Just to be sure, it's also faster copying a large amount of normal (uncompressed) files, when dialog is minimized. Tested with extracted wordpress-setup.
I think informations are send to dialog anyway, just not displayed, so you can see proper informations in copy dialog right after you maximize it (otherwise you'll not see filename of the present file copy or other info). The advantage of minimized dialog is only because informations are not sent on screen. It's like "screenupdating false/true" in VB.
Exactly.
@peterb I said it caught my curiosity. No scientific test, just tried something to see if there was something to this. I didn't see anything of concern...for me.
Regarding the display of info...I want to see progress to know that the process hasn't stopped and an idea of how long before it completes.
I'm all for a video I/O reduction and under the applicable circumstances (tons of tiny files) there should be SOME speed improvement. But keep in mind, how often does that situation arise compared to all DO does and how long are you going to stick with Win7? Those are valid considerations for everyone, not just deveropers.
Lots of people may copy a few files (like you), but same amount of people copy lots of files. And time is money for some of them. BTW we are not talking about 2% anymore, that's a normal value!
Stick with 7? AFAIK Win 7 is still supported by MS, so why should he change if he don't want to change? BTW the issue exists also on Win 10 and there're still lots of specialized apps, that require Win 7 (or even XP)!
And looking at Win 10 update policy, not removable welcome-screen since anniversary or reinstalled apps after update I don't want... newer is not always better!
Fist of all - I want to see progress too - that is why I started this topic. With 0.2 second delay of displaying info (or other type of decrease number of refreshes that window) you'll see the same or even faster. Unless, of course, you have 1000 Hz monitor and robot's eyes. 
Second - now even Leo confirm that there is difference between shown and hidden copy dialog. If you didn't see it, it doesn't mean there is no problem. For you it's rare situation, for me - frequent. If some people have some problems that can be fixed, do not discourage programmers with that method of talking ("there is no problem, dear programmers, do not listen this guy, I am happy and do not fix anything").
I don't know how long I stick with win7. I will change system if that give me some advantages - otherwise is too much work. It takes lot of time which I don't have, unfortunatelly. And, what is more important, that problem with slow down related to win7 GUI is just my guessing.
(my last post was an answer to Ankor's post)
OK, I spent the day looking into this and trying various things, using the Joomla_3.6.2-Stable-Full_Package test case post in this thread about a hundred posts back ( ). Many thanks for providing that test case, as it made it easy to see the problem with that set of files, and it's also a real-world example.
I've made some changes which have improved things a great deal, at least on my own machine. They will be part of a forthcoming 12.2.3 beta and then, assuming they don't introduce any unexpected problems, the 12.3 stable release after that.
There is probably still some overhead to having the progress dialog open (nothing comes for free) but it is now very small, into margin-of-error territory, even when copying thousands of tiny files like this test case. I did most of my testing using debug builds, which run slower and exaggerate the problem, and the overhead went from ~13 seconds (28 seconds total) to ~1 second (16 seconds total). Switching to a release build, the overhead is even smaller and barely measurable now. So I think things are good now, but try with 12.2.3 once it is released to see if it's the same for you.
Great news, I will wait for this beta.
BTW. Was my guessing (about too often text update) correct? Or it was just something else, not related? I'm just curious.
Partly, but it's fairly complicated, and the sum of several small things interacting between two threads and adding up over several thousand small files if things could not keep up for long enough.
We actually already had code to throttle updates in there already, it just didn't cover some of the things which happen with the test case.
Thanks to everyone in this thread for patiently investigating this, all Opus users will benefit from this 
[quote="peterb"]For you it's rare situation, for me - frequent. If some people have some problems that can be fixed, do not discourage programmers with that method of talking ("there is no problem, dear programmers, do not listen this guy, I am happy and do not fix anything").
I don't know how long I stick with win7. I will change system if that give me some advantages - otherwise is too much work. It takes lot of time which I don't have, unfortunatelly. And, what is more important, that problem with slow down related to win7 GUI is just my guessing.[/quote]
I said I was all for reducing video I/O so I wasn't discouraging devs to do nothing or ignore you. Quite the opposite because I think it's better programming (ie better for users). As a developer, I've always focused heavily on "fixed/enhanced once by dev and enjoyed by all users countless times". But dev time isn't infinite so it's always a tug-of-war between priorities. After all, as users, what's the big deal about implementing MY ONE idea/fix?
It's the same with Win7...another issue tugging at priorities. I stuck with XP until Win8 came out. How's that for stubborn? lol
It's not to force users to do anything but the consideration constantly in the minds of devs of where to put their efforts. Sure Win7 is supported by MS but if you were a developer, how much effort would you be willing to put toward XP compatibility compared to newer, better XP-noncompatible features? It's a constant, neverending tug-of-war. That's all I'm saying.
And thank you Leo for the enhancement that will be "enjoyed by users countless times". Good discussion.
I switch to win7 after I testing how many advantages it gives me - faster transfer over internet and lan, better/faster disk i/o, better os control (even small but great improvement: "open file location" in task manager), better os for new hardware etc. I was testing win8 and win10 too and I saw that nothing really changes - similar speed i/o operations, a little better gui (without annoying "desktop composition" duality mode) in some cases (in some worse) but more annoying stuff comes with these small improvements. From win8 I cannot turn off Defender (just disable, service still running) or few other services because Microsoft knows better how I should use operating system. Options that user can turn off, switchs to on after restart (it's cheating, isn't?) and, as one person said (don't remember where) - why do I need operating system with which I have to fight? Sure - sooner or later I'll switch to new Windows, why not. It was free for upgrade, so I "reserved" myself that option and can upgrade anytime. But I prefer wait for something really fresh - maybe few service packs or anniversary updates etc. Vista start with revolutionary Aero, win8 with Metro and that was good, but as history shows - people don't like revolutions. I like big changes, but I still waiting for changes that are interesting for me.
And about this thread - now everyone are happy and you said that you're not against changes and fixes I wrote. As I remember (and I can read previous posts - they're not hidden) I must spend lot of time to prove I'm right against almost everyone here. I'm happy that I did it, but it was tiring process. I hope in the future it will be less comments like "everything works fine here" etc. and more focus on fixing bugs. Trust is what we need - if user says that he has problem, it's really better for everyone to find and resolve that problem instead of writing discouraging comments.
Greetings for everyone.
("I switch to win7" - from XP, I forgot to say)
Please argue in the CoffeeShop area. This area is for tech support.
Ok ok, no problem.
After last beta - testing my 16 thousand files directory:
24 seconds - DO, jobs bar
25 seconds - DO, copy dialog
7 seconds - FastCopy
Is faster but still - something, as I see, can be improved.
Why is it so important? I made backups a lot, not just one directory but large number of them.
Turn off everything under Preferences / File Operations / Copy Attributes and test again. What are your results then?
That is what I do during this test (turn on and off that options). No difference. I just forgot to write that info.
BTW. Better "real life" file to test: drupal.org/project/drupal/releases/8.2.1
12 seconds (DO) vs 3 seconds (FastCopy).
That was "ram to ram". HDD to HDD was 30 seconds (DO) vs 10 seconds (FastCopy). So FastCopy is faster copying HDD to HDD than DO using "ram to ram".
Do not get me wrong - I like DO, I bought this program because of that (even if it's price is similar to whole operating system). I just want to have best program possible for that price. At least if we're talking about file managing.