List of Features Removed In Windows 7

[Bob I]

Eh? The Start menu is a list of shortcuts.

No 5hit, and perhaps you have even figured out the "real" location of
those "shortcut" files?

 

[Char Jackson]

I thought so, and I looked, and it isn't quite so.

There are folders and files therein, at least here.

You have actual files within the structure of your Start menu? I
wonder how they got there...

 

[Char Jackson]

Maybe because you can delete a folder from the library without deleting
it from the file system...

Then the folder behavior should rightfully be the confusing part, not
the file behavior. And yet, people only seem to complain about the
file behavior, the part that hasn't changed since forever. Weird.

 

[Stan Brown]

Then the folder behavior should rightfully be the confusing part, not
the file behavior. And yet, people only seem to complain about the
file behavior, the part that hasn't changed since forever. Weird.

+1

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:07:29 -0800, Gene E. Bloch

Then the folder behavior should rightfully be the confusing part, not
the file behavior. And yet, people only seem to complain about the
file behavior, the part that hasn't changed since forever. Weird.

I would rather accidentally *not lose* a folder than accidentally
*lose* a file.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:08:29 -0800, Gene E. Bloch

You have actual files within the structure of your Start menu? I
wonder how they got there...

Me too!

 

[Bob I]

Me too!

Gene, are you sure that what you are looking at is where you think
you're looking at it at? Start r-clicking on and select properties of
the item, then look at the location.

 

[Jeff Layman]

Then the folder behavior should rightfully be the confusing part, not
the file behavior. And yet, people only seem to complain about the
file behavior, the part that hasn't changed since forever. Weird.

We agree on something, Char! But the /impression/ Microsoft are trying
to give is that there is something special about a file in a library
folder. In Help | Working with libraries what does Microsoft mean by "A
library gathers files from different locations and displays them as a
single collection, without moving them from where they're stored?
Exactly /what/ is being displayed in that library folder?

Maybe the confusion here is the use of "gathers". How can it "gather"
something without moving it? Microsoft should have chosen a different
word which does not have such an obvious analogy in the real world.
Perhaps they should also not have focussed on whether the file is moved
or not; maybe they should just have said that the library folder
contains a special, direct, link to the file in the original folder,
which behaves as though it /were/ the file in the original folder

 

[John Williamson]

We agree on something, Char! But the /impression/ Microsoft are trying
to give is that there is something special about a file in a library
folder. In Help | Working with libraries what does Microsoft mean by "A
library gathers files from different locations and displays them as a
single collection, without moving them from where they're stored?
Exactly /what/ is being displayed in that library folder?

Maybe the confusion here is the use of "gathers". How can it "gather"
something without moving it? Microsoft should have chosen a different
word which does not have such an obvious analogy in the real world.
Perhaps they should also not have focussed on whether the file is moved
or not; maybe they should just have said that the library folder
contains a special, direct, link to the file in the original folder,
which behaves as though it /were/ the file in the original folder

That about sums it up. The library just collects all the links together
and displays them to the user in one location. Each link in the library
is actually a pointer to a file, and opening this file using the library
just opens it in the normal way, with all the associated functionality.

Now I've tamed it, it's actually a handy system. It's also handy that
you can create new libraries with your own names and contents.

 

[Wolf K]

[...]
We agree on something, Char! But the /impression/ Microsoft are trying
to give is that there is something special about a file in a library
folder. In Help | Working with libraries what does Microsoft mean by
"A library gathers files from different locations and displays them as
a single collection, without moving them from where they're stored?
Exactly /what/ is being displayed in that library folder?

Maybe the confusion here is the use of "gathers". How can it "gather"
something without moving it? Microsoft should have chosen a different
word which does not have such an obvious analogy in the real world.
Perhaps they should also not have focussed on whether the file is
moved or not; maybe they should just have said that the library folder
contains a special, direct, link to the file in the original folder,
which behaves as though it /were/ the file in the original folder

That about sums it up. The library just collects all the links together
and displays them to the user in one location. Each link in the library
is actually a pointer to a file, and opening this file using the library
just opens it in the normal way, with all the associated functionality.

Now I've tamed it, it's actually a handy system. It's also handy that
you can create new libraries with your own names and contents.

Are you sure it's the links that are displayed (presented) in a Library
"folder"? If that's the case, then deleting the link should not delete
the file, but apparently it does. What's your experience?

OTOH, if deleting the link to a file is interpreted as "delete the
file", then that's very, very bad design IMO. Deleting a link should
never delete the target.

I was going to test Libraries using my usual method of using a test
folder with copies of files. But I couldn't find a way of preventing
the Library from "gathering" all images (for example) from a specified
partition. If it's possible to limit the "gathering", then I'll play
with Libraries to see whether there are any redeeming features. Tips or
advice?

HTH
Wolf K.

 

[John Williamson]

On 22/01/2012 4:55 AM, John Williamson wrote:

Are you sure it's the links that are displayed (presented) in a Library
"folder"? If that's the case, then deleting the link should not delete
the file, but apparently it does. What's your experience?

What is presented is a link, which when clicked on, uses the normal
Windows "Open File" command set. In effect, the Library is a shortcut to
the file control programs.

OTOH, if deleting the link to a file is interpreted as "delete the
file", then that's very, very bad design IMO. Deleting a link should
never delete the target.

What happens is that when you delete the file, Windows does the
housekeeping necessary to delete the link.

I was going to test Libraries using my usual method of using a test
folder with copies of files. But I couldn't find a way of preventing
the Library from "gathering" all images (for example) from a specified
partition. If it's possible to limit the "gathering", then I'll play
with Libraries to see whether there are any redeeming features. Tips or
advice?

Right click on the Library, open "Properties", and use the box there to
add and remove folders from the library. My "Pictures" library controls
"D:\My Pictures" and "D:\MyAlbum", with the default save location set to
D:\MyAlbum. To save a file in MyAlbum, I just save it to the Pictures
library. Or I can navigate to D:\MyAlbum in the normal way.

You could, if you wished, set the root of a drive as the default
location for a library (Libraries (Right click - New Library - Set
propoerties to have D:\ as the folder controlled)), and that would let
you open a drive *exactly* as if you had used Explorer, with all the
control you would normally have, but without all the clicking round the
system opening stuff here, there, and everywhere that the default layout
of Explorer makes you use to navigate to D:\.

They're a powerful tool, and like all such need to be treated with
respect, and a thorough reading of the manual.

 

[Char Jackson]

We agree on something, Char! But the /impression/ Microsoft are trying
to give is that there is something special about a file in a library
folder. In Help | Working with libraries what does Microsoft mean by "A
library gathers files from different locations and displays them as a
single collection, without moving them from where they're stored?
Exactly /what/ is being displayed in that library folder?

I didn't have the same impression that you had. It was immediately
clear to me that files in Libraries are not special. I also didn't
obsess about the use of the word "gathers". It all just made sense to
me once I skimmed through the Help file about it. A minute's worth of
time invested paid immediate dividends.

Maybe the confusion here is the use of "gathers". How can it "gather"
something without moving it? Microsoft should have chosen a different
word which does not have such an obvious analogy in the real world.
Perhaps they should also not have focussed on whether the file is moved
or not;

To me, they did me a favor by reinforcing the point that files are not
moved into a Library. That gave me the clue I needed to understand
that files in a Library view are exactly the same as files in any
other Windows Explorer window. I also immediately thought it was nice
that creating a Library doesn't create a second set of files. I'm
space constrained as it is, so the last thing I want is another set of
files.

All of that is irrelevant, though. How long does it take to create a
Library, populate it with one or more folders, add/rename/copy/delete
files or folders, just to see what happens? A minute to read the Help
file, maybe 3 minutes to play with it, so less than 5 minutes and the
confusion is cleared.

maybe they should just have said that the library folder
contains a special, direct, link to the file in the original folder,
which behaves as though it /were/ the file in the original folder

That might have been overkill since there is no special, direct, link.
At the file level, it's no different than any other Windows Explorer
file view. There are differences at the folder level, but the file
level is the same as always.

 

[Wolf K]

Wolf K wrote: [...]

Are you sure it's the links that are displayed (presented) in a
Library "folder"? If that's the case, then deleting the link should
not delete the file, but apparently it does. What's your experience?

What is presented is a link, which when clicked on, uses the normal
Windows "Open File" command set. In effect, the Library is a shortcut to
the file control programs.

Um, it seems to me a Library is a good deal more than that. I just
opened the

What happens is that when you delete the file, Windows does the
housekeeping necessary to delete the link.

OK, that's a handy feature, but IMO should happen when you delete a
link (shortcut) anywhere, not just in a Library.

I just experimented with the Libraries/Videos. It showed me /Sample
Videos, and within that Wildlife.wmv (bundled with the OS). I clicked on
'Open file location', and found it was in /Users/..../Public Videos. I
copied it from there to the Desktop, then started did the whole
Libraries/Videos... thing again until I saw Wildlife.wmv. I deleted it,
then navigated to /Users/.../Public Videos. It was gone (sent to Recycle
Bin).

IOW, when Libraries do not display links to files, but the files
themselves. Only the Videos "folder" is a link. Everything inside it is
the real thing.

So we're back to what I can't figure out: why would MS implement such a
bizarre mess? If the "files" inside "folders" were in fact links,
Libraries would be very, very useful. As it is, they are worse than
useless, they are dangerous.

Right click on the Library, open "Properties", and use the box there to
add and remove folders from the library. My "Pictures" library controls
"D:\My Pictures" and "D:\MyAlbum", with the default save location set to
D:\MyAlbum. To save a file in MyAlbum, I just save it to the Pictures
library. Or I can navigate to D:\MyAlbum in the normal way.

Thanks.

Wolf K.
[...]

 

[Char Jackson]

So we're back to what I can't figure out: why would MS implement such a
bizarre mess? If the "files" inside "folders" were in fact links,
Libraries would be very, very useful. As it is, they are worse than
useless, they are dangerous.

I'm really struggling to see your point of view, so far without
success.

What's bizarre about it, why is it a mess, and why is it dangerous? If
you can handle Windows Explorer, which has been around in various
forms for ~15 years, surely you can handle this, too?

 

[Wolf K]

I'm really struggling to see your point of view, so far without
success.

What's bizarre about it, why is it a mess, and why is it dangerous? If
you can handle Windows Explorer, which has been around in various
forms for ~15 years, surely you can handle this, too?

OK, one more (last, I promise) time:

The advantage of using Library (presenting sorted lists of files
automatically) is offset by this design flaw: Any revision of those
lists that entails removing an item from a "folder" will lose data. The
file itself will be deleted. Never mind that you gave it multiple tags,
so that you could see it in several "folders" in Library: it's gone.
This is IMO a Bad Idea. It should disappear _only_ from the "folder"
from which you removed it.

I can think of several workarounds, but they all require going outside
the Library for more or less complicated recopying and retagging
operations. So why bother using Library? You can achieve the same
purposes by building directory trees, and placing copies (or shortcuts)
of files in whatever folders you think expedient. And you can revise
those folder contents whenever you change your mind without losing the
original file.

HTH,
Wolf K.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Gene, are you sure that what you are looking at is where you think you're
looking at it at? Start r-clicking on and select properties of the item, then
look at the location.

Exactly what I did.

I also opened the location in a separate window, and also played with
some sample files that I added in various places, all to try to discern
what the heck was going on.

 

[Char Jackson]

OK, one more (last, I promise) time:

The advantage of using Library (presenting sorted lists of files
automatically) is offset by this design flaw: Any revision of those
lists that entails removing an item from a "folder" will lose data. The
file itself will be deleted. Never mind that you gave it multiple tags,
so that you could see it in several "folders" in Library: it's gone.
This is IMO a Bad Idea. It should disappear _only_ from the "folder"
from which you removed it.

I can think of several workarounds, but they all require going outside
the Library for more or less complicated recopying and retagging
operations. So why bother using Library? You can achieve the same
purposes by building directory trees, and placing copies (or shortcuts)
of files in whatever folders you think expedient. And you can revise
those folder contents whenever you change your mind without losing the
original file.

Thanks for the detailed explanation, but IMHO this newfangled Library
function runs rings around your method. YMMV

 

[Stan Brown]

The advantage of using Library (presenting sorted lists of files
automatically) is offset by this design flaw: Any revision of those
lists that entails removing an item from a "folder" will lose data. The
file itself will be deleted.

That's not a flaw. If you had a database query with lots of linked
tables, and you deleted a record, it would be deleted. I accept that
that seems strange to you, but frankly I can't understand at all how
it can possibly seem so.

 

[Wolf K]

That's not a flaw. If you had a database query with lots of linked
tables, and you deleted a record, it would be deleted. I accept that
that seems strange to you, but frankly I can't understand at all how
it can possibly seem so.

Of course I expect a record to be deleted, but I don't expect any items
linked to it to be deleted. You'd be in real trouble if deleting
Employee123_Location would also delete every other record of Employee123.

But that's what Library does. Library uses tags to select and present
filenames. Eg, "Trip to Erewhon" tag will display all pictures you took
on that trip. Some will also be tagged "Samuel Butler",say, or "Aunt
Emily", or whatever. If I delete the filename IMG_02001 in the folder
"Trip to Erewhon", why on earth would I want the file to be deleted? All
I want is for that filename to disappear from "Trip to Erewhon". I would
still want it to appear in "Aunt Emily"!

See?

Wolf K.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Of course I expect a record to be deleted, but I don't expect any items
linked to it to be deleted. You'd be in real trouble if deleting
Employee123_Location would also delete every other record of Employee123.

But that's what Library does. Library uses tags to select and present
filenames. Eg, "Trip to Erewhon" tag will display all pictures you took on
that trip. Some will also be tagged "Samuel Butler",say, or "Aunt Emily", or
whatever. If I delete the filename IMG_02001 in the folder "Trip to Erewhon",
why on earth would I want the file to be deleted? All I want is for that
filename to disappear from "Trip to Erewhon". I would still want it to appear
in "Aunt Emily"!

Wolf K.

It still seems strange to me that something as logical, clear cut, and
obvious as what you just wrote is going to be rejected :-(