Re: Desktop folders lost!
- From: John McGhie <john@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:02:48 +0930
Let it be recorded for all the world to see: I fully and completely agree
with Phillip :-)
And I also found John's research both fascinating and helpful :-)
On 24/8/07 6:25 AM, in article #tUIofc5HHA.5424@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
"Phillip Jones" <pjones1@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There is no flame war on this group about top or bottom posting. Some
here one of the gurus might have been you said that fight was silly and
doesn't really make a difference. so long once a for mat for reply is
started, stick with it through the thread. Say if a question is asked
and the first reply is above the op then top posting should continue.
If the reply is below the original OP the thread should continue with
replies below. swapping back and forth is frowned upon. We are a
community here not just group on a server.
Now! I am going to give my opinion of my feelings on the subject. Note
it is just my opinion its not set in stone and I go by the Rule, "When
in Rome, do as the Romans do."
I believe in a "support" group such as this, its far easier, and more
convenient, and even faster to put the current reply above the original
post. If the questions worded right in the subject and the op is only
used to expand/expound upon the question (go into details).
If top posted you find out what the latest suggestion or answer, or
thank you is given ; you can quickly decided to add your 2 cent worth or
move on to the next question. Your able to read through and answer a lot
more post.
Here if its bottom posted you have to waste valuable time scrolling (or
some other action) to get to the bottom of the page. Nothing irks me
more than scroll through 50 replies and end up reading "Me too."
Think of it this way you have 20 people in a line and each time someone
is added to the line you have to go back to the first in the line and
sound off again, by the time you get to the fiftieth person and you
start at one one and go to 50 it gets annoying.
Now on the other hand if the group is not a tech support group of some
kind , shoot the breeze, comment on the latest CD you got from Led
Zephlin or something. Bottom posting is in order. Because this is more
of enjoyable conversation. And its strictly conversation then you read
it as a book or letter to enjoy every reply.
No That is my opinion. Its like the famous song "That's my Story, and I
am sticking to it!"
John McGhie wrote:
Hi Carl:
Oh, I don't think that one will ignite a flame war. If you're looking for a
fight, weigh in on top- or bottom-posting :-)
I also keep my desktop clear ‹ I am much more disciplined than John, there's
only two items on it currently, and one is Mac HDD :-)
However, I don't think that, other than for reasons of good housekeeping,
there is any purpose in doing this in OS X?
In DOS and OS9, the "Desktop" was in fact the root of the mounted boot
volume, and there was a physical limit to the number of files that could be
stored there.
Now in OS X, the "Desktop" is in fact an alias to a folder within the \Usr
structure. So it's already subfolder, and there is no real reason not to
store your entire document library there if you want to.
Makes the computer very difficult to drive and makes stuff hard to find, but
I can't think of any technical reason not to do it. Can you?
Cheers
On 23/8/07 7:17 AM, in article
carl-54463B.17473022082007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Carl Witthoft"
<carl@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <220820070132111854%nospam@xxxxxxxxx>,
Elliott Roper <nospam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <C2F0F70A.75A5%a.cowden@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ann Cowden[snip]
<a.cowden@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Help. Can anyone tell me how to get my desktop folders/files back intoFirst check you have not deleted them.
view? I accidentally put a photo up as a screen saver then when I
reverted
to a standard one, I lost all of my desktop files.
In Finder type cmd-shift-h then cmd-3
That should show your home folder in column view.
Click on the desktop folder to confirm the files are still there.
I suppose this'l just reignite a flame war, but in fact Ann has shown
yet one more reason NEVER to put files or folders on (i.e. in) the
Desktop. It's sloppy, pointless, and only leads to trouble.
It really is very easy to create a folder named "coolstuff" or
"notthedesktop" and then open a Finder window to display that folder's
contents. Stay away from the Desktop.
And lets face it: changing screen savers has nothing to do with the
desktop in the first place, so Ann will benefit from running thru some
of the "OS X for Dummies" basic training. This is not to put her down:
we all needed that training at some point in our past.
Maybe she meant that she changed her Desktop wallpaper, not the
screensaver; then again maybe she doesn't realize that the actual
Desktop is not visible when the screensaver is active. More info needed.
--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/
Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.
John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxx
.
- References:
- Desktop folders lost!
- From: Ann Cowden
- Re: Desktop folders lost!
- From: Elliott Roper
- Re: Desktop folders lost!
- From: Carl Witthoft
- Re: Desktop folders lost!
- From: John McGhie
- Re: Desktop folders lost!
- From: Phillip Jones
- Desktop folders lost!
- Prev by Date: Re: Desktop folders lost!
- Next by Date: Re: Do documents have to open at the beginning in Word 2004?
- Previous by thread: Re: Desktop folders lost!
- Next by thread: Purchasing Word
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading