Why would anyone use Windows 7?

On Wed, 18 May 2016 16:52:55 -0400, Mayayana wrote:

On XP I see My Documents (a folder I've never used) and "My
Network Places", despite that I've never had a networked
computer.

This 'My...' nonsense has gone in Win10.

On Wed, 18 May 2016 22:59:39 +0100, Mike Barnes wrote:

mechanic wrote:
On Wed, 18 May 2016 18:35:10 +0200, Z. wrote:

When I double click on Computer, I get all the drives including
C.

Maybe too simple for some on here. No hunting needed.

You're disregarding the hunting needed to *find* "Computer".

IMO "Computer" should always be the top line. But it isn't, is
it?

No it isn't, but 'This PC' is in the lhs pane on the first screen I
get after clicking on the folder icon in the Start menu. Presumably
'Computer' confused some people who wondered which computer they
were talking about, 'This PC' made it clearer. If you really have
problems finding the C: drive or the home folder for your account I
expect Cortana will help out - I haven't tried it.

On Wed, 18 May 2016 18:06:04 -0500, Sam E wrote:

The closest to being acceptable (in it's time) is Windows 2000.

Hahaha! Yes, no progress in the last sixteen years, 8 'Moore'
periods when machines became 2^8=256 times more powerful.

On Wed, 18 May 2016 17:01:29 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:

"half" my time is trying to navigate to where I was going, and
then answering the question "Now, what was I trying to do when I
started this?"

You have this problem when going upstairs in your house?

On Wed, 18 May 2016 21:40:42 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:

Maybe if I had had the time to play with it, see how all the
innovations worked, rather than having to try to get stuff done
day 1. Fnord, I was busy trying to get class work done, reinstall
software, all the while trying to find where stuff I needed was
now hidden (not to mention having to stop and ask "what is the
icon look like on this computer, to do the common task I'm used
to?"

Win7 went RTM in July 2009, so long enough to have famiiarised
yourself with this system and the new features by now. If you're
still in denial and want to stick with Win98/2001/XP or whatever,
good luck (and sooner or later you'll need it).

| The main disadvantage of XP is not that Microsoft is no longer
| supporting it, but that a lot of other people aren't.
|

That's certainly coming. I haven't run into it yet.
I know Adobe doesn't support XP for their Creative
Cloud, but I would never use CC anyway.

| One hassle is that Dropbox, which I use quite a lot for sharing files
| between my desktop and laptop, will no longer work on XP from August.

I don't use any of those online services, but my
understanding is that it's only the Windows
Dropbox software that's being discontinued and
that a browser upload will be unaffected. I don't
see why they need a dedicated program installed,
anyway. My ladyfriend has it to see her kids'
photos. It seems to be spyware, loading at boot
and running in general. Why does a program to
upload files need to run at boot and check for
updates? If my FTP software wanted to run all
the time I'd uninstall it for the crime of being
"excessively ludicrous".

| I just recently discovered how to remove
| "libraries" from Explorer treeviews.
|
| If it's not too complicated, could you share how you did that? I'd love
| to get Libraries out of Explorer treeviews. In fact, what I'd prefer to
| see right away is
|

As I suspected, there are more options to clean
up unwanted items, though it's not quite as orderly
as I would have hoped. Each item has its own Registry
key and the value needed is not "guessable":

https://gist.github.com/joshbode/960f381c68c9523825e5

On Thu, 19 May 2016 09:37:34 -0400, Wolf K wrote:

On 2016-05-18 23:12, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Okay

Taskbar - shortcut "Goto My Documents"
[...]

Ah, I see, you're using the "library".

I don't, so I don't have your problems. I gave up on "libraries" almost
as soon as they appeared, way back when. A nice idea, but very, very
badly implemented. No wonder you're frustrated.

Sometimes the best way to solve a problem is to avoid it.

I've been using Libraries for a few years now, on 7 and 8, and no problems
so far. If I were given the power to change how they work, I'd probably
leave them just as they are.

--

Char Jackson

wrote:

Why would anyone use Windows 7, knowing it was built upon the
foundation of Windows Vista?

Vista was great and worked perfectly for those of us who bothered to
RTFM....

You might want to troll elsewhere, you're not very good at it....

--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

In message , Mark Lloyd
writes:
On 05/18/2016 09:33 AM, BillH wrote:

Having survivied MSDOS 3.1 and many itertions, I observe that there
have been basically two MS operating systems; FAT-based and NT-based.


FAT is a disk format. I suppose you mean DOS.

I understood what he meant: DOS, Windows 3.x, and Windows 95, 98, and Me
could _only_ use FAT. Windows NT [as you'd expect!], 2000, and XP
onwards by default used NTFS, though [at least XP - not sure about the
others] _could_ use FAT. The underlying [default] disk/disc format _did_
have effects on how the OS worked (arguably it didn't have to, but it
did).

Otherwise change has consisted mostly of expanded capabilities to keep
up with hardware, bric-a-brac features, and improved (?) cosmetics. As
to XP and later versions, drill down far enough in Windows 7, 8.0, 8.1
and 10, and you find the old familiar XP windows, leading me to
believe these later versions are just XP hopped up and beautified.

Or 2000, or NT.

[spam snipped]


--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I'm too lazy to have a bigger ego. - James May, RT 2016/1/23-29

In message , Roger Blake
writes:
[]
Windows 7 is essentially Vista cleaned up, slimmed down, and polished the
way it should have been in the first place. It's stable and performs
well even on some pretty low-end hardware. Windows 7 is still the
preferred platform for most businesses. The only real issue with it is

I'd say that's quite a good summary. [I still use XP for everyday use,
but 7 seems both good and stable. (I use it at work.)]

that support from Microsoft will terminate in January of 2020.

After Microsoft support stops, Windows 7 users will find themselves in
the same position that XP users are in today - use it at your own peril
with no security fixes and diminishing 3rd-party support.

Hmm. I guess we'd better try to encourage lots of shops, banks etc. to
start using embedded 7 in their POS and similar ... (-:

[Does 7 even exist in embedded form?]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I'm too lazy to have a bigger ego. - James May, RT 2016/1/23-29

mechanic on Thu, 19 May 2016 12:39:16 +0100
typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
On Wed, 18 May 2016 21:40:42 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:

Maybe if I had had the time to play with it, see how all the
innovations worked, rather than having to try to get stuff done
day 1. Fnord, I was busy trying to get class work done, reinstall
software, all the while trying to find where stuff I needed was
now hidden (not to mention having to stop and ask "what is the
icon look like on this computer, to do the common task I'm used
to?"

Win7 went RTM in July 2009, so long enough to have famiiarised
yourself with this system and the new features by now. If you're
still in denial and want to stick with Win98/2001/XP or whatever,
good luck (and sooner or later you'll need it).

WIN7 may have gone RTM in July 2009. I saw no need or reason to
go to the expense of an upgrade until Sept 2013. Which was in the
middle of classes, so I didn't exactly have a lot of time to play with
it and find out what it has changed this time.
I was able to port some stuff from a Vista laptop which has been a
help (e.g., the "improved" Wordpad suffered from feature bloat.)
--
pyotr filipivich
Just because they're invisible doesn't mean they are your friends.

Wolf K on Thu, 19 May 2016 09:37:34 -0400 typed
in alt.windows7.general the following:
On 2016-05-18 23:12, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Okay

Taskbar - shortcut "Goto My Documents"
[...]

Ah, I see, you're using the "library".

I don't, so I don't have your problems. I gave up on "libraries" almost
as soon as they appeared, way back when. A nice idea, but very, very
badly implemented. No wonder you're frustrated.

How do I do that?

Seriously. Microsoft rarely seems to have a clue as to what it is
I am asking (when I had problems with an error message along the lines
of "Access is not permitted", when I searched for the exact quote, I
found out all sorts of wonderful things MS Office Access could do for
my productivity, but not for what the problem I actually had. No
wonder there is a thriving industry writing the manuals "that
Microsoft/Adobe/{BrandNameHere} forgot.")

Sometimes the best way to solve a problem is to avoid it.

Have a good day,
--
pyotr filipivich
The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another.
-- George Bancroft

Wolf K on Thu, 19 May 2016 09:59:16 -0400 typed
in alt.windows7.general the following:
On 2016-05-18 23:12, pyotr filipivich wrote:
Wolf K on Wed, 18 May 2016 20:34:48 -0400 typed
[...]
But the folder/navigation view in Win7 has a few "quirks" which
break the patterns I'm used to.
Where am I? - Win7 doesn't open the tree to where I am.

Where is "where"?

Good question.

My _programs_ always open to their current directory (either the last
one I Saved to, or its working directory). Eg, WordPerfect shows the
current (sub-) Folder name in the address box, which can be expanded to
show the Explorer tree with the current (sub-) Folder highlighted.

Running it from "Start" (not the shortcut I built) okay, it starts
in the WP directory, and yes, "going up a level" gets me to My
Documents.

Other
programs open a complete Explorer window, with the tree view in the left
pane. That's why I initially diagnosed your problem as software, not OS.
Nothing
like being in a sub directory, and Win7 is indicating you are no where
near where you are. It is sort of like one of those "You are here"
dots on a mall map - only it is showing you a map of the country. "You
are somewhere in the state of Florida." So how do I get from where I
am, to where I want to be?

Where is "where"?

"Here" B-) (See next post)

Control Panel -- Folders -- set the "Show complete path". You'll see
it in the Explorer title bar. It should be the default, but it ain't.

If I remember to click up there ... which is the problem: the
things I got used to doing in the previous OS, are hard to replicate
in the "new" OS.

Blame MS for it's usual fear of confusing the dummies.

Which doesn't explain why it decided to change the icons for
shortcuts & programs. E.G., the icon for "Desktop" was a "desktop
blotter" with a pen. So why did they change it to a blue rectangle?

On balance, I still think your problems are software related.

Yep. The GUI for the OS.

And a problem with the wetware, I'll admit.
--
pyotr filipivich
The fears of one class of men are not the measure of the rights of another.
-- George Bancroft

J. P. Gilliver (John) formulated the question :
In message , Mark Lloyd
writes:
On 05/18/2016 09:33 AM, BillH wrote:

Having survivied MSDOS 3.1 and many itertions, I observe that there
have been basically two MS operating systems; FAT-based and NT-based.


FAT is a disk format. I suppose you mean DOS.

I understood what he meant: DOS, Windows 3.x, and Windows 95, 98, and Me
could _only_ use FAT. Windows NT [as you'd expect!], 2000, and XP onwards by
default used NTFS, though [at least XP - not sure about the others] _could_
use FAT. The underlying [default] disk/disc format _did_ have effects on how
the OS worked (arguably it didn't have to, but it did).

Otherwise change has consisted mostly of expanded capabilities to keep
up with hardware, bric-a-brac features, and improved (?) cosmetics. As
to XP and later versions, drill down far enough in Windows 7, 8.0, 8.1
and 10, and you find the old familiar XP windows, leading me to
believe these later versions are just XP hopped up and beautified.

Or 2000, or NT.

[spam snipped]

NT OSes were called that because of the New Technology File System
which they supported. I don't think it is wrong to group the OS types
that way (FAT/NT) since they are all DOS (Disk Operating Systems).