This is something I've been quite curious about for a while. Why are these symbols forbidden to be used when naming a folder or file? \/:*?"<>|
I would assume it has something to do with programs, apps, OS scripts et cetera that cannot be compromised and as such they just don't allow you to add those symbols in idk.
They're used in command line, which often involves the use of files. Using these symbols within file names would cause chaos.
What about them would create chaos? I mean, I get the whole command line...sort of, and the name part, and that a name can make a file work or whatever you're trying to do(which in itself confuses the heck outta me.), but if you're naming a folder with those sort of things, does it not work because you'd be naming it like a file and making it think it's a file?
It would look for a directory named 1800's containing a file named Old English. You can thank Windows' retro-compatibility (which goes all the way down to MS DOS prehistory) for that minor annoyance (and for a shitload of stability issues).
Is windows the only software that does it? Or does Linux, Mac, and any other programs that might be out there do it as well. Although since you said it goes all the way down to MS DOS prehistory(I have no idea what I'm talking about or what that is), is that only Microsoft, or something else that's used by everyone?
Nope, it only applies to Windows. Well, some versions of Linux or Mac might be a little retro-compatibile (I' m not sure), but if they are it' s certainly not to the same ridiculous extent as Windows. They' re both notoriously much more stable than Windows, especially Linux. The only reason Windows remains the most used is the monopoly situation Microsoft had at some point (and arguably still enjoys to this day in many regards). MS DOS is Windows' furthest ancestor, "Windows 1981" if you will. Every new iteration of Windows tries to be retro-compatible with every older Windows or MS DOS iteration, meaning they try to make it so that it can run, say, an old 1982 MS DOS or Win 95 program. It' s annoying for two reasons : - It forces them to respect outdated conventions that modern programmers/users would gladly do without. - If they fail to notice that what they' ve made isn' t 100% retro-compatible some situations would lead to abherant behavior or fatal errors (what we said would happen if they were to let you use any character to name a file illustrates this well).
Well, I got most of that, but some of it is still slightly confusing to me. But basically in a nutshell, what you're saying is that Windows is always making it's systems compatible with the older versions, and because of that it ends up having the same problems? And while it might be annoying, I'm still more of a fan of windows than mac or linux, just since I hate the interface of mac and I'm not sure of Linux
Yeah, they keep adding rooms and floors to a house whose moldy basement is menacing to crumble, instead of blowing the whole thing out and getting a fresh start. We have a word for that in French : "usine a gaz" (top-heavy, unwieldy, slow and impractical: "a Heath Robinson device"/"a kludge"). I use Windows too. Some of the programs I use don' t exist on Linux, and I hate the single mouse button Mac interface.
With Google pushing Web apps, Google's trying to make the OS you run underneath hardly matter. Hence Chrome OS, with its speedy boot times which never slows down. Apple discontinued support for PowerPC applications in 2011; basically killing any legacy software that's more than 5 years old. It forced vendors to update their software for them to continue to work on updated Macs. The selling point for Windows is, "All your apps simply work," and not, "It's lightweight and fast." Microsoft's refusal to start fresh reminds me of Web developers that still make sure their code works in Internet Explorer 6.
This is a huge annoyance, just so everyone knows. If you're using anything below IE9 you should feel very bad. You make my life harder. Microsoft did make a gutsy move in discontinuing support of Windows XP, which I think compelled a lot of schools and businesses to move to newer operating systems, but many of them have now moved to Windows XP... which is a three year old OS. That's hardly progress. The solution to this, as Nel mentions, is that many are moving towards cloud or virtual computing. Whether that will pan out I don't know, and compatibility with older programs is important, but we can't keep serving the outdated past if it means holding back the future.
