Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18
  1. #1
    New Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    W7 copy/replace file foobar

    Am here for help !

    Am migrating to W7 from XP on primary desktop.

    In XP, when copying any file from desktop to USB, XP would just ask "file of same name,copy/replace" options, then overwrite/update files on the USB stick.

    My USB is 512 mb: 400 mb used, FAT32.
    The file I am copying from desktop is 150mb.
    The old version of the file is on the USB and accessible.
    I do a copy update of this file from desktop to USB every day.

    In W7, when I try to copy the same file from desktop to same USB, I get a message "Not enough space" !!
    WOT?

    Why wont W7 do the same copy/overwrite function as XP.?
    I have tested the W7 copy/ move with more free space then the file size: no problem 'usual' options come up.
    I am not writing a new file to free space, just wanting to copy/update the current file on the USB.

    Am i missing some settings somewhere.??
    Surely this cant be correct: that W7 will not copy/overwrite a file of same name unless there is more freespace available than the file size to be copied.

    What happens with large files that may occupy > 50% of any disc ?
    What happens updating system snapshots to external drives taht are > 50% of space ??
    This is confusing and unsettling as I often need to move files that are > 50% of free space.

    I dont really see why the XP functionality is lost.
    I dont want to have to use 3rd party tools: RichCopy, Teracopy etc.
    I dont really trust sync tools: too many breakpoints.

    Any advice please.
    ( so far experience with W7 is poor on many levels )
    Regards,
    Jack

  2. #2
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California, USA
    Posts
    735
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked 80 Times in 78 Posts
    Jack,

    That's "FUBAR" (an acronym - you could look it up in your Funk & Wagnall's).

    Zig

  3. #3
    New Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    @zig
    Thx
    Appreciate the speedy reply.

    Any input to the problem ??

  4. #4
    Plutonium Lounger Medico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    12,631
    Thanks
    161
    Thanked 936 Times in 856 Posts
    First 512 Mb is a VERY small flash drive. You can get a 8 Gb drive now for about $10. I suspect the overhead for Win 7 is somewhat larger than XP and as such the flash drive needs a little more space. There is only 112 Mb of free space, again very small free space.

    Do yourself a favor and get a larger flash drive. Even the expensive ones are very reasonable in price.

    Also do not depend on flash drives for critical backups. They can fail unexpectedly without warning.
    BACKUP...BACKUP...BACKUP
    Have a Great Day! Ted


    Sony Vaio Laptop, 2.53 GHz Duo Core Intel CPU, 8 GB RAM, 320 GB HD
    Win 8 Pro (64 Bit), IE 10 (64 Bit)


    Complete PC Specs: By Speccy

  5. #5
    Super Moderator bbearren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Polk County, Florida
    Posts
    3,760
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 424 Times in 338 Posts
    The default behavior for Windows 7 file copy to a location where a file with the same name exists is to offer to copy and replace, don't copy, or copy and keep both files.

    Since "Keep both files" is an option in the copy command, there must be enough room in the target location for a complete and separate copy of the file. That's why you are getting the error message; there is not enough room to "Keep both files".

    You either need to free up space on the USB drive, or, as Medico suggested, get a larger thumb drive. The smallest I now own is 2GB. I carry an 8GB in my pocket, and I have two more 8GB and two 32GB thumb drives on my desk. I have these because I can't resist a sale when I see SanDisk Cruzers for less than $1 / GB. The last one I bought was a 32GB for $24.99.
    Create a fresh drive image before making system changes, in case you need to start over!

    "The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem. Savvy?"—Captain Jack Sparrow "When you're troubleshooting, start with the simple and proceed to the complex."—M.O. Johns "Experience is what you get when you're looking for something else."—Sir Thomas Robert Deware.
    Unleash Windows

  6. #6
    Plutonium Lounger Medico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    12,631
    Thanks
    161
    Thanked 936 Times in 856 Posts
    They are very inexpensive. That would be the best solution in this case. Plus the larger Flash Drive gives lots more capabilities.
    BACKUP...BACKUP...BACKUP
    Have a Great Day! Ted


    Sony Vaio Laptop, 2.53 GHz Duo Core Intel CPU, 8 GB RAM, 320 GB HD
    Win 8 Pro (64 Bit), IE 10 (64 Bit)


    Complete PC Specs: By Speccy

  7. #7
    WS Lounge VIP Browni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Rochdale, UK
    Posts
    1,653
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 161 Times in 139 Posts
    I think the OP has a valid point.

    It shouldn't matter if you are copying 150MB or 1.5GB Windows should take into consideration the space that would be freed if you choose to replace the existing file.

  8. #8
    WS Lounge VIP mrjimphelps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    3,407
    Thanks
    447
    Thanked 405 Times in 377 Posts
    Not sure about this, but might "FAT32" have something to do with it? That's a pretty old file system.

  9. #9
    Super Moderator bbearren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Polk County, Florida
    Posts
    3,760
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 424 Times in 338 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by mrjimphelps View Post
    Not sure about this, but might "FAT32" have something to do with it? That's a pretty old file system.

    Not at 512MB. It's a simple matter of available free space and Windows 7's default copy behavior.
    Create a fresh drive image before making system changes, in case you need to start over!

    "The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem. Savvy?"—Captain Jack Sparrow "When you're troubleshooting, start with the simple and proceed to the complex."—M.O. Johns "Experience is what you get when you're looking for something else."—Sir Thomas Robert Deware.
    Unleash Windows

  10. #10
    Super Moderator bbearren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Polk County, Florida
    Posts
    3,760
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 424 Times in 338 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Browni View Post
    I think the OP has a valid point.

    It shouldn't matter if you are copying 150MB or 1.5GB Windows should take into consideration the space that would be freed if you choose to replace the existing file.
    I don't disagree with your logic, but that isn't the default behavior, which is to make available the option to keep both files.

    The default behavior for XP is to "Confirm File Replace"; a warning that a file with the same name is already at the location, and a choice to replace or not. XP has no offer to keep both files, so the free space issue doesn't come up. Of course, keeping both could be done by the user by renaming the file being copied, and in such a case in XP with the OP's stated drive status, XP would also warn of "Not enough free space".

    (I had to fire up my Dell D800 to confirm my recollection; I dual-boot XP and Windows 7 on the 9 year-old D800).
    Last edited by bbearren; 2012-10-25 at 18:59. Reason: spelling
    Create a fresh drive image before making system changes, in case you need to start over!

    "The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem. Savvy?"—Captain Jack Sparrow "When you're troubleshooting, start with the simple and proceed to the complex."—M.O. Johns "Experience is what you get when you're looking for something else."—Sir Thomas Robert Deware.
    Unleash Windows

  11. #11
    New Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Ah
    sanity prevails ...even with MS there is a logic ...somewhere.

    @bbearren
    The default behavior for Windows 7 file copy to a location where a file with the same name exists is to offer to copy and replace, don't copy, or copy and keep both files.
    Since "Keep both files" is an option in the copy command, there must be enough room in the target location for a complete and separate copy of the file. That's why you are getting the error message; there is not enough room to "Keep both files".
    &
    The default behavior for XP is to "Confirm File Replace"; a warning that a file with the same name is already at the location, and a choice to replace or not. XP has no offer to keep both files, so the free space issue doesn't come up. Of course, keeping both could be done by the user by renaming the file being copied, and in such a case in XP with the OP's stated drive status, XP would also warn of "Not enough free space".
    You got it.
    I have checked too.
    I hadn't realised the difference in the options btwn XP and W7. Doh.

    You are also right about the urge to "grab a few" USB sticks when they are on sale for so few $$.
    It's amazing technology and so cheap
    Ive got 1/2 a dozen just sitting in front of me.
    I remember well when 4G was an UNIMAGINABLY HUGE space. LOL.

    Thx for the inputs.
    This problem has cropped up all over the web.
    It seems no-one is really happy with the 'new' default options
    Just to replace a file of same name rrequires several extra "clicks" extra operations, and extra time.
    Commonest w/a is bigger drive.
    Not really solution: just a sidestep.

    Ok, I can see there may be some 'security" in the new defaults re copy/overwrite files by mistake.
    This is a hopelessly flawed implementation by MS imho.
    An uneccessary change to a perfectly functional tool.
    No added advantages.
    Another example of user-unfriendly defaults.
    ( heh: the 'new' control panel in W7 is another learning curve for me )

    I have no choice but to move to W7 for various reasons, so will wrestle with these saddle burrs as I go.

    Of course i can buy a new flash drive, but the problem will recur as that flash drive fills up.
    Moving bigger files will be a problem sooner by extension ... get another drive ... and another. Heh.

    BTW @ Medico:
    No need to be unkind about my flash drive.
    The issue was what has changed and how to stop it.
    I am aware that flash drives can fail "without warning", that is not my sole backup: be pretty stupid if it was neh?
    FWIW I have had more platter drives fail over the last 10 years than flash sticks.
    LOL, I usually lose the flash drives before they break.
    Not to worry, I just pick one up from the ones hanging around the parking lot: plug it in and away I go


    @mrjimphelps
    but might "FAT32" have something to do with it?
    No.
    Not for small files.
    Most flash drives are formatted to FAt32 ( or where when I last bought some )
    Fat32 has a problem with BIG files > larger than 1 byte less than 4Gb.
    This is becoming relevant with big data files and typically large Audio-Visual files.
    AFAIK NTFS file systems can support up to 16Tb file size (that would be close to the maximum supported partition size)

    So, ftm, I have upgraded to a bigger drive.
    Seems silly really.

    Does anyone know whether the Classic Explorer in "Classic Shell", works as advertised ??
    http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/
    GO here:
    http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/features.html and check the feature list.
    Its a good looking tool.
    Be interested in any opinions.

    The other consideration wrt to Classic Shell, is that there obviously exists code that WILL fix/change this W7 default.
    I cant find it.
    Some one must know where. ??

    As a new member here( a subscriber to Win secrets and lurker here for years ) I know I am now on shaky ground.
    At risk of being impolite, but, the first couple of replies were unhelpful, failed to address the issue, assumed a certain level of stupidity ie patronising, and were somewhat melodramatic.

    I am a basic end user:
    I have 3 Macs, 4 PCs, and 2 CentOs boxes on a wired and wireless network with 2 raided NAS boxen in a failover setup at home.
    I tend to spend most of my private time in an XP or Linux VM on Linux host.
    Have just started experimenting with W7 in a VM to get the feel.
    At work; 4 networked offices with wired and wireless on a server based system with daily rotating disc backup.
    Moving to W7 at workstation level which has led me here.

    I dont facebook or twitter.

    Nonetheless W7 is new environment for me.
    Particularly as my baseline persona is crabby old fart.
    Still finding the sides.

    Regards
    Thanks to responders, if I may, I'd like to be around for a while.
    Last edited by Jack Irish; 2012-10-26 at 04:34.

  12. #12
    Super Moderator bbearren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Polk County, Florida
    Posts
    3,760
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 424 Times in 338 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Irish View Post
    Ah
    sanity prevails ...even with MS there is a logic ...somewhere.

    @bbearren

    &

    You got it.
    I have checked too.
    I hadn't realised the difference in the options btwn XP and W7. Doh.

    You are also right about the urge to "grab a few" USB sticks when they are on sale for so few $$.
    It's amazing technology and so cheap
    Ive got 1/2 a dozen just sitting in front of me.
    I remember well when 4G was an UNIMAGINABLY HUGE space. LOL.

    Thx for the inputs.
    This problem has cropped up all over the web.
    It seems no-one is really happy with the 'new' default options
    Just to replace a file of same name rrequires several extra "clicks" extra operations, and extra time.
    Commonest w/a is bigger drive.
    Not really solution: just a sidestep.

    Ok, I can see there may be some 'security" in the new defaults re copy/overwrite files by mistake.
    This is a hopelessly flawed implementation by MS imho.
    An uneccessary change to a perfectly functional tool.
    No added advantages.
    Another example of user-unfriendly defaults...
    In MS defense (something I rarely do), I move files around quite a bit at times between folders and partitions/logical drives. If I do want to keep both files (for example, a .css file I might be working on but haven't finalized how I want it) the additional option in Windows 7 is a one-click remedy; I've got both files where I want them. In XP, I must cancel the move (click "No"), right-click the file name, add a character to differentiate the name of the file I want to move, hit Enter or click some empty area in the explorer pane to confirm the renaming, and then move the file again. Or, knowing that a file exists in the target area, I must first differentiate my filename and then move it.

    In XP, either way I go to save both files in one folder requires more mouse/keyboard use than a simple drag-and-drop and a click on "Keep both files".

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Irish View Post
    Thanks to responders, if I may, I'd like to be around for a while.
    By all means stick around, and glad to have you. I feel certain that the computing environment that you work in gives you insights into a number of areas that could well be helpful to others. Your observations on the response to your post are legitimate, and you presented them in clear (and non-flaming) prose that is welcome here.
    Create a fresh drive image before making system changes, in case you need to start over!

    "The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem. Savvy?"—Captain Jack Sparrow "When you're troubleshooting, start with the simple and proceed to the complex."—M.O. Johns "Experience is what you get when you're looking for something else."—Sir Thomas Robert Deware.
    Unleash Windows

  13. #13
    New Lounger
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    8
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    @bbearren
    In MS defense (something I rarely do), I move files around quite a bit at times between folders and partitions/logical drives. If I do want to keep both files (for example, a .css file I might be working on but haven't finalized how I want it) the additional option in Windows 7 is a one-click remedy; I've got both files where I want them. In XP, I must cancel the move (click "No"), right-click the file name, add a character to differentiate the name of the file I want to move, hit Enter or click some empty area in the explorer pane to confirm the renaming, and then move the file again. Or, knowing that a file exists in the target area, I must first differentiate my filename and then move it.
    In XP, either way I go to save both files in one folder requires more mouse/keyboard use than a simple drag-and-drop and a click on "Keep both files".
    I can see how that might be good option.
    I move a few files around too.
    After 10 yrs of doing it one way: it's almost reflex. ( AFAICR it was the same on '98 so maybe > 10yrs Heh )
    W7:
    Just a 'little' relearning.
    Brain ache.
    Retrain hand.
    Actually watch what I'm doing.
    Learning curve.
    Data protection. +++

    You haven't really lived until you've experienced a sudden HD burnout on your OS disc or while retrieving a file.
    Changes your life. LOL.
    My usual saviors: FDISR, Shadow Protect and NetGear. !!

    @bbearren
    What happens in W7 if you want to save/copy multiple unfinalized .css file versions to same space and they have the same name?
    Do u get a 'numerical sequence' rename?
    That might be useful for me as I could 'go back" to point in time rather than keep cumulative file as such.
    Need a BIG drive space! Doable, prolly not specifically useful atm.

    By all means stick around, and glad to have you. I feel certain that the computing environment that you work in gives you insights into a number of areas that could well be helpful to others
    Thx and ..maybe..
    Regards.
    Last edited by Jack Irish; 2012-10-26 at 11:07.

  14. #14
    Super Moderator bbearren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Polk County, Florida
    Posts
    3,760
    Thanks
    26
    Thanked 424 Times in 338 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Irish View Post
    @bbearren
    You haven't really lived until you've experienced a sudden HD burnout on your OS disc or while retrieving a file.
    Changes your life. LOL.
    My usual saviors: FDISR, Shadow Protect and NetGear. !!
    Then I've really lived! I had an OS drive crash so hard it shut the machine down, and the PC would not even boot the BIOS screen. It killed the whole PC. I did my step-by-step troubleshooting and got to the step of unplugging the hard drive cable, and the machine booted, asking for a valid boot device.

    I replaced that drive with a new one, restored my drive image via Image For DOS from TeraByte Unlimited (no formatting necessary), and was back to where I started. There are no data files on my OS partition/drive; they are on a second hard drive, which is also regularly imaged.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Irish View Post
    @bbearren
    What happens in W7 if you want to save/copy multiple unfinalized .css file versions to same space and they have the same name?
    Do u get a 'numerical sequence' rename?
    That might be useful for me as I could 'go back" to point in time rather than keep cumulative file as such.
    Need a BIG drive space! Doable, prolly not specifically useful atm.


    Thx and ..maybe..
    Regards.
    I just tried the multiple duplicate file names to confirm my suspicions; not possible. In order to have more than one file with the same name, they must be in different folders. I don't know of a way to make multiple selections from different folders of files with the same name. One can Ctrl + left-click, but only one file gets moved, the last one clicked. And of course, the right-click > copy method won't work at all, because the default behavior there doesn't give a "Copy" option on the second right-click on a file, only "Paste".

    Of course, doing it one file at a time gets the default Windows 7 copy behavior, which does result in a numerical sequence renaming convention; *(2).css, *(3).css, etc.
    Create a fresh drive image before making system changes, in case you need to start over!

    "The problem is not the problem. The problem is your attitude about the problem. Savvy?"—Captain Jack Sparrow "When you're troubleshooting, start with the simple and proceed to the complex."—M.O. Johns "Experience is what you get when you're looking for something else."—Sir Thomas Robert Deware.
    Unleash Windows

  15. #15
    5 Star Lounger
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California, USA
    Posts
    735
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked 80 Times in 78 Posts
    Jack,

    Although I find Win7 vastly superior to XP in many respects, I agree with your comments on the Start panel; Classic Shell is a good beginning - I use it for its "Up one level" capability - but you might also try the free version of Start Window X:

    http://www.startmenux.com/index.html

    Give it a try

    Zig

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •