File Manager ?

[neo158]

If your phone had a file manager on it you would not have to use it, but it would be available for those who want to. Its like text messaging to me I don't use it or like it, but I don't think they should have remove it from every phone because I don't need it. WOW

I wish there were a lot of things on the O/S which gave us more control of the O/S to manage it and take care of it. I think it's the term choices vs fully automated which we now have.

Did you even read what I posted or just pick it, write a comment and then click post?

 

[Tom Snyder]

If your phone had a file manager on it you would not have to use it, but it would be available for those who want to. Its like text messaging to me I don't use it or like it, but I don't think they should have remove it from every phone because I don't need it. WOW

I wish there were a lot of things on the O/S which gave us more control of the O/S to manage it and take care of it. I think it's the term choices vs fully automated which we now have.

Unless I read the above quote in post #51 totally wrong, you said we would be imposing on you if a file manager was available, even though you would not have to use it. Is that not what you said? Or did someone else post it I'm very sorry if it was not you.

 

[a5cent]

If your phone had a file manager on it you would not have to use it, but it would be available for those who want to.

This is a typical argument made by those who want a file manager. It is based on the false premise that a file manger is used in isolation of everything else, and that the availability of a file manager has no influence on other design choices made by OS designers and app developers. An OS that supports a publicly accessible file system, and expects users to navigate it using a file manager, will nudge OS developers and 3rd party app developers towards different design choices. Over time, the sum of those design choices leads the OS and ecosystem to become something very different from what they would have become without a file manager. That is why the idea, that we who don't want a file manager could simply ignore its existence and not be affected in any other way, is extremely na?ve.

From what I understand, MS will add some file management features to the SkyDrive app. I wouldn't consider that to be a file manager, yet it still has the potential to solve many of the problems WP has with random file access. Instead of arguing about this further, it's probably better to wait and see what MS' approach has to offer. I'm not sure it can solve every last problem, but on the other hand, a full blown file manager definitely can't solve all the problems either, at least not without throwing out WP's entire security model, which clearly isn't an option.

 

[ntice_521]

WP8 already supports file management. Just not in a consistent, logical way. You can transfer files by USB, but not WiFi (it's a smartphone, Microsoft, not an MP3 player from 1998!). You can open files with some apps, but not others. Some file extensions can be used, and not others. It's an embarrassing mess.

 

[fatclue_98]

Another file manager thread. Is it Groundhog Day again already?

 

[juanitoriv]

I'm sayin!! Deja vu all over again!!

 

[a5cent]

WP8 already supports file management. Just not in a consistent, logical way.

It's good to see someone on your side of the fence acknowledge that it is possible to (a) support certain aspects of file management functionality, without (b) a file manager being the only possible way to do so. Unlike you, many seem unable to grasp that concept.

However, you are misjudging the current technical situation, or at least mischaracterizing it. The entire system underlying WP's approach to file handling can be explained in just a few sentences. It is much simpler than the system used by Android, and it's simplicity alone should easily convince anyone that the system is neither inconsistent nor illogical in any way.... it is incomplete however. I'm not sure I'd agree if you were to call it "too simple", but I wouldn't argue with that characterization either.

The closest WP will get to offering something like a file manager is a built-in app to access network shares. That is sorely lacking. Better SkyDrive integration will probably be the limit of file manager like functionality for files stored locally. How those two aspects of remote file system access (with local sync support) should integrate with WP, so as to fulfil our needs, would make for a far more interesting discussion than yelling "I want a file manager", which is void of any real information and therefore pretty much useless.

 

[Ssrki]

With Flash Videos?

Really??

Really??

Dude!!!!!!!

This is one of the very first apps that I ever bought. I love it!! There are video tutorials IN THE APP to show you how.. I follow it to a tee. XLight Server and everything. I pull movies and shows all the time, then I transfer. Swipe until you see help, then tap on "video tutorials". Watch the ones about transferring files.

Goodness gracious.

I watched and done everything like in tutorial, but I didn' bought app, I use trial version. Maybe problem in trial. It works good for you?

 

[neo158]

Unless I read the above quote in post #51 totally wrong, you said we would be imposing on you if a file manager was available, even though you would not have to use it. Is that not what you said? Or did someone else post it I'm very sorry if it was not you.

That's not what I was saying at all, If you read back through the posts I was replying to you would see why I stated that the comment about imposing a lifestyle of those who don't want a file manager works both ways.

 

[juanitoriv]

I watched and done everything like in tutorial, but I didn' bought app, I use trial version. Maybe problem in trial. It works good for you?

I'm watching The Hunger Games: Catching Fire on my PC connected TV right now!!! Watched Showtime's Masters of Sex just a few minutes ago, and I don't have cable tv. It is SO worth the purchase!!

 

[juanitoriv]

WP8 already supports file management. Just not in a consistent, logical way. You can transfer files by USB, but not WiFi (it's a smartphone, Microsoft, not an MP3 player from 1998!). You can open files with some apps, but not others. Some file extensions can be used, and not others. It's an embarrassing mess.

WP8 does allow for WiFi transfer, just not natively. There are apps that DO allow for this back and forth.

 

[juanitoriv]

In fact, read here.

http://forums.windowscentral.com/windows-phone-8/228198-emailing-sharing-pdfs-how.html

 

[ntice_521]

WP8 does allow for WiFi transfer, just not natively. There are apps that DO allow for this back and forth.

There is exactly ONE app that can do this - Moliplayer, and it's only because the app has special Nokia privileges. It's not supposed to be possible.

 

[link68759]

This is exactly ONE app that can do this - Moliplayer, and it's only because the app has special Nokia privileges. It's not supposed to be possible.

No, plenty of apps can do it, some of them even use samba network sharing so you don't need server software on the PC nor do you need the browser.

The only thing special about moliplayer is the fact that it can write to the SD card/video library. Then again, any other app can do that by renaming said file to mp3 and having the system import it. I'm beta testing moliplayer and I've specifically requested that they have moliplayer examine file contents and not just extensions, so if they listen to me, you can in the future open videos saved as .mp3 by other apps. Moliplayer already does this for audio, so if you have a sample.flac, and import it into the library via another app as sample.flac.mp3, moliplayer can play it.

 

[juanitoriv]

There is exactly ONE app that can do this - Moliplayer, and it's only because the app has special Nokia privileges. It's not supposed to be possible.

So, I've been doing something that's "not" possible for 6 to 8 months now?? Well better tell me phone and PC that then!!

 

[ntice_521]

However, you are misjudging the current technical situation, or at least mischaracterizing it. The entire system underlying WP's approach to file handling can be explained in just a few sentences. It is much simpler than the system used by Android, and it's simplicity alone should easily convince anyone that the system is neither inconsistent nor illogical in any way.... it is incomplete however. I'm not sure I'd agree if you were to call it "too simple", but I wouldn't argue with that characterization either.

How do you explain in a few sentences why you can open a PDF file with Adobe Reader but not Microsoft PDF Reader? Why music players can play OGG and FLAC files but not MP3s? Why UC Browser saves every file as an MP3? Why file browsers tell you to append a ".y" or some such at the end of all your files? Why a file browser shows epubs but not mobis? What is the significance of the number 20?

Come on...it took me weeks to figure this stuff out, and there's still probably lots I don't know. The only way you can make it simple is to pretend that WP is some other operating system, one that doesn't support files at all.

 

[link68759]

How do you explain in a few sentences why you can open a PDF file with Adobe Reader but not Microsoft PDF Reader? Why music players can play OGG and FLAC files but not MP3s? Why UC Browser saves every file as an MP3? Why file browsers tell you to append a ".y" or some such at the end of all your files? Why a file browser shows epubs but not mobis? What is the significance of the number 20?



Come on...it took me weeks to figure this stuff out, and there's still probably lots I don't know. The only way you can make it simple is to pretend that WP is some other operating system, one that doesn't support files at all.

Ignoring your first two questions, which are just incorrect:

WP has a media library handled by the system. Apps cannot read or write to the library directly- the system acts as the gatekeeper, delivering content both in and out. Only mp3s and jpgs are allowed in currently, and (3) various apps exploit that fact to easily export any file.

Apps are not allowed to register more than a few protocols/extensions, (4) so some apps suggest you rename content to file.ext.y, so only one extension needs to be registered. (5) I've also seen devs claim that certain extensions cannot be registered or viewed because the system owns them, but other devs have no problem with the same files, so... *shrugs*

(6) ?

 

[ntice_521]

Ignoring your first two questions, which are just incorrect:

They are valid I assure you. Some programs have a built in file browser (all different, and most bad), some don't. Music players can't play mp3s because that file type is restricted (you can play them only if you rename them). See the documentation for Mediaplayer XP if you don't believe me.

A file browser can display 20 file types. If a file is not one of the lucky 20 selected by the file browser developer, it will be invisible.

 

[geoghotas]

Yes really need it file manager...

 

[link68759]

They are valid I assure you. Some programs have a built in file browser (all different, and most bad), some don't. Music players can't play mp3s because that file type is restricted (you can play them only if you rename them). See the documentation for Mediaplayer XP if you don't believe me.

A file browser can display 20 file types. If a file is not one of the lucky 20 selected by the file browser developer, it will be invisible.

Why on earth would you have a set of mp3s not in the core music library, where it can EASILY be seen by ANY app? Sorry, that's just user error, and pure stupidity.

And I have no problems opening a pdf with whatever programs have registered support for pdf with the system... again, I'm going to guess that's more user error on your part.

Don't use mediaplayer xp, it's an interesting experiment but just bad for general use. There are other, better apps- or even smarter is to just convert your flacs to wma lossless and use a normal music app.