Nikon FDUtility
in [Scanners]
|
From: Surfer! on 1 Feb 2006 04:04 In message <Xns975D374AAF5iamback(a)194.109.133.242>, Marjolein Katsma <nobody(a)example.net> writes <snip> > >> 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)? If you check C:\Documents and Settings, it contains a sub-directory for each user (login name). In there is all the user-specific stuff - desktop, start menu, favourites for IE, loads of other stuff and yes, My Documents. I'm sure it's possible to get My Documents somewhere else via the various policies, but as only I use my computer all I've done is move it to E:. Win2K/XP does have all the stuff to control who can see what of other people's work though again I've never really investigated it as I don't have that need. > >I always rename everything "my whatever" to "whatever". :D Apparently this is happening in the next windows, Vista... :) However think how powerful it was as a brand - for example, we have 'My Travel' in the UK, and probably quite a few other businesses who thought it cute/smart to follow the MS branding style. > <Snip> -- Surfer! Email to: ramwater at uk2 dot net
From: Don on 1 Feb 2006 07:35 On Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:29:40 +0000, Surfer! <surfer(a)127.0.0.1> wrote: >>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'? Really? I still run W98 (and W2K) and have intentionally kept away from the XP. Well, then the plot thickens as they say, or as I like to put it "the thick plotten"... ;o) Seriously though, that would just confirm how confused MS is. Don.
From: Don on 1 Feb 2006 07:35 On 31 Jan 2006 23:20:23 GMT, Marjolein Katsma <nobody(a)example.net> wrote: >>>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? Think about it. How are different desktop settings saved for different users? You save user data the same way. >I'm not getting what you're proposing - can you give a concrete example >how you'd do that? Yes, each user has a separate directory for their system settings (e.g. desktop, etc) usually called the same as their login name. That's for system settings as they relate to each user. You can do exactly the same thing for user data. I think another confusion is the inexactness of natural languages. "User data" can mean two different things depending of current point of view (POV). From the system's POV "user data" is data *about* the user (such as desktop settings). From the user's POV "user data" are personal documents (such as pics you took on your latest trip). >> 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)? Each user has their own "my" directory. >I always rename everything "my whatever" to "whatever". :D My data is in a directory called "D-A-T-A". That's for historical (read "hysterical" ;-)) reasons because I always called it that. In the olden days that stood out, and actually it still does. BTW, "My" directory names are indirect, so you can change them and the system will still know where they are. In my case above (with D-A-T-A) I did *not* do that intentionally! In other words the system doesn't know about it! That way I can monitor what various programs automatically put in "My Documents" which I then delete. Anything I want to keep I manually store in D-A-T-A. >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. Exactly! Don.
From: Don on 1 Feb 2006 07:35 On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 09:04:24 +0000, Surfer! <surfer(a)127.0.0.1> wrote: >However think how powerful it was as a brand - for example, we have 'My >Travel' in the UK, and probably quite a few other businesses who thought >it cute/smart to follow the MS branding style. Indeed! Although, from the computer science point of view, it's the absolutely worst name imaginable! As Marjolein points out who's files are they anyway? "My" means different things to each person. It's that ambiguity which makes it totally unsuitable. But, you're absolutely right, it has a certain ring to it and has spread like wild fire. Don.
From: Surfer! on 1 Feb 2006 10:47
In message <6d91u1ta36otqjfm4ou28fnthn2rgr5upb(a)4ax.com>, Don <phoney.email(a)yahoo.com> writes >On Wed, 1 Feb 2006 09:04:24 +0000, Surfer! <surfer(a)127.0.0.1> wrote: > >>However think how powerful it was as a brand - for example, we have 'My >>Travel' in the UK, and probably quite a few other businesses who thought >>it cute/smart to follow the MS branding style. > >Indeed! Although, from the computer science point of view, it's the >absolutely worst name imaginable! Really? Why so? It's where Word etc. put documents by default. Seems OK to me. The 'My' means 'mine' rather than 'Freds'. I cannot see 'Freds' unless I am an administrator and I go looking for them. If I know where to look I will know whose they are. > >As Marjolein points out who's files are they anyway? "My" means >different things to each person. It's that ambiguity which makes it >totally unsuitable. Somehow I feel you are being deliberately obtuse - unless it's that you've never, ever been anywhere near anything after Win98 in which case you are talking from a somewhat ill-educated stance, in terms of Win2K & WinXP. If you look at what the folder that the 'my documents' desktop icon corresponds to, it becomes obvious who the documents belong to. If you log out and log in as a different user, clicking on it now takes you to the new user's files, even on a PC like mine where the one for my usual login has been moved. Even in large commercial organisations where there are hundreds of users with their documents on some great big server, it still appears as 'my documents' on the desktop, the users still get their own documents and no-one else's. Ditto everything else in 'documents and settings'. -- Surfer! Email to: ramwater at uk2 dot net |