A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old Yesterday, 05:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Neil[_9_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 383
Default Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos

On 10/17/2018 5:59 AM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 21:51:36 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Ken Hart
wrote:

it absolutely was a universal limitation. it's *not* possible for dos
to do wysiwyg. period.

whatever preview you had was only an approximation of the final output.
it was *not* wysiwyg.

the mac was the first mainstream computer to do wysiwyg. all drawing to
the screen used the *same* graphics apis as drawing to the printer, so
whatever was on screen was *exactly* what would be on paper, regardless
of font, size, face or embedded graphics.

Years ago, in the pre-win3.1 days of MS-DOS, there was a software
package called "Fontasy". I remember it fondly from that time- it could
do all sorts of graphics, text layout, various fonts (hence the name),
etc; and it ran on......

(Drumroll, please....)

MS-DOS 2.1 or higher.

Here is a Google Books link to PC Mag for Oct 15, 1985, showing a
full-page ad for Fontasy.

https://books.google.com/books?id=Wc...=fontasy+ wor
d+processing+software&source=bl&ots=BB93psWbaI&sig =qcxCpMaw9oGwTL2_4wXwRyQ4NOk
&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj2opPPoYzeAhXs24MKHWuuClEQ6 AEwDHoECAgQAQ#v=onepage&q=fo
ntasy%20word%20processing%20software&f=false

One of the cool things I remember doing was to lay out a page with
multiple columns and boxes containing photos, then filling in text
around these items on the page. All this on screen, in WYSIWYG, running
on a DOS PC.

At the time, I thought the software was so good, I refused to pirate it!
The program was $50, and additional font disks were (IIRC) only $6 each
for 5" floppies.

Obviously, times have changed, and we don't use 9-pin dot matrix
printers anymore. But the point is: this was a WYSIWYG word processing,
page layout program that ran under DOS.


it wasn't wysiwyg. it was wysiawyg. almost what you get.


As opposed to Apple, if you are to be believed, which was WYSIOWG -
only what you get.

the ad even states 'the size may vary on some other printers'.

that they included a disclaimer is a very big clue.

you might have been impressed with it enough to break from your illicit
piracy habits, but the manufacturer even admits it's *not* an exact
match for what came out of the printer.


If that is your definition of WYSIWYG then modern Apple and Windows
systems are not WYSIWYG in that what comes out of the printer is
rarely an exact match for what you see on the screen. And remember, it
was you, just now, introduce the need for an *exact* match.

one of the key features of the macintosh was wysiwyg as part of the os
itself, which means *all* apps are wysiwyg, and nearly two years before
that ad ran.

and while you were fussing with dot-matrix printers, the mac was
printing wysiwyg to the laserwriter at its native resolution.


Laserwriter was 300 dpi while the resolution of the screen of the
classic Macintosh 512x342 on a 9" screen which equals about 68
pixels/inch. Using the definition you used to disqualify Fontasy on
DOS as WYSIWYG the classic MacIntosh was not WYSIWYG either.

The Mac's screen resolution was 72ppi. Apple marketed it to people in
the print industry as a "good thing", because type points are 1/72 inch.
In reality, that was a useless feature.

--
best regards,

Neil
  #152  
Old Yesterday, 05:57 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Neil[_9_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 383
Default Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos

On 10/17/2018 6:26 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
On Tuesday, 16 October 2018 16:18:06 UTC+1, Neil wrote:
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).


so it's NOT WYSYIWYG is it.


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.


only if you ignore the facts.
Publications don't matter, unless they were viewed on a screen.
You could use a daisy wheel printer to get letter quality but that wasn't WYSYIWYG.

Perhaps the extra characters in your above comment provide some meaning
beyond "What You See Is What You Get", but as far as I'm concerned, it
only means what it says; one can preview on-screen the parameters the
app can control and the output will match that. It has nothing at all to
do with a GUI.

--
best regards,

Neil
  #153  
Old Yesterday, 06:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,965
Default Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos


One of the cool things I remember doing was to lay out a page with
multiple columns and boxes containing photos, then filling in text
around these items on the page. All this on screen, in WYSIWYG, running
on a DOS PC.

At the time, I thought the software was so good, I refused to pirate it!
The program was $50, and additional font disks were (IIRC) only $6 each
for 5" floppies.

Obviously, times have changed, and we don't use 9-pin dot matrix
printers anymore. But the point is: this was a WYSIWYG word processing,
page layout program that ran under DOS.


it wasn't wysiwyg. it was wysiawyg. almost what you get.


As opposed to Apple, if you are to be believed, which was WYSIOWG -
only what you get.


wrong.

the ad even states 'the size may vary on some other printers'.

that they included a disclaimer is a very big clue.

you might have been impressed with it enough to break from your illicit
piracy habits, but the manufacturer even admits it's *not* an exact
match for what came out of the printer.


If that is your definition of WYSIWYG then modern Apple and Windows
systems are not WYSIWYG in that what comes out of the printer is
rarely an exact match for what you see on the screen. And remember, it
was you, just now, introduce the need for an *exact* match.


wrong. nothing has been introduced. i said that the design of mac os
was the first mainstream computer designed with wysiwyg built into the
os itself (i.e., every app) and that what dos did could only be an
approximation which varied depending on all sorts of factors.

all things considered, what dos did was pretty good given the numerous
limitations of the hardware and software, however, it was not as good
as what the mac could do out of the box.

tl;dr anyone who claims dos can do wysiwyg never used a mac.

one of the key features of the macintosh was wysiwyg as part of the os
itself, which means *all* apps are wysiwyg, and nearly two years before
that ad ran.

and while you were fussing with dot-matrix printers, the mac was
printing wysiwyg to the laserwriter at its native resolution.


Laserwriter was 300 dpi while the resolution of the screen of the
classic Macintosh 512x342 on a 9" screen which equals about 68
pixels/inch. Using the definition you used to disqualify Fontasy on
DOS as WYSIWYG the classic MacIntosh was not WYSIWYG either.


wrong. the size was the same, as was the layout, just at a higher
resolution.

it was wygibtwys, what you get is better than what you see.

once again, you don't understand something and choose to argue.

oh, and the laserwriter had appletalk networking built in. multiple
macs and laserwriters could be networked together using ordinary
telephone cord, which was already in the walls. not only any app, but
any mac on the network could print wysiwyg. nothing on the pc side came
anywhere close to that for many years.
  #154  
Old Yesterday, 06:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,965
Default Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos

In article , Neil
wrote:

I remember Fontasy, and there were several such programs available prior
to that with less layout capability. People who think WYSIWYG requires
OS-based GUIs don't understand that WYSISYG means only what it says; one
knows what one will get prior to printing it out.


people who think dos could do wysiwyg don't realize that the mac did it
*better*, and without any of the fuss.

wysiwyg on dos was an approximation, perhaps close enough for whatever
you were doing, but there was a lot of room for improvement.

the mac spawned the desktop publishing industry, not dos or even
windows.
  #155  
Old Yesterday, 06:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,965
Default Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos

In article ,
Whisky-dave wrote:

We had it on a xerox sstem before that ~1981.


true, but the xerox star/alto weren't personal computers. they were
priced *well* above what end users could afford (low 5 digits), even
most businesses.

Here is a Google Books link to PC Mag for Oct 15, 1985, showing a
full-page ad for Fontasy.


After Word wss released on the Mac in 1985, which had true WYSYIWYG.


yep, and macwrite/macpaint nearly 2 years earlier. by 1985, there were
a lot of choices.
  #156  
Old Yesterday, 06:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,965
Default Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

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.

And you will go on arguing like this when if you really had given me a
clear explanation you would direct me to it or quote it.


i did give a clear explanation, which you responded to. don't blame
others if you don't know what you've said.


What do you think was your clear explanation? Come on, give me a
message ID.


read your own posts.

it's not my fault you're senile.
  #157  
Old Yesterday, 06:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,965
Default Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

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.

I have C and D, also known as System and User. That naming system
predates both Mac and Dos.


that's not a naming system.


I named them. That's been my naming system for most of the last 30
years.


no. you chose a drive letter based on convention and physical port.
that's *not* a name, nor can you have two of the same letter.

deviating from that convention causes all sorts of problems, especially
windows, which assumes c: is the boot drive.

move the c: drive to another computer in an external enclosure. it's no
longer c:, as that other computer has its own c: drive. so much for the
name you supposedly gave it.

the mac was the first computer to let the user name disks anything they
wanted. in the floppy days, the mac would ask for a specific floppy by
name if it was not inserted. it was *impossible* to write to the wrong
floppy, as it was with dos, cp/m, etc.
  #158  
Old Yesterday, 06:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,965
Default Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos

In article , Neil
wrote:

The Mac's screen resolution was 72ppi. Apple marketed it to people in
the print industry as a "good thing", because type points are 1/72 inch.
In reality, that was a useless feature.


it was not useless at all. you know very little about macs.
  #159  
Old Yesterday, 06:06 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,965
Default Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:


nothing more than yet another ad hominem attack, because you can't
support any of your claims.

... while you don't support any of your claims.


wrong. they're fully supported, often with numerous links.


Numerous links? Not when you claim you have explained something in the
past. e.g. how should I have best sent 4GB of photographs to my sister
if not with a USB memory stick?


it's in the thread and you responded to it.

do you not remember what you wrote? if not, you have bigger problems.
  #160  
Old Yesterday, 10:05 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Neil[_9_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 383
Default Windows 10 update wipes out files and photos

On 10/17/2018 1:06 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Neil
wrote:

The Mac's screen resolution was 72ppi. Apple marketed it to people in
the print industry as a "good thing", because type points are 1/72 inch.
In reality, that was a useless feature.


it was not useless at all. you know very little about macs.

Well, I have Macs, know what they are *and aren't*, have been involved
in typography and lithography since the 1960s, know what that is *and
isn't*, and as a result know that you know none of the above.

--
best regards,

Neil
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Printing a bust of a person on a 3D printer from panoramic JPEG files on Windows Grease Monkey Digital Photography 1 October 7th 18 01:38 AM
Printing a bust of a person on a 3D printer from panoramic JPEG files on Windows Eric Stevens Digital Photography 1 September 8th 18 12:15 AM
Viewing MP4 Files Under Windows Harpocrates Digital Photography 4 February 6th 05 08:13 PM
Opening Pentax *ist DS RAW .PEF files in Windows 98? Helen Edith Stephenson Digital SLR Cameras 24 January 10th 05 08:16 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.