Windows Explorer Replacements

"Char Jackson" wrote

| In my XP Pro VM, that option was checked by default, so no lines were
| displayed. After unchecking that option and opening a new Win Explorer,
| the lines were displayed.
|

Good catch. And here's the setting:

HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Exp lorer\Advanced\FriendlyTree

0 - lines. 1 - no lines.

On 12/11/17 3:59 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 11 Dec 2017 14:09:28 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

I tend to organized my stuff, and I prefer to be able to see that
organization via Treeview. In fact, in XP I've forgotten how to switch
from the Treeview.

I wonder if possibly MS dropped the lines over the years. Plenty of
shots on Google Images with the Treeview.

I just looked at my XP, which is Pro, and you're right, no lines. I
wonder if there could have been a difference for the Home version,
Wouldn't make much sense to do that to me.

I fired up an XP VM and the option to display the lines or not can be
found by opening a Windows Explorer window, then go to Tools, Folder
Options, select the View tab, then UNcheck the option called "Display
simple folder view in Explorer's Folders list". It's the third option
from the top.

In my XP Pro VM, that option was checked by default, so no lines were
displayed. After unchecking that option and opening a new Win Explorer,
the lines were displayed.

OK, works the same here in a real computer! LOL

I'll tell you what sold me on this Mac. snip

I'll give you an example...

I've spent 2.5 months working with an individual on
social.technet.******* to get my PC's to network to El Capitan, the
version of OS I'm running. After 2 months, we finally had 8.1 and 10
networked. We never got 7 to work as desired, but at least we got it to
where I could map the Mac shares to 7. But, it means I can't print to
my USB printers attached to the Mac. We never got Vista Ultimate and XP
Pro to connect.

Know how long it took me to get the Mac to connect to my Windows
computers? Maybe 30 minutes, and that includes tracking down the
instructions from Apple. After following the Apple instructions, the
Mac connects to XP. Vista, 7 Starter and ultimate, 8.1, and 10.

I've been playing with Linux Mint. I want to network it too. I figure
this will take a bit of fiddling, but to what extent I don't know yet.
Right now, it doesn't even see the Windows computers. Neither did
Windows see the Mac at first. But, to my surprise, the Mac was there.
When I tried to login, I entered my Mac username and password, and all
my shared folders were available. And, I can print!

Networking anything to anything else, when both sides use the same
underlying protocol, TCP/IP typically, shouldn't take more than a few
minutes. Where people run into problems, many times, is when they have
an expectation that they should be able to 'see' a visual representation
of the remote host. That's never necessary, but many people act as if it
is. They want an icon to appear on their screen that they can click on.
With DHCP, networking is all but automatic these days, but people don't
realize it because they can't see an icon to click on.

I finally came to the conclusion my "helper" was an IT wannabe. But, he
knew far more than me, so I couldn't complain, as he was the only one
that offered to help. Worse, in the first week, I have two people
telling me to do different things. The 2nd person eventually disappeared.

Several years ago I was visiting a friend in a distant city who runs a
guided tour company. She had 3 PCs in the office, and someone messed
around to the point where the PCs couldn't talk to each other anymore.
Two of them lost access to the Internet, and two stopped being able to
open the shared customer database, which was actually an Excel
spreadsheet stored internally on the third PC. She hired an IT guy and
he came to the office for two full days. At the end of the second day,
he admitted defeat and submitted his bill for something like $1700. She
asked if I'd take a look, and I expected the worst. All I found were
static IP entries that were wrong, as in wrong subnets on two PCs, wrong
network masks, wrong default gateways, etc. I had it all straightened
out in about 5-6 minutes.

So what was that other guy doing out there for two full days? No one
knows. She says he had his laptop open the whole time, tapping away at
something, but he never physically visited any of the PCs that were
right there in the office. He reminds me of an IT guy who posts in the
Windows groups from time to time who has problems with the basics.

Sounds like a guy who didn't know what he was doing. It's sad to say,
but my impression is fewer and fewer people in any profession know what
they are doing, and there's no desire to go '"above and beyond" to solve
a problem they've been made aware of.

One thing I've observed/learned,us old guys have experiences and
knowledge from doing whatever over our lifetimes, things that are just
not taught anywhere that I know of.

Case in point, my brother-in-law called me today, almost all of his
icons disappeared from his desktop when he turned the computer on. And,
the screen rez was wrong. W7

I had him shut down, not restart, then boot into safe mode. Screen rez
was fine there. Had him shut down, boot as normal, and all was well.
Boot up was slow, as the system apparently was rebuilding the desktop.
He hasn't called back, so all must still be well.

--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.11.6
Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit)
Thunderbird 52.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

"Mayayana" on Mon, 11 Dec 2017 09:29:02
-0500 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Yes, probably "modern" being the biggest factor, with acres of empty
| space rather than the lines. (It doesn't actually _save_ any space, as
| the indenting is still present.)

Maybe it's just that people have got used to the
treeview, so the lines were deemed unnecessary.
I mostly use XP and don't use the folder treeview
panel. I tend to be very organized, so I don't
hunt for things. But when I do use the treeview
I don't see any lines. Just the little + squares. And
I don't see any winfile.exe anywhere. So I don't
know where Ken is getting his File Manager.

| It's like the modern fashion for lots
| of emptiness in the home - which is fine for show, but makes it not very
| practical to actually _do_ anything.

That's an interesting point. I suppose it can
be an expression of ascetic taste. But I'm inclined
to think it's mostly an expression of materialistic/
nihilistic world view. We live in a culture wed to
a belief in naive concretism: The world is exactly
what it seems on the surface. Nothing more and
nothing less. Aesthetics and spiritual values are
relegated to decorative roles, at best. Modern
art, to a great extent, is dedicated to breaking
any lingering expectation of meaning in human
expression. The only option for meaning is Nihilism,
as a stage more sophisticated than mere belief,
which self-consciously clings to the multi-paradigmatic
aesthetic of transcending aesthetic: It's all bull****,
but at least we know that, so we're above it;
transcendent.

So how do people express their personal passions
and attachments? In their homes they only put
items necessary in practical terms. But there can be
symbolism in terms of things like showing off one's
success and sophistication with expensive items,
provided that those are presented as merely
practical: Keurig coffee makers for the up-and-coming
hoi polloi who think cinnamon flavored coffee is
clever (and who don't have the sense to reject the
idea of throwing away one plastic cup into a landfill
for every cup of coffee they drink). Stainless steel
Braun appliances for the minimalist upper-middle
class denizens who've arrived... somewhere or other.
("And the walls, sir? Shall we paint very white or
normal white? We could also go retro with a slightly
warm white. A humorous touch.")

I notice that a lot of those people even
buy art. But what is art in a nihilistic worldview?
Just another appliance. They buy non-evocative
abstracts. It's almost like a frame with a label that
says, "Official art painting - what were you
expecting, you hayseed?".
Even the art is only practical, a la Charlie the
Tuna who tried to impress Starkist with his good
taste in TV ads by wearing a beret and carrying
an artist's tripod.

At the other extreme, the sociologist/semioticist
Dean MacCannell, in his fascinating theorizing about
social symbolism, noted that houses in Nazi Germany
at the end of WW2 were often stuffed with kitsch.
Which makes an interesting point: Kitsch symbolizes
that one partakes of the lowest common denominator.
Having cliche plaques in one's kitchen (Good bread,
good meat, good God, Let's eat) tells people, "Don't
worry about me. I'm completely normal and predictable.
I don't have an iconoclastic bone in my body. I don't
even take my own religion too seriously."

It makes sense that people under Nazi rule would
have felt a need to express hyper-normalcy. But what's
normalcy in the modern world of scientific materialism
where we've washed away belief systems? Nihilism.
And a tasteful dash of Postmodernly superficial
appreciation of "authenticity" -- historical relics from
one's ancestors, fertility statues from the South
Pacific, etc.

In a way one can see the same progression in the
Windows UI. First there was the UI as progress in
itself. Then there was prettification and even
some commercialization of the UI. (Active Desktop.)
XP brought Fischer Price garrishness. Vista/7 brought
slick techno-pizzazz with semi-transparent windows
and pseudo-3D, which looked impressive even though
they served no purpose. Metro brought return to
minimalism. Nothing left to achieve. The sophisticated
aesthetic of people who can't decide between normal
white and slightly warm white.

Meanwhile, Apple have always tried to serve the Braun
crowd who pay $500 for a toaster and like to decorate
their glass coffee table with a miniarture Zen sand
garden. Steve Jobs had a knack for the "just so" flair in
an otherwise blank landscape. Nihilism as meaning in
itself. For anyone sophisticated enough to reject their
mother's tacky kitchen plaques, Jobsian aesthetic looks
like a worthy self-development goal.


Wow. Well stated.

Thanks

pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?

We have guys that do that ware i work char they remote in and almost NEVER
come to the actual computer to fix it or look at it for that matter.
Me i go directly to the affected machine to work on it.


--
AL'S COMPUTERS
"Char Jackson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 11 Dec 2017 14:09:28 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

I tend to organized my stuff, and I prefer to be able to see that
organization via Treeview. In fact, in XP I've forgotten how to switch
from the Treeview.

I wonder if possibly MS dropped the lines over the years. Plenty of
shots on Google Images with the Treeview.

I just looked at my XP, which is Pro, and you're right, no lines. I
wonder if there could have been a difference for the Home version,
Wouldn't make much sense to do that to me.

I fired up an XP VM and the option to display the lines or not can be
found by opening a Windows Explorer window, then go to Tools, Folder
Options, select the View tab, then UNcheck the option called "Display
simple folder view in Explorer's Folders list". It's the third option
from the top.

In my XP Pro VM, that option was checked by default, so no lines were
displayed. After unchecking that option and opening a new Win Explorer,
the lines were displayed.

I'll tell you what sold me on this Mac. snip

I'll give you an example...

I've spent 2.5 months working with an individual on
social.technet.******* to get my PC's to network to El Capitan, the
version of OS I'm running. After 2 months, we finally had 8.1 and 10
networked. We never got 7 to work as desired, but at least we got it to
where I could map the Mac shares to 7. But, it means I can't print to
my USB printers attached to the Mac. We never got Vista Ultimate and XP
Pro to connect.

Know how long it took me to get the Mac to connect to my Windows
computers? Maybe 30 minutes, and that includes tracking down the
instructions from Apple. After following the Apple instructions, the
Mac connects to XP. Vista, 7 Starter and ultimate, 8.1, and 10.

I've been playing with Linux Mint. I want to network it too. I figure
this will take a bit of fiddling, but to what extent I don't know yet.
Right now, it doesn't even see the Windows computers. Neither did
Windows see the Mac at first. But, to my surprise, the Mac was there.
When I tried to login, I entered my Mac username and password, and all
my shared folders were available. And, I can print!

Networking anything to anything else, when both sides use the same
underlying protocol, TCP/IP typically, shouldn't take more than a few
minutes. Where people run into problems, many times, is when they have
an expectation that they should be able to 'see' a visual representation
of the remote host. That's never necessary, but many people act as if it
is. They want an icon to appear on their screen that they can click on.
With DHCP, networking is all but automatic these days, but people don't
realize it because they can't see an icon to click on.

Several years ago I was visiting a friend in a distant city who runs a
guided tour company. She had 3 PCs in the office, and someone messed
around to the point where the PCs couldn't talk to each other anymore.
Two of them lost access to the Internet, and two stopped being able to
open the shared customer database, which was actually an Excel
spreadsheet stored internally on the third PC. She hired an IT guy and
he came to the office for two full days. At the end of the second day,
he admitted defeat and submitted his bill for something like $1700. She
asked if I'd take a look, and I expected the worst. All I found were
static IP entries that were wrong, as in wrong subnets on two PCs, wrong
network masks, wrong default gateways, etc. I had it all straightened
out in about 5-6 minutes.

So what was that other guy doing out there for two full days? No one
knows. She says he had his laptop open the whole time, tapping away at
something, but he never physically visited any of the PCs that were
right there in the office. He reminds me of an IT guy who posts in the
Windows groups from time to time who has problems with the basics.

--

Char Jackson

In message , Mayayana
writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Yes, probably "modern" being the biggest factor, with acres of empty
| space rather than the lines. (It doesn't actually _save_ any space, as
| the indenting is still present.)

Maybe it's just that people have got used to the
treeview, so the lines were deemed unnecessary.

Deemed by who. At least one of the posters in this thread is teaching
people who are new to computers - who are still a significant part of
society. For them, you can't say the lines are unnecessary, or that the
treeview without them is intuitive. And this isn't just people (often,
but by no means always, elderly) who haven't used IT at all; it also
might well apply to your average smartphone user, or similar, who decide
to (or find they have to) get a bit more into computers for whatever
reason.

I mostly use XP and don't use the folder treeview
panel. I tend to be very organized, so I don't
hunt for things.

Good for you (-:. I think I'm quite organised (inside the computer
anyway - not in my house otherwise!), but I still like to have the
lines. (Even, as a result of this discussion, considering putting
Classic Shell on my 7 machine, even though I've got used to most of the
other things it would "correct".)
[]
| It's like the modern fashion for lots
| of emptiness in the home - which is fine for show, but makes it not very
| practical to actually _do_ anything.

[BIG snip] Wow, I didn't think of it as quite the major sociological
thing you do! Just that I find acres of empty space not a _practical_
way to run a home. (OK, I'm far too far the other way, being very
untidy. But I _do_ feel the effort required in maintaining empty
everything - which means you put everything away every time you use it -
isn't efficient, either.)

In a way one can see the same progression in the
Windows UI. First there was the UI as progress in
itself. Then there was prettification and even
some commercialization of the UI. (Active Desktop.)
XP brought Fischer Price garrishness. Vista/7 brought
Yes, a bit, though I guess I'm used to it - or rather, I've set it more
to the older (9x) style (my Windows have square corners, and the three
same-size buttons in their top right).
slick techno-pizzazz with semi-transparent windows
and pseudo-3D, which looked impressive even though
they served no purpose.
I must admit to agreeing with you when I first saw them, and am aware of
the extra processing load involved, but I now quite like the Aero thing.

Metro brought return to
minimalism. Nothing left to achieve. The sophisticated
aesthetic of people who can't decide between normal
white and slightly warm white.

Yes, I definitely didn't like that at all. Even, and I always _do_ try
to see the other person's point of view, for people new to computers; I
suppose I can see it being of use to those who only ever want to do a
limited number of things with their computer (which is probably a lot of
people).

Meanwhile, Apple have always tried to serve the Braun
crowd who pay $500 for a toaster and like to decorate
their glass coffee table with a miniarture Zen sand
garden. Steve Jobs had a knack for the "just so" flair in
an otherwise blank landscape. Nihilism as meaning in
itself. For anyone sophisticated enough to reject their
mother's tacky kitchen plaques, Jobsian aesthetic looks
like a worthy self-development goal.

Nicely put (-:. The importance of the price, as well as the emptiness,
being significant is well stated.

It's possible to be in both camps: my blind friend (which of course also
has other effects on perception) loves her iPhone, but uses Windows (and
has stayed with 7 rather than 10) on her (desktop) computer. Her husband
(also blind) has a similar iPhone, though isn't as bothered, _has_ gone
to 10 for his Windows (laptop and desktop), and has an Android-based but
Braille-and-speech-interfaced machine (a HIMS Polaris). [Which he's
currently getting frustrated with.]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

If mankind minus one were of one opinion, then mankind is no more justified in
silencing the one than the one - if he had the power - would be justified in
silencing mankind. -John Stuart Mill, philosopher and economist (1806-1873)

On 12/12/17 10:01 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Mayayana
writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Yes, probably "modern" being the biggest factor, with acres of empty
| space rather than the lines. (It doesn't actually _save_ any space, as
| the indenting is still present.)

Maybe it's just that people have got used to the
treeview, so the lines were deemed unnecessary.

Deemed by who. At least one of the posters in this thread is teaching
people who are new to computers - who are still a significant part of
society. For them, you can't say the lines are unnecessary, or that the
treeview without them is intuitive. And this isn't just people (often,
but by no means always, elderly) who haven't used IT at all; it also
might well apply to your average smartphone user, or similar, who decide
to (or find they have to) get a bit more into computers for whatever
reason.

On the Mac, the most powerful file manager I ever found is called
Pathfinder. I used it before upgrading the OS to a point my version
would not work.

They had, at that time, a page that listed requested features

Know what #2 was? A Treeview. G

snip


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.11.6
Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit)
Thunderbird 52.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| I mostly use XP and don't use the folder treeview
| panel. I tend to be very organized, so I don't
| hunt for things.
|
| Good for you (-:. I think I'm quite organised (inside the computer
| anyway - not in my house otherwise!), but I still like to have the
| lines.

Maybe it's not so much about being organized.
I just never use the folder treeview because I'm
not looking around. I have shortcuts to all partitions
and numerous folders on my desktop. I have links
to typical destinations in a custom Explorer Bar
that I use instead of folder treeview. I also have
a number of custom SendTo items. So 95% of
what I'm doing involves only one or two clicks.
And anything I'm currently working on is probably
on my desktop.

On 12/12/17 5:11 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| I mostly use XP and don't use the folder treeview
| panel. I tend to be very organized, so I don't
| hunt for things.
|
| Good for you (-:. I think I'm quite organised (inside the computer
| anyway - not in my house otherwise!), but I still like to have the
| lines.

Maybe it's not so much about being organized.
I just never use the folder treeview because I'm
not looking around. I have shortcuts to all partitions
and numerous folders on my desktop. I have links
to typical destinations in a custom Explorer Bar
that I use instead of folder treeview. I also have
a number of custom SendTo items. So 95% of
what I'm doing involves only one or two clicks.
And anything I'm currently working on is probably
on my desktop.

Because of some things I've been reading on the web, I've been
rethinking a lot of things I do on the computer. Actually started this
process when I was digging into Spotlight on the Mac.

Discovering things in both OS X and Windows that would make things a lot
easier and quicker for the user, *if* the user were giving the info
right front when the new OS versions come out. As a result, I think
lots of people stay stuck in doing things the same way they learned 20
years ago. Which is an inefficient way to do things today.

Regardless of that, leaving the line in Explorer doesn't hurt a damned
thing, and certainly helps the new user figure things out.

After what Char said he found in XP for turning on those lines, I can't
help but think than setting may be stored in the registry. And if so,
maybe it's still buried in the registry of newer OSes.


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.11.6
Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit)
Thunderbird 52.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

"Ken Springer" wrote

| After what Char said he found in XP for turning on those lines, I can't
| help but think than setting may be stored in the registry. And if so,
| maybe it's still buried in the registry of newer OSes.
|

Did you miss my post above? Char found the UI setting
on XP, so I ran it through Regmon and found the Registry
setting:

HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Exp lorer\Advanced\FriendlyTree

0 - lines. 1 - no lines.

But it doesn't look good for Win7. I tried adding that
value. It had no effect. I also tried adding it to HKLM.
No effect.

I came across a discussion indicating that the effect
can now only be done via API calls to set the style
of treeview windows. Which means it *could* probably
be done but would require a constant monitoring of
new windows and their "children" to find SysTreeView32
class windows and change their style. I also explained
that above.

Here's the discussion, for what it's worth.

https://sourceforge.net/p/classicshe...570be8/?page=1

It may not be very clear to anyone not familiar with
window-related API functions. The gist of it is that
most things onscreen are "windows". Thus the OS name.
A window is a GUI object. Buttons, windows, textboxes,
treeviews... all windows from a programming perspective.
Windows have a static life, functionality and styles,
provided by Windows -- as opposed to UI elements
that are just painted onscreen. Styles can be things
like a border or no. If it's a textbox the style options
might include scrollbars: h, v, or none. That kind of
thing.
When the window is created the caller specs those styles.
To some extent they can also be applied after creation.
What's being said in the discussion is that one can add
the treeview lines by finding the window, getting its handle,
then using that to change the style and include the
TVS_HASLINES style.

I haven't experimented with any of that. I only
know it's possible and it would be a pain in the neck.
Since Classic Shell already does it there seems to be
no reason to look further.

It's not surprising that MS would have removed the
setting from Folder Options. Since they're ostensibly
making a slicker, better UI with each version it spoils
the image to provide options to go backward. They want
to feel that the new style is more elegant.

On 12/12/17 8:52 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"Ken Springer" wrote

| After what Char said he found in XP for turning on those lines, I can't
| help but think than setting may be stored in the registry. And if so,
| maybe it's still buried in the registry of newer OSes.
|

Did you miss my post above? Char found the UI setting
on XP, so I ran it through Regmon and found the Registry
setting:

I saw your post, as well as Char's, and I've changed my XP to show the
lines.

HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Exp lorer\Advanced\FriendlyTree

0 - lines. 1 - no lines.

But it doesn't look good for Win7. I tried adding that
value. It had no effect. I also tried adding it to HKLM.
No effect.

And, at this point, it all goes way over my head, into the internals of
computer operations that has never interested me. I don't mind changing
a registry setting, to accomplish what I want, if someone with the
knowledge tell me what to do provides the instructions.

I came across a discussion indicating that the effect
can now only be done via API calls to set the style
of treeview windows. Which means it *could* probably
be done but would require a constant monitoring of
new windows and their "children" to find SysTreeView32
class windows and change their style. I also explained
that above.

Here's the discussion, for what it's worth.

https://sourceforge.net/p/classicshe...570be8/?page=1

It may not be very clear to anyone not familiar with
window-related API functions. The gist of it is that
most things onscreen are "windows". Thus the OS name.
A window is a GUI object. Buttons, windows, textboxes,
treeviews... all windows from a programming perspective.
Windows have a static life, functionality and styles,
provided by Windows -- as opposed to UI elements
that are just painted onscreen. Styles can be things
like a border or no. If it's a textbox the style options
might include scrollbars: h, v, or none. That kind of
thing.
When the window is created the caller specs those styles.
To some extent they can also be applied after creation.
What's being said in the discussion is that one can add
the treeview lines by finding the window, getting its handle,
then using that to change the style and include the
TVS_HASLINES style.

I haven't experimented with any of that. I only
know it's possible and it would be a pain in the neck.
Since Classic Shell already does it there seems to be
no reason to look further.

It's not surprising that MS would have removed the
setting from Folder Options. Since they're ostensibly
making a slicker, better UI with each version it spoils
the image to provide options to go backward. They want
to feel that the new style is more elegant.

I don't think the new style is more elegant at all. To me, it's just
eye-candy, form over function, that makes understanding the computer
more difficult for many.


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.11.6
Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit)
Thunderbird 52.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

"Ken Springer" wrote

|
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Exp lorer\Advanced\FriendlyTree
|
| 0 - lines. 1 - no lines.
|
| But it doesn't look good for Win7. I tried adding that
| value. It had no effect. I also tried adding it to HKLM.
| No effect.
|
| And, at this point, it all goes way over my head, into the internals of
| computer operations that has never interested me.

HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE. Microsoft like
to give long, technical sounding names to things. We can
be thankful they didn't name it with a GUID (globally
unique ID), like:
{12345678-abcd-dcba-efac-12345678abcd}

The 'Softies just *love* those things. They name
everything they can with them.

And for some reason geeks tend to like lots of
underscores. (I never use them. They require me
to find the shift key.

Anyway, HKLM is just the machine-wide Registry
settings. The Registry has both HKLM and HKCU
(HKEY_CURRENT_USER) "hives". A hive is the MS
term for a grouping of settings. It's designed for
multi-user setups in corporate environments.

Some things are only in HKCU. Some are only in HKLM.
Some are in both. For example, IE settings are in both
and the HKLM settings can override HKCU. It's designed
that way so that corporate IT people can control employee
browsers regardless of what the employees think they've
chosen for settings.

The FriendlyTree setting seems to be only in XP and only
in HKCU. I tried different ways to do it on Win7, just to be
thorough. But Win7 Explorer doesn't seem to check the
setting.

More than you want to know, probably. Sorry. I'm trying
to keep it as simple as possible while still being clear.

The long and the short of it seems to be that you'll need
to keep Classic Shell. CS seems to be creating its own
version of the treeview. So it's only going to show up
in Explorer windows because it's not a setting but rather
the folder tree is a CS window, replacing the normal Explorer
folder tree panel.

On 12/13/17 7:37 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"Ken Springer" wrote

|
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Exp lorer\Advanced\FriendlyTree
|
| 0 - lines. 1 - no lines.
|
| But it doesn't look good for Win7. I tried adding that
| value. It had no effect. I also tried adding it to HKLM.
| No effect.
|
| And, at this point, it all goes way over my head, into the internals of
| computer operations that has never interested me.

HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE. Microsoft like
to give long, technical sounding names to things. We can
be thankful they didn't name it with a GUID (globally
unique ID), like:
{12345678-abcd-dcba-efac-12345678abcd}

The 'Softies just *love* those things. They name
everything they can with them.

And for some reason geeks tend to like lots of
underscores. (I never use them. They require me
to find the shift key.

I read a long time ago, some computer filesystems had issues with spaces
in filenames. Ergo, the underscores.

I don't know if that's true, but if you use underscores you avoid the
issue if it exists.

Anyway, HKLM is just the machine-wide Registry
settings. The Registry has both HKLM and HKCU
(HKEY_CURRENT_USER) "hives". A hive is the MS
term for a grouping of settings. It's designed for
multi-user setups in corporate environments.

Some things are only in HKCU. Some are only in HKLM.
Some are in both. For example, IE settings are in both
and the HKLM settings can override HKCU. It's designed
that way so that corporate IT people can control employee
browsers regardless of what the employees think they've
chosen for settings.

The FriendlyTree setting seems to be only in XP and only
in HKCU. I tried different ways to do it on Win7, just to be
thorough. But Win7 Explorer doesn't seem to check the
setting.

More than you want to know, probably. Sorry. I'm trying
to keep it as simple as possible while still being clear.

No apology needed, I've always wondered what HKLM and HKCU meant.

The long and the short of it seems to be that you'll need
to keep Classic Shell. CS seems to be creating its own
version of the treeview. So it's only going to show up
in Explorer windows because it's not a setting but rather
the folder tree is a CS window, replacing the normal Explorer
folder tree panel.

I figured Classic Shell would have to stay. I hope someone takes over
that piece of software.



--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.11.6
Firefox 53.0.2 (64 bit)
Thunderbird 52.0
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"

Ken Springer wrote:


I read a long time ago, some computer filesystems had issues with spaces
in filenames. Ergo, the underscores.

I don't know if that's true, but if you use underscores you avoid the
issue if it exists.

You'll notice the OS company, never lets this bother them :-)
They put spaces in lots of stuff, like it was fun.

For each affected subsystem, there are rules to "escape"
paths, such that they work. In some cases, it's a flavor
of "quotes" that goes around the string. Some punctuation
characters can be escaped with a backslash. And if you
want a literal backslash, you escape it with one of
its own as in \\.

Because there are so many software environments and
scenarios, it's almost impossible to keep all these
blasted rules straight in your head.

In some cases, when writing scripts, you have
*multiple* levels of escaping to consider.
First, one level of escapes is removed by
a shell. Then the next level of escapes is
removed by the next software layer. It takes
a lot of experiments to verify you got the
syntax right, in such situations.

"A little space isn't going to hurt anyone", but
it *will* waste a lot of your time researching
the correct solution for it. This is why some
of the shortcuts you examine on your desktop,
have quotes around the executable string in there.

Paul

"Ken Springer" wrote

| I read a long time ago, some computer filesystems had issues with spaces
| in filenames. Ergo, the underscores.
|
| I don't know if that's true, but if you use underscores you avoid the
| issue if it exists.
|

Yes, but why not dashes? The oldtimers still put
underscores everywhere for no reason.

"Paul" wrote

|
| I read a long time ago, some computer filesystems had issues with spaces
| in filenames. Ergo, the underscores.
|

| You'll notice the OS company, never lets this bother them :-)
| They put spaces in lots of stuff, like it was fun.
|

Good point "Program Files". What were they thinking?
It ends up requiring complex nested quotes in
command lines.