Official Just Manager forum
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Other than JM, I have the following file managers installed.
Name Directory size
Just Manager 1,095,627
Multi Commander 14,079,811
Speed Commander 27,698,760
TCUP 859,625,115
Total Commander 11,023,490
WinNC 86,799,293
JM is much more user friendly, specific, down to earth, easy to work, better appearance, simpler customization options, much faster response, wonderful support, extremely lightweight and easier update options, compared to all above.
Is is due to the fact that JM has truly expert documentation and 'NO JUNK' theory or something else.
Thank you
Last edited by sajjansinghania (2012-12-27 08:54:34)
Offline
JM directory size is smaller, compared to TC for example, becuase JM has less functionality then others, doesn't support archives, utility for file operations under admin rights, updater, 32x32 icon pack, e.t.c.
Offline
JM is much more user friendly, specific, down to earth, easy to work, better appearance, simpler customization options, much faster response, wonderful support, extremely lightweight and easier update options, compared to all above.
Is is due to the fact that JM has truly expert documentation and 'NO JUNK' theory or something else.
JM directory size is smaller, compared to TC for example, becuase JM has less functionality then others, doesn't support archives, utility for file operations under admin rights, updater, 32x32 icon pack, e.t.c.
Sir, after using JM I get fascinated everyday on all the above counts and many more. Therefore, being an admirer of JM, I had posted this topic for my academics.
I was expecting a more descriptive answer with regards to user friendly, specific, wonderful support, down to earth, easy to work, better appearance, simpler customization options, much faster response and easier update.
Sir, you explained only on comparative size due to some missing features, which I think are not used by 95% of their users.
Anyway, thank you for responding Sir.
Offline
JM is much more user friendly, specific, down to earth, easy to work, better appearance, simpler customization options, much faster response, wonderful support, extremely lightweight and easier update options, compared to all above...
Sir, you explained only on comparative size due to some missing features, which I think are not used by 95% of their users.
I've tried many if not most windows FM, some I've used on a daily basis for years and JM is not just another FM.
After using it two for days only, I'm impressed by its speed and user friendly interface.
I agree, other FM became pretty bloated by implementing half-baken, sluggish BS features which most users don't need.
Win7x64SP1
Offline
Pages: 1