Re: mystery dac

In article <1145555946.055932.153320@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
dagmargoodboat@xxxxxxxxx says...

Keith wrote:
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006 23:01:53 +0000, Joerg wrote:

Hello John,


Why doesn't Windows have a "copy only newer files" operation?


DOS does :-)

I do not trust Windows with file transfers.

Good plan, particularly when then the LFN->SFN translation needs to be
kept. Window's registry is a nightmare.

--
Keith

On Windows, XCOPY in a DOS box does a pretty good job of mass file
transfers, with options for just about anything you'd want to do. Try
it. (Note: XCOPY in a DOS box is *not* the same as the same command
after booting the same machine into MS-DOS mode.)

Windows still mucks up this translation. Depending on the order
the files are copied the SFNs may change causing all sorts of
registry grief.

Other than XCOPY disk-to-disk transfers to a mirror drive, preserving
long file names for backups under Windows is a headache I have yet to
really solve. I save data sheets (and other documents) with
descriptive file names, e.g. "electr\data\opamps\LM324 (quad bipolar
3-32Vcc 1MHz dip14).pdf".

I use Partition Magic or similar. There are other programs that
don't mess up the LFN->SFN translation.

Copying to CD-R truncates these filenames, as does copying over a
network, and, under XP, copying to CD changes all the files' time/date
stamps to the time/date *of the CD's creation.* All the above fail to
copy filenames with apostrophes and various other allowed characters in
the file name, substituting "_" instead. That an operating system
should presume to adulterate filenames and update date stamps is, to
me, is unimaginable, inconceivable...yet Windows does.

Surprised?

--
Keith
.

Quantcast