I'm helping a friend move some files over to his other computer upstairs, just using the wireless router in his home. (Command-K, etc).

I grabbed 10 files and watched how each one showed up in a Copy window, starting their transfer. My friend asked a question I wasn't sure of: "Will this copying procedure go faster if you only copy one file at a time, wait until it's done, then copy the next one, etc.?"

Anyone know the definitive answer to that? More curious than anything important. Both methods get the job done.

---

M1 2020 Mac mini (16G 2T) • Ventura 13.x • Dual 27" Dell S2722QC monitors • M2 2022 13" MBAir (512G 16G) •

Multiple is faster (assuming no errors occur during copying); there is no idle time while the hideously slow human chooses the next file, clicks on it, locates the copy command (or presses the copy command key), and (finally!) begins the transfer...about 5 seconds per file, assuming you are right there on top of it all the time.

That's my US$0.02 and I'm sticking to it!

Better as a group like TheCaber says - unless the files are coming from a CD or DVD.

I copied a bunch of files from a DVD and my DVD went crazy switching from track to track- getting a little of this file and then a little of the next, etc. A hard drive will do the same but it faster and has a buffer to store part of the file in.


Fred Also

You only get multiple copy windows like the ones you described when you start 10 separate copy procedures. Better to select all ten files and copy as a group -- you'll get only one copy window and the copy procedure will progress faster than would 10 separate, concurrent copy procedures.

---

It is what it is.

archive them (zip/sit/RAR) then move them.

---

******************************

******************************

All depends on the medium. If you had 200 files on a floppy disk...better to copy several at a time, rather than all 200 at once.

---