Is tera copy useful?

Status
Not open for further replies.
oh man... u dont need to use cuss words...i wouldn't post that unless i was absolutely sure...i have already experienced it..sometimes it can decrease the video qaulity as well........once i copied Oceans' 13 HD DVD rip and when i compared the teracopy version and the normal copy version i found that the teracopy version had decreased video quality....
Click to expand...

That was one reply i was looking for. As even one of my friend also told the same thing that teracopy decreases the video quality and also corrupts files if we are doing big copying.

How many of you agree with it?
 
rohitshakti2 said:
That was one reply i was looking for. As even one of my friend also told the same thing that teracopy decreases the video quality and also corrupts files if we are doing big copying.

How many of you agree with it?
Click to expand...

as i said b4...i have already corrupted many files of mine by using teracopy. so i use it to the minimum.......so i obviously agree. the one thing i absolutely hate is that sometimes Teracopy automatically adjusts the buffer size to 10MB :S:@ and once i corrupted some of WinXP setup files because of this...Now...i always keep the default size to 256KB wen i copy something..one alternate is that u can use Supercopier..its still in its testing stages...u can still give it a try..
 
Balkazzaar said:
oh man...:S u dont need to use cuss words...i wouldn't post that unless i was absolutely sure...i have already experienced it..sometimes it can decrease the video qaulity as well........once i copied Oceans' 13 HD DVD rip and when i compared the teracopy version and the normal copy version i found that the teracopy version had decreased video quality....
Click to expand...

Another big LOL :P .

Did you try checking the md5 for both the files, if they are still same and you have difference in video quality then it's not teracopy's fault. Anyway file corrupting/change is definitely because of other issues like system crash/power off/corrupt ram and even windows file copy will fail in that case. Also remember if u are running full HD movies from a external drive, sure USB interface is slower than internal drives and may take more time to seek the video.

I still seriously doubt teracopy cause corrupt files.
 
i used tera copy and there was a considerable increase in speed and there are other advantages like 1)pause the copy whenever you want 2)if one file is not readable it will skip it and continuing copying
 
teracopy does have its advantages over windows file copier but some people may find its buffering methods a little bit irritative. what i liked the most was while copying stuff to 2 different places itll complete one tast first while pausing the other ..this is definately faster than copying both at the same time with windows copier
 
Balkazzaar said:
as i said b4...i have already corrupted many files of mine by using teracopy. so i use it to the minimum.......so i obviously agree. the one thing i absolutely hate is that sometimes Teracopy automatically adjusts the buffer size to 10MB :S:@ and once i corrupted some of WinXP setup files because of this...Now...i always keep the default size to 256KB wen i copy something..one alternate is that u can use Supercopier..its still in its testing stages...u can still give it a try..
Click to expand...

That's kind of interesting. I have been using Teracopy extensively at office for quite some time now. I use it because I have to copy a directory with a huge number of files in various sub directories over a target dir without overwriting any files that are already present in various sub directories. I never got an issue till now regardless of how much I played with the buffer settings. One of the previous versions of Teracopy did have a problem with data corruption due to a bug and it was fixed. If you still face the problem with the latest version, next time why don't you try doing a binary diff of the source and copied files and send the report to the developer?
 
Lord Nemesis said:
That's kind of interesting. I have been using Teracopy extensively at office for quite some time now. I use it because I have to copy a directory with a huge number of files in various sub directories over a target dir without overwriting any files that are already present in various sub directories. I never got an issue till now regardless of how much I played with the buffer settings. One of the previous versions of Teracopy did have a problem with data corruption due to a bug and it was fixed. If you still face the problem with the latest version, next time why don't you try doing a binary diff of the source and copied files and send the report to the developer?
Click to expand...

thanks for ur input nemesis...u c as i mentioned in my post b4...i have nothing against teracopy....it definitely is useful...especially when u have a large number of files to b copied...but i try not to depend on it too much...sometimes i follow the traditional way of copying things... escpecially when its movies...since quality is a very important thing for me....but when i do have a large number of files to b copied, i use teracopy, but i do make sure i set the buffer settings to a proper size say 256KB or may be even 128KB...
 
I haven't found much of a difference while using Teracopy. Prefer the ctrl+c and ctrl+v method :D

I bet Teracopy mainly depends on read-write speeds of your HDD so I doubt whether that can be optimized further than what the manufacturer provides.
 
Well, I tried it once. Although any speed gains went unnoticed by me, but I liked the idea of being able to continue copy-pasting or moving files, even if one file poses some problems, which is a serious deficit in Windows' default one. Hope that helps!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom