If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
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) |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
|
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
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!" |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
"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$1 dont-email.me Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:08:10 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="5d1a7d9faf1f2f582a4c99e0c60bc7e2"; logging-data="3665"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19o5JyaKaX0Z3cAZh/weXuU" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 130927-1, 09/27/2013), Outbound message Cancel-Lock: sha1:BvYlTRMu92Sxl5HvVrhwVYCYNTQ= X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28858 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8280 free.usenet:5124181 free.spirit:1260 |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
All troll, zero substance...
-- Mike Tomlinson mike jasper.org.uk wrote: Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mike Tomlinson mike jasper.org.uk Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8 Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence... Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:24:17 +0000 Organization: The Boozer Lines: 12 Message-ID: sobj9ABxsMlSFwdb jasper.org.uk References: l6sjct$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$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid, Gene E. Bloch not-me other.invalid writes It's not rocket science... This is John Doe we're talking about. Don't waste the skin off your fingertips replying to him. -- (\_/) (='.'=) (")_(") |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
I'm having fun too...
-- "Gene E. Bloch" not-me other.invalid wrote: Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!n ews.albasani.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Gene E. Bloch" not-me other.invalid Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8 Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence... Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 10:51:33 -0800 Organization: Astrolabe Lines: 14 Message-ID: r2joa1z0w8wc$.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) |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
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 |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
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$.dlg stumbler1907.invalid Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e9bb209ca68a5d0a57db5ef833d3b704"; logging-data="29914"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19+M1/2Rq286UiuYrXOT4ic4D+NUdx+9OfE4LZWa/Rv6g==" User-Agent: MicroPlanet-Gravity/3.0.4 Cancel-Lock: sha1:VAqWC1d9feF2hM2AJ//ayRt0mp0= Xref: news.eternal-september.org alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:28863 alt.comp.os.windows-8:8284 |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Showing intellectual superiority to most of your peers on the
Internet is like being a big guy in real life. Mental midgets enjoy trying to prove something by picking on him. It's most obvious when there is zero substance to the troll's reply... -- "Gene E. Bloch" not-me other.invalid wrote: Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!n ews-1.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!news.informatik.hu-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Gene E. Bloch" not-me other.invalid Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8 Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence... Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 10:50:56 -0800 Organization: Astrolabe Lines: 28 Message-ID: 14sko5ud34x6c.dlg stumbler1907.invalid References: l6sjct$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 $.dlg stumbler1907.invalid... On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 23:34:22 +0000, mechanic wrote: On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 21:55:37 +0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote: Microsoft-speak aside, the file creation date should be the date I create the file, not the date the file is copied. It *is* the date the file is created, when you copy a file you create a file that's a duplicate of the original. What's so hard to understand? f/u set For John Doe, the whole idea... I think it is more thought in general that challenges it. It has taken me several seconds to get here to type a reply and I'm *still* laughing :-) -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
Something so obviously wrong deserves discussion.
-- "dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com wrote: Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "dadiOH" dadiOH invalid.com Newsgroups: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.comp.os.windows-8,free.usenet,free.spirit,free.usenet,free.spirit Subject: Microsoft's perennial incompetence... Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 17:30:49 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 22 Message-ID: l737et$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$5 dont-email.me If there is to be an attribute for when the file container is created, an attribute nobody has a use for, it shouldn't be prominently displayed to the user in Windows Explorer. The file contents are what matters to a user (all users), users couldn't care less about the file container. When you get around to writing an OS you can do it anyway you like. In the meantime, adapt. -- dadiOH ____________________________ Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race? Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change? Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
On 26 Nov 2013, John Doe wrote in
alt.comp.os.windows-8: It's most obvious when there is zero substance to the troll's reply... I see: "zero substance" like your reply. Puffing yourself up with air like a blowfish makes you... a blowfish. Emphasis on "blow". |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
On 11/26/13 1:27 PM, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote:
On Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:13:33 -0700, "Ken Springer" wrote in article l72h97$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 |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
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 |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
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". |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Microsoft's perennial incompetence...
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... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|