windoze 7 and thunderbird

[Stan Brown]

I spent about 40 minutes a few evenings ago trying to explain the
concept of Libraries in Win 7 to a customer, and in the end she still
didn't get it. It makes my head hurt to think what her reaction would
be if she and I had a discussion about VM's.

LOL. Libraries are easy: "Unless you're networking this computer
with others, you don't need them."

 

[Stan Brown]

I'd usually immediately disregard your question due to your childish
and meaningless attempted insult. But, hey, you're lucky - I'm bored
and have extra time, and I know the answer, so you will be the
fortunate recipient of my vast knowledge of Microsoft Windows:

No, there is no such conflict or incompatibility.

You may now kiss my ring.

I'm wondering which ring you mean, but as this is a family newsgroup
I won't post my guess.

 

[Char Jackson]

LOL. Libraries are easy: "Unless you're networking this computer
with others, you don't need them."

OK, I gotta ask. How do Libraries help (specifically) with networking?
It seems to me they have the exact same pros and cons locally versus
across a LAN, no?

 

[Dave \Crash\ Dummy]

OK, I gotta ask. How do Libraries help (specifically) with
networking? It seems to me they have the exact same pros and cons
locally versus across a LAN, no?

I believe it makes more sense if you replace "networking" with "multiple
users." Libraries are for home computers that have separate accounts for
Mom, Pop, Junior, Sis, and Gramps. What I would like to see is a "single
user" option during installation that would eliminate libraries and users.

 

[Twayne]

In

Is there a conflict between them. Friend has a new
computer and outlook depressed will not go on line for
him. I suggested thunder bird, but his wife has said that
there is an incompatibility problem between the two.
Dave

There is no such thing as "windoze". Try again.

 

[XS11E]

In Dave <[email protected]> typed:

There is no such thing as "windoze". Try again.

It's used by immature twits, I filter them because they're certainly
not worth an answer.

 

[Stan Brown]

OK, I gotta ask. How do Libraries help (specifically) with networking?
It seems to me they have the exact same pros and cons locally versus
across a LAN, no?

This goes back to discussions from almost a year ago, when I was
struggling with the libraries concepts. It's not that libraries help
with networking as such, but rather that with a library you can have
(say) a media collection hosted on several different computers act as
though it were all in one place.

 

[Stan Brown]

I believe it makes more sense if you replace "networking" with "multiple
users." Libraries are for home computers that have separate accounts for
Mom, Pop, Junior, Sis, and Gramps. What I would like to see is a "single
user" option during installation that would eliminate libraries and users.

That makes sense to me, Dave. I don't remember last year's
discussions in detail, but what you say sounds familiar.

 

[James Silverton]

Is there a conflict between them. Friend has a new computer and outlook
depressed will not go on line for him. I suggested thunder bird, but his
wife has said that there is an incompatibility problem between the two.

Dave

The use of puerile mangling of names, like "Windoze" and "Outlook
Depressed" is not particularly ingenious and does not dispose me to
reply in a serious news group. I don't actually use things like Outlook
Express or Windows Live Mail but I have no trouble running the latest
version of Thunderbird, now 6.0.2, under Windows 7 for both email and
news groups.

--


James Silverton, Potomac

I'm *not* (e-mail address removed)

 

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

Yes, for the non-MS products.

I was fortunate in that I had a legitimate XP that had never been
used...

For Windows 7 Pro and several other high-end systems, the free
downloadable XP Mode includes a license.

Sorry - I know some versions of 7 come with a valid XP. But when Stan
said "For trying out something possibly dangerous", I assumed he meant a
Windows 7 something.
[]

 

[Big Steel]

And "Dave" never replied to the thread and never will ;-)

The dumb clown knows better. He needs a foot put to his ass.

 

[Char Jackson]

I believe it makes more sense if you replace "networking" with "multiple
users." Libraries are for home computers that have separate accounts for
Mom, Pop, Junior, Sis, and Gramps.

Thanks, Dave, but I don't understand that example any more than I
understand the 'networking' example. I'm under the impression that
Libraries are useful anytime you want to aggregate two or more
separate locations and make them appear as one, so it doesn't seem to
make any difference whether the computer is primarily used by a single
person or by multiple people. It's getting late and I'm tired, so that
doesn't help, either.

What I would like to see is a "single
user" option during installation that would eliminate libraries and users.

I want to agree with you on that, but I've found myself using the
'multi user' feature on a regular basis, even though I'm the only
person to sit down in front of the machine. Sure as heck, if I were
given the choice and selected Single User, it wouldn't be long before
I wished I had taken the other option.

 

[Dave \Crash\ Dummy]

Thanks, Dave, but I don't understand that example any more than I
understand the 'networking' example. I'm under the impression that
Libraries are useful anytime you want to aggregate two or more
separate locations and make them appear as one, so it doesn't seem to
make any difference whether the computer is primarily used by a
single person or by multiple people. It's getting late and I'm tired,
so that doesn't help, either.

You could be right. I mostly spend my time avoiding libraries, not
understanding them.

I want to agree with you on that, but I've found myself using the
'multi user' feature on a regular basis, even though I'm the only
person to sit down in front of the machine. Sure as heck, if I were
given the choice and selected Single User, it wouldn't be long before
I wished I had taken the other option.

The only time I have had multiple users is when I enabled REAL
administrator, and that would be my single user user.

http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/507-built-administrator-account-enable-disable.html
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yjg3ol8

 

[Gordon]

The only time I have had multiple users is when I enabled REAL
administrator, and that would be my single user user.

Which would lay you WIDE open to security risks and great difficulties
WHEN the User account becomes corrupt (not IF)
Why do you think the most secure OSs (MAC, Linux and Unix) do NOT
normally allow users to run as Root (aka Administrator in the Windows
world)?
Why do you think MS has disabled the built-in Administrator account by
default in Windows 7?

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

You could be right. I mostly spend my time avoiding libraries, not
understanding them.

+1 - or maybe +2.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Sorry - I know some versions of 7 come with a valid XP.

No, it's a free download.

But when Stan
said "For trying out something possibly dangerous", I assumed he meant a
Windows 7 something.
[]

Running something dangerous under a virtual machine only messes up the
client software - the VM image, I am calling it (might be the wrong
term) ...

It's easy to make a copy of a working VM image and run the questionable
software on the copy. If the VM gets messed up, toss it and you're home
free.

 

[charlie]

"Running something dangerous under a virtual machine only messes up the
client software"

Usually, when the VM is written properly. But, a really clever
programmer can find a way or too. The Russians used to be king of this
sort of thing.

Having said that, we used to use VMware to debug windows apps and in a
few cases, drivers. (Before Win 7 & XP) At least when an app crashed
windows, with it running under VM, you usually had sufficient debug
info, and could restart windows without a hard reboot.

Sorry - I know some versions of 7 come with a valid XP.

No, it's a free download.

But when Stan
said "For trying out something possibly dangerous", I assumed he meant a
Windows 7 something.
[]

Running something dangerous under a virtual machine only messes up the
client software - the VM image, I am calling it (might be the wrong
term) ...

It's easy to make a copy of a working VM image and run the questionable
software on the copy. If the VM gets messed up, toss it and you're home
free.

 

[Stan Brown]

I want to agree with you on that, but I've found myself using the
'multi user' feature on a regular basis, even though I'm the only
person to sit down in front of the machine.

I'm curious how you use the multiple-user feature. In XP, I had an
admin account and a regular account; but in Win 7 I have just the one
account. It has admin privileges, but if a *program* needs admin
privileges it has to prompt me for permission.

The only multi-user feature I have used is that I enabled the Guest
account before my computer went to the shop. And I put permission on
my data partitions denying all access to Guest.

 

[Char Jackson]

I'm curious how you use the multiple-user feature. In XP, I had an
admin account and a regular account; but in Win 7 I have just the one
account. It has admin privileges, but if a *program* needs admin
privileges it has to prompt me for permission.

Let's see, I have identical user accounts to match each of the other
PCs on the LAN to facilitate file access/sharing between PCs. I also
have a user account on most of the PCs to facilitate access by the
media players. In addition, on the shop PC I frequently have to create
a new user account in order to test something that a customer is
complaining about. On each PC the Guest and Admin accounts are
disabled, but there are about a half dozen user accounts at any given
time.

The only multi-user feature I have used is that I enabled the Guest
account before my computer went to the shop. And I put permission on
my data partitions denying all access to Guest.

My PCs don't "go to the shop" since I am the shop.

 

[Jeff Layman]

You could be right. I mostly spend my time avoiding libraries, not
understanding them.

I looked at libraries when I first got Win7. I soon stopped when I
found that they weren't just a sort of shortcut to the files which were,
as far as I was concerned, still in their original folder, but the
actual files themselves - as it is the /folder/ which is in the library.
In other words, if you deleted a file in a library because you no
longer wanted it in the library, you deleted the file in its original
folder. In fact, looking at "Help" (I know...), answered this point:

"If you delete files or folders from within a library, they're also
deleted from their original locations. If you want to remove an item
from a library but not delete it from the location it's stored in, you
should remove the folder containing the item."

"If you delete a library, the library itself is moved to the Recycle
Bin. The files and folders that were accessible in the library are
stored elsewhere and therefore aren't deleted."

I still cannot understand why MS designed it this way. Why not simply
make a library create a shortcut to the original file in its original
folder?