So, I was just thinking, the windows progress bar lies. Constantly. it seems that it says "If it keeps going at the rate it's going at now, you'll be done in X amount of time"
But The rate it's at right now constantly fluctuates.
So I was thinking a better alternative would be to take samples of how fast it's going maybe every 5-30 seconds depending on how large the file is (5 seconds for smaller files, 30 seconds or more for larger files) and use those previous readings, average them out based on how long you've been doing whatever process, and get an average of "If you keep going at the rate you HAVE been going at for the past X minutes, you should be done in Y amount of time"
Is there anything that would prevent this?
[url=http://www.codesector.com/teracopy.php]TeraCopy[/url]'s progress bar is quite accurate.
Related:
[img]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/estimation.png[/img]
I'd rather I just saved the processing power to speed up the progress!
The timer will never be accurate in Windows. It's kind of a "it's done when it's done" kind of thing. If they could get it like Linux's it'd be great. But that will never happen.
They should just be on the sure side and always show "324 years" instead.
[QUOTE=Lego399;22557852]They should just be on the sure side and always show "324 years" instead.[/QUOTE]
Wouldn't be the first time. I've seen it say 1 year before.
Mine is pretty accurate, here on windows 7. Was almost just as accurate on vista, but this hardware is pretty good.
On windows xp and shitty hardware it was never correct.
Mine is usually pretty correct. If anything, the estimate is a little long.
In XP I mean.
In Opera (as in the browser) the time remaining counter for downloads is incredibly accurate, it almost always got it correct when I used to use it.
[QUOTE=catch33;22569176]In Opera (as in the browser) the time remaining counter for downloads is incredibly accurate, it almost always got it correct when I used to use it.[/QUOTE]
Downloads don't tend to fluctuate as much. File copies change as you use more resources on your computer.
Did they fix this to an extent in Windows 7? It seems to be somewhat accurate now.
I've seen the infinity sign before.
[QUOTE=lil JJ;22569853]I've seen the infinity sign before.[/QUOTE]
Haha wow, I'm surprised they even coded for that.
I wasn't aware they did. I thought it just went up to 9999 years, or something like that.
[QUOTE=lil JJ;22569853]I've seen the infinity sign before.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't show that.
[QUOTE=Panda X;22581685]It doesn't show that.[/QUOTE]
Mutorrent will show infinity, but I don't think Windows does.
I agree with OP, you would think it could do some sort of simple measurement of the rate of change to get a more accurate estimate.
[QUOTE=Panda X;22558228]Wouldn't be the first time. I've seen it say 1 year before.[/QUOTE]
I keep this around cause it makes me laugh.
[img]http://meta.filesmelt.com/downloader.php?file=transfer.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Wearwolf;22582002]I keep this around cause it makes me laugh.
[img]http://meta.filesmelt.com/downloader.php?file=transfer.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Lol, and how much time did it finally take?
[QUOTE=John the Gr8;22582403]Lol, and how much time did it finally take?[/QUOTE]
About 42530 days and 3 hours.
[QUOTE=John the Gr8;22582403]Lol, and how much time did it finally take?[/QUOTE]
I can't remember but I think it was somewhere between half an hour and an hour and a half.
[QUOTE=Wearwolf;22582002]I keep this around cause it makes me laugh.
[img]http://meta.filesmelt.com/downloader.php?file=transfer.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
I remember when I got my external drive, I copied everything from the hard drive I had currently which was roughly 60GB of crap, and it told me it would take somewhere around that long. Scared the shit out of me and it ended up taking around 2 hours.
[editline]04:12PM[/editline]
Stupid USB 2.0.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.