Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos

On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 19:37:22 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


How would you improve the design of a USB memory stick from the user's
point of view?

i already explained why sending photos on a usb stick is not a good
solution, with several alternatives. do try to keep up.

Dodge - twist - evade.

nope.

How should I go about sending you 4GB of photos?

read previous post.

I've just made a global search of all the messages in this thread
containing 4GB and have found that you seem to have evaded answering
my previous queries on this subject. Just in case I'm wrong, could you
please cite the message in which you explained or could you even
repeat your explanation?
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 10/16/2018 6:00 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 15 October 2018 14:25:35 UTC+1, Neil wrote:
On 10/15/2018 9:14 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 15 October 2018 13:08:04 UTC+1, Neil wrote:
nospam wrote:
keep in mind that i've been using them longer than you have, since
word/excel were available for macs before they were for windows.

I've used Word under DOS before Macs existed. So, I don't know what you
think you were using, but it wasn't the first versions of Word.

He did say BEFORE windows not before DOS there's quite a differnce without mouse control or WYSIWYG

Word under DOS had both mouse control and WYSIWYG, as did all apps that
needed it, such as drawing, painting, etc. FWIW, Windows 1, 2, & 3.x
were merely DOS shells, and there were better shells available prior to
them.

I don't remmeber WYSIWYG being any good under DOS. It could have been that at the time all we had was orange/black or green/black 80 coloumn monitors.

I think it depends on one's systems. I had NTSC color monitors under DOS
and I could see the layout, word spacing, fonts, etc. I was going to get
prior to printing the document. That, to me, *is* WYSIWYG.

--
best regards,

Neil

In article , MC
wrote:


what you fail to understand is that word/excel is not the best choice
for every word processing and spreadsheet related task. it might be
for you, but that doesn't mean everyone else must abide by your
personal preferences.
for simple tasks, they're overkill. yes, they 'can' be used but there
are better choices. simple concept.


Why do you stress so much over people using oftware they will rarely,
if at all, use to its full potential.

i don't stress about it. all i'm saying is choose the best tool for the
job.

you're the one who is bent out of shape that someone might choose
something *other* than what you use.

Even cars come equiped with a
top speed well in excess of any legal speed limits and some go even
faster. I do not see people clamouring to obtain a vehicle that will
only travel at the current speed limits.

bad analogy. people don't buy vehicles based on maximum speed. they buy
them based on looks, seating & luggage capacity, fuel economy, comfort,
cost, etc., and lately, gas/hybrid/electric.

Also, why should I want to care what people want to use?

because it's *their* choice, not yours.

That is not
the point. The point being argued here is that Word and Excel are the
most comprehensive and versatile apps in their genre.

that wasn't in dispute.

the point is that not everyone needs the most comprehensive and
versatile products for every task, and not just apps.

Most of your
argument is based on "current" need rather than "potential" need and I
think most people would rather have software that will cover any
potential need rather than find out later on that the software thay
have is lacking the capability to fulfil that need.

that's where you're wrong.

people usually use what fits their needs.

if people wanted to cover any potential need, they would always buy the
top of the line product.

using your car analogy, an suv can carry more people and luggage than
an econobox, so people should always buy an suv to cover any potential
need where they might have to do that.





you have stated you do not use macs and despise apple.

First half of the quote is correct. As for the second half, please
site.

your posts clearly demonstrate a deep dislike of apple, fueled by gross
misinformation about the company and their products, blindly dismissing
anything that shows your beliefs to be wrong.

and it's cite, not site.

what you fail to understand is that there are easier solutions for
the tasks they want to do. it's highly unlikely they need the full
capabilities of word or excel or need to deal with windows, especially
at their age.

Again you make assumptions. How do you or I know what will be the
potential need will be? (It was not just seniors, by the way)

i'm only going by what you said, which was seniors.

you are forcing them to learn windows and word/excel, without finding
out what their needs actually are. if that is the right choice, great,
but chances are, it's not


What bit of my post suggested I forced people to use stuff they did not
want to use. At what point did THEIR choice to want to learn to use a
PC and MS Office become my responsibility to deter them from learning
to use the hardware and software they wanted to use. The fact that
there was no difficulty in them becoming proficient users of both the
hardware and software elements I see no reason why THEIR choice was
wrong.

at what point did they objectively evaluate all other options?

more than likely, they did not know about the various alternatives. few
people know what a chromebook is, outside of schools where they're
common. or they have mistaken beliefs that an ipad is for games or
watching movies.



windows is not a universal solution for every computing task. that's
one of many reasons why ballmer was fired.

Who said it was? In fact I use Linux based Single Board Computers for
many small projects.

what if that small project turns into a large project? you should be
using a workstation to cover any potential need, not an sbc.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

How would you improve the design of a USB memory stick from the user's
point of view?

i already explained why sending photos on a usb stick is not a good
solution, with several alternatives. do try to keep up.

Dodge - twist - evade.

nope.

How should I go about sending you 4GB of photos?

read previous post.

I've just made a global search of all the messages in this thread
containing 4GB and have found that you seem to have evaded answering
my previous queries on this subject. Just in case I'm wrong, could you
please cite the message in which you explained or could you even
repeat your explanation?

i have not evaded anything and your search skills are not very good.

you even commented on the various suggestions, so you have full
knowledge of the existence of the post.

in other words, *you* are the one who is evading.

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

keep in mind that i've been using them longer than you have, since
word/excel were available for macs before they were for windows.

I've used Word under DOS before Macs existed. So, I don't know what you
think you were using, but it wasn't the first versions of Word.

He did say BEFORE windows not before DOS there's quite a differnce
without mouse control or WYSIWYG

Word under DOS had both mouse control and WYSIWYG, as did all apps that
needed it, such as drawing, painting, etc. FWIW, Windows 1, 2, & 3.x
were merely DOS shells, and there were better shells available prior to
them.

I don't remmeber WYSIWYG being any good under DOS. It could have been that at
the time all we had was orange/black or green/black 80 coloumn monitors.
and this is NOT what I call WYSIWYG, although it may have been on the PC,
but not the mac.

dos does *not* do wysiwyg. anyone who thinks that is very mistaken.

In article , Neil
wrote:


Word under DOS had both mouse control and WYSIWYG, as did all apps that
needed it, such as drawing, painting, etc. FWIW, Windows 1, 2, & 3.x
were merely DOS shells, and there were better shells available prior to
them.

I don't remmeber WYSIWYG being any good under DOS. It could have been that
at the time all we had was orange/black or green/black 80 coloumn monitors.

I think it depends on one's systems. I had NTSC color monitors under DOS
and I could see the layout, word spacing, fonts, etc. I was going to get
prior to printing the document. That, to me, *is* WYSIWYG.

then you have a different definition than the rest of the world.

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

I don't remmeber WYSIWYG being any good under DOS. It could have been
that at the time all we had was orange/black or green/black 80 coloumn
monitors.

I think it depends on one's systems.

I don;t think so DOS was NEVER WYSIWYG.

correct.

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

Thank you for offering an Apple-only solution to the solution of a
problem involving Windows 10.

backups are not a platform specific issue.

The presumed ease of use of Time Machine is.

it's not presumed. it *is* easier.

... and the relevance of this to Windows 10 is ...?

that as good as win10 is, it's still not as easy to use as it could be.

But what's that got to do with the specific problem of backing up
Windows 10?

Any OS worth using should be easy to backup from the users point of view.

not just backups. any os worth using should be easy to use all around,
without needing to jump through hoops to get stuff done. macos and ios
do a much better job of that than anything microsoft has ever done.

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

Then you refer to connecting an external hard drive. Why would a
person who can't figure out how to view images on a USB stick want or
have an external drive? And, that means she'd be backing up on C, and
that's hardly any protection from loss.

Macs don;t have obscure C drives, or D drives they ahve names and can be
given any name just loke you'd name a child.

'untitled' is a good name for a child.

https://i.stack.imgur.com/mDyOd.jpg

On 10/16/2018 8:20 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 16 October 2018 12:52:12 UTC+1, Neil wrote:
On 10/16/2018 6:00 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 15 October 2018 14:25:35 UTC+1, Neil wrote:
On 10/15/2018 9:14 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 15 October 2018 13:08:04 UTC+1, Neil wrote:
nospam wrote:
keep in mind that i've been using them longer than you have, since
word/excel were available for macs before they were for windows.

I've used Word under DOS before Macs existed. So, I don't know what you
think you were using, but it wasn't the first versions of Word.

He did say BEFORE windows not before DOS there's quite a differnce without mouse control or WYSIWYG

Word under DOS had both mouse control and WYSIWYG, as did all apps that
needed it, such as drawing, painting, etc. FWIW, Windows 1, 2, & 3.x
were merely DOS shells, and there were better shells available prior to
them.

I don't remmeber WYSIWYG being any good under DOS. It could have been that at the time all we had was orange/black or green/black 80 coloumn monitors.

I think it depends on one's systems.

I don;t think so DOS was NEVER WYSIWYG.

Under DOS/Windows, WYSYIWYG is determined by the app, not the OS. Not
all apps need to be able to preview font sizes and so forth (or even be
able to print, for that matter).

I had NTSC color monitors under DOS
and I could see the layout, word spacing, fonts, etc. I was going to get
prior to printing the document. That, to me, *is* WYSIWYG.

Not at the time it wasn't could you see underline and the font sizes as well as font type.

Well, I have numerous publications from those times that were created in
Word, and I could always preview them prior to printing. So, I don't
know (or care) what your limitations were, but they weren't universal.

--
best regards,

Neil