[n370]

This is a curiosity question more than anything...
At my office, an outside tech guy told us to always copy-and-paste when moving files on our NAS drives and never to cut-and-paste or drag-and-drop. I'm wondering: why?

Is there a file integrity issue when using cut-and-paste or drag-and-drop that doesn't exist when you copy-and-paste? Is there a serious issue that can develop if you cut or drag?

Thanks.

[loserOlimbs]

Less prone to human error if you only do the 'sure-fire' method.

Cut and paste can fail and leave you with only tape back-ups (or not single reliable location of the files.)

Drag and Drop can also be configured to cut and paste or copy/ paste.

[n370]

Interesting, thanks. Is this an issue because the file is on a separate drive as opposed to the local drive in my machine or is the same true even on my computer?

I've also heard that MAC drag-and-drop is more bullet-proof than on a PC is this due to how the OSes manages files?

[loserOlimbs]

When you copy and paste on one drive, nothing really moves. The majority of the file never changes, just where the OS represents the location changes. In fact even when you delete a file it only changes the header of the file. The information is still there and easily recovered.

When you copy to another drive, there is real and true data creation/ deletion.

Mac drag-and-drop more bullet-proof is propaganda IMHO. The default handling preferences might be more fool-proof... but not as much any better.

[Saga Lout]

In addition to what's already been said, a sloppy mouse action can drop in the wrong place. Mice are a darned nuisance in, say, Excel Spreadsheets and can create havoc. Give me the keyboard controls any day.

[Rick_in_Fla]

When you copy and paste you still have the file in it's original location, plus where ever you paste it to.

When you cut and paste the file is no longer in it's original location.

[n370]

Thanks for the replies. The file header and disk location are good considerations in understanding how those copy operations work. It's always good to know what's going on under the hood.

[n370]

Answers always lead to more questions...

With copy-and-paste or cut-and-paste (if the file is not 'moving' on the physical drive, but its header is being altered to represent a new OS location) why is this file header change a more risky option as opposed to the creation of a copy of the file? Are there more chances for file corruption if its location is changed as opposed to creating a copy of it?

[loserOlimbs]

If a cut and paste completely FUBARs... then your out of your only copy...

Copy and paste, if something goes horribly wrong (power failure) then you still have the original, and the failed new files.

[Saga Lout]

Originally Posted by loserOlimbs

If a cut and paste completely FUBARs... then your out of your only copy...

Copy and paste, if something goes horribly wrong (power failure) then you still have the original, and the failed new files.

I use cut and paste quite a lot, which I believe has the same effect as drag and drop, and the cut stops if the paste fails for whatever reason. If a file can't be transferred, there's a warning message box then when I look at the old folder, the file I was warned about is top of the list. I simply skip that one and select the others, then Cut and Paste again. Therefore, I don't hold with the "completely FUBAR" assessment.

[TheOutcaste]

The Cut and Paste method first copies the file(s) then when the copy is completed it deletes the original. There is a slight chance that if the copy fails, windows might not get notified that it failed and will delete the original anyways.
The fact that a copy completed does not always mean it was successful either. Data may be successfully written to a bad sector, but when read is completely different.
A copy and paste gives you a chance to test the file, or do a separate verification of some kind to insure the copy wasn't corrupted.

[loserOlimbs]

Originally Posted by TheOutcaste

The Cut and Paste method first copies the file(s) then when the copy is completed it deletes the original. There is a slight chance that if the copy fails, windows might not get notified that it failed and will delete the original anyways.
The fact that a copy completed does not always mean it was successful either. Data may be successfully written to a bad sector, but when read is completely different.
A copy and paste gives you a chance to test the file, or do a separate verification of some kind to insure the copy wasn't corrupted.

Exactly, and thank you!