[Lazarus-other] File Managers compared

Graeme Geldenhuys graeme at geldenhuys.co.uk
Tue Sep 4 11:38:33 CEST 2012

[ please note the new mailing list is used ]

On 04/09/12 04:10, Alexander Klenin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 11:12 PM, Kostas Michalopoulos
> <badsectoracula at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, i used Norton Commander for many years (basically until early
>> 2000s) and i use Midnight Commander always in Linux. Compared to FAR
>> Manager, Midnight Commander is very limited in features. I'm not sure
>> it makes sense to go and list all the differences, you can just
>> download and install it in a Windows box and try it yourself. You'll
>> see how much more advanced FAR is.
> I agree. Far Manager is certainly the most advanced in its class by a
> wide margin.
> Pity it is not portable.

I still fail to see the "by a wide margin" statement. I had a look at 
FAR, read the feature list, looked at lots of screenshots, viewed some 
comparison websites like Wikipedia etc. I can't see anything in FAR that 
Midnight Commander cannot do. The only thing I'm not sure about Midnight 
Commander (I'm not a MC expert) is if it supports tabs in the panels.

A big plus point for Midnight Commander is it can do everything out of 
the box without the need for 3rd party plugins (configurable panels, 
FTP, NFS, SSH, SMB/CIFS, creating various archives, navigate various 
archives as if they are standard directories, syntax highlighting for 
over a 100 file types, regex support, Hex viewer, directory 
shortcuts/favourites, user customizable and extendible menus and 
commands etc), Midnight Commander is cross platform.  Plus Midnight 
Commander as been in existence before May 1994 (Dec 1997 was release 
v4.1 already - earlier release dates are unknown), and still under 
active development (last release 30 days ago).

Have you guys actually tried MC? I have tried FAR, so I can justify my 
statement above.

   - Graeme -

More information about the Lazarus-other mailing list