Microsoft's perennial incompetence...

"John Doe" wrote in message

Grinder grinder no.spam.maam.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.


My apologies if this has already been noted elsewhere,
but there is good reason for CreationDate ModifyDate.

When a file is copied, the copy gets the current date
as a creation date, but the modification date is copied
from the original file.

Yeah, but what happened to the creation date? I guess that
programmers think computers are more important than
people. When
the file is copied, somehow the computer is "creating" a
file. And who cares when the human being originally
created the file...

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.

You have to wonder what they're thinking up there in
Redmond.

They're thinking that when you copy a file the date it was copied is the
date it was created. They are right. A copied file is a different entity
than the one from which it was copied.

--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change?
Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net

On 24/11/2013 11:01 PM, Grinder wrote:
On 11/24/2013 9:42 PM, John Doe wrote:
IT DOESN'T MAKE MY UNDERWEAR BUNCH UP EITHER, IT'S JUST ONE OF
DOZENS OF IDIOTIC IN-YOUR-FACE THINGS WINDOWS DOES THAT SHOWS HOW
INCOMPETENT/LAZY/WHATEVER MICROSOFT IS. IT'S JUST ONE OF SO MANY
CONSTANT REMINDERS THAT MICROSOFT ISN'T A GENUINE HIGH TECHNOLOGY
COMPANY AND THAT THEY COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT ANYTHING EXCEPT
THEIR MONOPOLY POWER.


Your argument makes much more sense now that you've capitalized it.

LOL.

SS

"dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com wrote:

"John Doe" jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote
Grinder grinder no.spam.maam.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.

My apologies if this has already been noted elsewhere,
but there is good reason for CreationDate ModifyDate.

When a file is copied, the copy gets the current date
as a creation date, but the modification date is copied
from the original file.

Yeah, but what happened to the creation date? I guess that
programmers think computers are more important than
people. When
the file is copied, somehow the computer is "creating" a
file. And who cares when the human being originally
created the file...

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.

You have to wonder what they're thinking up there in
Redmond.

They're thinking that when you copy a file the date it was copied is the
date it was created. They are right. A copied file is a different entity
than the one from which it was copied.

Another idiotic answer...

--




--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change?
Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net




Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:37:19 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 49
Message-ID: l6vga2$qnl$1 dont-email.me
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me OvOdnX7fV7vICA_PnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d mchsi.com l6u5se$tcl$1 dont-email.me
Injection-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 12:37:22 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="5d1a7d9faf1f2f582a4c99e0c60bc7e2"; logging-data="27381"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19lNA38B7WIp4sp3b+ko3zJ"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130927-1, 09/27/2013), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7OjKwg9LN77kfCetBSQJ31FlSuk=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28819 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8227

On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 20:23:15 -0600, Grinder wrote:

Personally, I would prefer the creation date to remain intact across a
file copy, as it's more conformed to the idea that the dates are about
to contents of the file rather than the container. It doesn't really
make my underwear bunch up, though, as it is.

Just put the creation date in the file itself as a comment for
example, rather than rely on the OS to track it for you. File
meta-data is not designed for configuration management for the user.

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:37:19 -0500, dadiOH wrote:

They're thinking that when you copy a file the date it was copied is the
date it was created. They are right. A copied file is a different entity
than the one from which it was copied.

So teh copied file will have a different creation date to that of
the original, although the contents will be the same. Don't rely on
OS file meta-data for user configuration management.

f/u set

"dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com wrote:

"John Doe" jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote
Paul nospam needed.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.

You're assuming, for some reason, they would correct any out
of range dates. But that would be a mistake, as the date,
even if tragically wrong, should be preserved for later
analysis and correction (as needed).

The creation date is obviously the oldest date associated with
the file. Why can't they maintain the oldest date as the
creation date? It's obviously a major blunder that keeps going
and going...

I'm surprised this isn't well-known. All you have to do to
prove it is copy a file from one folder to another. The
creation date changes to the copy date. You might consider the
copy date to be the creation date but I certainly don't, and it
destroys the real creation date of the copied file. That
totally messes up backups if you ever need to use them, since
they are copies.

Or maybe the real creation date is maintained as one of the
other 15 or so different date properties? Please advise.

When you copy a file, the "creation date"

To an English speaker, the term "creation date" is very easily
understood to be the date that the file was created by the user.
It has an ordinary English meaning. And then there's the fact that
knowing when I created the file can be very useful. Like when I
started keeping track of something. It's not rocket science...

[the creation date] of the original file becomes the "modified
date" of the copy.

The modified date is not the creation date.

Microsoft's aim is to please the masses. Ignorance is bliss.

--






--

dadiOH
____________________________

Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change?
Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net




Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:32:05 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 45
Message-ID: l6vg09$p4b$1 dont-email.me
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me l6tbqd$tqe$1 dont-email.me l6tm7a$3h7$1 dont-email.me
Injection-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 12:32:09 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="5d1a7d9faf1f2f582a4c99e0c60bc7e2"; logging-data="25739"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+6vhl+4YRfrk5KpUjTvTYG"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130927-1, 09/27/2013), Outbound message
Cancel-Lock: sha1:XZnTFCp1Vo+Klx4fCoDqMyHWeUE=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28818 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8226

mechanic mechanic example.net wrote:

Grinder wrote:

Personally, I would prefer the creation date to remain intact
across a file copy, as it's more conformed to the idea that the
dates are about to contents of the file rather than the
container.

Just put the creation date in the file itself as a comment for
example, rather than rely on the OS to track it for you.

That's a ridiculous workaround.

File meta-data is not designed for configuration management for
the user.

But seriously...

Microsoft's Windows Explorer recognizes over 400 file attributes.
Right-click on the columns bar and select More. And you're welcome
for the lesson.

--








Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mechanic mechanic example.net
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 16:47:52 +0000
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 10
Message-ID: k5gq326t1d6m.dlg example1357.net
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me OvOdnX7fV7vICA_PnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d mchsi.com l6u5se$tcl$1 dont-email.me hcSdna1HbZBSKQ_PnZ2dnUVZ_sGdnZ2d mchsi.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: wkMxF+sfZT5k7vJB8LQ+TA.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse aioe.org
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28827 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8234

On 25/11/2013 03:38:14, 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".

I use Directory Opus which gives you a column called 'Document Created'
I stopped using windows explorer in the last century.

--
mick

John Doe wrote:
"dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com wrote:

"John Doe" jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote
Grinder grinder no.spam.maam.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.
My apologies if this has already been noted elsewhere,
but there is good reason for CreationDate ModifyDate.

When a file is copied, the copy gets the current date
as a creation date, but the modification date is copied
from the original file.
Yeah, but what happened to the creation date? I guess that
programmers think computers are more important than
people. When
the file is copied, somehow the computer is "creating" a
file. And who cares when the human being originally
created the file...

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.

You have to wonder what they're thinking up there in
Redmond.
They're thinking that when you copy a file the date it was copied is the
date it was created. They are right. A copied file is a different entity
than the one from which it was copied.

Another idiotic answer...


Hmmm.

Now this looks interesting. "Copy" versus "Move". Different semantics.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/299648

Paul

I'm not sure it is a clock problem but maybe a date format
problem. The date could be 2013 Nov 23rd. It is strange either
way.

Ed P

Paul laid this down on his screen :
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.

If a system clock is wrong on a system, the creation date
could be wrong later.

You're assuming, for some reason, they would correct any
out of range dates. But that would be a mistake, as the date,
even if tragically wrong, should be preserved for later analysis
and correction (as needed).

On the file systems, NTFS uses UTC. FAT32 uses DST, and it's
more possible to see peculiar situations on FAT32, than on
NTFS. (Like, copy files between NTFS and FAT32, and the
translation between UTC and DST etc. Lots of permutations
and combinations there are possible. And a headache for
the people designing backup software.)

And changing the FAT32 spec now, is not an option.
It has to be left broken, for compatibility with all
those hardware boxes also implementing FAT32 that way.

Paul

Paul nospam needed.com wrote:

Hmmm.

Now this looks interesting. "Copy" versus "Move". Different
semantics.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/299648

I think it's as Grinder said, Microsoft is concerned about the
container date, not the date that the user created the file. In
which case, Microsoft should properly name it "date copied" or
whatever. If I were into conspiracy theories, I would think
Microsoft has something against users copying files. This useless
file attribute garbage has been around forever.

I am impressed by how many users can get along without knowing or
caring when they create files. Or maybe they don't know how to
copy files. That does apply to a large number of users. Most users
just look at it as a blob of files on their hard drive that are
stuck there perhaps like clutter on the floor of their room.

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 16:59:07 +0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote:

"dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com wrote:

"John Doe" jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote
Paul nospam needed.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.

You're assuming, for some reason, they would correct any out
of range dates. But that would be a mistake, as the date,
even if tragically wrong, should be preserved for later
analysis and correction (as needed).

The creation date is obviously the oldest date associated with
the file. Why can't they maintain the oldest date as the
creation date? It's obviously a major blunder that keeps going
and going...

I'm surprised this isn't well-known. All you have to do to
prove it is copy a file from one folder to another. The
creation date changes to the copy date. You might consider the
copy date to be the creation date but I certainly don't, and it
destroys the real creation date of the copied file. That
totally messes up backups if you ever need to use them, since
they are copies.

Or maybe the real creation date is maintained as one of the
other 15 or so different date properties? Please advise.

When you copy a file, the "creation date"

To an English speaker, the term "creation date" is very easily
understood to be the date that the file was created by the user.
It has an ordinary English meaning. And then there's the fact that
knowing when I created the file can be very useful. Like when I
started keeping track of something. It's not rocket science...

[the creation date] of the original file becomes the "modified
date" of the copy.

The modified date is not the creation date.

Microsoft's aim is to please the masses. Ignorance is bliss.

The file was *created on the new computer* when it was copied to the new
computer.

It's not rocket science...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 16:47:23 +0000, John Doe wrote:

"dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com wrote:


They're thinking that when you copy a file the date it was copied is
the date it was created. They are right. A copied file is a different
entity than the one from which it was copied.

Another idiotic answer...

He's correct from the os point of view. However, I think you highlight a
genuine issue (accompanied by a little extreme rhetoric), creation date in
English does to my mind mean the date first created and MS should show
that.
This is important for .jpg files and windows 7 explorer will show a date
taken on digital photos. I suspect this is from the exif data, but since I
maintain the exif data on all my files I'm unable to check situation when
a .jpg lacks that info.
As others have suggested, we could have date copied or anything else added
if people feel it is needed.
Another serious problem is the automatic daylight savings time nonsense.
This magically changes the date modified fields. This may not matter most
of the time, but it messes up my winmerge file sync algorithm. I've turned
off automatic time savings and manually changing the time doesn't seem to
screw things up. I'll know for sure in the spring.

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 19:50:46 +0000 (UTC), Dave wrote:

Another serious problem is the automatic daylight savings time nonsense.
This magically changes the date modified fields. This may not matter most
of the time, but it messes up my winmerge file sync algorithm. I've turned
off automatic time savings and manually changing the time doesn't seem to
screw things up. I'll know for sure in the spring.

I use a program that knows how to deal with Daylight Saving Time.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 16:52:40 +0000, "mechanic"
wrote in article ...

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 07:37:19 -0500, dadiOH wrote:

They're thinking that when you copy a file the date it was copied is the
date it was created. They are right. A copied file is a different entity
than the one from which it was copied.

So teh copied file will have a different creation date to that of
the original, although the contents will be the same. Don't rely on
OS file meta-data for user configuration management.

f/u set

Exactly, the OS is looking at it from a *gasp* OS perspective!

--
Zaphod

Voted "Worst Dressed Sentient Being in the Known Universe" for seven
years in a row.