User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; ru; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061025 Firefox/1.5.0.8 Build Identifier: When one copies a file from a folder to another it would be VERY interesting to know how fast the files are being copied. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Try to copy a big file from one folder to another 2. Look for the speed which the file is being copied Actual Results: The progress bar says just how much time is remaining. Expected Results: On the progress bar which says how much time is remaining, the avarage copy speed should also be shown.
Maybe add a [Details >>>] button which will grow the window and add current and/or average speed details... This way users who don't like this feature just don't see it...
Another comment: Whilst copying files, the 'x' minutes remaining is a bit weird because the '1 minute remaining' shows for one minute and after that, you still have to wait a minute before completion... 60secs 60secs 60secs 1 1 1 1 etc 3 minutes->2 minutes->1 minute->60 59 58 57 etc I'd reckon that all 'x minutes remaining' should be +1 and '1 minute remaining' should only be displayed 1 second, or not at all...
Any update when this will be implemented?
(In reply to comment #3) > Any update when this will be implemented? Probably not at all. Not displaying this information helps users in quickly understanding what's going on and how long it will take for the operation to finish. If you want to debug e.g. your SFTP or SMB transfer performance, then use scp or rsync or something else. Copying files is not an exciting thing to do, really. So why not see the lack of MB/sec information as a nice feature that helps you focus on other things on your desktop; a feature that keeps you from wasting time double-checking the estimated remaining time in your head? The question whether the current way to display the estimated format is the best solution, as raised by Harold, is another one for a different bug.
(In reply to comment #4) > Copying files is not an exciting thing to do, really. So why not see the lack > of MB/sec information as a nice feature that helps you focus on other things on > your desktop; a feature that keeps you from wasting time double-checking the > estimated remaining time in your head? It's a feature, not a bug. Well do as you see fit. > The question whether the current way to display the estimated format is the > best solution, as raised by Harold, is another one for a different bug. If you don't want to fix the bug then at least close it.
Sure, I first wanted to give everyone the chance to reply to my arguments though.