I have used many browsers over time and have adopted the method of having
my favourites/bookmarks in a bookmarks toobar in drop-down folders.
However I see some browsers referring to 'Collections' - is this the same
thing?
--
Jim S

On 12/7/21 9:46 AM, this is what Jim S wrote:
> I have used many browsers over time and have adopted the method of having
> my favourites/bookmarks in a bookmarks toobar in drop-down folders.
> However I see some browsers referring to 'Collections' - is this the same
> thing?
>
Is this an answer?
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/organize-your-ideas-with-collections-in-microsoft-edge-60fd7bba-6cfd-00b9-3787-b197231b507e

--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

On 12/7/2021 12:52 PM, Big Al wrote:
> On 12/7/21 9:46 AM, this is what Jim S wrote:
>> I have used many browsers over time and have adopted the method of having
>> my favourites/bookmarks in a bookmarks toobar in drop-down folders.
>> However I see some browsers referring to 'Collections' - is this the same
>> thing?
>>
> Is this an answer?
> https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/organize-your-ideas-with-collections-in-microsoft-edge-60fd7bba-6cfd-00b9-3787-b197231b507e
>
>
I may be wrong but it sounds like MS is doing what they did several
years ago. Add what they think is and improvement and rename what has
existed since DOS 1.

I still use directories and sub directories and must translated when
discussing them to the new terminology, folders and sub folders.

Is there practically a lot of difference? Folders function as
directories, and sub folders functions as sub directories.

On 12/7/21 3:13 PM, this is what knuttle wrote:
> On 12/7/2021 12:52 PM, Big Al wrote:
>> On 12/7/21 9:46 AM, this is what Jim S wrote:
>>> I have used many browsers over time and have adopted the method of having
>>> my favourites/bookmarks in a bookmarks toobar in drop-down folders.
>>> However I see some browsers referring to 'Collections' - is this the same
>>> thing?
>>>
>> Is this an answer?
>> https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/organize-your-ideas-with-collections-in-microsoft-edge-60fd7bba-6cfd-00b9-3787-b197231b507e
>>
>>
> I may be wrong but it sounds like MS is doing what they did several years ago.  Add what they think is and improvement and rename what has
> existed since DOS 1.
>
> I still use directories and sub directories and must translated when discussing them to the new terminology,  folders and sub folders.
>
> Is there practically a lot of difference?  Folders function as directories, and sub folders functions as sub directories.
>
I find the whole thing stupid. I think it's just another attempt to help the stupid (oops, computer illiterates) to understand
organization. Goes along with the joke they did years ago in Windows (can't remember the name) of allowing you to group several folders
together. They finally dropped it.

I can't throw a stone very far, as I have a sister who knows only one thing, the downloads folder is a place she puts everything. And I
mean everything. No subfolders, no organization, and finding anything (for me) is impossible. And to boot, she downloads the same file 8
times and has file file(1) file(2)... file(n) in there. Any time I do maintenance I wind up deleting tons of dupes. If I did it enough, I
would install a duplicate file finder utility to make things easier.

--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

Big Al <Bears@invalid.com> wrote in news:soo710$m8q$2@dont-email.me:

> On 12/7/21 9:46 AM, this is what Jim S wrote:
>> I have used many browsers over time and have adopted the method of
having
>> my favourites/bookmarks in a bookmarks toobar in drop-down folders.
>> However I see some browsers referring to 'Collections' - is this the
same
>> thing?
>>
> Is this an answer?
> https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/organize-your-ideas-
with-collections-in-microsoft-edge-60fd7bba-6cfd-00b9-3787-b197231b507e
>

Thanks. As I suspected it seems to be a way to make a simple job
complicated. I think I'll stick with what I know best.

On 12/7/21 14:13, knuttle wrote:

[snip]

> I may be wrong but it sounds like MS is doing what they did several
> years ago.  Add what they think is and improvement and rename what has
> existed since DOS 1.
>
> I still use directories and sub directories and must translated when
> discussing them to the new terminology,  folders and sub folders.

I call them directories and subdirectories. I just have to accept the
other words.

> Is there practically a lot of difference?  Folders function as
> directories, and sub folders functions as sub directories.
--
17 days until the winter celebration (2021/12/25 12:00:00 AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction." - Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)

On 12/7/21 15:23, Big Al wrote:

[snip]

> I find the whole thing stupid.  I think it's just another attempt to
> help the stupid (oops, computer illiterates) to understand
> organization.   Goes along with the joke they did years ago in Windows
> (can't remember the name) of allowing you to group several folders
> together.  They finally dropped it.
>
> I can't throw a stone very far, as I have a sister who knows only one
> thing, the downloads folder is a place she puts everything.  And I mean
> everything.  No subfolders, no organization, and finding anything (for
> me) is impossible.  And to boot, she downloads the same file 8 times and
> has file file(1) file(2)... file(n) in there.  Any time I do maintenance
> I wind up deleting tons of dupes.  If I did it enough, I would install a
> duplicate file finder utility to make things easier.

I've felt that Windows was like that for a long time. It's designed for
people who should (of at least M$ thinks they should) be protected from
knowledge.

One of those things is "hide file extensions" (which has been on by
default in every version of Windows I remember), which makes it harder
to use, and provides a benefit for malware writers. For example a virus
email attachment named "house.txt.exe" which Windows stupidly displays
as "house.txt" (note the .txt is NOT the extension, so isn't hidden).
Windows knows the real extension is .exe, and treats it that way when
you click on it.

--
17 days until the winter celebration (2021/12/25 12:00:00 AM for 1 day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction." - Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)

On 12/8/2021 9:30 AM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
> On 12/7/21 14:13, knuttle wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I may be wrong but it sounds like MS is doing what they did several
>> years ago.  Add what they think is and improvement and rename what has
>> existed since DOS 1.
>>
>> I still use directories and sub directories and must translated when
>> discussing them to the new terminology,  folders and sub folders.
>
> I call them directories and subdirectories. I just have to accept the
> other words.

According to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directory_%28computing%29#Folder_metaphor

"There is a difference between a directory, which is a file system
concept, and the graphical user interface metaphor that is used to
represent it (a folder).[original research?] For example, Microsoft
Windows uses the concept of special folders to help present the contents
of the computer to the user in a fairly consistent way that frees the
user from having to deal with absolute directory paths, which can vary
between versions of Windows, and between individual installations. Many
operating systems also have the concept of "smart folders" or virtual
folders that reflect the results of a file system search or other
operation. These folders do not represent a directory in the file
hierarchy. Many email clients allow the creation of folders to organize
email. These folders have no corresponding representation in the
filesystem structure."

To me, that difference is so slight that I ignore it. These days I just
call everything a folder.

On 12/8/2021 12:30 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
> On 12/8/2021 9:30 AM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
>> On 12/7/21 14:13, knuttle wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> I may be wrong but it sounds like MS is doing what they did several years ago.  Add what they think is and improvement and rename what has existed since DOS 1.
>>>
>>> I still use directories and sub directories and must translated when discussing them to the new terminology,  folders and sub folders.
>>
>> I call them directories and subdirectories. I just have to accept the
>> other words.
>
>
> According to
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directory_%28computing%29#Folder_metaphor
>
> "There is a difference between a directory, which is a file system concept, and the graphical user interface metaphor that is used to represent it (a folder).[original research?] For example, Microsoft Windows uses the concept of special folders to help present the contents of the computer to the user in a fairly consistent way that frees the user from having to deal with absolute directory paths, which can vary between versions of Windows, and between individual installations. Many operating systems also have the concept of "smart folders" or virtual folders that reflect the results of a file system search or other operation. These folders do not represent a directory in the file hierarchy. Many email clients allow the creation of folders to organize email. These folders have no corresponding representation in the filesystem structure."
>
> To me, that difference is so slight that I ignore it. These days I just call everything a folder.
>

We can get out a microscope and have a look.

That microscope is NFI.exe, written around the year 2000 by MSFT,
and still used, as nothing better has ever been written by them!

File 40 <=== Details stored in $MFT if directory has few enough items
\ProgramData\Microsoft\WLSetup An entry might fit snugly within 4KB of the $MFT
$STANDARD_INFORMATION (resident)
$FILE_NAME (resident)
$OBJECT_ID (resident)
$INDEX_ROOT $I30 (resident) <=== associated with a directory entry, how you "suspect" such, $I30

File 41
\ProgramData\Microsoft\WLSetup\Logs <=== this is a directory, within the previous directory
$STANDARD_INFORMATION (resident)
$FILE_NAME (resident) <=== a directory has a name
$OBJECT_ID (resident)
$INDEX_ROOT $I30 (resident)

File 42
\ProgramData\Microsoft\WLSetup\Logs\2010-09-30_20-37_b50-xwi68z4g.log <=== this one is a "file"
$STANDARD_INFORMATION (resident)
$FILE_NAME (resident) \___ Could be a hardlinked file, with two filenames.
$FILE_NAME (resident) / No. The program won't give us both names. Ugh.
$DATA (nonresident)
logical sectors 15472592-15472831 (0xec17d0-0xec18bf) <=== clusters holding the data, unfragmented file

So really, a directory is "just a file"
and uses a file entry in the $MFT.

You will notice they did not use a descriptive term, neither
folder nor directory was used in the dump as a term.

For this file system at least, everything is a file :-)

Paul

On 12/8/21 3:14 PM, this is what Paul wrote:
> On 12/8/2021 12:30 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On 12/8/2021 9:30 AM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
>>> On 12/7/21 14:13, knuttle wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> I may be wrong but it sounds like MS is doing what they did several years ago.  Add what they think is and improvement and rename what
>>>> has existed since DOS 1.
>>>>
>>>> I still use directories and sub directories and must translated when discussing them to the new terminology,  folders and sub folders.
>>>
>>> I call them directories and subdirectories. I just have to accept the
>>> other words.
>>
>>
>> According to
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directory_%28computing%29#Folder_metaphor
>>
>> "There is a difference between a directory, which is a file system concept, and the graphical user interface metaphor that is used to
>> represent it (a folder).[original research?] For example, Microsoft Windows uses the concept of special folders to help present the
>> contents of the computer to the user in a fairly consistent way that frees the user from having to deal with absolute directory paths,
>> which can vary between versions of Windows, and between individual installations. Many operating systems also have the concept of "smart
>> folders" or virtual folders that reflect the results of a file system search or other operation. These folders do not represent a
>> directory in the file hierarchy. Many email clients allow the creation of folders to organize email. These folders have no corresponding
>> representation in the filesystem structure."
>>
>> To me, that difference is so slight that I ignore it. These days I just call everything a folder.
>>
>
> We can get out a microscope and have a look.
>
> That microscope is NFI.exe, written around the year 2000 by MSFT,
> and still used, as nothing better has ever been written by them!
>
> File 40                               <=== Details stored in $MFT if directory has few enough items
> \ProgramData\Microsoft\WLSetup             An entry might fit snugly within 4KB of the $MFT
>     $STANDARD_INFORMATION (resident)
>     $FILE_NAME (resident)
>     $OBJECT_ID (resident)
>     $INDEX_ROOT $I30 (resident)       <=== associated with a directory entry, how you "suspect" such, $I30
>
> File 41
> \ProgramData\Microsoft\WLSetup\Logs   <=== this is a directory, within the previous directory
>     $STANDARD_INFORMATION (resident)
>     $FILE_NAME (resident)             <=== a directory has a name
>     $OBJECT_ID (resident)
>     $INDEX_ROOT $I30 (resident)
>
> File 42
> \ProgramData\Microsoft\WLSetup\Logs\2010-09-30_20-37_b50-xwi68z4g.log   <=== this one is a "file"
>     $STANDARD_INFORMATION (resident)
>     $FILE_NAME (resident)                  \___ Could be a hardlinked file, with two filenames.
>     $FILE_NAME (resident)                  /    No. The program won't give us both names. Ugh.
>     $DATA (nonresident)
>         logical sectors 15472592-15472831 (0xec17d0-0xec18bf)   <=== clusters holding the data, unfragmented file
>
> So really, a directory is "just a file"
> and uses a file entry in the $MFT.
>
> You will notice they did not use a descriptive term, neither
> folder nor directory was used in the dump as a term.
>
> For this file system at least, everything is a file :-)
>
>    Paul
And to make things worse, in Linux, they state that everything is a file, even drives. YET, they use the icon of a file folder for a
directory. Now isn't that confusing?!! LOL

--
Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.2 64bit, Dell Inspiron 5570 laptop
Quad Core i7-8550U, 16G Memory, 512G SSD, 750G & 1TB HDDs

On 12/8/2021 5:06 PM, Big Al wrote:
> On 12/8/21 3:14 PM, this is what Paul wrote:
>> On 12/8/2021 12:30 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
>>> On 12/8/2021 9:30 AM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
>>>> On 12/7/21 14:13, knuttle wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>>> I may be wrong but it sounds like MS is doing what they did several years ago.  Add what they think is and improvement and rename what has existed since DOS 1.
>>>>>
>>>>> I still use directories and sub directories and must translated when discussing them to the new terminology,  folders and sub folders.
>>>>
>>>> I call them directories and subdirectories. I just have to accept the
>>>> other words.
>>>
>>>
>>> According to
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directory_%28computing%29#Folder_metaphor
>>>
>>> "There is a difference between a directory, which is a file system concept, and the graphical user interface metaphor that is used to represent it (a folder).[original research?] For example, Microsoft Windows uses the concept of special folders to help present the contents of the computer to the user in a fairly consistent way that frees the user from having to deal with absolute directory paths, which can vary between versions of Windows, and between individual installations. Many operating systems also have the concept of "smart folders" or virtual folders that reflect the results of a file system search or other operation. These folders do not represent a directory in the file hierarchy. Many email clients allow the creation of folders to organize email. These folders have no corresponding representation in the filesystem structure."
>>>
>>> To me, that difference is so slight that I ignore it. These days I just call everything a folder.
>>>
>>
>> We can get out a microscope and have a look.
>>
>> That microscope is NFI.exe, written around the year 2000 by MSFT,
>> and still used, as nothing better has ever been written by them!
>>
>> File 40                               <=== Details stored in $MFT if directory has few enough items
>> \ProgramData\Microsoft\WLSetup             An entry might fit snugly within 4KB of the $MFT
>>      $STANDARD_INFORMATION (resident)
>>      $FILE_NAME (resident)
>>      $OBJECT_ID (resident)
>>      $INDEX_ROOT $I30 (resident)       <=== associated with a directory entry, how you "suspect" such, $I30
>>
>> File 41
>> \ProgramData\Microsoft\WLSetup\Logs   <=== this is a directory, within the previous directory
>>      $STANDARD_INFORMATION (resident)
>>      $FILE_NAME (resident)             <=== a directory has a name
>>      $OBJECT_ID (resident)
>>      $INDEX_ROOT $I30 (resident)
>>
>> File 42
>> \ProgramData\Microsoft\WLSetup\Logs\2010-09-30_20-37_b50-xwi68z4g.log   <=== this one is a "file"
>>      $STANDARD_INFORMATION (resident)
>>      $FILE_NAME (resident)                  \___ Could be a hardlinked file, with two filenames.
>>      $FILE_NAME (resident)                  /    No. The program won't give us both names. Ugh.
>>      $DATA (nonresident)
>>          logical sectors 15472592-15472831 (0xec17d0-0xec18bf)   <=== clusters holding the data, unfragmented file
>>
>> So really, a directory is "just a file"
>> and uses a file entry in the $MFT.
>>
>> You will notice they did not use a descriptive term, neither
>> folder nor directory was used in the dump as a term.
>>
>> For this file system at least, everything is a file :-)
>>
>>     Paul
> And to make things worse, in Linux, they state that everything is a file, even drives.   YET, they use the icon of a file folder for a directory.   Now isn't that confusing?!!  LOL
>

Everyone in computing, seems to have a wicked sense of humor.

Paul

On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 10:37:21 -0600, Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid>
wrote:

>One of those things is "hide file extensions" (which has been on by
>default in every version of Windows I remember), which makes it harder
>to use, and provides a benefit for malware writers. For example a virus
>email attachment named "house.txt.exe" which Windows stupidly displays
>as "house.txt" (note the .txt is NOT the extension, so isn't hidden).
>Windows knows the real extension is .exe, and treats it that way when
>you click on it.
>

That particular "enhancement" has been in Windows from the very
beginning (I started with 3.0 so can't speak for 1.0 or 2.0/2.1) and I
have always considered it Satanic for the very reason you describe.

It certainly isn't new to Win or Win 10

Though no question my favorite Windows moment was when Bill Gates got
a blue screen of death at the Win 98 launch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IW7Rqwwth84

That was probably the only time in my memory that a blue screen of
death appeared on local broadcast TV.

The Horny Goat wrote:

> Mark Lloyd wrote:
>
>> One of those things is "hide file extensions" (which has been on by
>> default in every version of Windows I remember)
>
> That particular "enhancement" has been in Windows from the very
> beginning (I started with 3.0 so can't speak for 1.0 or 2.0/2.1)

It wasn't in Win3.x only 95 onwards