Why do you still use Windows XP?

Per Char Jackson:
That's right, I don't, and I doubt that I'm more mentally agile than
the average bear. It's just not that big of a deal.

When I used to write mainframe code - way back before anybody
even thought about coding standards - the most
heinously-difficult-to-maintain code seemed tb written by the
smartest people in the shop.

My theory: they were so smart that code being difficult to
understand just didn't occur to them.
--
Pete Cresswell

"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in
:

When I used to write mainframe code - way back before anybody
even thought about coding standards - the most
heinously-difficult-to-maintain code seemed tb written by the
smartest people in the shop.

My theory: they were so smart that code being difficult to
understand just didn't occur to them.


That figures. While looking for examples of ANSI C making tabbed controls
(like properties pages) using the Win32 API and no MFC, etc, I saw a few
posts that helped, scattered around the web on forums, and one point that
recurred was commentary that MSDN, the usual source of info that 'experts'
expect people to turn to, was a desert of contextless unhelpful noise.

There is something particularly indolent, stupid, conceited, and narrow-
minded going on when people who want everyone to think they are at the top of
the game, also claiming (or just beleiving) that everyone can and should
already know the same stuff. They can't have it both ways.

The REALLY smart stuff that I have found, is invariably written by a person
who has just learned to do it, and who can present a small, complete working
example. Not surprising, really. Sure, they are NOT experts, but who is
better at drawing a map? The guy who takes time to note details as he passes
a route? Or the idiot who thinks he can draw it all from memory long after he
finished the trail and left the territory?

"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in
:

Per Char Jackson:
Do you also get confused when you shop at two stores, and
the second store is not the same as the first?

I see that as a pretty good analog. I wouldn't use the word
"confused", but the local grocery store re-arranges the food
locations I definitely lose time on my next shopping trip - and
I've heard other people complain about it.

The spiel I heard from the grocery store perspective is that
moving stuff around increases sales because people wind up
wandering past products they had not considered buying before -
as they try to find the products on their shopping list.

I'd say it's definitely a time sink from the customer
perspective.

Interesting.. One thing I noticed once, a local shop had changed a lino
floor, but kept everything else as it had been. I had seen the old lono floor
a couple of times a week for years, but the moment I saw the new floor, I had
no ability to recall what the old one had looked like! This had no effect on
my shopping time other than mentioning this fact as a curiosity, when paying,
but the effect was strange, and if anythign HAD relied on the bit of memory
that had stalled, I might well have lost a lot more time, or been disoncerted
enough to leave if I knew another shop I could remember was equally easy to
reach.

One supermarket (Gateway, now the Co-op, in Britain), decided to arrange its
long shelves like those non-touching perpendicular raised bars often seen on
drain covers. The idea was that no long views could be had, compelling people
to look more closely, and walk around ends of shelves to see the sides of
others. They assumed that this would cause a rise of sales by making people
think of more things they could buy. This failed. Never mind 'getting used to
it', or adapting to new layouts, some layouts are INHERENTLY unhelpful. That
one cost them money, and the next refit saw a return to standard parallel
aisles. Arguably that debacle was why eventually Gateway lost the store to
the Co-op.

From a few posts here, and on the web, it's beginning to look as if Microsoft
have made a similar error.

On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:31:16 -0000, Lostgallifreyan
wrote:

"BillW50" wrote in :

You forget that you can make Windows 95
to look very much like Windows 3.1 if you would like.

File Manager? That is a vision I now wish I could wash off.


type "winfile" or search for NTwinfile for XP systems.
the NT version has very good permission controls added in.

--
[dash dash space newline 4line sig]

Albi CNU

In message op.v91kosyf1r0rdn@dell3100, Harry Vaderchi
writes:
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:31:16 -0000, Lostgallifreyan
wrote:

"BillW50" wrote in :

You forget that you can make Windows 95
to look very much like Windows 3.1 if you would like.

File Manager? That is a vision I now wish I could wash off.


type "winfile" or search for NTwinfile for XP systems.
the NT version has very good permission controls added in.

I just did, and didn't find it anywhere on my hard drives. I do remember
that it was still there on '9x, though I only ever used it once or twice
as a curiosity.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Nothing fixes a thing so intensely in the memory as the wish to forget it.
-Michel de Montaigne, essayist (1533-1592)

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message op.v91kosyf1r0rdn@dell3100, Harry Vaderchi
writes:
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:31:16 -0000, Lostgallifreyan
wrote:

"BillW50" wrote in :

You forget that you can make Windows 95
to look very much like Windows 3.1 if you would like.

File Manager? That is a vision I now wish I could wash off.


type "winfile" or search for NTwinfile for XP systems.
the NT version has very good permission controls added in.

I just did, and didn't find it anywhere on my hard drives. I do remember
that it was still there on '9x, though I only ever used it once or twice
as a curiosity.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Nothing fixes a thing so intensely in the memory as the wish to forget it.
-Michel de Montaigne, essayist (1533-1592)

File Manager (winfile) was in some ways nicer to use than Windows Explorer,
but it didn't support long file names. I think you might be able to still
run it on XP, but it's not a good idea, since it is unaware of long file
names (and will break them if you do anything with them using File Manager).

On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 20:32:39 -0000, J. P. Gilliver (John)
wrote:

In message op.v91kosyf1r0rdn@dell3100, Harry Vaderchi
writes:
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:31:16 -0000, Lostgallifreyan
wrote:

"BillW50" wrote in :

You forget that you can make Windows 95
to look very much like Windows 3.1 if you would like.

File Manager? That is a vision I now wish I could wash off.


type "winfile" or search for NTwinfile for XP systems.
the NT version has very good permission controls added in.

I just did, and didn't find it anywhere on my hard drives. I do remember
that it was still there on '9x, though I only ever used it once or twice
as a curiosity.

Ah, when I said Search, I was avoiding typing g**gle; and I omitted a
space - try here
http://www.brydon.net/winfile/



--
[dash dash space newline 4line sig]

Albi CNU

In message op.v92saock1r0rdn@dell3100, Harry Vaderchi
writes:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 20:32:39 -0000, J. P. Gilliver (John)
wrote:

In message op.v91kosyf1r0rdn@dell3100, Harry Vaderchi
writes:
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:31:16 -0000, Lostgallifreyan
wrote:

"BillW50" wrote in :

You forget that you can make Windows 95
to look very much like Windows 3.1 if you would like.

File Manager? That is a vision I now wish I could wash off.


type "winfile" or search for NTwinfile for XP systems.
the NT version has very good permission controls added in.

I just did, and didn't find it anywhere on my hard drives. I do
remember that it was still there on '9x, though I only ever used it
once or twice as a curiosity.

Ah, when I said Search, I was avoiding typing g**gle; and I omitted a
space - try here
http://www.brydon.net/winfile/

Ah, sorry.


--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible,
he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he
is
very probably wrong." - Arthur C. Clarke

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message op.v92saock1r0rdn@dell3100, Harry Vaderchi
writes:
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 20:32:39 -0000, J. P. Gilliver (John)
wrote:

In message op.v91kosyf1r0rdn@dell3100, Harry Vaderchi
writes:
On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:31:16 -0000, Lostgallifreyan
wrote:

"BillW50" wrote in :

You forget that you can make Windows 95
to look very much like Windows 3.1 if you would like.

File Manager? That is a vision I now wish I could wash off.


type "winfile" or search for NTwinfile for XP systems.
the NT version has very good permission controls added in.

I just did, and didn't find it anywhere on my hard drives. I do
remember that it was still there on '9x, though I only ever used it
once or twice as a curiosity.

Ah, when I said Search, I was avoiding typing g**gle; and I omitted a
space - try here
http://www.brydon.net/winfile/

Ah, sorry.

Even if you find it, be careful, as it is NOT long filename aware, and can
(will) destroy those longfilenames, since it is NOT longfilename aware (IF
you use it to "work on" the files ("work on" meaning more than just
displaying them). But I have to admit in some ways, File Manager seemed
better (had some additional features over Windows Explorer).

On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:41:45 -0000, Bill in Co
wrote:

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

[re winfile]

http://www.brydon.net/winfile/

Ah, sorry.

No, my fault for not being clear.

Even if you find it, be careful, as it is NOT long filename aware, and
can
(will) destroy those longfilenames, since it is NOT longfilename aware
(IF
you use it to "work on" the files ("work on" meaning more than just
displaying them). But I have to admit in some ways, File Manager seemed
better (had some additional features over Windows Explorer).

Did you look at the link I posted? It claims to be updated version that
*is* LFN aware.

--
[dash dash space newline 4line sig]

Albi CNU