[Dixonary] OT: Robocopy

[Guerri Stevens]

I got a new external disk drive and installed it yesterday. Thanks for
the advice from all of you to my earlier question about drives! In the
process of testing it, I wanted to use the XCOPY command and couldn't
remember the options, so I typed "help xcopy" in a command prompt
window. In addition to the help information was this message:

NOTE: Xcopy is now deprecated, please use Robocopy.

Very odd. I mean "deprecated"??? By whom? Help for Robocopy scrolls off
the screen.

So what is Robocopy, and why should I use it if XCOPY works perfectly well?

--
Guerri

[Paul Keating]

Unfortunately xcopy doesn't really work perfectly well in Vista. It’s been overtaken by developments.

xcopy can't handle paths longer than 260 characters, nor does it always do the right thing with file security attributes. It can’t assert the Windows NT backup right so there might be some files it can’t back up. It also gives up in the face of network interruptions.

To stop the help for robocopy scrolling off the screen (all 150-odd lines of it):

C:\Users\Me> help robocopy | more

xcopy says it’s deprecated in Vista, but it does not say that in Windows 7. This may indicate that MS has seen sense and made xcopy simply issue the corresponding robocopy commands. I hope so. It is what they should have done in the first place.

--
Paul Keating
The Hague

-----Original Message-----
From: Guerri Stevens

NOTE: Xcopy is now deprecated, please use Robocopy.

Very odd. I mean "deprecated"??? By whom? Help for Robocopy scrolls off
the screen.

So what is Robocopy, and why should I use it if XCOPY works perfectly well?

[Guerri Stevens]

Thanks for the "more" to keep from scrolling. I knew there was a way,
but couldn't remember it. Should have looked in my old DOS manual! Or
even asked Help, for that matter.

I don't think any of my paths are longer than 260 characters. What was a
problem originally was folder names that didn't conform to the old DOS
8+3 characters with no spaces etc. But I have those worked out now.

I do have things that don't get backed up, such as the trash folder(s),
but I don't really care about those. Plus there are error messages for
the C: drive that say "access denied" or something like that, but I
don't think I care about those either. I have partitioned my drive with
my own files, at least in theory, in specific places. I suppose I am
being too picky, but I figure I can always reinstall software, perhaps
having to remember and redo settings. And I like the idea of being able
to go to the backup drive and do a plain ordinary COPY without having to
decrypt or run special software.

One think I don't like about the My Book is that it's a little more
tippy than my previous drive, and thus easier to knock over. They don't
have a stand for it, and I may find it's best to put it somewhere more
secure between backups.

The new drive is a WD My Book Essential and it comes with its own backup
software that runs continuously in the background. My husband has a
different My Book, and he likes the backup done that way. I like to be
able to isolate, unplug and detach the backup drive. We do have
thunderstorms, and usually I unplug everything, at least if I'm home
when they occur.

Now why would MS use the word "deprecated"? I realize that could simply
be to disapprove of, but I always think of it as to belittle something.

Guerri

Paul Keating wrote:
> Unfortunately xcopy doesn't really work perfectly well in Vista. It’s
> been overtaken by developments.
>
> xcopy can't handle paths longer than 260 characters, nor does it always
> do the right thing with file security attributes. It can’t assert the
> Windows NT backup right so there might be some files it can’t back up.
> It also gives up in the face of network interruptions.
>
> To stop the help for robocopy scrolling off the screen (all 150-odd
> lines of it):
>
> C:\Users\Me> *help robocopy | more*
>
> xcopy says it’s deprecated in Vista, but it does not say that in Windows
> 7. This may indicate that MS has seen sense and made xcopy simply issue
> the corresponding robocopy commands. I hope so. It is what they should
> have done in the first place.

[Hugo Kornelis]

I must admit that I never looked up the dictionary definition, but in my corner of the Microsoft world (SQL Server, their database product), "deprecating" means that a feature still works in the current version for backwards compatibility reasons, but will stop working in a future version. It often also means that the feature doesn't work well with newer features.



 



Best, Hugo 



From : Guerri Stevens
To : dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com;
Subject : Re: [Dixonary] OT: Robocopy
 





Thanks for the "more" to keep from scrolling. I knew there was a way, but couldn't remember it. Should have looked in my old DOS manual! Or even asked Help, for that matter. I don't think any of my paths are longer than 260 characters. What was a problem originally was folder names that didn't conform to the old DOS 8+3 characters with no spaces etc. But I have those worked out now. I do have things that don't get backed up, such as the trash folder(s), but I don't really care about those. Plus there are error messages for the C: drive that say "access denied" or something like that, but I don't think I care about those either. I have partitioned my drive with my own files, at least in theory, in specific places. I suppose I am being too picky, but I figure I can always reinstall software, perhaps having to remember and redo settings. And I like the idea of being able to go to the backup drive and do a plain ordinary COPY without having to decrypt or run special software. One think I don't like about the My Book is that it's a little more tippy than my previous drive, and thus easier to knock over. They don't have a stand for it, and I may find it's best to put it somewhere more secure between backups. The new drive is a WD My Book Essential and it comes with its own backup software that runs continuously in the background. My husband has a different My Book, and he likes the backup done that way. I like to be able to isolate, unplug and detach the backup drive. We do have thunderstorms, and usually I unplug everything, at least if I'm home when they occur. Now why would MS use the word "deprecated"? I realize that could simply be to disapprove of, but I always think of it as to belittle something. Guerri Paul Keating wrote: > Unfortunately xcopy doesn't really work perfectly well in Vista. It’s > been overtaken by developments. >   > xcopy can't handle paths longer than 260 characters, nor does it always > do the right thing with file security attributes. It can’t assert the > Windows NT backup right so there might be some files it can’t back up. > It also gives up in the face of network interruptions. >   > To stop the help for robocopy scrolling off the screen (all 150-odd > lines of it): >   > C:\Users\Me> *help robocopy | more* >   > xcopy says it’s deprecated in Vista, but it does not say that in Windows > 7. This may indicate that MS has seen sense and made xcopy simply issue > the corresponding robocopy commands. I hope so. It is what they should > have done in the first place.

[John Barrs]

Hugo

In other words, MS have no idea what the word actually means

Originally deprecate meant to pray or plead for deliverance from something
bad -- (Microsoft frequently get my vote there), nowadays it usually means
to disaprove of but is increasingly being used to mean depreciate in the
sense of to belittle something. From what you say, Microsoft appear to be
using it for the other meaning of depreciate - that is, to lose value over
time

Wonderful how our language works!

JohnnyB

On 22 August 2011 01:07, Hugo Kornelis <hugo (AT) perfact (DOT) info> wrote:

> I must admit that I never looked up the dictionary definition, but in my
> corner of the Microsoft world (SQL Server, their database product),
> "deprecating" means that a feature still works in the current version for
> backwards compatibility reasons, but will stop working in a future version.
> It often also means that the feature doesn't work well with newer features.
>
>
>
> Best, Hugo
> ------------------------------
> From : Guerri Stevens**
> To : dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com;
> Subject : Re: [Dixonary] OT: Robocopy
>
>
>
> Thanks for the "more" to keep from scrolling. I knew there was a way,
> but couldn't remember it. Should have looked in my old DOS manual! Or
> even asked Help, for that matter.
>
> I don't think any of my paths are longer than 260 characters. What was a
> problem originally was folder names that didn't conform to the old DOS
> 8+3 characters with no spaces etc. But I have those worked out now.
>
> I do have things that don't get backed up, such as the trash folder(s),
> but I don't really care about those. Plus there are error messages for
> the C: drive that say "access denied" or something like that, but I
> don't think I care about those either. I have partitioned my drive with
> my own files, at least in theory, in specific places. I suppose I am
> being too picky, but I figure I can always reinstall software, perhaps
> having to remember and redo settings. And I like the idea of being able
> to go to the backup drive and do a plain ordinary COPY without having to
> decrypt or run special software.
>
> One think I don't like about the My Book is that it's a little more
> tippy than my previous drive, and thus easier to knock over. They don't
> have a stand for it, and I may find it's best to put it somewhere more
> secure between backups.
>
> The new drive is a WD My Book Essential and it comes with its own backup
> software that runs continuously in the background. My husband has a
> different My Book, and he likes the backup done that way. I like to be
> able to isolate, unplug and detach the backup drive. We do have
> thunderstorms, and usually I unplug everything, at least if I'm home
> when they occur.
>
> Now why would MS use the word "deprecated"? I realize that could simply
> be to disapprove of, but I always think of it as to belittle something.
>
> Guerri
>
> Paul Keating wrote:
> > Unfortunately xcopy doesn't really work perfectly well in Vista. It’s
> > been overtaken by developments.
> >
> > xcopy can't handle paths longer than 260 characters, nor does it always
> > do the right thing with file security attributes. It can’t assert the
> > Windows NT backup right so there might be some files it can’t back up..
> > It also gives up in the face of network interruptions.
> >
> > To stop the help for robocopy scrolling off the screen (all 150-odd
> > lines of it):
> >
> > C:\Users\Me> *help robocopy | more*
> >
> > xcopy says it’s deprecated in Vista, but it does not say that in Windows
> > 7. This may indicate that MS has seen sense and made xcopy simply issue
> > the corresponding robocopy commands. I hope so. It is what they should
> > have done in the first place.
>
>
>
>

[Guerri Stevens]

Ah. A Microsoft definition. But why not say that in a straightforward
manner? Why use, instead, a word with an ordinary meaning that is not
going to make sense in the context of that warning message? I guess that
is a question you can't answer.

Guerri

Hugo Kornelis wrote:
> I must admit that I never looked up the dictionary definition, but in my
> corner of the Microsoft world (SQL Server, their database product),
> "deprecating" means that a feature still works in the current version
> for backwards compatibility reasons, but will stop working in a future
> version. It often also means that the feature doesn't work well with
> newer features.

[Tony Abell]

On 2011-08-22 at 06:56 John Barrs wrote:

> In other words, MS have no idea what the word actually means

The use of deprecated to describe features of software is by no means
Microsoft's invention. It has been standard terminology in computer science
and, I believe, engineering (as by organizations that set standards) for
several decades. Although clearly deriving from the modern general meaning "to
belittle or disparage," it has its own distinct use in technical contexts, and
I'm surprised any recent dictionary would not have that meaning listed.

[Steve Graham]

Quite so.

Other than the choice of word, the concept is quite useful since it gives
not only individual users, but huge organizations as well to the ability to
plan for the future instead of just waking up one morning and find that some
functionality has disappeared and everything has ground to a halt.

Steve Graham

Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too
dark to read. Groucho Marx


-----Original Message-----
From: dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com [mailto:dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com] On Behalf
Of Tony Abell
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 5:50 AM
To: John Barrs
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] OT: Robocopy


On 2011-08-22 at 06:56 John Barrs wrote:

> In other words, MS have no idea what the word actually means

The use of deprecated to describe features of software is by no means
Microsoft's invention. It has been standard terminology in computer science
and, I believe, engineering (as by organizations that set standards) for
several decades. Although clearly deriving from the modern general meaning
"to
belittle or disparage," it has its own distinct use in technical contexts,
and
I'm surprised any recent dictionary would not have that meaning listed.

[John Barrs]

Several decades??

I admit to being retired ill since 1996 but I was in software since 1962 up
until then - maybe on your side of the pond you have used the word that way
for a while, but I only noticed it very recently myself. I have also talked
(emailed) to several of my friends still active in the industry over here
and the invariable understanding is that is is a far too common misspelling;
but my correspondents were not sure of what it was a misspelling. Missing
from anyone's understanding was the idea that there was any planning
necessary.

Once again you guys are leading the world in adding a special use to a word
which has another meaning - I am not being pejorative here, that is how
language works. What I can be pejorative about is the general "devil take
the hindmost if they do not understand my special meaning" attitude.
In this environment here we are OK with strange words and meanings but in
the world at large if we try using a word with a meaning which it has had
for centuries but which is no longer that of the current idiot then we are
usually condemned as pedantic. I am merely making a plea for the pedant.

JohnnyB

On 22 August 2011 13:50, Tony Abell <hello (AT) isanybodyhome (DOT) com> wrote:

>
> On 2011-08-22 at 06:56 John Barrs wrote:
>
> > In other words, MS have no idea what the word actually means
>
> The use of deprecated to describe features of software is by no means
> Microsoft's invention. It has been standard terminology in computer science
> and, I believe, engineering (as by organizations that set standards) for
> several decades. Although clearly deriving from the modern general meaning
> "to
> belittle or disparage," it has its own distinct use in technical contexts,
> and
> I'm surprised any recent dictionary would not have that meaning listed.
>
>

[Tony Abell]

On 2011-08-22 at 17:11 John Barrs wrote:

> I have also talked (emailed) to several of my friends still active in the
> industry over here and the invariable understanding is that is is a far too
> common misspelling; but my correspondents were not sure of what it was a
> misspelling. Missing from anyone's understanding was the idea that there was
> any planning necessary.

I can't imagine what word "deprecate" could be a misspelling of, at least in
the context where the meaning is to declare or identify a feature or standard
as obsolete or about to become obsolete.

I've been reading the word in technical contexts (almost always in a passive
construction as a past participle) for so long that I simply summarized the
time as "decades". It's possible this usage does not go back as far as that
implies, but at least ten years, I'd guess. And I must also say that its
meaning in context was clear to me from the start as an extension of its
"disapprove" meaning. The earlier meaning of "praying to avert" was unknown to
me before this thread.

But usually I'm on the side of the pedant, and find myself bristling on
encountering what seems to be a pointless neologism. For example, last year a
female acquaintance announced on Facebook that she had spent the afternoon
spinning at the gym. Ruling out the possibility that she had been rotating
rapidly about vertical axis, I could only picture her pumping away at an
old-fashioned, wooden spinning wheel making yarn. Since she had been doing it
at a gym, it was clear that it was some kind of exercise, and at least it was
one which produced a useful product as a side effect; however, it would really
only exercise one leg.

It turns out "spinning" now means using a stationary bicycle. Nonetheless,
when I hear it used thus, I still can't get those spinning wheels out of my
mind.

[Hugo Kornelis]

&quot;You guys&quot;?



&nbsp;



Please don't include me. That I know the meaning MS (and apparently other software companies) use doesn't mean I condone it!



It's just that I stopped fighting it when they started calling questions and request &quot;an ask&quot;.



&nbsp;



Best, Hugo&nbsp;



&nbsp;



From : John Barrs
To : dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com;
Subject : Re: [Dixonary] OT: Robocopy
&nbsp;

Several decades??

I admit to being retired ill since 1996 but I was in software since 1962 up until then - maybe on your side of the pond you have used the word that way for a while, but I only noticed it very recently myself. I have also talked (emailed) to several of my friends still active in the industry over here and the invariable understanding is that is is a far too common misspelling; but my correspondents were not sure of what it was a misspelling. Missing from anyone's understanding was the idea that there was any planning necessary.

Once again you guys are leading the world in adding a special use to a word which has another meaning - I am not being pejorative here, that is how language works. What I can be pejorative about is the general &quot;devil take the hindmost if they do not understand my special meaning&quot; attitude.
In this environment here we are OK with strange words and meanings but in the world at large if we &nbsp;try using a word with a meaning which it has had for centuries but which is no longer that of the current idiot then we are usually condemned as pedantic. I am merely making a plea for the pedant.

JohnnyB



On 22 August 2011 13:50, Tony Abell&nbsp;&lt;hello (AT) isanybodyhome (DOT) com (mailto:hello (AT) isanybodyhome (DOT) com)&gt; wrote:



On 2011-08-22 at 06:56 John Barrs wrote:

&gt; In other words, MS have no idea what the word actually means



The use of deprecated to describe features of software is by no means
Microsoft's invention. It has been standard terminology in computer science
and, I believe, engineering (as by organizations that set standards) for
several decades. Although clearly deriving from the modern general meaning &quot;to
belittle or disparage,&quot; it has its own distinct use in technical contexts, and
I'm surprised any recent dictionary would not have that meaning listed.

[Guerri Stevens]

"Spinning" in the bicycle context is fairly old but I still have to
think twice when someone mentions having been spinning without also
mentioning the gym or bicycling or fleece.

My guess is that if "deprecate" in the computer software context is a
spelling error, it would have been intended to be "depreciate".
Although why someone would say that a given function was depreciated is
also odd, at least in my opinion. Why not say that the XCOPY doesn't
work well under Vista and has been replaced by ROBOCOPY. Or if XCOPY is
going to be removed from future versions of Windows, why not say that
explicitly? Or, why not make XCOPY into ROBOCOPY without introducing a
new command?

Until a few days ago I had not tried to get help on XCOPY. I do know
that I *have* done it since I got my Vista machine, so that warning
message is not something that was in use originally. I did run an update
of Vista in the past couple of months, and that is probably when it
crept into my computer.

Guerri

Tony Abell wrote:
> On 2011-08-22 at 17:11 John Barrs wrote:
>
>> I have also talked (emailed) to several of my friends still active in the
>> industry over here and the invariable understanding is that is is a far too
>> common misspelling; but my correspondents were not sure of what it was a
>> misspelling. Missing from anyone's understanding was the idea that there was
>> any planning necessary.
>
> I can't imagine what word "deprecate" could be a misspelling of, at least in
> the context where the meaning is to declare or identify a feature or standard
> as obsolete or about to become obsolete.
>
> I've been reading the word in technical contexts (almost always in a passive
> construction as a past participle) for so long that I simply summarized the
> time as "decades". It's possible this usage does not go back as far as that
> implies, but at least ten years, I'd guess. And I must also say that its
> meaning in context was clear to me from the start as an extension of its
> "disapprove" meaning. The earlier meaning of "praying to avert" was unknown to
> me before this thread.
>
> But usually I'm on the side of the pedant, and find myself bristling on
> encountering what seems to be a pointless neologism. For example, last year a
> female acquaintance announced on Facebook that she had spent the afternoon
> spinning at the gym. Ruling out the possibility that she had been rotating
> rapidly about vertical axis, I could only picture her pumping away at an
> old-fashioned, wooden spinning wheel making yarn. Since she had been doing it
> at a gym, it was clear that it was some kind of exercise, and at least it was
> one which produced a useful product as a side effect; however, it would really
> only exercise one leg.
>
> It turns out "spinning" now means using a stationary bicycle. Nonetheless,
> when I hear it used thus, I still can't get those spinning wheels out of my
> mind.
>
>

[Guerri Stevens]

Well, if a question is an "ask", then is the answer a "tell"? And could
you say you had found a "tell" when, I think, (without walking
downstairs to the large dictionary) you could be referring to an
archeological site?

And while we are on words, what about "volume"? It was a crossword
puzzle clue recently and I was trying to think of measures of loudness,
but the answer was "gallon"!

Guerri

Hugo Kornelis wrote:
> "You guys"?
>
>
>
> Please don't include me. That I know the meaning MS (and apparently
> other software companies) use doesn't mean I condone it!
>
> It's just that I stopped fighting it when they started calling questions
> and request "an ask".
>
>
>
> Best, Hugo
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From : John Barrs
> To : dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com;
> Subject : Re: [Dixonary] OT: Robocopy
>
> Several decades??
>
> I admit to being retired ill since 1996 but I was in software since 1962
> up until then - maybe on your side of the pond you have used the word
> that way for a while, but I only noticed it very recently myself. I have
> also talked (emailed) to several of my friends still active in the
> industry over here and the invariable understanding is that is is a far
> too common misspelling; but my correspondents were not sure of what it
> was a misspelling. Missing from anyone's understanding was the idea that
> there was any planning necessary.
>
> Once again you guys are leading the world in adding a special use to a
> word which has another meaning - I am not being pejorative here, that is
> how language works. What I can be pejorative about is the general "devil
> take the hindmost if they do not understand my special meaning" attitude.
> In this environment here we are OK with strange words and meanings but
> in the world at large if we try using a word with a meaning which it
> has had for centuries but which is no longer that of the current idiot
> then we are usually condemned as pedantic. I am merely making a plea for
> the pedant.
>
> JohnnyB
>
> On 22 August 2011 13:50, Tony Abell <hello (AT) isanybodyhome (DOT) com
> <mailto:hello (AT) isanybodyhome (DOT) com>> wrote:
>
>
> On 2011-08-22 at 06:56 John Barrs wrote:
>
> > In other words, MS have no idea what the word actually means
>
> The use of deprecated to describe features of software is by no means
> Microsoft's invention. It has been standard terminology in computer
> science
> and, I believe, engineering (as by organizations that set standards) for
> several decades. Although clearly deriving from the modern general
> meaning "to
> belittle or disparage," it has its own distinct use in technical
> contexts, and
> I'm surprised any recent dictionary would not have that meaning listed.
>
>

[Tony Abell]

On 2011-08-22 at 20:45 Guerri Stevens wrote:

> "Spinning" in the bicycle context is fairly old but I still have to
> think twice when someone mentions having been spinning without also
> mentioning the gym or bicycling or fleece.

That's fascinating, because I had never heard spinning used that way before
last year, and it still strikes me as very strange.

I think one's reaction to new or variant word meanings may be essentially
arbitrary. Both John Barrs and Hugo Kornelis join you in finding the software
usage of deprecate to be confusing or annoying to some degree, whereas to me
it seemed a natural extension of the older meaning from the first time I saw
it. Instead, I have a negative reaction to "spinning" as referring to
bicycling (or monocycling) for exercise, which bothers no one else.

> My guess is that if "deprecate" in the computer software context is a
> spelling error, it would have been intended to be "depreciate".

Yes, I've seen "depreciated" used when referring to software features as well,
but depreciated suggests a more passive process of something becoming less
used over time due to its unpopularity, whereas "deprecated" carries a
condemnatory tone, as would be appropriate to the party who has made a
decision not to offer or support the facility or standard in the future.

[John Barrs]

Y'all

I think I had two things in mind last night. One is that I was tired and
feeling out of sorts but the other is the generalised arrogance that decides
to use a word to really mean - "OK you users out there, buy something new
from me to replace a perfectly good idea that you have been using for ages"
They seem to have forgotten the one fundamental rule "if it ain't broke then
don't fix it"

== apropos of XCOPY, Windows 7 is where I found the word deprecate used in
context of XCOPY and no alternative was offered to me. My instant
understanding was that they meant that they had depreciated the value of
what is left of the DOS-type commands - which is after all the effect. (I
was having to go back to DOS type commands becasue the visual interface
(explorer) was just not working to delete a set of files that the msi
installer had failed to remove when I "removed" some software - the specific
files were in system32 and a folder in Program Files: it turned out that
they were "owned" by Trusted Installer - the software manufacturer had no
idea why the "Trusted Installer" had been invoked and it takes a bit of
research to locate how to change the ownership - and that reminds me, I
have a question

becasue there is only one user on this machine I only have JohnB as a user
and he has full privileges. Particularly, I do not have Admin or
Administrator. Does anyone know how I can really give JohnB full Admin
priveleges? I keep finding that there are things that I cannot do becasue I
am not Administrator - So far I have not done them! == I will admit that
this may not be Microsoft, this may be other software people assuming that
the only valid "all priveleges" user will be called Administrator, but I
don't think so, having made the decision to remove Administrator, if I try
to recreate that user he only has the same privileges as I have and the
software still says that I need Administrator priveleges. Also it is
annoying to have to slide down menus to find "open as adminsitrator" for
ordinary everyday use. So, Advice welcomed

JohnnyB

On 23 August 2011 06:54, Tony Abell <hello (AT) isanybodyhome (DOT) com> wrote:

>
> On 2011-08-22 at 20:45 Guerri Stevens wrote:
>
> > "Spinning" in the bicycle context is fairly old but I still have to
> > think twice when someone mentions having been spinning without also
> > mentioning the gym or bicycling or fleece.
>
> That's fascinating, because I had never heard spinning used that way before
> last year, and it still strikes me as very strange.
>
> I think one's reaction to new or variant word meanings may be essentially
> arbitrary. Both John Barrs and Hugo Kornelis join you in finding the
> software
> usage of deprecate to be confusing or annoying to some degree, whereas to
> me
> it seemed a natural extension of the older meaning from the first time I
> saw
> it. Instead, I have a negative reaction to "spinning" as referring to
> bicycling (or monocycling) for exercise, which bothers no one else.
>
> > My guess is that if "deprecate" in the computer software context is a
> > spelling error, it would have been intended to be "depreciate".
>
> Yes, I've seen "depreciated" used when referring to software features as
> well,
> but depreciated suggests a more passive process of something becoming less
> used over time due to its unpopularity, whereas "deprecated" carries a
> condemnatory tone, as would be appropriate to the party who has made a
> decision not to offer or support the facility or standard in the future.
>
>

[Guerri Stevens]

Out of sorts is my usual feeling toward Windows products, which become
increasingly complex over time, adding features I don't want or don't
care about and removing or "deprecating" features I do want. Windows 7
in the 64-bit or 32-bit or whatever the newest kind is, will not run DOS
programs at all. And I have two that I use all the time, not to mention
my .BAT procedure for backing up.

I wonder what was done to prevent the DOS programs from continuing to
work? Was there a conscious decision to do that? Did something have to
be removed or disabled? Were there certain commands or features that
weren't going to work and therefore it was decided to remove all
functionality? Or is this just a way of saying we should move into the
future and stop clinging to the past?

Guerri, aka one of the "bitter clingers"

John Barrs wrote:
> Y'all
>
> I think I had two things in mind last night. One is that I was tired and
> feeling out of sorts but the other is the generalised arrogance that
> decides to use a word to really mean - "OK you users out there, buy
> something new from me to replace a perfectly good idea that you have
> been using for ages" They seem to have forgotten the one fundamental
> rule "if it ain't broke then don't fix it"

[France International]

I transitioned successfully from Windows 98 to WIndows 7 and had several DOS
legacy programs that will now either run at the command prompt or in DosBox.
So far, I haven't encountered any difficulties with them.

Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Guerri Stevens" <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com>
To: <dixonary (AT) googlegroups (DOT) com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2011 5:59 AM
Subject: Re: [Dixonary] OT: Robocopy


> Out of sorts is my usual feeling toward Windows products, which become
> increasingly complex over time, adding features I don't want or don't care
> about and removing or "deprecating" features I do want. Windows 7 in the
> 64-bit or 32-bit or whatever the newest kind is, will not run DOS programs
> at all. And I have two that I use all the time, not to mention my .BAT
> procedure for backing up.
>
> I wonder what was done to prevent the DOS programs from continuing to
> work? Was there a conscious decision to do that? Did something have to be
> removed or disabled? Were there certain commands or features that weren't
> going to work and therefore it was decided to remove all functionality? Or
> is this just a way of saying we should move into the future and stop
> clinging to the past?
>
> Guerri, aka one of the "bitter clingers"
>
> John Barrs wrote:
>> Y'all
>>
>> I think I had two things in mind last night. One is that I was tired and
>> feeling out of sorts but the other is the generalised arrogance that
>> decides to use a word to really mean - "OK you users out there, buy
>> something new from me to replace a perfectly good idea that you have been
>> using for ages" They seem to have forgotten the one fundamental rule "if
>> it ain't broke then don't fix it"
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3850 - Release Date: 08/22/11
>

[John Barrs]

Guerri

try using click Start, --> typing in the word *command* in the imediate
search textbox and when you can see 'command.exe' or 'command promp' then
rightclick it and choose to "run as administrator" from the resultant menu
== this works fine for me in the WIN 7 32 bit version== .bat commands
included (provided all the commands within them are still there and will not
be blown up by windows permissions)

"bitter clinger" - I like it! a group that I am obviously suited to belong
to

JohnnyB

On 23 August 2011 10:59, Guerri Stevens <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com> wrote:

> Out of sorts is my usual feeling toward Windows products, which become
> increasingly complex over time, adding features I don't want or don't care
> about and removing or "deprecating" features I do want. Windows 7 in the
> 64-bit or 32-bit or whatever the newest kind is, will not run DOS programs
> at all. And I have two that I use all the time, not to mention my .BAT
> procedure for backing up.
>
> I wonder what was done to prevent the DOS programs from continuing to work?
> Was there a conscious decision to do that? Did something have to be removed
> or disabled? Were there certain commands or features that weren't going to
> work and therefore it was decided to remove all functionality? Or is this
> just a way of saying we should move into the future and stop clinging to the
> past?
>
> Guerri, aka one of the "bitter clingers"
>
>
> John Barrs wrote:
>
>> Y'all
>>
>> I think I had two things in mind last night. One is that I was tired and
>> feeling out of sorts but the other is the generalised arrogance that decides
>> to use a word to really mean - "OK you users out there, buy something new
>> from me to replace a perfectly good idea that you have been using for ages"
>> They seem to have forgotten the one fundamental rule "if it ain't broke then
>> don't fix it"
>>
>
>

[Tim B]

> In other words, MS have no idea what the word actually means

This use of the word has been common in computing circles for many years; I think it was first used
in this sense by IBM around 40 years ago. It is also used in International Standards, for example in
programming languages, to indicate that a language feature is likely to be removed in a future
version of the standard.

Best wishes,
Tim B.

[Guerri Stevens]

I no longer have the Windows 7 machine - had other issues with it. I
also have not kept up with these things, but I *think* I had the 64-bit
version, and was told by someone that DOS apps would work on the 32-bit
but not 64-bit.

One of the DOS apps I wanted to keep was a calendar, and I wanted it to
appear at boot on the theory that if I saw immediately what I was to do
or appointments I had they would not be forgotten!

I know the handwriting is on the wall, and sooner or later I will be
forced into Windows 7 or whatever comes after it. So I should put on the
aforementioned calendar an item that says to find a new calendar
application and replacements for the other DOS stuff.

What happened to "user friendly"? It's not friendly if a new version
means the old stuff either doesn't work, or works only with tinkering.


Guerri

John Barrs wrote:
> Guerri
>
> try using click Start, --> typing in the word *command* in the imediate
> search textbox and when you can see 'command.exe' or 'command promp'
> then rightclick it and choose to "run as administrator" from the
> resultant menu == this works fine for me in the WIN 7 32 bit version==
> .bat commands included (provided all the commands within them are still
> there and will not be blown up by windows permissions)
>
> "bitter clinger" - I like it! a group that I am obviously suited to
> belong to
>
> JohnnyB

[John Barrs]

Guerri

I don't know about now, but 6 months ago in this country if you bought a
personal or home machine then you were very unlikley to get anything other
than Windows 7 64 bit. If however you bought a commercial or professional
machine then the default offered was Windows 7 32 bit - becasue there was so
much legacy software in the business world. I must admit that I like it now.
I still have issues with it in things I would like to set myself but it
learns my requirements and becomes the machine I want - often without me
being able to make the change myself, it does it. A bit frightening! but
very nice none-the-less. For instance, one of my apps creates a winzip
command line and runs it as a batch file. No matter what I did with the
software it would not run the batch file. I dropped into a command prompt to
test it a couple of times ... and since then the call to run any batch file
from my software now works (assuming the batch file can still access its
commands - hence no xcopy - but the winzip commandline works a treat)

Although I am a home user nowadays I was advised to buy a commercial machine
for a totally different reason - the fact that they come in proper metal
cases that will take a bit of wear,,,, my advisor said that home machines
are usually so flimsily built that even with great care the casing, and
therefore the motherboard, would twist to become unusable within a year or
two

JohnnyB

On 23 August 2011 23:37, Guerri Stevens <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com> wrote:

> I no longer have the Windows 7 machine - had other issues with it. I also
> have not kept up with these things, but I *think* I had the 64-bit version,
> and was told by someone that DOS apps would work on the 32-bit but not
> 64-bit.
>
> One of the DOS apps I wanted to keep was a calendar, and I wanted it to
> appear at boot on the theory that if I saw immediately what I was to do or
> appointments I had they would not be forgotten!
>
> I know the handwriting is on the wall, and sooner or later I will be forced
> into Windows 7 or whatever comes after it. So I should put on the
> aforementioned calendar an item that says to find a new calendar application
> and replacements for the other DOS stuff.
>
> What happened to "user friendly"? It's not friendly if a new version means
> the old stuff either doesn't work, or works only with tinkering.
>
>
> Guerri
>
>
> John Barrs wrote:
>
>> Guerri
>>
>> try using click Start, --> typing in the word *command* in the imediate
>> search textbox and when you can see 'command.exe' or 'command promp' then
>> rightclick it and choose to "run as administrator" from the resultant menu
>> == this works fine for me in the WIN 7 32 bit version== .bat commands
>> included (provided all the commands within them are still there and will not
>> be blown up by windows permissions)
>>
>> "bitter clinger" - I like it! a group that I am obviously suited to
>> belong to
>>
>> JohnnyB
>>
>
>

[earler]

Dos programs will work under windows 7 32bit edition.

As for xcopy, there is a much improved version which is called xxcopy that will handle things for you. Robocopy is good, too, and there is graphics interface offered by microsoft, too.

[Guerri Stevens]

At the time I bought the Windows 7 machine I knew nothing about Windows
7. I figured it couldn't be worse than Vista; I was wrong, but that's
just me. At any rate until someone told me, I didn't realize that there
were both 32- and 64-bit versions. I didn't like the computer itself, so
returned it.

Good to know about the personal vs commercial machines. When it's time
for a new machine, I hope I remember that.

Guerri

John Barrs wrote:
> Guerri
>
> I don't know about now, but 6 months ago in this country if you bought a
> personal or home machine then you were very unlikley to get anything
> other than Windows 7 64 bit. If however you bought a commercial or
> professional machine then the default offered was Windows 7 32 bit -
> becasue there was so much legacy software in the business world. I must
> admit that I like it now. I still have issues with it in things I would
> like to set myself but it learns my requirements and becomes the machine
> I want - often without me being able to make the change myself, it does
> it. A bit frightening! but very nice none-the-less. For instance, one of
> my apps creates a winzip command line and runs it as a batch file. No
> matter what I did with the software it would not run the batch file. I
> dropped into a command prompt to test it a couple of times ... and since
> then the call to run any batch file from my software now works (assuming
> the batch file can still access its commands - hence no xcopy - but the
> winzip commandline works a treat)
>
> Although I am a home user nowadays I was advised to buy a commercial
> machine for a totally different reason - the fact that they come in
> proper metal cases that will take a bit of wear,,,, my advisor said that
> home machines are usually so flimsily built that even with great care
> the casing, and therefore the motherboard, would twist to become
> unusable within a year or two
>
> JohnnyB
>
> On 23 August 2011 23:37, Guerri Stevens <guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com
> <mailto:guerri (AT) tapcis (DOT) com>> wrote:
>
> I no longer have the Windows 7 machine - had other issues with it. I
> also have not kept up with these things, but I *think* I had the
> 64-bit version, and was told by someone that DOS apps would work on
> the 32-bit but not 64-bit.
>
> One of the DOS apps I wanted to keep was a calendar, and I wanted it
> to appear at boot on the theory that if I saw immediately what I was
> to do or appointments I had they would not be forgotten!
>
> I know the handwriting is on the wall, and sooner or later I will be
> forced into Windows 7 or whatever comes after it. So I should put on
> the aforementioned calendar an item that says to find a new calendar
> application and replacements for the other DOS stuff.
>
> What happened to "user friendly"? It's not friendly if a new version
> means the old stuff either doesn't work, or works only with tinkering.
>
>
> Guerri
>
>
> John Barrs wrote:
>
> Guerri
>
> try using click Start, --> typing in the word *command* in the
> imediate search textbox and when you can see 'command.exe' or
> 'command promp' then rightclick it and choose to "run as
> administrator" from the resultant menu == this works fine for me
> in the WIN 7 32 bit version== .bat commands included (provided
> all the commands within them are still there and will not be
> blown up by windows permissions)
>
> "bitter clinger" - I like it! a group that I am obviously
> suited to belong to
>
> JohnnyB
>
>
>

[Tim B]

> Once again you guys are leading the world in adding a special use to a word
> which has another meaning

I have to confess that the only meaning I have ever known for _deprecated_ (not _depreciated_) is
the one being discussed here! I think I first came across it about 1970 in connection with a
forthcoming new PL/I compiler, in which some features would no longer be supported; they were
therefore diagnosed as deprecated by the latest version of the then current compiler.

Best wishes,
Tim.

[Tim B]

> Windows 7
> in the 64-bit or 32-bit or whatever the newest kind is, will not run DOS
> programs at all.

I highly recommend a free program called DOSBox, which runs fine in Windows 7, either 32 or 64 bit,
and has run every DOS program I've tried on it.

Best wishes,
Tim B.

[Tim Bourne]

> becasue there is only one user on this machine I only have JohnB as a user
> and he has full privileges. Particularly, I do not have Admin or
> Administrator. Does anyone know how I can really give JohnB full Admin
> priveleges? I keep finding that there are things that I cannot do becasue I
> am not Administrator

As I understand it, any user may be an Administrator, if defined as such when created, and being an
Administrator is what counts when installing software, for example. Maybe some software is less
well-behaved.

When I set up my son's Windows 7 system, I created four users. He and I are defined as
Administrators, and the children just as users. When the children try to install anything, an
Administrator's password is required; either will do, so they have to get one of us to agree with
what they are doing. I can't recall any mention of a special user called Administrator.

Best wishes,
Tim B.