Microsoft's perennial incompetence...

On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 13:55:16 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

Gene E. Bloch has written on 11/26/2013 1:51 PM:
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:24:17 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

In article , Gene E. Bloch
writes

It's not rocket science...

This is John Doe we're talking about. Don't waste the skin off your
fingertips replying to him.

Heck, I'm having fun. Don't rain on my (meager) parade :-)

You need to get out more, Gene! :-0

OK - I'm going out for lunch as soon as I turn this thing off.

I did *not* say out *to* lunch...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 10:59:38 -0800, "Gene E. Bloch" not-
lid wrote in article
...

On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 13:55:16 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

Gene E. Bloch has written on 11/26/2013 1:51 PM:
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:24:17 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

In article , Gene E. Bloch
writes

It's not rocket science...

This is John Doe we're talking about. Don't waste the skin off your
fingertips replying to him.

Heck, I'm having fun. Don't rain on my (meager) parade :-)

You need to get out more, Gene! :-0

OK - I'm going out for lunch as soon as I turn this thing off.

I did *not* say out *to* lunch...

And the fact you had to qualify that statement as you did speaks
volumes ;-)

--
Zaphod

"The best Bang since the Big One" - Eccentrica Gallumbits

On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:13:33 -0700, "Ken Springer"
wrote in article l72h97$mu2$4
@speranza.aioe.org...

On 11/26/13 7:03 AM, dadiOH wrote:
"John Doe" wrote in message

"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...

No, it's not. So why are you having so much trouble understanding that the
creation date of a file copy is the date you copied it?

Everybody is getting lost/confused/focused on the words "creation date".
The problem with those two words, and those two words *only* is you
don't know which creation day you are talking about based on the screen
display. The creation date of the file, or the creation date of the
data. To most users, the creation date of the data is far more
important than the creation date of the file.

And yet, the OS *cannot* know that, so it handles it in the best way
possible from the OS standpoint, and that is to record when that
instance of the file was added to the file system. Since that date
follows the file when the file moves, and a copy of the file gets a new
date since the contents can branch at that point, makes sense.

If, however, the software you are using to create or maintain the data
is capable of such, it can track the metadata about the content,
including creation and modification information.

I think that separation is valuable.

--
Zaphod

"Yeah. Listen, I'm Zaphod Beeblebrox, my father was Zaphod Beeblebrox
the Second, my grandfather Zaphod Beeblebrox the Third..."

"What?"

"There was an accident with a contraceptive and a time machine. Now
concentrate!"

"dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com wrote:

"John Doe" jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote in message
DevilsPGD boogabooga crazyhat.net wrote:
John Doe jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote:
"Gene E. Bloch" not-me other.invalid wrote:
"John Doe" jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote

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.

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

I see... Software pirates aren't *copying*, they're
*creating*!

"I didn't steal it, judge, I created the file right
there on my own computer!"

Microsoft-speak aside, the file creation date should
be the date I create the file, not the date the file
is copied.

It isn't. It's the date the file was created in the file
system, nothing more, nothing less.

To point out how that is so obviously wrong... If that were
true, the "date created" attribute would change when the file
is moved to another hard drive. But it isn't. The "date
created" attribute in fact morphs into the "date copied"
attribute after the actual date created data is destroyed by
Windows Explorer.

1. Move file = one file

2. Copy file = two files...the original and the new one that was
just CREATED

I see... Software pirates aren't *copying*, they're *creating*!

"I didn't steal it, judge, I created the file right there on my
own computer!"

Microsoft-speak aside, the file creation date should be the date I
create the file, not the date the file is copied.

I bet you have difficulty with life in general, don't you.

Yes, this thing's mother has me complexed...



--

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,free.usenet,free.spirit
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:08:06 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 68
Message-ID: l72a09$3ih$1 dont-email.me
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me l6tbqd$tqe$1 dont-email.me l6tm7a$3h7$1 dont-email.me l6vg09$p4b$1 dont-email.me l6vvkr$q8d$1 dont-email.me 1iso4h7k45wuy$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid l70h0p$fc3$1 dont-email.me mai799t3b0tqep5olnhcb8i4cgin6qr8v3 4ax.com l71t39$sq8$1 dont-email.me
Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:08:10 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="5d1a7d9faf1f2f582a4c99e0c60bc7e2"; logging-data="3665"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19o5JyaKaX0Z3cAZh/weXuU"
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:BvYlTRMu92Sxl5HvVrhwVYCYNTQ=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28858 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8280 free.usenet:5124181 free.spirit:1260

All troll, zero substance...

--
Mike Tomlinson mike jasper.org.uk wrote:

Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mike Tomlinson mike jasper.org.uk
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:24:17 +0000
Organization: The Boozer
Lines: 12
Message-ID: sobj9ABxsMlSFwdb jasper.org.uk
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me l6tbqd$tqe$1 dont-email.me l6tm7a$3h7$1 dont-email.me l6vg09$p4b$1 dont-email.me l6vvkr$q8d$1 dont-email.me 1iso4h7k45wuy$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="faa73761eadf3073041d6dac0d67f9d2"; logging-data="22923"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19jSRGqUH02VcLKI4APXSMNAoMFSgUMr QA="
X-Newsreader: Turnpike Integrated Version 5.02 U VMTPiHL5Yau4Wv1ejyRbt3fZ80
Cancel-Lock: sha1:np4H67PxVLdG9nzj1SQupKBLVlw=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28864 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8290

In article 1iso4h7k45wuy$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid, Gene E. Bloch
not-me other.invalid writes

It's not rocket science...

This is John Doe we're talking about. Don't waste the skin off your
fingertips replying to him.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

I'm having fun too...

--
"Gene E. Bloch" not-me other.invalid wrote:

Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!n ews.albasani.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Gene E. Bloch" not-me other.invalid
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 10:51:33 -0800
Organization: Astrolabe
Lines: 14
Message-ID: r2joa1z0w8wc$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me l6tbqd$tqe$1 dont-email.me l6tm7a$3h7$1 dont-email.me l6vg09$p4b$1 dont-email.me l6vvkr$q8d$1 dont-email.me 1iso4h7k45wuy$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid sobj9ABxsMlSFwdb jasper.org.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net 10vSbjp7ol4QkSaBNpCGCwKlwlodXuqPsMAerEGFhowopcshgs
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YhediRHN7uQXlSGD18kkzZ8+zTQ=
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.84
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28866 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8294

On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:24:17 +0000, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

In article 1iso4h7k45wuy$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid, Gene E. Bloch
not-me other.invalid writes

It's not rocket science...

This is John Doe we're talking about. Don't waste the skin off your
fingertips replying to him.

Heck, I'm having fun. Don't rain on my (meager) parade :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

A troll acting like it has no idea what "create" means...

--
"dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com wrote:

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: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:03:16 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 58
Message-ID: l729n7$1tt$1 dont-email.me
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me l6tbqd$tqe$1 dont-email.me l6tm7a$3h7$1 dont-email.me l6vg09$p4b$1 dont-email.me l6vvkr$q8d$1 dont-email.me
Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:03:19 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="5d1a7d9faf1f2f582a4c99e0c60bc7e2"; logging-data="1981"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/s9cmVYh5FX9r+zdWm1Znr"
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:dzYJ+LzZW58dZ9jwDAsyND1VrLI=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28857 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8279

"John Doe" jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote in message
news:l6vvkr$q8d$1 dont-email.me
"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...

No, it's not. So why are you having so much trouble understanding that the
creation date of a file copy is the date you copied it?

--

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

Zaphod Beeblebrox Zaphod.Arisztid.Beeblebrox gmail.com wrote:

"Gene E. Bloch" not- me other.invalid wrote
mechanic wrote:
John Doe wrote:

I see... Software pirates aren't *copying*, they're
*creating*!

"I didn't steal it, judge, I created the file right there on
my own computer!"

Microsoft-speak aside, the file creation date should be the
date I create the file, not the date the file is copied.

It *is* the date the file is created, when you copy a file you
create a file that's a duplicate of the original. What's so
hard to understand?

For John Doe, the whole idea...

I think it is more thought in general that challenges it.

Similarly intelligent people, of which there are few, disagree.
Showing intellectual superiority to most of your peers on the
Internet is like being a big guy in real life. Mental midgets
enjoy trying to prove something by picking on him. It's most
obvious when there is zero substance to the troll's reply...



--
Zaphod

If I had two heads like you, Zaphod,
I could have hours of fun banging them against a wall.
-Ford Prefect


Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Zaphod Beeblebrox Zaphod.Arisztid.Beeblebrox gmail.com
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:09:13 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 27
Message-ID: MPG.2cfe91b065aa935d9898be news.eternal-september.org
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me l6tbqd$tqe$1 dont-email.me l6tm7a$3h7$1 dont-email.me l6vg09$p4b$1 dont-email.me l6vvkr$q8d$1 dont-email.me 1iso4h7k45wuy$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid l70h0p$fc3$1 dont-email.me 1swid23go51ab$.dlg example1357.net da5fyvg6mt8t$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e9bb209ca68a5d0a57db5ef833d3b704"; logging-data="29914"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19+M1/2Rq286UiuYrXOT4ic4D+NUdx+9OfE4LZWa/Rv6g=="
User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/3.0.4
Cancel-Lock: sha1:VAqWC1d9feF2hM2AJ//ayRt0mp0=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28863 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8284

Showing intellectual superiority to most of your peers on the
Internet is like being a big guy in real life. Mental midgets
enjoy trying to prove something by picking on him. It's most
obvious when there is zero substance to the troll's reply...

--
"Gene E. Bloch" not-me other.invalid wrote:

Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!n ews-1.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!news.informatik.hu-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Gene E. Bloch" not-me other.invalid
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 10:50:56 -0800
Organization: Astrolabe
Lines: 28
Message-ID: 14sko5ud34x6c.dlg stumbler1907.invalid
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me l6tbqd$tqe$1 dont-email.me l6tm7a$3h7$1 dont-email.me l6vg09$p4b$1 dont-email.me l6vvkr$q8d$1 dont-email.me 1iso4h7k45wuy$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid l70h0p$fc3$1 dont-email.me 1swid23go51ab$.dlg example1357.net da5fyvg6mt8t$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid MPG.2cfe91b065aa935d9898be news.eternal-september.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net dO09ySn6g2TnLFv4sAoRuAFNbqhMmAmGLIMRFSVLDA2WuZHho8
Cancel-Lock: sha1:747XlgCT00t7JqaUqmWaUY8S7eA=
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.84
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28865 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8293

On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:09:13 -0500, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 20:07:00 -0800, "Gene E. Bloch" not-
me other.invalid wrote in article da5fyvg6mt8t
$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid...

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 23:34:22 +0000, mechanic wrote:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 21:55:37 +0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote:

Microsoft-speak aside, the file creation date should be the date I
create the file, not the date the file is copied.

It *is* the date the file is created, when you copy a file you
create a file that's a duplicate of the original. What's so hard to
understand?

f/u set

For John Doe, the whole idea...

I think it is more thought in general that challenges it.

It has taken me several seconds to get here to type a reply and I'm
*still* laughing :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Something so obviously wrong deserves discussion.

--
"dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com wrote:

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,free.usenet,free.spirit,free.usenet,free.spirit
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 17:30:49 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 22
Message-ID: l737et$v2o$1 dont-email.me
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me OvOdnX7fV7vICA_PnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d mchsi.com l6u5se$tcl$1 dont-email.me l6vga2$qnl$1 dont-email.me l6vuur$h19$3 dont-email.me l72a6v$4p4$1 dont-email.me l735vv$gnp$5 dont-email.me
Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 22:30:53 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="5d1a7d9faf1f2f582a4c99e0c60bc7e2"; logging-data="31832"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18G2fySC0XTXauQVfpC/t3f"
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:gS94lXImhqMHC/ZCl6nwYF1PslQ=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28877 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8310 free.usenet:5127544 free.spirit:1269

"John Doe" jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote in message
news:l735vv$gnp$5 dont-email.me
If there is to be an attribute for when the file
container is created, an attribute nobody has a use for,
it shouldn't be prominently displayed to the user in
Windows Explorer. The file contents are what matters to a
user (all users), users couldn't care less about the file
container.

When you get around to writing an OS you can do it anyway you like. In the
meantime, adapt.

--

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 26 Nov 2013, John Doe wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8:

It's most obvious when there is zero substance to the troll's
reply...

I see: "zero substance" like your reply.

Puffing yourself up with air like a blowfish makes you... a blowfish.

Emphasis on "blow".

On 11/26/13 1:27 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:13:33 -0700, "Ken Springer"
wrote in article l72h97$mu2$4
@speranza.aioe.org...

On 11/26/13 7:03 AM, dadiOH wrote:
"John Doe" wrote in message

"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...

No, it's not. So why are you having so much trouble understanding that the
creation date of a file copy is the date you copied it?

Everybody is getting lost/confused/focused on the words "creation date".
The problem with those two words, and those two words *only* is you
don't know which creation day you are talking about based on the screen
display. The creation date of the file, or the creation date of the
data. To most users, the creation date of the data is far more
important than the creation date of the file.

And yet, the OS *cannot* know that, so it handles it in the best way
possible from the OS standpoint, and that is to record when that
instance of the file was added to the file system. Since that date
follows the file when the file moves, and a copy of the file gets a new
date since the contents can branch at that point, makes sense.

But it *can* know that date. For camera photos, for instance, the date
is part of the file. The OS doesn't need to change it when the photo is
moved/copied from the camera to the hard drive. Or any other external
peripheral.

Files created on the computer are probably a grey area. Take the
writing of a manual, for instance. The initial version will obviously
be edited. But there should be a way of saying "this is done", and that
creation date never changes.

If, however, the software you are using to create or maintain the data
is capable of such, it can track the metadata about the content,
including creation and modification information.

But Windows, or any OS, should be clearer in explaining what those dates
really are, and leave the original date alone, or at least in a field of
it's own. As, I think, John said in another post.

I think that separation is valuable.

I'd agree, and I'm sure today's files have a lot more data attached than
those created with older software and OSes. Like the EXIF data that
wasn't even part of a camera's abilities 15-20 years ago, AFAIK.

It is about how you manage that data, especially timestamps, that's
important. And if the OS changes those dates to make it useless for
tracking, of what good is the timestamp to the user?


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 24.0
Thunderbird 17.0.8

Paul wrote:
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

Here is another opinion piece, from a software developer.

http://www.xxcopy.com/xxcopy15.htm

Paul

Showing intellectual superiority to most of your peers on the
Internet is like being a big guy in real life. Mental midgets like
Nildo enjoy trying to prove something by picking on him. It's most
obvious when there is zero substance to the troll's reply...

--
Nil rednoise REMOVETHIScomcast.net wrote:

Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!n ews-2.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Nil rednoise REMOVETHIScomcast.net
Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8
Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 20:32:29 -0500
Organization: (?!)
Lines: 11
Message-ID: XnsA284D0F5D3811nilch1 wheedledeedle.moc
References: l6sjct$nro$2 dont-email.me l6tbqd$tqe$1 dont-email.me l6tm7a$3h7$1 dont-email.me l6vg09$p4b$1 dont-email.me l6vvkr$q8d$1 dont-email.me 1iso4h7k45wuy$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid l70h0p$fc3$1 dont-email.me 1swid23go51ab$.dlg example1357.net da5fyvg6mt8t$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid MPG.2cfe91b065aa935d9898be news.eternal-september.org 14sko5ud34x6c.dlg stumbler1907.invalid l736tr$rl4$2 dont-email.me
X-Trace: individual.net 7Bx8R8g1WxmLCGyXiVeK3QXb2axdhLUSSkeL5qN2ehMcanyi4z
Cancel-Lock: sha1:rcDsDtBvBacpI4RMLdvZbCDUZ4g=
User-Agent: Xnews/2006.08.24
X-Face: esm\a~e7BW-JD"t0\Ww_~\t!z_p0}xokJ"]a4/!ZtMGxQt_J`\IuTO++qOqVx0&Y.=z(B!:d?HNxL}yTuIS^5T8 W\iGv_s'oSFfLp%X|naUNr
Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28879 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8312

On 26 Nov 2013, John Doe jdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8:

It's most obvious when there is zero substance to the troll's
reply...

I see: "zero substance" like your reply.

Puffing yourself up with air like a blowfish makes you... a blowfish.

Emphasis on "blow".

Paul nospam needed.com wrote:

Here is another opinion piece, from a software developer.

http://www.xxcopy.com/xxcopy15.htm

When I move a file from physical drive D to physical drive E, the
date created attribute doesn't change.

It's nonsensical as "date created". It doesn't even follow the
rule of container creation since a move operation from one drive
to another doesn't change the date. It effectively morphs into the
"date copied" attribute after Windows Explorer destroys the
creation date when the file is copied. In other words... The
appropriate/logical attribute name would be "date copied" or "copy
date" with the original value being the date created.

And now we have that down to a science...