When comparing Double Commander vs Ranger, the Slant community recommends Double Commander for most people. In the question“What are the best file managers for Windows?” Double Commander is ranked 9th while Ranger is ranked 10th. The most important reason people chose Double Commander is:
you can use same tool in all desktop OS enviroments
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pro Multi-platform (Linux, Windows, MacOS X)
you can use same tool in all desktop OS enviroments
Lots of options allow you to configure DC the way it suits you best: Tools, Fonts, Colors, Hotkeys, Mouse, Fileviews, Plugins, Layout, Toolbars, Tabs, Icons etc.
Pro Powerful tcmd-like search tool (alt+F7)
Pro Directory Hotlist
Save shortcuts to folders. Organize them in a treeview with submenus. Define a name and sorting for each entry.
Pro Source code is available (true free software)
If the developer loses interest there is at least the possibility that someone else will pick up the torch.
Pro tcmd-like multi-rename tool (CTRL+M)
Pro DC uses TCmd plugin API
so you can use documentation from Total Commander for writing plugins. WCX (packer), WDX (content), WFX (file system), WLX (lister)
Pro Closely follows TotalCommander UX
For instance, the 'Settings | Layout' pane is quasi-identical to TCs.
Pro It's that good, you can replace tcmd on windows too
Pro Very sophisticated
Although it is lightweight and simple to use, it can do very sophisticated tasks, like copying files from directories which have a certain extension or file size or have a certain text pattern in them. Also, it's very customizable and stable.
Pro Source Code written in (Object) PASCAL
It's all a matter of perspective. I'm not for an argument about IDE's, frameworks etc, but to me that's a big plus. I think it should be a tie, it's either a pro or a con or should that be neither a pro nor a con. It just depends on context.
Pro Minimalist and efficient
There is no need for icons of files if headings are used. Previews of text documents and a simple design creates and efficient workflow.
Pro Can be used in terminal
Which makes for a good choice of file explorer for those that use machines without a GUI.
Pro Extensible, scriptable (with python)
Ranger allows the use of various scripts for calling on individual or multiple files, for file previews, or for other operations.
In commands.py the "my_edit"-function can be extended to do whatever in python can be done. Target files can be the file under the cursor (self.fm.thisfile.path), the files marked/selected in the current tab (self.fm.thistab.get_selection() ) and the files in the copy-buffer (add/remove: ya, yr) (respectively the delete-buffer: add/remove da/dr) (both: self.fm.copy_buffer).
The most appropriate list of files can be found out automatically, like so:
for file in self.fm.copy_buffer:
for file in self.fm.thistab.get_selection():
file = self.fm.thisfile.path
This allows for in-terminal full colour previews of images and videos.
You can even call external scripts or chain shell commands from the primary interface.
Pro Vim-like bindings
Ranger has Vim-like keybindings which help a lot in increasing efficiency and speed up the workflow.
Pro File preview
Unlike other terminal file managers, Ranger can preview many files, including text files, archives, etc.
Pro Image preview support
Ranger can use w3m to preview images in terminal through framebuffer.
Pro Easily used with SSH
Pro PDF preview
This may fall under "File preview", but it is a very powerful feature for PDF files in particular.
Pro Fast and responsive
This software is super fast and responsive in navigation.
Pro Bookmark system
Makes it easy to jump to any specific folder locations you work with.
Pro Treeview and listview (equal viewports) possible
Supports any number of viewports on folders side by side.
Con Apparently only one developer
Con Much slower on Linux and Mac than on Windows
Con Can't edit files on remote FTP servers
Con Source code written in Pascal language
But this does not affect users negatively. It's just programmers problem
Written in a scripted language. Enabling file previews makes it even slower.
Con Difficult learning curve for people who are not used to Vim
Since it uses many of vim's keybindings, it may be hard for someone who does not use vim or does not know how to use vim to learn how to work with this file manager.
Con Depends heavily on third party utilities
Con Lags everywhere, even the redraws show
A script that gathered too much bloat in the name of features over the years. Thunar seems faster than ranger when it should have been the opposite.
Con No way to calculate folder size
Con No built-in ability to navigate FTP/SSH
Most other GUI-based file managers provide easy bookmarking and browsing of multiple FTP & SSH locations using either keys or keychain stored user credentials. Ranger doesn't have this.
Con Needs heavy configuration to setup
Con A great idea but not GUI friendly
May be difficult to get past the fact that it asked for commands dd and cc and the likes to cut and or paste. Arch-Linux normally prides itself on not over-complicating things. Too bad ... a great idea with the 3 Smart Columns, but why would anyone prefer to need to learn 30 commands in order to cut and paste or copy a file or folder, or to see/change permissions.