Ultracopier is an open source file copying tool for Windows, macOS and Linux
I like to keep things organized on my system especially when it comes to file downloads. While all downloads end up in a single location on my system, I like to copy them to specific folders every once in a while as it improves manageability. I put documents into a folder, and do the same for program installers, portable applications, media files, and other file types.
I learned long ago that using native Windows copy functionality may not be the best approach as jobs may take a long time to process.
If you're like me, you probably have multiple copying tasks running sometimes. Depending on the read/write speed of your drives, it could take a long time to run them simultaneously. Windows 10 does offer a pause/resume option in File Explorer which makes it a tad easier. There are alternative options such as TeraCopy or Total Copier which have been around for a long time, but even if you run copy job after copy job, you may end up waiting a long time.
Recently while looking around GitHub I came across Ultracopier. It is the official replacement for Supercopier. And like its predecessor, Ultracopier is an open source project.
When I was halfway through the reviewing process, I discovered that the developer added a Bitcoin Miner to a specific version of the program a few years ago to support development; this was discovered by a user and the developer removed the miner from the application afterwards.
A Virustotal scan shows that the installer is clean, there are no hits at the time of writing. The developer did acknowledge the issue and resolved it; the GitHub page is still up even though it could have been deleted easily.
Once installed, Ultracopier replaces the Windows Explorer's copying functionality with its own. Whenever you run copy, move, cut, and paste operations, Ultracopier is used instead of the native Windows copy functionality.
The Ultracopier interface is displayed during the process; it displays the source and destination folder, progress information, the amount of data that is left to copy, the remaining time (this was completely inaccurate during my tests similarly to how Windows cannot provide a good estimate of the remaining time), and the transfer speed in MB/s.
A click on the more button brings up options, but you may also access it through the tray icon > Add copy/moving > Add transfer option.
At the moment Ultracopier v2 is missing a few features which were present in v1, e.g. checksums are not available yet. The option to pause the copy doesn't work and speed limit isn't functioning either. The developer has promised to add these back in the future. Frankly, these are some of my favorite features in copier applications.
Note: Though the program is free and open source, a premium version is available as well. The interface has a line of text (which is in fact a link) that requests you to buy the Ultimate version to support the development.
The program's secondary interface can be accessed from the system tray icon. The menu here has two primary sections: Add copy/moving and Options.Â Add copy/moving has three more options: Add copy, Add transfer and Add Move. All require that you select the source and destination folders.
The add transfer option brings up the Ultracopier pop-up window into view and you will need to click on More to access the transfer pane. It's pretty straightforward, you add files and folders, manage the queuing order and start the transfer.
The Copy Engine tab has some nice options such as "Transfer the file rights, Keep the file date, move the whole folder, follow the strict order, and create full path if it doesn't exist". These aren't crucial options, though it's nice to have some control. You can manually tweak the performance settings (threads and buffer), I didn't because I wanted to review the program with its default settings. There are a few plugins available on the GitHub page for additional functionality.
Time for some tests. I used a 1.83GB Linux Mint ISO and ensured no apps were running in the background (apart from Notepad where I was saving the results).
- External HDD to SSD - 29 seconds at 68MB/s avg.
- SSD to HDD - 26 seconds at an average speed of 72MB/s.
- HDD to SSD - 24.30 seconds at an average speed of 77MB/s.
- HDD to external HDD - 20.15 seconds at an average speed of 65MB/s.
Windows File Explorer
- External HDD to SSD - 27.61 seconds at 69MB/s avg.
- External HDD to HDD - 25.58 seconds at 69MB/s avg. (started high at 80)
- SSD to HDD - 20.76 seconds at an average speed of 80MB/s. (started in the 200s).
- SSD to external HDD - 29.34 seconds at an average speed of 65MB/s.
Note: I should point out my HDD is very old and quite slow (CrystalDiskInfo shows Caution). The SSD and the external hard drive on the other hand are great.
1.31GB of Music files (100+ in multiple formats) in different folders (unable to determine average speeds because it displayed speed per file)
- HDD to External HDD - 30 seconds
- HDD to SSD - 23 seconds
- SSD to External HDD - 25 seconds
- SSD to HDD - 30 seconds
Windows Explorer test
- HDD to External HDD - 20 seconds
- HDD to SSD - 19 seconds
- SSD to External HDD - 21 seconds
- SSD to HDD - 33 seconds
You may notice that Windows Explorer tests are faster here. That's because it seemed to use some sort of caching, and the copying process sort of started with the progress bar half-filled at times. I had to clear the clipboard, restart Explorer's process by copying something else and repeat the tests. It also shot up at times, using more CPU power. I'm not sure if the results will be similar in Windows 7 or 8.
I repeated these tests with Big Buck Bunny MOV and AVI videos (which I usually use for testing video related software), and the speeds were quite similar. There is not a huge difference in regards to speed but that is to be expected. It is possible that you could get more out of the program under certain configurations.
The main gain is not the performance gain (if any) but the options to create custom copy jobs that may save you quite a bit of time.
Did I mention that it is also available for Linux, macOS and Android?
Ultracopier was written in Qt. I think that it could be a good replacement for TeraCopy, once the missing features are added. There is a portable option in the settings of the installed version (yes you read that correctly), though I didn't test it.