Re: Backup software--like GHOST

PCR · May 27, 2008

|>
|> Haven't you left a few meals & naps out?
|
|
| Never left a meal out no, but too often left naps out yes <s>

I hope you aren't sleep-eating those missing meals then!

. Anyway,
it's good to see you back participating, Chauvin, instead of just
lurking (as you said). You always have good stuff!

| Rick
|
|
|> --
|> Thanks or Good Luck,
|> There may be humor in this post, and,
|> Naturally, you will not sue,
|> Should things get worse after this,
|> PCR
|> pcrrcp@netzero.net

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net

Rick Chauvin · May 28, 2008

Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.

I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups I
frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I use to
anymore though, but am always around.

Rick

PCR · May 28, 2008

Rick Chauvin wrote:
| Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
|
| I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups I
| frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I use to
| anymore though, but am always around.

Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in my
head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with XP
Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that folder or
remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can Terhune have
been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be added by a tweak, acc.
to Brian A.?

| Rick

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net

Bill in Co. · May 28, 2008

PCR wrote:
> Rick Chauvin wrote:
>> Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
>>
>> I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups I
>> frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I use to
>> anymore though, but am always around.
>
> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
> tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in my
> head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
> Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with XP
> Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that folder or
> remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can Terhune have
> been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be added by a tweak, acc.
> to Brian A.?
>
>> Rick

All I know is what I can tell you - it DOES change the Folder Modification
date.

But then again, as I later noted, I was wondering if that's the way it
should be by design, since someone could (conceivably) argue, "hey, you made
a change inside that folder, so I'm gonna update its date!". But it
doesn't work that way in Win98SE, and I liked it better that way.

Also, I don't want to have to keep track of TWO folder dates (Creation and
Modification). I've got enough to keep track of as it is!

Point #2. Hey PCR, if you're ever even considering WinXP, time is running
out. As of June 30, it (for all intents and purposes) ain't gonna be
around anymore (if MS keeps its date).

Gary S. Terhune · May 28, 2008

In re me, the answer is, "No." You think I didn't quadruple-check?

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:eqUvx0SwIHA.1236@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Rick Chauvin wrote:
> | Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
> |
> | I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups I
> | frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I use to
> | anymore though, but am always around.
>
> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
> tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in my
> head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
> Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with XP
> Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that folder or
> remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can Terhune have
> been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be added by a tweak, acc.
> to Brian A.?
>
> | Rick
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> Should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>
>

PCR · May 28, 2008

Bill in Co. wrote:
| PCR wrote:
|> Rick Chauvin wrote:
|>> Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
|>>
|>> I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups I
|>> frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I use to
|>> anymore though, but am always around.
|>
|> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
|> tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in
|> my head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
|> Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with XP
|> Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that folder or
|> remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can Terhune have
|> been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be added by a tweak,
|> acc. to Brian A.?
|>
|>> Rick
|
| All I know is what I can tell you - it DOES change the Folder
| Modification date.

It doesn't seem right that Home would & Professional wouldn't. Could be
Terhune has a special setting, was looking at Creation Date, or was
dizzy over a 24-hour effort & fix for CdLSRN, I guess.

| But then again, as I later noted, I was wondering if that's the way it
| should be by design, since someone could (conceivably) argue, "hey,
| you made a change inside that folder, so I'm gonna update its date!".
| But it doesn't work that way in Win98SE, and I liked it better that
| way.

Yea, I like it that way too. It says when the package first entered my
machine. What you say could be a logical explanation-- BUT why is
Terhune seeing it differently? Could be he's been exposed to more of the
XP-irradition, I guess.

| Also, I don't want to have to keep track of TWO folder dates
| (Creation and Modification). I've got enough to keep track of as
| it is!

Creation would be important for folders only & modification for files.
So... it's still the same number of dates you'd have to keep track of.

| Point #2. Hey PCR, if you're ever even considering WinXP, time is
| running out. As of June 30, it (for all intents and purposes) ain't
| gonna be around anymore (if MS keeps its date).

You don't even want to keep track of two dates-- how do you expect me to
keep track of two computers?!

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net

Gary S. Terhune · May 28, 2008

In re Point #2 :

How long ago did MS "stop sales" of Windows 98SE?

How easy is it to still obtain a brand new copy, much less used copies, much
less pirated ones?

I rest my case.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:%23RK$yFTwIHA.4560@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> PCR wrote:
>> Rick Chauvin wrote:
>>> Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
>>>
>>> I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups I
>>> frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I use to
>>> anymore though, but am always around.
>>
>> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
>> tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in my
>> head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
>> Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with XP
>> Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that folder or
>> remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can Terhune have
>> been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be added by a tweak, acc.
>> to Brian A.?
>>
>>> Rick
>
> All I know is what I can tell you - it DOES change the Folder Modification
> date.
>
> But then again, as I later noted, I was wondering if that's the way it
> should be by design, since someone could (conceivably) argue, "hey, you
> made a change inside that folder, so I'm gonna update its date!". But
> it doesn't work that way in Win98SE, and I liked it better that way.

>
> Also, I don't want to have to keep track of TWO folder dates (Creation and
> Modification). I've got enough to keep track of as it is!
>
> Point #2. Hey PCR, if you're ever even considering WinXP, time is
> running out. As of June 30, it (for all intents and purposes) ain't
> gonna be around anymore (if MS keeps its date).
>
>

PCR · May 28, 2008

Gary S. Terhune · May 28, 2008

Anyway, my sieve of a brain DOES recall running into what Bill is talking
about, but I can't recall the circumstances. That simple. It struck me as
something certain types of workers might like, but danged if I can recall
the logic behind that thought.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:%23ADAvZTwIHA.548@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
> | In re me, the answer is, "No." You think I didn't quadruple-check?
>
> It just seems odd, is all. And I do know you've been extremely busy
> lately with a 24-hour fix effort for CdLSRN. Good work on that, though.
>
> | --
> | Gary S. Terhune
> | MS-MVP Shell/User
> | www.grystmill.com
> |
> | "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
> | news:eqUvx0SwIHA.1236@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> |> Rick Chauvin wrote:
> |> | Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
> |> |
> |> | I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups I
> |> | frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I use
> |> | to anymore though, but am always around.
> |>
> |> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
> |> tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in
> |> my head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
> |> Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with XP
> |> Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that folder or
> |> remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can Terhune have
> |> been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be added by a tweak,
> |> acc. to Brian A.?
> |>
> |> | Rick
> |>
> |> --
> |> Thanks or Good Luck,
> |> There may be humor in this post, and,
> |> Naturally, you will not sue,
> |> Should things get worse after this,
> |> PCR
> |> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> Should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>
>

Bill in Co. · May 29, 2008

PCR wrote:
> Bill in Co. wrote:
>> PCR wrote:
>>> Rick Chauvin wrote:
>>>> Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
>>>>
>>>> I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups I
>>>> frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I use to
>>>> anymore though, but am always around.
>>>
>>> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
>>> tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in
>>> my head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
>>> Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with XP
>>> Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that folder or
>>> remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can Terhune have
>>> been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be added by a tweak,
>>> acc. to Brian A.?
>>>
>>>> Rick
>>
>> All I know is what I can tell you - it DOES change the Folder
>> Modification date.
>
> It doesn't seem right that Home would & Professional wouldn't. Could be
> Terhune has a special setting, was looking at Creation Date, or was
> dizzy over a 24-hour effort & fix for CdLSRN, I guess.

I don't know. All I *do* know is what happens over here on XP Home.

>> But then again, as I later noted, I was wondering if that's the way it
>> should be by design, since someone could (conceivably) argue, "hey,
>> you made a change inside that folder, so I'm gonna update its date!".
>> But it doesn't work that way in Win98SE, and I liked it better that
>> way.

>
> Yea, I like it that way too. It says when the package first entered my
> machine. What you say could be a logical explanation-- BUT why is
> Terhune seeing it differently? Could be he's been exposed to more of the
> XP-irradition, I guess.
>
>> Also, I don't want to have to keep track of TWO folder dates
>> (Creation and Modification). I've got enough to keep track of as it
>> is!
>
> Creation would be important for folders only & modification for files.
> So... it's still the same number of dates you'd have to keep track of.

But I only needed to keep track of Modified date for folders too! After
all, when a Folder is "created", its Modified date is also date stamped
then, too. So, no real need (most of the time) for a Creation Date column,
at least for me, for that reason.

>> Point #2. Hey PCR, if you're ever even considering WinXP, time is
>> running out. As of June 30, it (for all intents and purposes) ain't
>> gonna be around anymore (if MS keeps its date).
>
> You don't even want to keep track of two dates-- how do you expect me to
> keep track of two computers?!

LOL. It is a bit challenging at times, I can say. But in all honest, I
haven't been using the Win98SE one so much now (but still do, on occasion).

Gary S. Terhune · May 29, 2008

OK, I swear I tested and I tested at least twice, then when questioned, I
tested again, and did not see any change in a folder's date-modified change
after adding/subtracting files. But I look now and that is what is
happening. Blame fatigue, blame distractions, or maybe blame something more
mysterious. (And, no, PCR, I don't even have Date Created showing unless I
need it, and then I turn it right back off when I'm done with it.) In any
case, when you think about it, it makes sense. Why repeat the Date Created
with Date Modified? Why not have Date Modified, for a folder, mean
something?

Still, I'm sorry about that foul-up. It's something I probably already knew,
but that went bye-bye along with a lot of my memory. I meant it when I said
I'd used the info a lot, just not any time recently. Though I'm not clear on
why you would need the info at all frequently, I used it to sort what
amounted to a huge database. I must have been using Date Created.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:eNxFdtVwIHA.6096@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> PCR wrote:
>> Bill in Co. wrote:
>>> PCR wrote:
>>>> Rick Chauvin wrote:
>>>>> Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
>>>>>
>>>>> I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups I
>>>>> frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I use to
>>>>> anymore though, but am always around.
>>>>
>>>> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
>>>> tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in
>>>> my head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
>>>> Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with XP
>>>> Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that folder or
>>>> remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can Terhune have
>>>> been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be added by a tweak,
>>>> acc. to Brian A.?
>>>>
>>>>> Rick
>>>
>>> All I know is what I can tell you - it DOES change the Folder
>>> Modification date.
>>
>> It doesn't seem right that Home would & Professional wouldn't. Could be
>> Terhune has a special setting, was looking at Creation Date, or was
>> dizzy over a 24-hour effort & fix for CdLSRN, I guess.
>
> I don't know. All I *do* know is what happens over here on XP Home.
>
>>> But then again, as I later noted, I was wondering if that's the way it
>>> should be by design, since someone could (conceivably) argue, "hey,
>>> you made a change inside that folder, so I'm gonna update its date!".
>>> But it doesn't work that way in Win98SE, and I liked it better that
>>> way.

>>
>> Yea, I like it that way too. It says when the package first entered my
>> machine. What you say could be a logical explanation-- BUT why is
>> Terhune seeing it differently? Could be he's been exposed to more of the
>> XP-irradition, I guess.
>>
>>> Also, I don't want to have to keep track of TWO folder dates
>>> (Creation and Modification). I've got enough to keep track of as it
>>> is!
>>
>> Creation would be important for folders only & modification for files.
>> So... it's still the same number of dates you'd have to keep track of.
>
> But I only needed to keep track of Modified date for folders too! After
> all, when a Folder is "created", its Modified date is also date stamped
> then, too. So, no real need (most of the time) for a Creation Date
> column, at least for me, for that reason.
>
>>> Point #2. Hey PCR, if you're ever even considering WinXP, time is
>>> running out. As of June 30, it (for all intents and purposes) ain't
>>> gonna be around anymore (if MS keeps its date).
>>
>> You don't even want to keep track of two dates-- how do you expect me to
>> keep track of two computers?!
>
> LOL. It is a bit challenging at times, I can say. But in all honest,
> I haven't been using the Win98SE one so much now (but still do, on
> occasion).
>

Etal · May 29, 2008

Gary S. Terhune wrote:

> OK, I swear I tested and I tested at least twice, then when questioned,
> I tested again, and did not see any change in a folder's date-modified
> change after adding/subtracting files. But I look now and that is what
> is happening. Blame fatigue, blame distractions, or maybe blame
> something more mysterious. (And, no, PCR, I don't even have Date Created
> showing unless I need it, and then I turn it right back off when I'm
> done with it.) In any case, when you think about it, it makes sense. Why
> repeat the Date Created with Date Modified? Why not have Date Modified,
> for a folder, mean something?
>
> Still, I'm sorry about that foul-up. It's something I probably already
> knew, but that went bye-bye along with a lot of my memory. I meant it
> when I said I'd used the info a lot, just not any time recently. Though
> I'm not clear on why you would need the info at all frequently, I used
> it to sort what amounted to a huge database. I must have been using Date
> Created.

I can provide another data-point that will refute one theory here.

I have the WinXP Home Ed. Bundle and the modification dates of my
folders never change.

My theory has been that it has to do with me using FAT32, and
that the changing mod.-dates are happening under NTFS. But that
theory goes against my prejudices that Bill would stay old-school
and also use FAT32 while you would have been using NTFS -/

Can it have been that you converted from FAT32 to NTFS and that
your folder-dates started to change after that?

--
Nah-ah. I'm staying out of this. ... Now, here's my opinion.

Rick Chauvin · May 29, 2008

"PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:eqUvx0SwIHA.1236@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl

> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
> tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in my

Nah, no you don't have a tinfoil hat PCR (I've seen you mention the tin
foil hat a thousand times over the past year or so) ...but sooner or later
you will have wxp and no hat needed, and you know what, after a short
period of time you will be relieved in many ways.. ..no need to respond or
think forward about it. When the opportunity and/or the funds are there you
will have it and will actually enjoy the multifaced benifits of such.

> head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
> Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with XP
> Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that folder or
> remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can Terhune have

When it first was mentioned the other day I checked mine - not that I had
to because I am Extremely fussy about date stamps being a certain way on
all levels in all categories! My Date Modified column never changes its
date on a folder 'no matter what I do' within that folder.

Now that today Gary revised what he said yesterday saying his actually does
change, you've got me wondering - however if so then it can only be one of
two reasons why mine doesn't. (although if it was like others and my
folder Modified Date stamp did change as you specified, I would uncheck the
Modified Date column and check the Creation Date column in its place, but I
don't need to.

Rick

> been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be added by a tweak, acc.
> to Brian A.?
>
>| Rick
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> Should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net

Gary S. Terhune · May 29, 2008

Nope, I always use NTFS for my own NT systems. Now, maybe way back in the
beginning, when I was doing that project... But not recently.

--
Gary S. Terhune
MS-MVP Shell/User
www.grystmill.com

"Etal" <look@sig.bcause.this.is.invalid> wrote in message
news:g1n6o2$pgu$1@aioe.org...
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>
>> OK, I swear I tested and I tested at least twice, then when questioned, I
>> tested again, and did not see any change in a folder's date-modified
>> change after adding/subtracting files. But I look now and that is what is
>> happening. Blame fatigue, blame distractions, or maybe blame something
>> more mysterious. (And, no, PCR, I don't even have Date Created showing
>> unless I need it, and then I turn it right back off when I'm done with
>> it.) In any case, when you think about it, it makes sense. Why repeat the
>> Date Created with Date Modified? Why not have Date Modified, for a
>> folder, mean something?
>>
>> Still, I'm sorry about that foul-up. It's something I probably already
>> knew, but that went bye-bye along with a lot of my memory. I meant it
>> when I said I'd used the info a lot, just not any time recently. Though
>> I'm not clear on why you would need the info at all frequently, I used it
>> to sort what amounted to a huge database. I must have been using Date
>> Created.
>
> I can provide another data-point that will refute one theory here.
>
> I have the WinXP Home Ed. Bundle and the modification dates of my folders
> never change.
>
> My theory has been that it has to do with me using FAT32, and that the
> changing mod.-dates are happening under NTFS. But that theory goes against
> my prejudices that Bill would stay old-school and also use FAT32 while you
> would have been using NTFS -/
>
> Can it have been that you converted from FAT32 to NTFS and that your
> folder-dates started to change after that?
>
>
> --
> Nah-ah. I'm staying out of this. ... Now, here's my opinion.

Rick Chauvin · May 29, 2008

"Etal" <look@sig.bcause.this.is.invalid> wrote in message
news:g1n6o2$pgu$1@aioe.org

[...]

> My theory has been that it has to do with me using FAT32, and
> that the changing mod.-dates are happening under NTFS.

It's not a theory but true.
As you know compared to Win9x, Win2K/XP NTFS format besides a host of other
things, its folder handling structure is different and where I assume the
folder date contrast comes in.

> But that theory goes against my prejudices that Bill would stay
> old-school and also use FAT32 while you would have been using NTFS -/

I have my triple boot setup with all three OS's having FAT32 boot
partitions.

In truth over the years there have been a thousand threads in every forum
venue discussing the pro's and con's of one format over the other by
capable professionals in the field.. ..you know in the final analysis each
file system has its valid merits one over the other, and depending on what
the end users needs and desired outcome are - is where the value of each
preference will dictate each valid situations decision.

I can hear the FAT32/NTFS commentaries brewing (well not so much in this
group really) I won't debate the FAT32/NTFS issue with anyone and I've
given my positive yet neutral stance on it, and support both I like and
use what I do, and so be it.

Rick

> Can it have been that you converted from FAT32 to NTFS and that
> your folder-dates started to change after that?
>
>
> --
> Nah-ah. I'm staying out of this. ... Now, here's my opinion.

PCR · May 29, 2008

Bill in Co. wrote:
| PCR wrote:
|> Bill in Co. wrote:
|>> PCR wrote:
|>>> Rick Chauvin wrote:
|>>>> Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
|>>>>
|>>>> I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups I
|>>>> frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I use
|>>>> to anymore though, but am always around.
|>>>
|>>> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
|>>> tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in
|>>> my head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
|>>> Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with
|>>> XP Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that
|>>> folder or remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can
|>>> Terhune have been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be
|>>> added by a tweak, acc. to Brian A.?
|>>>
|>>>> Rick
|>>
|>> All I know is what I can tell you - it DOES change the Folder
|>> Modification date.
|>
|> It doesn't seem right that Home would & Professional wouldn't. Could
|> be Terhune has a special setting, was looking at Creation Date, or
|> was dizzy over a 24-hour effort & fix for CdLSRN, I guess.
|
| I don't know. All I *do* know is what happens over here on XP Home.

I see now Terhune has looked a tenth time & discovered his folder
Modified Date will change too. It's praiseworthy of him to have checked
again! Also I see a controversy has arisen over FAT32 & NTFS. I think
I'd better stay out of it!

Sounds like it could make a difference, though, & Chauvin seems certain
it does. THAT would be understandable -- if it were true that the Mod
Date sometimes changes & sometimes doesn't -- DUE TO file system
differences & not to OS version -- MS could be forgiven for that, if one
had a forgiving nature!

For it to be true... I think... you would have to be using FAT32, &
Terhune that tenth time looked at a folder on a FAT32 partition... I
think... maybe.

|>> But then again, as I later noted, I was wondering if that's the way
|>> it should be by design, since someone could (conceivably) argue,
|>> "hey, you made a change inside that folder, so I'm gonna update its
|>> date!". But it doesn't work that way in Win98SE, and I liked it
|>> better that way.

|>
|> Yea, I like it that way too. It says when the package first entered
|> my machine. What you say could be a logical explanation-- BUT why is
|> Terhune seeing it differently? Could be he's been exposed to more of
|> the XP-irradition, I guess.
|>
|>> Also, I don't want to have to keep track of TWO folder dates
|>> (Creation and Modification). I've got enough to keep track of as
|>> it is!
|>
|> Creation would be important for folders only & modification for
|> files. So... it's still the same number of dates you'd have to keep
|> track of.
|
| But I only needed to keep track of Modified date for folders too!
| After all, when a Folder is "created", its Modified date is also date
| stamped then, too. So, no real need (most of the time) for a
| Creation Date column, at least for me, for that reason.

You are stuck in your ways, Colorado! I think, under the same
circumstance, I'd be content to know Creation Date works just fine for
it!

|>> Point #2. Hey PCR, if you're ever even considering WinXP, time is
|>> running out. As of June 30, it (for all intents and purposes)
|>> ain't gonna be around anymore (if MS keeps its date).
|>
|> You don't even want to keep track of two dates-- how do you expect
|> me to keep track of two computers?!
|
| LOL. It is a bit challenging at times, I can say. But in all
| honest, I haven't been using the Win98SE one so much now (but still
| do, on occasion).

Uh-huh. Very likely it wouldn't be long I'd gravitate away from Win98
use too, IF I had XP & IF it worked well. That's what I want to avoid!

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net

PCR · May 29, 2008

Gary S. Terhune wrote:
| Anyway, my sieve of a brain DOES recall running into what Bill is
| talking about, but I can't recall the circumstances. That simple. It
| struck me as something certain types of workers might like, but
| danged if I can recall the logic behind that thought.

Etal brought up a good point... NTFS vrs. FAT32. It remains to be seen
whether you & Colorado are using the same file system when you have the
same observation on the Mod Date. (You know I am tounge-in-cheek when I
rib you on XP-irradiation & 24-hour weariness & stuff.)

| --
| Gary S. Terhune
| MS-MVP Shell/User
| www.grystmill.com
|
| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
| news:%23ADAvZTwIHA.548@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
|> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
|> | In re me, the answer is, "No." You think I didn't quadruple-check?
|>
|> It just seems odd, is all. And I do know you've been extremely busy
|> lately with a 24-hour fix effort for CdLSRN. Good work on that,
|> though.
|>
|> | --
|> | Gary S. Terhune
|> | MS-MVP Shell/User
|> | www.grystmill.com
|> |
|> | "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
|> | news:eqUvx0SwIHA.1236@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
|> |> Rick Chauvin wrote:
|> |> | Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
|> |> |
|> |> | I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups
|> |> | I frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I
|> |> | use to anymore though, but am always around.
|> |>
|> |> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of
|> |> my tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new
|> |> holes in my head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue
|> |> whether the Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill
|> |> of Co. with XP Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed
|> |> in that folder or remain the same (Terhune with Professional
|> |> Edition)? Can Terhune have been looking at Creation Date, which
|> |> needs to be added by a tweak, acc. to Brian A.?
|> |>
|> |> | Rick
|> |>
|> |> --
|> |> Thanks or Good Luck,
|> |> There may be humor in this post, and,
|> |> Naturally, you will not sue,
|> |> Should things get worse after this,
|> |> PCR
|> |> pcrrcp@netzero.net
|>
|> --
|> Thanks or Good Luck,
|> There may be humor in this post, and,
|> Naturally, you will not sue,
|> Should things get worse after this,
|> PCR
|> pcrrcp@netzero.net

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net

PCR · May 29, 2008

Rick Chauvin wrote:
| "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
| news:eqUvx0SwIHA.1236@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl
|
|> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of my
|> tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new holes in
|> my
|
| Nah, no you don't have a tinfoil hat PCR (I've seen you mention the
| tin foil hat a thousand times over the past year or so) ...but sooner
| or later you will have wxp and no hat needed, and you know what,
| after a short period of time you will be relieved in many ways.. ..no
| need to respond or think forward about it. When the opportunity
| and/or the funds are there you will have it and will actually enjoy
| the multifaced benifits of such.

Yea. Most of that is ribbing-- BUT I really have no intention to upgrade
until absolutely necessary, if ever!

|> head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue whether the
|> Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill of Co. with XP
|> Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed in that folder or
|> remain the same (Terhune with Professional Edition)? Can Terhune have
|
| When it first was mentioned the other day I checked mine - not that I
| had to because I am Extremely fussy about date stamps being a certain
| way on all levels in all categories! My Date Modified column never
| changes its date on a folder 'no matter what I do' within that folder.
|
| Now that today Gary revised what he said yesterday saying his
| actually does change, you've got me wondering - however if so then it
| can only be one of two reasons why mine doesn't. (although if it was
| like others and my folder Modified Date stamp did change as you
| specified, I would uncheck the Modified Date column and check the
| Creation Date column in its place, but I don't need to.

Interesting. I thought I saw you agree with Etal that it was a FAT32
vrs. NTFS issue? Oops-- this post of yours predates the one to Etal by
1.5 hours. So... that is it, then... it's a file system difference. And
since you are FAT32, Colorado must have been using NTFS. Something like
that? Visa versa?

| Rick
|
|
|> been looking at Creation Date, which needs to be added by a tweak,
|> acc. to Brian A.?
|>
|>| Rick
|>
|> --
|> Thanks or Good Luck,
|> There may be humor in this post, and,
|> Naturally, you will not sue,
|> Should things get worse after this,
|> PCR
|> pcrrcp@netzero.net

--
Thanks or Good Luck,
There may be humor in this post, and,
Naturally, you will not sue,
Should things get worse after this,
PCR
pcrrcp@netzero.net

Bill in Co. · May 29, 2008

I'm using NTFS for WinXP (for my system partition), and that's the one I'm
talking about. (I also have some FAT32 partitions on the drive for other
stuff, however).

PCR wrote:
> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>> Anyway, my sieve of a brain DOES recall running into what Bill is
>> talking about, but I can't recall the circumstances. That simple. It
>> struck me as something certain types of workers might like, but
>> danged if I can recall the logic behind that thought.
>
> Etal brought up a good point... NTFS vrs. FAT32. It remains to be seen
> whether you & Colorado are using the same file system when you have the
> same observation on the Mod Date. (You know I am tounge-in-cheek when I
> rib you on XP-irradiation & 24-hour weariness & stuff.)
>
>> --
>> Gary S. Terhune
>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>> www.grystmill.com
>>
>> "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
>> news:%23ADAvZTwIHA.548@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:
>>>> In re me, the answer is, "No." You think I didn't quadruple-check?
>>>
>>> It just seems odd, is all. And I do know you've been extremely busy
>>> lately with a 24-hour fix effort for CdLSRN. Good work on that,
>>> though.
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Gary S. Terhune
>>>> MS-MVP Shell/User
>>>> www.grystmill.com
>>>>
>>>> "PCR" <pcrrcp@netzero.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:eqUvx0SwIHA.1236@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Rick Chauvin wrote:
>>>>>> Thanks, and same courteous sentiments to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I always skim read the forums here (as well as the other groups
>>>>>> I frequented) I don't have the time luxury to post as much as I
>>>>>> use to anymore though, but am always around.
>>>>>
>>>>> Good to know you are around. I've had to triple the thickness of
>>>>> my tinfoil hat in this WinXP thread-- but still got a few new
>>>>> holes in my head! Before I leave it, can you settle the issue
>>>>> whether the Modification Date of an XP folder should change (Bill
>>>>> of Co. with XP Home Edition) when a file is added/removed/changed
>>>>> in that folder or remain the same (Terhune with Professional
>>>>> Edition)? Can Terhune have been looking at Creation Date, which
>>>>> needs to be added by a tweak, acc. to Brian A.?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rick
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Thanks or Good Luck,
>>>>> There may be humor in this post, and,
>>>>> Naturally, you will not sue,
>>>>> Should things get worse after this,
>>>>> PCR
>>>>> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks or Good Luck,
>>> There may be humor in this post, and,
>>> Naturally, you will not sue,
>>> Should things get worse after this,
>>> PCR
>>> pcrrcp@netzero.net
>
> --
> Thanks or Good Luck,
> There may be humor in this post, and,
> Naturally, you will not sue,
> Should things get worse after this,
> PCR
> pcrrcp@netzero.net

PCR · May 30, 2008

Bill in Co. wrote:
| I'm using NTFS for WinXP (for my system partition), and that's the
| one I'm talking about. (I also have some FAT32 partitions on the
| drive for other stuff, however).

And what about the FAT32 partition? Does that behave the same as in
Win98 with that Mod date? If so... congratulations to Etal & Chauvin for
figuring it... though your only cure will be to shape-shift your NTFS
into a FAT32-- or learn to live with it! Put your head inside the box
for a triple dose of the irradiation-- & you may forget the problem
entirely!

Re: Backup software--like GHOST

PCR

Rick Chauvin

PCR

Bill in Co.

Gary S. Terhune

PCR

Gary S. Terhune

PCR

Gary S. Terhune

Bill in Co.

Gary S. Terhune

Etal

Rick Chauvin

Gary S. Terhune

Rick Chauvin

PCR

PCR

PCR

Bill in Co.

PCR

Similar threads