Nikon FDUtility
in [Scanners]
|
From: Marjolein Katsma on 30 Jan 2006 12:00 Don (phoney.email(a)yahoo.com) wrote in news:edast15t3r0990ilq6rpdo8ovmuo844tdl(a)4ax.com: >>If only... far too many applications still asssume C: is where my >>system resides (it's on R:). > > Sure, but such applications no longer get the MS seal of approval. Most applications don't, or don't even bother to get one - surely that seal doesn't come free? I don't give a d*** about MS's seal of approval; what counts for me is functionality and a well-behaved program, with good support, preferably at a reasonable price. >>No proof at all since for many programs different users can have their >>*own* settings; they need to be kept separate, of course. Which is >>proof settings *are* user data. ;-) > > No, that's a proof of undisciplined and incompetent so-called > "programmers". And I anticipated that, of course, which is why I wrote > in the very next paragraph (which you didn't quote): > > Yes, I'm sure you'll come up with many examples of applications > which store user data there but that falls under "programmer's > incompetence is no excuse". Huh? How is storing different user's settings in different locations "undiciplined and incompetent"? You have a better proposal for how to do that? >>I'm not excusing Windows - it's just not determining where user data >>are stored, the application does that. > > Yes it is from W2K onwards because there is a Documents and Settings > directory where such user data belongs. Unless it belongs in the Registry, of course. Or the user is given a choice (which I prefer). -- Marjolein Katsma *Help with HomeSite/Studio: http://hshelp.com/ *Travel blog: http://blog.iamback.com/ *Spam reporting addresses: http://banspam.javawoman.com/report3.html
From: Don on 31 Jan 2006 11:02 On 30 Jan 2006 17:00:40 GMT, Marjolein Katsma <nobody(a)example.net> wrote: >>>If only... far too many applications still asssume C: is where my >>>system resides (it's on R:). >> >> Sure, but such applications no longer get the MS seal of approval. > >Most applications don't, or don't even bother to get one - surely that >seal doesn't come free? Indeed it doesn't which is all a part of MS "world domination" i.e., randomly change paradigm, require re-certification, go back to step 1. >I don't give a d*** about MS's seal of approval; >what counts for me is functionality and a well-behaved program, with >good support, preferably at a reasonable price. Absolutely, which then goes back to incompetent programmers. >>>No proof at all since for many programs different users can have their >>>*own* settings; they need to be kept separate, of course. Which is >>>proof settings *are* user data. ;-) >> >> No, that's a proof of undisciplined and incompetent so-called >> "programmers". And I anticipated that, of course, which is why I wrote >> in the very next paragraph (which you didn't quote): >> >> Yes, I'm sure you'll come up with many examples of applications >> which store user data there but that falls under "programmer's >> incompetence is no excuse". > >Huh? How is storing different user's settings in different locations >"undiciplined and incompetent"? Read that again! That's a definition of "undisciplined and incompetent"! >You have a better proposal for how to do >that? Yes, and I already mention it several times: abstraction, system-wide standards, even using the registry, etc. >>>I'm not excusing Windows - it's just not determining where user data >>>are stored, the application does that. >> >> Yes it is from W2K onwards because there is a Documents and Settings >> directory where such user data belongs. > >Unless it belongs in the Registry, of course. Or the user is given a >choice (which I prefer). Which shows why Windows is so messy. I mean just look at the naming alone: "Documents and Settings". The word "documents" does not belong here because it confuses some users... ;o) What MS meant was "system documents" but some users understand that to mean "user documents". Of course that's wrong, because user documents belong in "My Documents". But whether you use the registry or the "Settings" directory it doesn't really matter in this context. As long as it's documented and standardized, as opposed to "undisciplined and incompetent". Don.
From: Surfer! on 31 Jan 2006 12:29 In message <65vut1p33v8mqu8m8dfld9irlte4p7id1q(a)4ax.com>, Don <phoney.email(a)yahoo.com> writes <snip> > >Which shows why Windows is so messy. I mean just look at the naming >alone: "Documents and Settings". The word "documents" does not belong >here because it confuses some users... ;o) > >What MS meant was "system documents" but some users understand that to >mean "user documents". Of course that's wrong, because user documents >belong in "My Documents". <Snip> You realise that the default location for 'my documents' for an XP user is in their folder in 'documents and settings'? -- Surfer! Email to: ramwater at uk2 dot net
From: Marjolein Katsma on 31 Jan 2006 18:20 Don (phoney.email(a)yahoo.com) wrote in news:65vut1p33v8mqu8m8dfld9irlte4p7id1q(a)4ax.com: >>Huh? How is storing different user's settings in different locations >>"undiciplined and incompetent"? > > Read that again! That's a definition of "undisciplined and > incompetent"! > >>You have a better proposal for how to do that? > > Yes, and I already mention it several times: abstraction, system-wide > standards, even using the registry, etc. In the *same* location for *different* users? I'm not getting what you're proposing - can you give a concrete example how you'd do that? > What MS meant was "system documents" but some users understand that to > mean "user documents". Of course that's wrong, because user documents > belong in "My Documents". Now that "My Documents" *is* a prime example of MS stupidity! They're not the files of the computer. And whose files are they anyway? Even if you accept that "my" really means "yours" - how does that handle multiple users (again)? I always rename everything "my whatever" to "whatever". :D And anyway, I do not store all my "documents" in anything called "documents" any more than I am storing my images in (my) Pictures. Anything that still ends up there is hard to find - anything else is easy to find because I build my directory trees carefully - and on different drives. -- Marjolein Katsma *Help with HomeSite/Studio: http://hshelp.com/ *Travel blog: http://blog.iamback.com/ *Spam reporting addresses: http://banspam.javawoman.com/report3.html
From: Marjolein Katsma on 31 Jan 2006 18:23
Surfer! (surfer(a)127.0.0.1) wrote in news:RO4LmrFE653DFwd3(a)nevis- view.co.uk: > You realise that the default location for 'my documents' for an XP user > is in their folder in 'documents and settings'? It probably is in Win2000, too - but I always forget that because I change such things: "My Documents" goes to a data drive, is renamed to "Documents" and then seldom used because I organize my stuff by subject, not the nature or format of the files. ;) -- Marjolein Katsma *Help with HomeSite/Studio: http://hshelp.com/ *Travel blog: http://blog.iamback.com/ *Spam reporting addresses: http://banspam.javawoman.com/report3.html |