List of Features Removed In Windows 7

On 1/17/2012, Dave "Crash" Dummy posted:
> Gene E. Bloch wrote:
>> On 1/17/2012, Wolf K posted:
>>> True, but I prefer to make my own, thanks. I've yet to find _any_ program
>>> that understands how I like to organise my data, for that matter.
>>
>> You're way ahead of me. I haven't found a person that understands how I
>> like to organise my data. Not even (or especially) me :-)
>>
>> As for libraries, I find them to be a bug, not a feature. I seem to be in
>> agreement with all the nay-sayers in this thread.
>>
>> Not the idea, necessarily, just the implementation as I have experienced it
>> in W7.

> Your data is organized?? How quaint!

No, no, no. I just *like* to organize my data. I don't actually *do*
it.

Why, you might ask? Obviously I don't want to be seen as quaint :-)

Thanks for the help :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:31:37 -0500, Wolf K <>
wrote:

>On 17/01/2012 12:38 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:42:51 +0000, mechanic<>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> >Does anyone actually use the Libraries?
>> I do. Here's my chronology: [snip]
>
>
>You're just too sane and reasonable for Usenet!
>
>;-o

Alrighty then, web forums here I come! ;-)

--

Char Jackson

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:11:47 -0600, DanS
<> wrote:

>The question I have, is, do you add a file to one of the
>libraries.....or, are the libraries "read-only", and you add a
>file to one of the folders the library represents?

Yes, you can add files to Libraries.

--

Char Jackson

On 1/17/2012, Char Jackson posted:
> On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:11:47 -0600, DanS
> <> wrote:

>> The question I have, is, do you add a file to one of the
>> libraries.....or, are the libraries "read-only", and you add a
>> file to one of the folders the library represents?

> Yes, you can add files to Libraries.

And also remove files, but the behavior is not intuitive. Enough so
that I won't try to explain it: I can't!

It is easy to remove directories from Libraries non-destructively, but
individual files seem to get deleted fromthe drive, not just removed
from the Library's list. OK, I said I wouldn't try, but I did anyway
:-)

This is one of the reasons I avoid Librairies.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

Gene E. Bloch <> wrote in
news::

> On 1/17/2012, Char Jackson posted:
>> On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:11:47 -0600, DanS
>> <> wrote:
>
>>> The question I have, is, do you add a file to one of the
>>> libraries.....or, are the libraries "read-only", and you
>>> add a file to one of the folders the library represents?
>
>> Yes, you can add files to Libraries.
>
> And also remove files, but the behavior is not intuitive.
> Enough so that I won't try to explain it: I can't!
>
> It is easy to remove directories from Libraries
> non-destructively, but individual files seem to get deleted
> fromthe drive, not just removed from the Library's list.
> OK, I said I wouldn't try, but I did anyway
>:-)
>
> This is one of the reasons I avoid Librairies.

I can really see it being an organizational nightmare.

There are some that dig those kinds of features though.

My beef isn't directly with all the shiny little gadgets and
new 'neat' little features, but rather with the

This particular method of turning off libraries is 10 or 12
registry edits, having virtually no meaning to anyone other
than like a bunch of bizarro hex strings.

There can't be checkbox in a dialog somewhere that's
captioned: Use 'Libraries' ?

DanS wrote:

> My beef isn't directly with all the shiny little gadgets and
> new 'neat' little features, but rather with the
>
> This particular method of turning off libraries is 10 or 12
> registry edits, having virtually no meaning to anyone other
> than like a bunch of bizarro hex strings.
>
> There can't be checkbox in a dialog somewhere that's
> captioned: Use 'Libraries' ?
>

When you see bizarro hex strings, sometimes that's not hex.
It's actually text, where every second character is 0x00 hex,
and the other character next to it is ASCII. If I take a
bizarro hex string, edit out all the 0x00 things, then
load the string into my hex editor, it'll translate it
into text so I can read it.

The real question would be, what loaded that registry entry
in the first place. It probably wasn't done with regedit,
if the user had to add the string as hex. It was probably
done by some other registry adding tool, that supports
unicode translation as needed.

I have seen blocks of hex in the registry, where they appeared
to just be a binary dump. But I've noticed more recently, the
dumping of things like paths "C:\WINDOWS\blah" as a unicode string.

Where this is really a pain, is if someone asks "does the string
helloworld appear in Windows", at one time all you'd have to
do is search for "helloworld" with a text search. But now, you
also need to search for the unicode version " h e l l o w o r l d"
where the space is the 0x00 character, when it is actually being
stored as 16 bit unicode. It really depends on whether your tool
flow or tool choice, happens to properly support unicode or not.

Heaven help us, if more of the flavors of unicode are actively
promoted in Windows...

As it is, I've written a simple minded custom search tool,
when I actually need to find things like " h e l l o w o r l d"
somewhere on a Windows partition. Sometimes a person will
say, "I'm getting the error message 'Helloworld'" and the only
way to get a hint about the source, is to scan the entire partition.

Just a guess,
Paul

On 1/17/2012 3:34 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:31:37 -0500, Wolf K<>
> wrote:
>
>> On 17/01/2012 12:38 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>> On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:42:51 +0000, mechanic<>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Does anyone actually use the Libraries?
>>> I do. Here's my chronology: [snip]
>>
>>
>> You're just too sane and reasonable for Usenet!
>>
>> ;-o
>
> Alrighty then, web forums here I come! ;-)
>
Too late, they are now web fiveums!

On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:10:44 -0600, Bob I <> wrote:

>
>
>On 1/17/2012 3:34 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:31:37 -0500, Wolf K<>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 17/01/2012 12:38 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 13:42:51 +0000, mechanic<>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Does anyone actually use the Libraries?
>>>> I do. Here's my chronology: [snip]
>>>
>>>
>>> You're just too sane and reasonable for Usenet!
>>>
>>> ;-o
>>
>> Alrighty then, web forums here I come! ;-)
>>
>Too late, they are now web fiveums!

That reminds me, I used to have a forehead, but looking in the mirror
the other day made me realize that I now have a fivehead!

--

Char Jackson

Paul <> wrote in
news:jf5461$fin$:

> DanS wrote:
>
>> My beef isn't directly with all the shiny little gadgets
>> and new 'neat' little features, but rather with the
>>
>> This particular method of turning off libraries is 10 or
>> 12 registry edits, having virtually no meaning to anyone
>> other than like a bunch of bizarro hex strings.
>>
>> There can't be checkbox in a dialog somewhere that's
>> captioned: Use 'Libraries' ?
>>
>
> When you see bizarro hex strings, sometimes that's not hex.
> It's actually text, where every second character is 0x00
> hex, and the other character next to it is ASCII. If I take
> a bizarro hex string, edit out all the 0x00 things, then
> load the string into my hex editor, it'll translate it
> into text so I can read it.
>
> The real question would be, what loaded that registry entry
> in the first place. It probably wasn't done with regedit,
> if the user had to add the string as hex. It was probably
> done by some other registry adding tool, that supports
> unicode translation as needed.
>
> I have seen blocks of hex in the registry, where they
> appeared to just be a binary dump. But I've noticed more
> recently, the dumping of things like paths
> "C:\WINDOWS\blah" as a unicode string.
>
> Where this is really a pain, is if someone asks "does the
> string helloworld appear in Windows", at one time all you'd
> have to do is search for "helloworld" with a text search.
> But now, you also need to search for the unicode version "
> h e l l o w o r l d" where the space is the 0x00 character,
> when it is actually being stored as 16 bit unicode. It
> really depends on whether your tool flow or tool choice,
> happens to properly support unicode or not.
>
> Heaven help us, if more of the flavors of unicode are
> actively promoted in Windows...
>
> As it is, I've written a simple minded custom search tool,
> when I actually need to find things like " h e l l o w o r
> l d" somewhere on a Windows partition. Sometimes a person
> will say, "I'm getting the error message 'Helloworld'" and
> the only way to get a hint about the source, is to scan the
> entire partition.
>
> Just a guess,

In this particular case, they're CLSIDs that belong to the exe
or dll, or whatever module somewhere that provides the library
function. I haven't researched it, but Libraries are probably
implemented as a shell extension.

On 17/01/2012 18:25, Wolf K wrote:
> On 17/01/2012 10:45 AM, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:
>> mechanic wrote:
>>> On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:13:51 -0600, Six Underground wrote:
>>>
> [...]
>>> Does anyone actually use the Libraries?
>>
>> Not me, and I really wish they were optional!
>
>
> Same here.
>
> Problem is that some software insists on using them. Eg, I just tried
> out PaperPort, dumped it because it couldn't/wouldn't navigate to
> anything outside Documents. Bizarre. Well, maybe there was a switch
> somewhere to enable P/P to use other directories, but I didn't bother
> looking fir it. Now I have to clean up the Libraries because P/P added a
> bunch of folders in each one.

I don't use PaperPort, but wondered what it would do if you'd previously
used a registry hack to stop libraries appearing in Explorer. Would it
simply not run?

> IMO, all built-in add-ons should be optional. And no program should
> impose unchangeable defaults.

"built-in add-ons"? Isn't that a contradiction in terms?! But I know
what you mean.

And as for no program imposing unchangeable defaults, well, isn't that
what happens every time MS change a program version? ;-)

--

Jeff