Some points noted

[Nagan]

Hi,
Thanks for the excellent software. I have been using version 2.0 and the earliers for years and have recently upgraded to 3.0 on my Win 7 x 64 system. I could find some discrepancies which are listed below.

1.Menu>> View>> Refresh List does not work . I checked by adding a few subfolders into a folder , and after refreshing the left hand selector does not list that. Ofcourse closing and opening the exe file lists that.

2.Earlier in ver 2.0 while keeping a particular file in the duplicate file list HIGHLIGHTED; selection assistant>>select by location >> box a simple click in the box would get the folder . Selecting thru "Select folder " is cumbersome and long winding.The dropdown arrow in the box does not yield anything. Img attached

dupeless 2012-09-13_221550.gif

3.While deleting vcf files the CPU usage shoots above the ceiling and the process is VERY SLOW.

[DigitalVolcano]

Thanks for your comments.

1
The 'Refresh List' in the view menu refreshes the Duplicate File list, not the folder selector. It basically removes any files from the list that have been deleted outside Duplicate Cleaner.
You can refresh the available folder tree using the refresh button to the right of it.

2
The Select By Location box is something we are looking to improve - it needs an easier way of getting a folder from the list. The drop down list just shows your recent history in the current session.

3
The deletion process has been updated in 3.0.9. and should be quicker. Are you deleting to recycle bin? Deleting permanently is much faster (be careful though).

[Nagan]

Thanks for your comments.

1
The 'Refresh List' in the view menu refreshes the Duplicate File list,..........

How silly!! Just missed that . It works great.

2
The Select By Location box is something we are looking to improve - it needs an easier way of getting a folder from the list. The drop down list just shows your recent history in the current session..

The mechanism was ideal in ver 2.0 of highlighting a file and bringing into the box. The choice of going thru explorer might be misleading if an user is allowed to pick a non-related folder.In ver 2.0, once the folder is entered into the box , I had to use the cursor to erase the subs to get into the superior folder.

3
The deletion process has been updated in 3.0.9. and should be quicker. Are you deleting to recycle bin? Deleting permanently is much faster (be careful though).

The present free version which I have is 3.0.0. and I believe this is the latest as per the site.In my case of vcf files (basically backup from my mobile) each update is stored as a folder indexed by date. So in effect duplicate cleaner would kick all except the latest folder. One thing I noted while the deletion was on , was that the loop was picking the duplicate files one by one. Instead if the deletion took place by folders the CPU strain can be lessened to a certain extent?

[DigitalVolcano]

Update: Duplicate Cleaner 3.0.1 Free now has the 'copy selected path' button reinstated This will arrive in Pro too when it is updated next.

[Nagan]

1.Thanks mate , Now (copy selected path) it works great..
2.The GUI screen obfuscates view in my setting 800 x 600. Also the version number in the top left corner still reads 3.0 . image attached.

DC 2012-10-01_072031.gif

3. One thought.. Duplicate files>> select by location ---Regarding selecting manually , a user can select a folder totally irrelevant to the search results. Can not the manoeuver be restricted only to relevant folders?

DC 2012-10-01_163531.gif

4. Regards the cleaning there still seems to be a hyperactive CPU consumption not necessarily only for small byte files. If the same files are selected thru explorer , and deleted to recycle bin they seem to be a little quicker and without the CPU spurt. I have just attached a sample vcf file.

DC.zip

Say there are approx 1000 such entries in one dated folder. Suppose there are 5 folders and I run DC and at the end there are approx 3900 entries which are common to be deleted it takes quiet a bit of time.

[Nagan]

As suggested by you DELETING DIRECTLY is tremendously fast. But deleting to recycle bin is not even @ quarter fast of that.. Is it ultimately limited by the Windows OS? Anyway for added safety delting to Recycle bin would be preferred just in case of some errors. Another thing I observe is the same set of duplicate folders>> duplicates>> Recycle bin works faster in WIN XP SP 3 desktop than in Win 7 x 64 laptop.

[DigitalVolcano]

We have got it to delete really fast to recycle bin using certain windows API methods (the same as when you delete from explorer), but the interface is unreliable, and will drop out on hitting a file it doesn't like without reporting back what went wrong...