What can you do on Windows 10 that you can't do on Windows XP or Windows 7?

On 16/04/2020 23:41, onionDatStinks wrote:
Didn't you know? MS updates are so they can inject more spyware into your
machine and disable it if it's not an official paid for version. It's not
about functionality, it's about enforcing more profits.

Too be fair, they have also fixed quite a lot of nasty, including zero
day, vulnerabilities.

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

Lucifer wrote:
You can stream audio over bluetooth.

Nope that's not a difference between Windows 10 and Windows XP/7.

You *could* stream audio over Bluetooth on Windows XP and ever since,
i.e. also on Windows 7. It only needed the proper driver, profiles,
etc., but those were (and are) supplied with/for the Bluetooth adapter
(probably a USB 'dongle' on XP).

In the XP days, you could even use Bluetooth to connect to a
'dumb'phone (for example Nokia 6310i) for use as a (2G (GSM/GPRS)) modem
to connect to the Internet. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.

Bill wrote:
Lucifer wrote:
You can stream audio over bluetooth.

I like the "snipping tool". I'm not completely sure whether it was
available earlier.

IIRC, it was already in XP, but at least in Vista.

[Newsgroups restored]

wrote:
On Thu, 02 Jul 2020 22:01:04 +1000, Lucifer
wrote:

You can stream audio over bluetooth.

My w/7 machines have no problem with that.

Please don't strip newsgroups, especially in cases like this where the
discussion is about different Windows versions. Thanks.

[Newsgroups restored]

Sjouke Burry wrote:
On 03.07.20 12:36, Frank Slootweg wrote:
[Newsgroups restored]

wrote:
On Thu, 02 Jul 2020 22:01:04 +1000, Lucifer
wrote:

You can stream audio over bluetooth.

My w/7 machines have no problem with that.

Please don't strip newsgroups, especially in cases like this where the
discussion is about different Windows versions. Thanks.

PLEASE strip newsgroups.
Only ASO's try to flood the internet.

Don't be silly! You can disagree about the (non-)sense of the
OP/subject, but it *is* applicable to all the listed newsgroups.

FWIW, I don't like massive crossposting either, but once the OP has
set the groups, snipping groups is nearly always counter-productive,
because people in the snipped group(s) will miss part of the discussion
or/and waste their time posting something which has already been
discussed in the other group(s).

Bottom line: There is *no* advantage snipping groups in an already
started thread, unless a group is off-topic from the start.

"Frank Slootweg" wrote

| I like the "snipping tool". I'm not completely sure whether it was
| available earlier.
|
| IIRC, it was already in XP, but at least in Vista.

This is the first I've ever heard of it. Pressing PrtScr
puts a desktop screenshot on the clipboard.
Pressing Ctrl + Prt Scr puts an active window screenshot
on the clipboard. That can then be pasted into any
graphic editor and cropped.

To think of "snipping tool"
as a new function is like thinking of built-in ZIP as a
new function: It's there, but only the least experienced
people, who never actually use ZIP files, would be
without a real ZIP program. The least of those is still
better than the confusing windows ZIP functionality
that shows a ZIP as a folder.

On 7/3/2020 7:26 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"Frank Slootweg" wrote

| I like the "snipping tool". I'm not completely sure whether it was
| available earlier.
|
| IIRC, it was already in XP, but at least in Vista.

This is the first I've ever heard of it. Pressing PrtScr
puts a desktop screenshot on the clipboard.
Pressing Ctrl + Prt Scr puts an active window screenshot
on the clipboard. That can then be pasted into any
graphic editor and cropped.

To think of "snipping tool"
as a new function is like thinking of built-in ZIP as a
new function: It's there, but only the least experienced
people, who never actually use ZIP files, would be
without a real ZIP program. The least of those is still
better than the confusing windows ZIP functionality
that shows a ZIP as a folder.



I can understand why you think of it as confusing, but personally I
think showing it as a folder is a good idea. It lets you open it as you
would open a folder and use the files within it (mostly) as you would
the files in a folder.

--
Ken

Mayayana wrote:
"Frank Slootweg" wrote

| I like the "snipping tool". I'm not completely sure whether it was
| available earlier.
|
| IIRC, it was already in XP, but at least in Vista.

This is the first I've ever heard of it. Pressing PrtScr
puts a desktop screenshot on the clipboard.
Pressing Ctrl + Prt Scr puts an active window screenshot
on the clipboard. That can then be pasted into any
graphic editor and cropped.

To think of "snipping tool"
as a new function is like thinking of built-in ZIP as a
new function: It's there, but only the least experienced
people, who never actually use ZIP files, would be
without a real ZIP program. The least of those is still
better than the confusing windows ZIP functionality
that shows a ZIP as a folder.

I'm so glad that Bill (please don't snip attributions, unless you're
nospam's twin-brother) gave you the opportunity for the above two
'rants'. I *could* - somewhat - debunk your 'reasoning', but where's the
fun in *that*!?

Keep up the good work! Your comments, especially the humourous/ironic/
sarcastic ones, are highly appreciated. (The ones in the face-mask
(etc.) thread really made my day.)

BTW, are we still on topic in all the groups? We can't have "ASO's
flooding the internet", can we!?

"Ken Blake" wrote

| I can understand why you think of it as confusing, but personally I
| think showing it as a folder is a good idea. It lets you open it as you
| would open a folder and use the files within it (mostly) as you would
| the files in a folder.
|
Yes. It's good for beginners, up to a point. But
it's deceptive. When I try to help others I always
have to explain adamantly that they need to take
the files/folder out of the ZIP. "Drag the folder out
of there and put it on the Desktop. Then delete the
original. It's not a real folder. I can't really explain it...
Just drag it out. There you go. Now you can open
that file and resave it..."

For my own purposes I've never used that functionality.
I always install a ZIP program as part of basic setup,
along with IrfanView, Sysinternals tools, etc. If I'm
taking files out of a ZIP there's a good chance I'll be
moving them around, saving an edited version, etc.
So to my mind, unpacking the files is the first step.

"Frank Slootweg" wrote

| BTW, are we still on topic in all the groups? We can't have "ASO's
| flooding the internet", can we!?

ASOs? It seems we've barely been on topic all
month. We're all breaking down in the face of
coronavirus lockdown, becoming more ourselves.
I'm wandering off into gleeful, iconoclastic diatribes
while you become the goodie-goodie hall monitor
who makes sure that everyone follows rules.

On Fri, 3 Jul 2020 at 12:16:41, Mayayana
wrote:
"Ken Blake" wrote

| I can understand why you think of it as confusing, but personally I
| think showing it as a folder is a good idea. It lets you open it as you
| would open a folder and use the files within it (mostly) as you would
| the files in a folder.

+1.
|
Yes. It's good for beginners, up to a point. But

I'm hardly a beginner (-:.

it's deceptive. When I try to help others I always
have to explain adamantly that they need to take
the files/folder out of the ZIP. "Drag the folder out
of there and put it on the Desktop. Then delete the
original. It's not a real folder. I can't really explain it...

Whose fault is that (-: ...[Just teasing you. I know what beginners -
or, even some long-term users who just aren't computerate - are like.]

Just drag it out. There you go. Now you can open
that file and resave it..."

For my own purposes I've never used that functionality.
I always install a ZIP program as part of basic setup,
along with IrfanView, Sysinternals tools, etc. If I'm
taking files out of a ZIP there's a good chance I'll be
moving them around, saving an edited version, etc.
So to my mind, unpacking the files is the first step.


I do have two or three zip programs. However, _most_ of the time I find
the explorer add-on sufficient in itself. If I want to look at a
picture, document (other than HTML file), or video that's inside a .zip,
I usually can. Even a .exe, though I know enough to know that that's
unwise unless it's the only file there. (And if it is, I know it's safe
to ignore the "this may rely on other files" warning, as there aren't
any!)

I don't think there's anything _wrong_ with its being there, as long as
you know its limitations - and, for me, it _is_ useful.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

.... behaving morally does not require religious adherence. - The Right Rev
Nigel McCulloch\Bishop of Manchester (Radio Times, 24-30 September 2011

On 03.07.20 16:26, Mayayana wrote:
"Frank Slootweg" wrote

| I like the "snipping tool". I'm not completely sure whether it was
| available earlier.
|
| IIRC, it was already in XP, but at least in Vista.

This is the first I've ever heard of it. Pressing PrtScr
puts a desktop screenshot on the clipboard.
Pressing Ctrl + Prt Scr puts an active window screenshot
on the clipboard. That can then be pasted into any
graphic editor and cropped.

To think of "snipping tool"
as a new function is like thinking of built-in ZIP as a
new function: It's there, but only the least experienced
people, who never actually use ZIP files, would be
without a real ZIP program. The least of those is still
better than the confusing windows ZIP functionality
that shows a ZIP as a folder.


also works in XP PRO.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:

[On Windows' built-in ZIP:]

I do have two or three zip programs. However, _most_ of the time I find
the explorer add-on sufficient in itself. If I want to look at a
picture, document (other than HTML file), or video that's inside a .zip,
I usually can. Even a .exe, though I know enough to know that that's
unwise unless it's the only file there. (And if it is, I know it's safe
to ignore the "this may rely on other files" warning, as there aren't
any!)

I don't think there's anything _wrong_ with its being there, as long as
you know its limitations - and, for me, it _is_ useful.

Some stuff, including software, is distributed in .zip files. It can
be handy that Joe Newbie doesn't have to install an (un)ZIP program
first to unzip what he has just downloaded. OTOH, if what Joe downloaded
is in 'non-standard' ZIP format, he'll have to get something like 7-Zip
anyway.

That said, nowadays I just use 7-Zip for most unzipping. (For *some*
unzipping, 7-Zip doesn't quite do the trick.)

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:

[built-in zip]

I don't think there's anything _wrong_ with its being there, as long
as you know its limitations - and, for me, it _is_ useful.

It can be useful in some cases but the deal breaker for me is that
(on XP) file dates are not preserved on extraction. They get the
current date & time.

On Sat, 4 Jul 2020 at 00:18:11, Apd wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:

[built-in zip]

I don't think there's anything _wrong_ with its being there, as long
as you know its limitations - and, for me, it _is_ useful.

It can be useful in some cases but the deal breaker for me is that
(on XP) file dates are not preserved on extraction. They get the
current date & time.


I hadn't spotted that. I rarely extracted - AFAICR, only for
installations that _required_ several files, and in those cases I'd
usually delete the extracted files after the installation was complete,
so it didn't matter. Yes, that would bug me too. (I'll have a look to
see if the same applies in 7 next time I do an extraction, if I
remember.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The motto of the Royal Society is: 'Take nobody's word for it'. Scepticism has
value. - Brian Cox, RT 2015/3/14-20