two files of the same name in the same directory

On 7/10/2019 5:28 PM, Zaidy036 wrote:
e results into Notepad or CMD window be easier?
Especially if you first put double quotation marks, and then pasted the
file name between them

--
Judge your ancestors by how well they met their standards not yours.
They did not know your standards, so could not try to meet them.

Keith Nuttle wrote:
On 7/10/2019 5:28 PM, Zaidy036 wrote:
e results into Notepad or CMD window be easier?
Especially if you first put double quotation marks, and then pasted the
file name between them


The advantage of using a utility, is if you get
desperate, you can actually drop the output.txt
into a hex editor, and examine the strings in there.

I have run into one case, on a computer, where
some text was "virtually invisible", and the
only tool that worked to identify the invisible
problem was a hex editor. Notepad is not sufficient
to identify obscure enough problems.

Paul

On 7/10/2019 6:15 PM, Keith Nuttle wrote:
On 7/10/2019 5:28 PM, Zaidy036 wrote:
e results into Notepad or CMD window be easier?
Especially if you first put double quotation marks, and then pasted the
file name between them

I am on Win 7 and it always uses quote marks for "Copy as Path"

--
Zaidy036

Andy Burns wrote:

VanguardLH wrote:

Even using your examples:

MyDocument.docx
MyDocument.txt
MyDocument.xlsx
MyDocument.pdf
mydocument.docx
mydocument.txt
mydocument.xlsx
mydocument.pdf

And Joe Average probably has "hide extensions for known file types"
enabled anyway.

That's why I brought it up to micky. The default misleads users.
Microsoft has been pushing document-centric operation for years, yet
they still default to hiding the type of document from their users.

In article , VanguardLH wrote:
....
That's why I brought it up to micky. The default misleads users.
Microsoft has been pushing document-centric operation for years, yet
they still default to hiding the type of document from their users.

That's not really true - although I certainly agree with your underlying
sentiment. Obviously, anyone with a computing IQ above room temperature is
going to turn that silly feature off.

But, here's the thing: The icon should tell you what "type" of file it is.
If it is an Excel file, it will have an Excel icon. If it is a Word file,
it will have a Word icon. Etc.

The idea is that extensions are a techy/geeky thing that "normal" users
should have nothing to do with. Normal users like pictures (icons).

--
"Every time Mitt opens his mouth, a swing state gets its wings."

(Should be on a bumper sticker)

"Kenny McCormack" wrote:
But, here's the thing: The icon should tell you what "type" of file it is.
If it is an Excel file, it will have an Excel icon. If it is a Word file,
it will have a Word icon. Etc.

The problem is that malware executables (.exe) often have those icons
as a resource and that's what gets displayed. So you're not being told
what type of file it is by the icon. In that case you have to look at
a list view in Explorer to see that it says "Application" rather than
"[something] document".

On 7/11/2019 2:06 AM, Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article , VanguardLH wrote:
...
That's why I brought it up to micky. The default misleads users.
Microsoft has been pushing document-centric operation for years, yet
they still default to hiding the type of document from their users.

That's not really true - although I certainly agree with your underlying
sentiment. Obviously, anyone with a computing IQ above room temperature is
going to turn that silly feature off.

But, here's the thing: The icon should tell you what "type" of file it is.
If it is an Excel file, it will have an Excel icon. If it is a Word file,
it will have a Word icon. Etc.

The idea is that extensions are a techy/geeky thing that "normal" users
should have nothing to do with. Normal users like pictures (icons).

Icons are OK but when they are tiny as in File Explorer the differences
are hard to distinguish. In some cases the only obvious difference is
the color. The extension are a lot easier to read.

With some image processing programs, the image files are identified by
the icon of the program that uses the file. This means that JPG, BMP,
etc all are identified with the same icon. Same is true for other
programs. While the WordPerfect may be the icon attached to the file,
without the extension there is no way of knowing if it is a DOC, DOCX,
wpd, etc file.

--
Judge your ancestors by how well they met their standards not yours.
They did not know your standards, so could not try to meet them.

On 7/10/2019 5:10 PM, Kenny McCormack wrote:
In article , Neil wrote:
...
There are settings to enable/disable this "feature", but I think it's
already too late to prevent regular, desirable Unix-style filename handling.

Fixed it for ya!

Via the typical unethical approach of revising the comments of someone
else.

It's got nothin' to do with Linux.

Oh? Perhaps you can explain why the recent business connections between
MS and Linux development has resulted in Win10 adopting a "feature" that
has been used in Linux for years? Unix may be the source of Linux'
adoption of the "feature", but that doesn't account for the timing of
this change in Windows.

--
best regards,

Neil

Many characters look the same but aren't.
There are about 18 "code points" for "space"; see:

http://jkorpela.fi/chars/spaces.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_point

"1lO0" is: One, 'L', the letter 'o', and Zero.

Convert both filenames to uppercase and display them using
the "OCR-A" font, extra-large, like this:

http://Jeff-Relf.Me/1lO0.PNG