Comment 159 for bug 197762

> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 9:54 PM, jamesnmandy <email address hidden>
> wrote:
>
> > There's no way all these people are seeing this behaviour because they all
> > have vastly different yet commonly "crappy" hardware. The same exact
> > hardware works great under the "other" OS. It's 100% a *nix issue and it's
> > 100% in the software. That's painfully obvious.

Stop thinking that Nautilus is a good indicator of speed already damnit!
It is possible that you and other users really get buggily slow
performance, but I assure that there is just as many in this thread that
experience no other bugs than themselves interpretting Nautilus wrong.

And since you didn't notice, there is nothing to solve as there haven't
been supplied sufficient information to diagnose a bug.

If you've got hardware that performs significantly better with Windows
or different kernels then file a proper bug.

> > I wish this would get fixed really soon, I recently went back to the "other"
> > OS and it itself has many stability issues that Ubuntu does not
> > have, so I promptly switched back to 9.04.

And I wish all you people got a clue as how to make a useful bug report
really soon, but it seems like I'll have to go back to dreaming.

> Not sure if this has been mentioned or not, but I noticed today that
> performance is much much better when copying directories to directories vs.
> copying a file to a directory. For example, I had a directory on my
> desktop, with three subdirectories, each with two files in them. When I
> right-click copy and then right-click paste on to my external USB HDD to a
> particular directory the file transfer speed stays at 15MBps +/- instead of
> the usual starting at 15MBps and tapering off to 5MBps or less and
> eventually just stopping altogether. The total size of the main directory
> being copied was just over 36GB. Each of the three subdirectories contained
> a 10-12GB file and a smaller 60kb file each.

Are these dstat numbers? Anyway, file a proper bug if you want progress.