Microsoft Visual Basic Virtual Machine 6.0) which is a legacy "engine", and as time passes it will get more and more isolated and abstracted from the real OS so that Microsoft can keep it working for compatibility reasons, similar to how DOS application compatibility was maintained for a while, with each subsequent version of Windows those legacy apps retaining less and less functionality, and then dropped entirely.
On the other hand, Opus is made in pure C++ and runs directly as a native machine code.
Look how polished its GUI is and all this is achieved without any GUI frameworks -- it's pure Win32 API -- as lowlevel as it gets (short of assembly code, but compilers today optimize C++ better than hand-made assembly).
This is why Opus can both look as stunningly as it looks and work as fast as it does. There are no sacrifices and no compromises: Opus is made the hard way (which is the only right way) to achieve both modern look and modern performance.
So when people say Opus is bloated... since when is the pure C++ code without any frameworks bloated
Then we have an xplorer2. While it is made in C++, last time I saw on their forums it is developed and compiled with Visual Studio 6 which was released in the year 1998. I don't want to badmouth it, I had a license and used it in the past, all I can say is that it's obviously difficult and time consuming to develop new features the hard way in pure C++ without frameworks. Which is evident with xplorer2 which is stuck in the past and is barely moving at all with new updates for years now.
The fact that Opus is doing it like it is (constant updates with pure and modern C++ codebase) is a testament to both Opus' quality of code which is obviously easily maintainable (otherwise it would be impossible) and GPSoft's dedication and love for the product (otherwise they'd give up like authors of most file managers did).
True that VB6 makes it easy to program. However it does not take away from the developer of what he was able to accomplish in making XYplorer still feel a very viable alternative file manager. In addition, it may be easier to program but it's definitely isn't easy in finding ways to work around some of the limitations when working on newer Windows which he works on all the time to make sure there are no problems while still being able to add new stable features including features for the scripting capability of the program. VB6 may have built-in image features but he takes it beyond what's capable and added a lot more features as well.
Basically VB6 gave the program a bad reputation but honestly, if he can make it work well and work great while providing a lot of good features to make it good as an alternative file manager, does it really matter?
Take xplorer2 for instance. It's written in C++. I don't consider xplorer2 anywhere near XYplorer or DOpus even if it's written in a language that is superior to VB6. The programmer is all that matters at this point. And let's say that xplorer2 is indeed using VS6 (he upgraded to 2010), then why is it still so far behind in terms of looks and features to XYplorer (they both are stable though) even though both are written in something that old?
So I agree mostly with bytespiller. However, I do not think at this point is it easy to program in VB6 on modern OS like Windows 10 which the developer is now on for the past year or more.
All in all, I think that XYplorer and DOpus are definitely the top two and I think the amount of work that both developers put into it means they are both very worthy of praise from their dedication. Since both are developers who had worked on their software for many many years, then you should know how hard the work is and should appreciate that both are hard workers, dedicated, and skilled instead of thinking about the languages that you work with.
I rest my case. 
Pfft lol. That's a weak argument against it. It also has many strengths just like DOpus does
Now if only both of them can make me breakfast in the morning...
It's a strong argument that VB6 is not fit for purpose in the modern age.
VB6 is physically unable to integrate context menus and other shell extensions made for modern versions of Windows, and it never will be as the language stopped being updated 20 years ago.
I agree. But all I'm trying to say is that you should not simply disregard it JUST because of that. If people out there are also thinking highly of XYplorer, that means it's doing something right. Of course, it's future is not looking good because of the language but for what it can do now, it's fine.