How many files can you fit on the C$?



  • I was loggin into the C$ on a Desktop on the network to migrate data to
    a replacment desktop....., It took about 15 minutes to display the
    contents on the drive:

     

    [IMG]http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p60/BOFH139/C_35K.jpg[/IMG] 

     

     



  • Acrobat gone crazy. Also, I bet a PNG would've resulted in a smaller filesize with much better quality.



  • Well you really answered your own question. You can fit 35,069 on there.

    On the plus side however, that looks like a great candidate for compression!



  •  Thats the price you pay for using Acrobat....

    Edit: Ok, I was too late. Sorry. But Acrobat sucks anyway.



  •  About 10,000 of the files are Excel ranging from 100k to 300Mb and there is also a few +4Gb Access DB's



  • @BOFH said:

     About 10,000 of the files are Excel ranging from 100k to 300Mb and there is also a few +4Gb Access DB's

     

    Was there a inmail.txt and an outmail.txt? search.exe?

    Time to clean out, and educate the user. (which I am sure will bring perfect results)

    Back to work!



  • @BOFH said:

    About 10,000 of the files are Excel ranging from 100k to 300Mb and there is also a few +4Gb Access DB's

    What the hell are in those things?! I've never seen so many Office files, especially of those size (300MB spreadsheet?!), on any computer. Also, by everything being on root, I would assume that an illiterate is at the controls. However, the illiterates tend to dump in My Documents. headdesk



  • @AbbydonKrafts said:

    Also, by everything being on root, I would assume that an illiterate is at the controls. However, the illiterates tend to dump in My Documents. headdesk
     

    And yet everyone swears at MS for 'hiding' the root of the drive...    sigh 



  • @BOFH said:

     About 10,000 of the files are Excel ranging from 100k to 300Mb and there is also a few +4Gb Access DB's

    Must be in subfolders, because at the bottom of the window, Explorer's telling you that the files total 1.83 GB.

    unless Explorer's total is way off...  



  • @belgariontheking said:

    unless Explorer's total is way off...  
     

    Psssh. Noob. MS invented math.



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    Psssh. Noob. MS invented math.

     

     

    It's "n00b".   n00b, gtfo. 



  • @BOFH said:

     a few +4Gb Access DB's

     

    Open one of them up. Tools -> Database Utilities -> Compact and Repair Database

    Just scored you 3+GB there first try ... ;-)



  • @medialint said:

    Open one of them up. Tools -> Database Utilities -> Compact and Repair Database

    Access does manage to throw in a lot of bloat on each trip around, doesn't it?



    How the heck do you come up with your tags? I keep wanting to laugh everytime I see them.



  • @Lysis said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    Psssh. Noob. MS invented math.

     

     

    It's "n00b".   n00b, gtfo. 

     

    Get with the times, its "nub"...you're both a bunch of newbies! 



  • @AbbydonKrafts said:

    Also, by everything being on root, I would assume that an illiterate is at the controls. However, the illiterates tend to dump in My Documents. headdesk

    Ah, bringing me back to my days as "the computer guy" at my high school, and the secretary there.  Now, it's my impression that a large part of a secretary's job involved working with documents in an organized fashion.  Imagine my surprise when she called me to say that her documents were "missing".

    "Where'd you save the file?" I asked.

    "On the computer?" she said.

    facepalm.  "No, like what folder did you put it in?"

    "I told you, I put it in the computer, not the filing cabinet."

    Guh.  Time to use that search feature... "What did you name the file?"

    "Huh?  I didn't name it.  It's not a person."  She must have been thinking to herself, "geez, they think this kid is smart?  sounds like an idiot to me".

    Finally I came to find out that she was just typing up her documents and they were defaulting their names to firstLineOfText.lwp, and Lotus would show the list of n most recent documents on startup.  So when it came time to retrieve a file that wasn't in the top n, it must not have existed anymore....

    So I showed her how to actually go open the file (conveniently located in "My Documents" along with everything else.  She kindly thanked me for "fixing" her computer.

    Two weeks later I got a call that another one of her files had disappeared and she needed me to come over and "do whatever it was that I did before".  I guess it was a particularly unlucky day because that note disappeared just like her file and I never saw it....



  • @Soviut said:

    @Lysis said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    Psssh. Noob. MS invented math.

     

     

    It's "n00b".   n00b, gtfo. 

     

    Get with the times, its "nub"...you're both a bunch of newbies! 

     

     

    Umm no, actually it's n00b.  n00b is a person who has no clue and is "new".  "nub" is a person who SHOULD know what he's doing because he's been doing it for a while, but he's so clueless he still acts like a dumb n00b.

    Oh wait....maybe you're right and MasterAsshat is a nub.  My bad. 



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    And yet everyone swears at MS for 'hiding' the root of the drive...    sigh 

     

    Because it's still a pain in the arse. Making it harder to access the root of the drive should have been preceded by an effort to make it less necessary to access the root of the drive.

    Of course, it's bound to take a while since MS has always allowed software vendors to throw their shit all through the filesystem.

    I wish MS had copied more from BSD than just the TCP/IP stack. A healthy respect for the benefits of software installation conventions would have been great.



  • @drinkingbird said:

    Because it's still a pain in the arse.
     

    Not for anyone who is intelligent enough to turn it off... it takes two seconds.

    @drinkingbird said:

    Making it harder to access the root of the drive should have been preceded by an effort to make it less necessary to access the root of the drive.

    I cannot remember the last time I NEEDED to access the root of the drive... This sounds like PEBKAC.

    @drinkingbird said:

    A healthy respect for the benefits of software installation conventions would have been great.

    They have standards. Program Files has been around for a long time. Just because stupid people don't understand the best practices, and therefore don't use them is hardly MS's fault.

    I am pleased to see them finally enforcing these, but now all you hear is how "MS broke my Windows! I can't install my program!", It is always a balancing act. People are not going to get any less stupid no matter what MS does.



  • @drinkingbird said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    And yet everyone swears at MS for 'hiding' the root of the drive...    sigh 

     

    Because it's still a pain in the arse. Making it harder to access the root of the drive should have been preceded by an effort to make it less necessary to access the root of the drive.

    Of course, it's bound to take a while since MS has always allowed software vendors to throw their shit all through the filesystem.

    I wish MS had copied more from BSD than just the TCP/IP stack. A healthy respect for the benefits of software installation conventions would have been great.

    I sometimes wonder if anyone at MS ha considered following Apple's lead and basing Windows 8 on one of the BSDs, and including thier own 64-bit WINE equivalent for backwards compatability. For those few who still want to run 32-bit apps in 6-8 years time when it would be released could use the now-current version of WINE, which is supposedly complete for 32-bit Windows. Since it would take a lot of work and probably lead to major compatability problems to "fix" Windows, it might be better to do this.



  • @Physics Phil said:

    I sometimes wonder if anyone at MS ha considered following Apple's lead and basing Windows 8 on one of the BSDs, and including thier own 64-bit WINE equivalent for backwards compatability. For those few who still want to run 32-bit apps in 6-8 years time when it would be released could use the now-current version of WINE, which is supposedly complete for 32-bit Windows. Since it would take a lot of work and probably lead to major compatability problems to "fix" Windows, it might be better to do this.
     

    That would be ridiculous and stupid. Good lord. 

    I would ask "What major issues are there to fix that they cannot work out over time?" but that is what you want. You are trying to start another OS jihad flamewar...



  • @drinkingbird said:

    I wish MS had copied more from BSD than just the TCP/IP stack.

    MS doesn't even use the BSD TCP/IP stack anymore.

     

    @Physics Phil said:

    I sometimes wonder if anyone at MS ha considered following Apple's lead and basing Windows 8 on one of the BSDs, and including thier own 64-bit WINE equivalent for backwards compatability. For those few who still want to run 32-bit apps in 6-8 years time when it would be released could use the now-current version of WINE, which is supposedly complete for 32-bit Windows. Since it would take a lot of work and probably lead to major compatability problems to "fix" Windows, it might be better to do this.

    This would be one of the dumbest moves Microsoft could make.  Apple didn't use Open Source software because they believed it was better or because they believe in freedom, the company was practically bankrupt and they couldn't invest the millions of dollars and years of development time in developing a world-class OS like Microsoft did.  Over time Apple has refined their core OS components, closing the sources of many.   Anyway, WINE is a P.O.S. and I find the idea that anybody would consider it a full replacement for Windows laughable.  God, are people really this ignorant of how the software industry is? 



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    God, are people really this ignorant of how the software industry is? 
     

    Apparently. We now have dlikhten, drinkingbird, Physics Phil and ZiggyFish mindlessly campaigning this anti-MS garbage. Not a single one can provide a single intelligent argument that doesn't boil down to "MS is for n00bs!"



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Anyway, WINE is a P.O.S. and I find the idea that anybody would consider it a full replacement for Windows laughable.
     

    Some of the closed source forks from WINE are better, but they all target a small part of the entire Windows continuum.  And even then, you still have to do application-specific configurations to get anything to work consistently.  So, in essence, my post can be boiled down to: "Agreed."



  • @bstorer said:

    Some of the closed source forks from WINE are better, but they all target a small part of the entire Windows continuum.  And even then, you still have to do application-specific configurations to get anything to work consistently.  So, in essence, my post can be boiled down to: "Agreed."

    Since WINE is LGPL, the sources for these forks are technically open, but the prebuilt binaries require a subscription.  Cedega is for gaming and it's better than WINE, but still far from Windows in terms of compatibility.  It costs $60 a year, so just counting the cash expense alone a Vista license pays for itself in less than 3 years and is more compatible.  If you're gaming, you really probably want to dual-boot anyway.

     

    WINE is okay for a few apps, but I don't need it (or VMWare).  I've got most apps I need on Linux.  At work I have a regular XP machine with IE7, IE6, Safari and Opera for compatiblity testing.  I just use rdesktop to log in which is more the fast enough in the office or through my cable.  I also have apps like MS Project and Visio on that machine because there are no suitable Open Source alternatives.  Abiword works great for editing Word docs, though, so I can do that from Linux.  I also have FF for browsing, gaim/pidgin for IM, vim for coding and svn.  That's pretty much all I run on Linux.  My point is that Linux is more than sufficient more my personal needs and the only things I really need Windows for are requirements for my job (Project, Visio, browser compatibility testing).  Then again, I'm not a gamer.  I think people who spend so much effort getting Windows programs to run under Linux are sort of wasting their time, but whatever, it's their time..



  • I know a guy who managed to get WoW running on WINE.  I've never actually seen it, but that's what he claims. 



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Since WINE is LGPL, the sources for these forks are technically open, but the prebuilt binaries require a subscription.
     

    Cedega, in particular, forked from WINE when it was under the MIT license, which isn't copyleft.



  • @belgariontheking said:

    I know a guy who managed to get WoW running on WINE.  I've never actually seen it, but that's what he claims. 

     

    I'm pretty sure it ran on Cedega, but I seem to recall problems when they introduced the cheat detection stuff.  This is all half-remembered, though, because I don't use Cedega or play WoW.



  • @bstorer said:

    Cedega, in particular, forked from WINE when it was under the MIT license, which isn't copyleft.

    Cedega CVS access.  Apparently a good deal of the core they use is still LGPL.  They do provide several other components under other licenses which do not require source redistribution.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Anyway, WINE is a P.O.S. and I find the idea that anybody would consider it a full replacement for Windows laughable.

    As someone who actually uses WINE on a regular basis, I can't tell what you're basing this statement on.

    For ordinary applications that play nicely with the Win32 API (ie. most non-Microsoft non-game applications), WINE is effectively bug-compatible with Windows. Games tend to abuse the DirectX APIs (Baldur's Gate, for example, depends on Windows zeroing out the contents of an invalid RECT structure passed to one of the APIs), and are less compatible, but they still often work well enough -- and some developers work to ensure that their games are compatible with WINE. The only major problem is copy-protection: since many copy-protection systems require custom device drivers, they aren't compatible with WINE, and the software being protected needs to be cracked before it can be used.



  • @Carnildo said:

    As someone who actually uses WINE on a regular basis, I can't tell what you're basing this statement on.

    For ordinary applications that play nicely with the Win32 API (ie. most non-Microsoft non-game applications), WINE is effectively bug-compatible with Windows. Games tend to abuse the DirectX APIs (Baldur's Gate, for example, depends on Windows zeroing out the contents of an invalid RECT structure passed to one of the APIs), and are less compatible, but they still often work well enough -- and some developers work to ensure that their games are compatible with WINE. The only major problem is copy-protection: since many copy-protection systems require custom device drivers, they aren't compatible with WINE, and the software being protected needs to be cracked before it can be used.

    Yeah, I've used WINE for years, too.   It's useful and I'm glad it exists, but I certainly wouldn't use it as a replacement for Windows.  That's what the original comment was about: Microsoft replacing Windows with WINE.  You fail reading.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.