What is the benefit of copy over xcopy on the command line?

I know that xcopy has more options however are there any benefits to using copy rather than xcopy?

edited Mar 7 '15 at 17:03

Flyk

1,37211928

asked Feb 9 '12 at 10:26

Phil Hannent

8501714

1

Which copy? This one? This one?

– JdeBP
Feb 9 '12 at 12:12

add a comment |

I know that xcopy has more options however are there any benefits to using copy rather than xcopy?

edited Mar 7 '15 at 17:03

Flyk

1,37211928

asked Feb 9 '12 at 10:26

Phil Hannent

8501714

1

Which copy? This one? This one?

– JdeBP
Feb 9 '12 at 12:12

add a comment |

I know that xcopy has more options however are there any benefits to using copy rather than xcopy?

edited Mar 7 '15 at 17:03

Flyk

1,37211928

asked Feb 9 '12 at 10:26

Phil Hannent

8501714

I know that xcopy has more options however are there any benefits to using copy rather than xcopy?

windows command-line file-transfer robocopy xcopy

edited Mar 7 '15 at 17:03

Flyk

1,37211928

asked Feb 9 '12 at 10:26

Phil Hannent

8501714

edited Mar 7 '15 at 17:03

Flyk

1,37211928

asked Feb 9 '12 at 10:26

Phil Hannent

8501714

edited Mar 7 '15 at 17:03

Flyk

1,37211928

edited Mar 7 '15 at 17:03

Flyk

1,37211928

edited Mar 7 '15 at 17:03

Flyk

1,37211928

asked Feb 9 '12 at 10:26

Phil Hannent

8501714

asked Feb 9 '12 at 10:26

Phil Hannent

8501714

asked Feb 9 '12 at 10:26

Phil Hannent

8501714

1

Which copy? This one? This one?

– JdeBP
Feb 9 '12 at 12:12

add a comment |

1

Which copy? This one? This one?

– JdeBP
Feb 9 '12 at 12:12

Which copy? This one? This one?

– JdeBP
Feb 9 '12 at 12:12

add a comment |

4 Answers
4

active

oldest

votes

xcopy is an external program, while copy is part of the interpreter (cmd.exe, command.com). This means that xcopy might not be present on another machine or a rescue disk.

Since we have Windows and rescue CDs, that isn't really an issue anymore.

copy can concatenate files.
```
copy file1 + file2 file3
```
creates a file (file3) which contains file1's and file2's contents.

copy can copy more than just files.

For example,
```
copy con file
```
lets you write directly from the keyboard (console) to file.

Likewise, you can print a file using
```
copy file prn

copy file \computerprinter
```
where the latter is for shared printers.

You can even combine the above: The command
```
copy con prn
```
lets you write directly to the printer.

edited Oct 10 '13 at 21:29

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:14

Dennis

40.7k7101136

5

Also, it's one less character to type when invoking it. :)

– Orangutech
May 31 '12 at 21:33

Wow, thanks for info regarding files concatenation. I've just found out it and understood why my result file was so big. You've made my day.

– Johnny_D
Oct 10 '13 at 13:57

add a comment |

I think the main difference is (or was) that xcopy is able to copy folder hierarchies and copy was intended to work on files only.

That being said, I don't think there is anything to gain (functionality- or performance-wise) from using copy.

Please note, even xcopy is outdated by today's standards. Robocopy is the new copy utility of choice on modern Windows platforms.

Also note that all the mentioned copy utilities have Wikipedia articles that could contain further information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_(command)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcopy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robocopy

edited Feb 9 '12 at 12:23

DMA57361

16.9k66195

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:08

Der Hochstapler

67.9k49230285

add a comment |

If you consider Powershell a "command line" then there is another "copy" command available. The Powershell "copy" apparently maps to a cmdlet.

One thing not mentioned by the other answers is that since Powershell expands a deeply embedded wildcard at the shell level, this command will work (only from PS not from DOS):

% copy G:gitonesource*morePathSomePattern*.dll destDir

while xcopy claims "file not found" since it accepts a single source.

edited Jan 3 '18 at 3:04

answered Jan 3 '18 at 2:39

crokusek

4031511

add a comment |

Anyone remember DOS on dual floppy PCs? Xcopy minimises the number of read seeks by loading multiple files into memory on a single read to speed up the copy. Probably still makes a trivial speed improvement with HDDs.

answered Jan 10 at 0:48

Bill

1

At the risk of splitting hairs, this is not, strictly speaking, an answer to the question, since it asks for benefit(s) of copy over xcopy. But, IMO, this is a valid contribution to the discussion.

– Scott
Jan 10 at 1:03

add a comment |

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});

}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f387859%2fwhat-is-the-benefit-of-copy-over-xcopy-on-the-command-line%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

4 Answers
4

active

oldest

votes

4 Answers
4

active

oldest

votes

xcopy is an external program, while copy is part of the interpreter (cmd.exe, command.com). This means that xcopy might not be present on another machine or a rescue disk.

Since we have Windows and rescue CDs, that isn't really an issue anymore.

copy can concatenate files.
```
copy file1 + file2 file3
```
creates a file (file3) which contains file1's and file2's contents.

copy can copy more than just files.

For example,
```
copy con file
```
lets you write directly from the keyboard (console) to file.

Likewise, you can print a file using
```
copy file prn

copy file \computerprinter
```
where the latter is for shared printers.

You can even combine the above: The command
```
copy con prn
```
lets you write directly to the printer.

edited Oct 10 '13 at 21:29

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:14

Dennis

40.7k7101136

5

Also, it's one less character to type when invoking it. :)

– Orangutech
May 31 '12 at 21:33

Wow, thanks for info regarding files concatenation. I've just found out it and understood why my result file was so big. You've made my day.

– Johnny_D
Oct 10 '13 at 13:57

add a comment |

xcopy is an external program, while copy is part of the interpreter (cmd.exe, command.com). This means that xcopy might not be present on another machine or a rescue disk.

Since we have Windows and rescue CDs, that isn't really an issue anymore.

copy can concatenate files.
```
copy file1 + file2 file3
```
creates a file (file3) which contains file1's and file2's contents.

copy can copy more than just files.

For example,
```
copy con file
```
lets you write directly from the keyboard (console) to file.

Likewise, you can print a file using
```
copy file prn

copy file \computerprinter
```
where the latter is for shared printers.

You can even combine the above: The command
```
copy con prn
```
lets you write directly to the printer.

edited Oct 10 '13 at 21:29

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:14

Dennis

40.7k7101136

5

Also, it's one less character to type when invoking it. :)

– Orangutech
May 31 '12 at 21:33

Wow, thanks for info regarding files concatenation. I've just found out it and understood why my result file was so big. You've made my day.

– Johnny_D
Oct 10 '13 at 13:57

add a comment |

xcopy is an external program, while copy is part of the interpreter (cmd.exe, command.com). This means that xcopy might not be present on another machine or a rescue disk.

Since we have Windows and rescue CDs, that isn't really an issue anymore.

copy can concatenate files.
```
copy file1 + file2 file3
```
creates a file (file3) which contains file1's and file2's contents.

copy can copy more than just files.

For example,
```
copy con file
```
lets you write directly from the keyboard (console) to file.

Likewise, you can print a file using
```
copy file prn

copy file \computerprinter
```
where the latter is for shared printers.

You can even combine the above: The command
```
copy con prn
```
lets you write directly to the printer.

edited Oct 10 '13 at 21:29

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:14

Dennis

40.7k7101136

xcopy is an external program, while copy is part of the interpreter (cmd.exe, command.com). This means that xcopy might not be present on another machine or a rescue disk.

Since we have Windows and rescue CDs, that isn't really an issue anymore.

copy can concatenate files.
```
copy file1 + file2 file3
```
creates a file (file3) which contains file1's and file2's contents.

copy can copy more than just files.

For example,
```
copy con file
```
lets you write directly from the keyboard (console) to file.

Likewise, you can print a file using
```
copy file prn

copy file \computerprinter
```
where the latter is for shared printers.

You can even combine the above: The command
```
copy con prn
```
lets you write directly to the printer.

edited Oct 10 '13 at 21:29

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:14

Dennis

40.7k7101136

edited Oct 10 '13 at 21:29

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:14

Dennis

40.7k7101136

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:14

Dennis

40.7k7101136

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:14

Dennis

40.7k7101136

5

Also, it's one less character to type when invoking it. :)

– Orangutech
May 31 '12 at 21:33

Wow, thanks for info regarding files concatenation. I've just found out it and understood why my result file was so big. You've made my day.

– Johnny_D
Oct 10 '13 at 13:57

add a comment |

5

Also, it's one less character to type when invoking it. :)

– Orangutech
May 31 '12 at 21:33

Wow, thanks for info regarding files concatenation. I've just found out it and understood why my result file was so big. You've made my day.

– Johnny_D
Oct 10 '13 at 13:57

Also, it's one less character to type when invoking it. :)

– Orangutech
May 31 '12 at 21:33

Wow, thanks for info regarding files concatenation. I've just found out it and understood why my result file was so big. You've made my day.

– Johnny_D
Oct 10 '13 at 13:57

add a comment |

Please note, even xcopy is outdated by today's standards. Robocopy is the new copy utility of choice on modern Windows platforms.

Also note that all the mentioned copy utilities have Wikipedia articles that could contain further information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_(command)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcopy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robocopy

edited Feb 9 '12 at 12:23

DMA57361

16.9k66195

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:08

Der Hochstapler

67.9k49230285

add a comment |

Please note, even xcopy is outdated by today's standards. Robocopy is the new copy utility of choice on modern Windows platforms.

Also note that all the mentioned copy utilities have Wikipedia articles that could contain further information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_(command)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcopy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robocopy

edited Feb 9 '12 at 12:23

DMA57361

16.9k66195

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:08

Der Hochstapler

67.9k49230285

add a comment |

Please note, even xcopy is outdated by today's standards. Robocopy is the new copy utility of choice on modern Windows platforms.

Also note that all the mentioned copy utilities have Wikipedia articles that could contain further information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_(command)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcopy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robocopy

edited Feb 9 '12 at 12:23

DMA57361

16.9k66195

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:08

Der Hochstapler

67.9k49230285

Please note, even xcopy is outdated by today's standards. Robocopy is the new copy utility of choice on modern Windows platforms.

Also note that all the mentioned copy utilities have Wikipedia articles that could contain further information:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copy_(command)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xcopy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robocopy

edited Feb 9 '12 at 12:23

DMA57361

16.9k66195

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:08

Der Hochstapler

67.9k49230285

edited Feb 9 '12 at 12:23

DMA57361

16.9k66195

edited Feb 9 '12 at 12:23

DMA57361

16.9k66195

edited Feb 9 '12 at 12:23

DMA57361

16.9k66195

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:08

Der Hochstapler

67.9k49230285

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:08

Der Hochstapler

67.9k49230285

answered Feb 9 '12 at 12:08

Der Hochstapler

67.9k49230285

add a comment |

If you consider Powershell a "command line" then there is another "copy" command available. The Powershell "copy" apparently maps to a cmdlet.

One thing not mentioned by the other answers is that since Powershell expands a deeply embedded wildcard at the shell level, this command will work (only from PS not from DOS):

% copy G:gitonesource*morePathSomePattern*.dll destDir

while xcopy claims "file not found" since it accepts a single source.

edited Jan 3 '18 at 3:04

answered Jan 3 '18 at 2:39

crokusek

4031511

add a comment |

If you consider Powershell a "command line" then there is another "copy" command available. The Powershell "copy" apparently maps to a cmdlet.

One thing not mentioned by the other answers is that since Powershell expands a deeply embedded wildcard at the shell level, this command will work (only from PS not from DOS):

% copy G:gitonesource*morePathSomePattern*.dll destDir

while xcopy claims "file not found" since it accepts a single source.

edited Jan 3 '18 at 3:04

answered Jan 3 '18 at 2:39

crokusek

4031511

add a comment |

If you consider Powershell a "command line" then there is another "copy" command available. The Powershell "copy" apparently maps to a cmdlet.

One thing not mentioned by the other answers is that since Powershell expands a deeply embedded wildcard at the shell level, this command will work (only from PS not from DOS):

% copy G:gitonesource*morePathSomePattern*.dll destDir

while xcopy claims "file not found" since it accepts a single source.

edited Jan 3 '18 at 3:04

answered Jan 3 '18 at 2:39

crokusek

4031511

If you consider Powershell a "command line" then there is another "copy" command available. The Powershell "copy" apparently maps to a cmdlet.

One thing not mentioned by the other answers is that since Powershell expands a deeply embedded wildcard at the shell level, this command will work (only from PS not from DOS):

% copy G:gitonesource*morePathSomePattern*.dll destDir

while xcopy claims "file not found" since it accepts a single source.

edited Jan 3 '18 at 3:04

answered Jan 3 '18 at 2:39

crokusek

4031511

edited Jan 3 '18 at 3:04

answered Jan 3 '18 at 2:39

crokusek

4031511

answered Jan 3 '18 at 2:39

crokusek

4031511

answered Jan 3 '18 at 2:39

crokusek

4031511

add a comment |

answered Jan 10 at 0:48

Bill

1

At the risk of splitting hairs, this is not, strictly speaking, an answer to the question, since it asks for benefit(s) of copy over xcopy. But, IMO, this is a valid contribution to the discussion.

– Scott
Jan 10 at 1:03

add a comment |

answered Jan 10 at 0:48

Bill

1

At the risk of splitting hairs, this is not, strictly speaking, an answer to the question, since it asks for benefit(s) of copy over xcopy. But, IMO, this is a valid contribution to the discussion.

– Scott
Jan 10 at 1:03

add a comment |

answered Jan 10 at 0:48

Bill

answered Jan 10 at 0:48

Bill

answered Jan 10 at 0:48

Bill

answered Jan 10 at 0:48

Bill

answered Jan 10 at 0:48

Bill

1

At the risk of splitting hairs, this is not, strictly speaking, an answer to the question, since it asks for benefit(s) of copy over xcopy. But, IMO, this is a valid contribution to the discussion.

– Scott
Jan 10 at 1:03

add a comment |

1

At the risk of splitting hairs, this is not, strictly speaking, an answer to the question, since it asks for benefit(s) of copy over xcopy. But, IMO, this is a valid contribution to the discussion.

– Scott
Jan 10 at 1:03

At the risk of splitting hairs, this is not, strictly speaking, an answer to the question, since it asks for benefit(s) of copy over xcopy. But, IMO, this is a valid contribution to the discussion.

– Scott
Jan 10 at 1:03

add a comment |

draft saved

draft discarded

Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!

Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …

Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Post as a guest

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

Name

Required, but never shown

This page is only for reference, If you need detailed information, please check here

搜尋此網誌

Gfrktyl