DO12 - Turn off speed-graph

An extra button takes no extra space. There's room for it. I cannot see how a button labelled 'show graph' or 'hide graph' can be confusing. Just like the button on the native Windows dialogs, where you also can show or hide extra info and graph.
Wanting to see the graph is not black and white. There are situations I want to see it so a toggle is preferable. Not uncommon for a lot of Windows btw.

Like the progress bar the graph is relative to the file sizes and amount. No difference there and no time line needed either because it's relative.
The graph is a visual presentation of the speed. You don't have to keep an eye on the speed in text form to see fluctuations in speed.
I agree the graph is ugly but they are working on it.

Not only ugly. I give example where graph just don't work proper. Is scaled dynamically but only new part of graph. Scaling do not change for whole graph, but only for new values - this is worst bug imo. Nice looking and nice working graph may be good, but look should be configurable and whole graph scaled down/up if needed. I hope I explain it good.

The off-topic discussion has been moved here.

So after discussing and moving the off-topic-threads could someone answer this question?

We don't usually give ETAs until the work is already done or close to done and is just pending the next release, since ETAs can slip and it's best not to make a promise than to break one. Same as in every thread.

There's an option now in 12.2.4 (beta).

Thanks, no more Explorer-feeling!

Don't misunderstand, DO is great, it's only the graph which isn't :wink:

The option doesn't exist in prefs when using USB-version (I updated it from regular DO with graph turned off).

If you open Help > About on that USB version, does it show you're running 12.2.4?

Yes.

Here:


It looks like the new option won't work in the USB version until the option's text has been translated (i.e. 12.3, not a beta release). You'd have to switch Opus to English to see it there.

Ok.

Is the graph still considered largely unfinished at this stage? Will something be done to make it less worthless?

I'm glad I can now disable it, but I would much rather have a graph that serves a function and doesn't simply rehash the long-term average transfer speed. As it stands it really has no purpose and adds no value. Too many samples are computed in the average--we already have a long-term average in the text field above the graph. You can have an accurate current transfer speed without chaotic spikes in the graph by still averaging, but using far fewer samples. The graph was initially a big upgrade selling point for me and I was disappointed when I saw the implementation of it.

We'd still like to do some more work on it at some point. Since the graph is more about eye-candy to watch while waiting for copies than something that could ever be useful, and since making it nicer isn't a quick 5 minute task, other work has taken priority so far.

You've said what you don't like about it, but what would you like to see it changed to?

My feeling is it is a bit spartan at the moment and could do with maybe grid lines and a moving 'current speed' line across the graph, with a number on it. If you have other/different requests, let us know and we can consider them when we get to doing this.

I'd like to see numbers off to the side that scale depending on highs and lows on the graph. Like I mentioned, I'd also like to see the graph be more granular. It could still be smoothed (I don't mind a spiky graph, but I understand many find them unsettling) while not being smoothed to the point of merely reflecting the old average transfer speed text indicator above the graph. As it is, its indication seems redundant to me.

(Arbitrary numbers warning:) If, for example, the average transfer speed text indicator takes, say, 1 sample per second and averages them over the course of 10 seconds to give you the average transfer rate, make the graph indicator more precise where only the last 3 samples are averaged.

If you're suggesting a more precise current speed line overlaying the smoothed average we have now, I think that's a good idea as well. Only issue I see is that a dramatic dip or spike of the current transfer speed could send the line beyond the bounds of the graph defined by the high/low rates of the average transfer speed, or if the current transfer speed is allowed to define the range, then the range of the graph will be a little too wide to be intuitive or aesthetically pleasing until the dip/spike scrolls past the margin...

I understand it's not a priority and I'm happy with the option to turn it off for now. I'm glad to hear you're considering revisiting eventually.

Do you have an opinion regarding the other point I raised in the thread I linked previously?: This isn't related to the graph, but I think it makes sense to freeze the elapsed transfer time indicator when a transfer is paused. Maybe I'm misremembering, but I feel it may have worked this way at some point in the past... While the total active transfer time is an interesting metric for me, I don't see the use in knowing the total active + paused transfer time.

What would you do with that additional information? As in, would it help you make any important decisions about the copy operation that currently you are having trouble deciding on?

I see the only one reason for graph - if it works proper (scale down/up whole graph, not only new parts) - it can shows is file/disk fragmented (if some files copying with high speed and others are below, for example, 30 MB/s). And should show value while mouse is over (like in MSI Afterburner, for example). But IMO it's waste of time to improve this graph now. It's just visual firework and can be improved some day I think.

I would do the same thing I do with the trip odometer in my car, or the CPU fan RPM graph on my desktop--not much, but it's the kind of information I like to have instead of a graphical but wholly redundant rehash of the average speed text indicator just above the graph in the transfer window.

I'm a Directory Opus user--that alone should tell you I'm not the sort who only wants barebones functionality and information where it's only of mission-critical importance. Directory Opus has more features than almost any user requires. Why did I bother typing my previous message, providing what I thought to be the sort of well-considered feedback I had been asked for, only to be asked, sarcastically, for justification? What could possibly justify the existence of the graph in its current form?

I shouldn't have bothered to contribute feedback. It won't happen again.

The thing is, if you say "X is useless, I want Y instead" then it implies Y is useful, and we want to try to understand why/how Y is (more) useful to see if it makes sense to spend time on it.

It seems like both X and Y have no real purpose, other than being something to look at while waiting for the operation to complete, but you feel strongly against one and in favour of the other. That's fine if it's just a personal preference (I somewhat agree with the preference myself, although I don't feel strongly either way, and a lot of people asked for the graph so they got the graph), but it sounded like there might be more to it as your wording suggested the extra information might be useful for something.