Microsoft's perennial incompetence...

A Google Groups blight on USENET...

--
RayLopez99 raylopez88 gmail.com wrote:

X-Received: by 10.67.3.34 with SMTP id bt2mr756620pad.41.1385648973636; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 06:29:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.182.213.41 with SMTP id np9mr436981obc.3.1385648973413; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 06:29:33 -0800 (PST)
Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!u s.feeder.erje.net!news.snarked.org!newsfeed.news.u cla.edu!usenet.stanford.edu!y3no14043649pbx.0!news-out.google.com!p7ni2355qat.0!nntp.google.com!dz2no 11007494qab.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000go o.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 06:29:33 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: l7007e$q8d$2 dont-email.me
Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=206.196.103.214; posting-account=fRZa_AkAAACE3nlFA9zM1Eq00OKq1Ycq
NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.196.103.214
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me OvOdnX7fV7vICA_PnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d mchsi.com l6u5se$tcl$1 dont-email.me hcSdna1HbZBSKQ_PnZ2dnUVZ_sGdnZ2d mchsi.com k5gq326t1d6m.dlg example1357.net l7007e$q8d$2 dont-email.me
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: ec3ab4e3-c2c2-453f-8fcc-62824fef305b googlegroups.com
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
From: RayLopez99 raylopez88 gmail.com
Injection-Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:29:33 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28888

On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 1:09:02 AM UTC+8, John Doe wrote:

That's a ridiculous workaround.


You're not a serious poster, imposter, so ridiculous suits you fat doughy face just fine.

It's John Doe against the world! The clown is going to change the world, one verbose header post at a time! Troll on dude!

RL

A troll the doesn't know the difference between "create" and "copy"...

--
David Trimboli david trimboli.name wrote:

Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: David Trimboli david trimboli.name
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8,free.usenet,free.spirit
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 12:16:03 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 36
Message-ID: l77tot$pkt$1 dont-email.me
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me OvOdnX7fV7vICA_PnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d mchsi.com l6u5se$tcl$1 dont-email.me l6ucdq$qng$1 dont-email.me l6ugn5$cmh$1 dont-email.me
Reply-To: david trimboli.name
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 17:16:14 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="509f64ee5d18779693bd0889dfcf0fda"; logging-data="26269"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1811diYphyH1AH90cGZx0Iq0qlZIhiOI rI="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
In-Reply-To: l6ugn5$cmh$1 dont-email.me
Cancel-Lock: sha1:1FuNXOb1HrdEEk0mJV2X0yTnPFQ=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28891 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8329 free.usenet:5137868 free.spirit:1276

On 11/24/2013 10:38 PM, John Doe wrote:
David Trimboli david trimboli.name wrote:

John Doe wrote:

There are so many file date attributes, you would think that
Microsoft could use one of them for maintaining when the file
was created. And it would probably be called "date created". If
you want to have a "date copied", fine, but that's a different
attribute.

The date attributes are not there to tell *you* when the file's
*content* was created or modified; they're there to tell the
*operating system* when the *file* was created or modified,
primarily for archiving purposes.

If that *were* true, then they wouldn't be selectable in *Windows
Explorer columns*. But *in fact* they are listed along with
*hundreds of other file attributes* that are obviously for the
user. Yes, Microsoft is too *lazy* to clean up its *obsolete* and
*misnamed* file attributes. But *knowing* when I started a file is
more *useful* than *95%* of the other *400+* attributes
*Microsoft* has *decided* to *recognize*. *Microsoft* is too
*lazy* to *add* such *useful* code to *Windows Explorer*, even
*though* *it* *already* *records* *the* *original* *creation*
*date*. *Instead*, *we* *have* *a* *misleading* *file* *attribute*
"meant for the operating system".

snipped spam signature, typically accompanying a bull**** answer

Ohhhhhhhhh. You're a jerk. That explains a lot. By all means, resume
your pointless whining.

--
David Trimboli
http://www.trimboli.name/

Windows Explorer file attributes on a downloaded file:
Date Created 13/11/28 13:01
Date Last Saved 13/11/28 13:01
Date Modified 13/11/28 13:01
Oh yeah, that makes sense...

I wrote:
Windows Explorer file attributes on a downloaded file:
Date Created 13/11/28 13:01
Date Last Saved 13/11/28 13:01
Date Modified 13/11/28 13:01

It's not entirely useless, after downloading a very large file,
you can subtract the Date Created from either of the other two
dates to figure out the approximate download time.

On 11/24/2013 5:11 AM, John Doe wrote:
File attributes:
Date Last Saved 13/11/23
Date Created 13/11/24
That's one thing Windows has always done wrong and always will.



I happen to agree with John Doe's basic premise - his methods of getting
his point across - not so much.

MS does not handle this in a useful way. From a business standpoint I
am interested in the *latest version* of a file and could care less when
it was *last copied*, in other words 'backed up'. I run into this
problem at work all the time and knowing which file I need to use (or
fall back to) is vital. Having to purchase and train folks to use
versioning software is just plain silly when a file date will do just as
well.

It may be a matter of semantics as many respondents have indicated, but
for real world use, older file systems and operating systems handled
this in a much more useful fashion.

John K.

John John nowhere.com wrote:

John Doe wrote:

File attributes: Date Last Saved 13/11/23 Date Created 13/11/24
That's one thing Windows has always done wrong and always will.



I happen to agree with John Doe's basic premise - his methods of
getting his point across - not so much.

Darn.

MS does not handle this in a useful way. From a business
standpoint I am interested in the *latest version* of a file and
could care less

It's "couldn't care less".

It may be a matter of semantics as many respondents have
indicated,

I love semantics.

--








indicatedbut for real world use, older file systems and
operating systems handled this in a much more useful fashion.

John K.

On 12/16/2013, John Doe posted:
It may be a matter of semantics as many respondents have
indicated,

I love semantics.

They make some great antivirus software.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 12/16/2013 3:10 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On 12/16/2013, John Doe posted:
It may be a matter of semantics as many respondents have
indicated,

I love semantics.

They make some great antivirus software.


I wonder how long that's going to last, since MS started including
similar abilities in windows.

On 12/17/2013 6:44 AM, charlie wrote:
On 12/16/2013 3:10 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On 12/16/2013, John Doe posted:
It may be a matter of semantics as many respondents have
indicated,

I love semantics.

They make some great antivirus software.

I wonder how long that's going to last, since MS started including
similar abilities in windows.

I myself would question MS's AV stuff, after all are they not the ones
responsible for the massive need to close all the holes in their
operating systems that need 'protection'?

Sort of Like 'Who Left the Barn Door Open'? and why are all the rats
trying to get in?


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com