Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-10 > #186368
| From | "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.internet.services.video.youtube, alt.comp.os.windows-10 |
| Subject | Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? |
| Date | 2025-07-30 09:42 +0200 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <106cj48$33k2s$2@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <1068ef6$3it0n$1@dont-email.me> <1068m0f$3jpnd$1@dont-email.me> <106953d$3it0o$4@dont-email.me> <1069v99$2hejd$1@dont-email.me> <106bfpq$2o3h5$3@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
J.P. , >> https://superuser.com/questions/1632295/creating-a-file-with-no-extension-with-right-click-on-windows-10 >> >> The whole "trick" seems to be to press ctrl-A to select the whole >> filename. > > That method - running the file through a text editor so you can use > quote marks when saving Thats not what I tried to suggest. You mentioned that, when creating a new document, you could edits the filename itself, but not the extension. At that moment try pressing ctrl-A and see if that results in the extension also getting selected for editing. ... but reading on I think I made an assumption which has made a fool outof me : > The better method is to ensure "show extensions [even] for known > filetypes" > is selected, then you can edit including the extensions without running > the > files through anything. I /assumed/ that you saw, after creating a new document, something like "[filename].ext", with only the part beween the "[" and "]" being editable. Which, from my POV, didn't seem too strange, as most people will want to keep the extension when changing the filename. The ctrl-a "trick" was, I assumed, to change the above into "[filename.ext]" (making the full filename editable). But yes, its quite possible that me having changed the OS configuration when I installed it to always show extensions just /might/ have something to do with me always seeing and being able to edit the full filename. <whistle> > That should have been the default for that option for decades, ever > since black hats started to use double extensions to hide malware. I do not agree with you there. Most users are just that, *users*. They know which icon they need to click on their desktop, but often no more than that. They really need to be protected against their own absense of knowledge (the same reason for why certain OS related files are hidden). Making sure that they can change a filename but not inadvertedly throw the extension away (after which the icon changes and they cannot find the file back and/or double-click it to open it) is one of those protections. Remember all those stories about users which tried to "clean up" their 'puters by throwing all files away they did not recognise - and than complained that their 'puter would not start anymore ? Yeah that happens when you "clean up" the OS folder that way. :-) But for "power"-users ? Certainly. But they are knowledgable enough to disable such hand-holding protections in the configuration just after having installed the OS. As yours truly has done, and absolutily forgotten about. :-| As for the "black hat" example you've given ? AFAIK the OS tries to warn you with a popup when you try to start downloaded executables. What does the run-of-the-mill user ? Figure out which choice makes the popup go away and than blindly apply it, without even reading what it tries to tell them (yeah, I have been shoulder-surfing a number of such users, just to figure out what went "wrong" on their machine - a popup comes up and within half a second its been clicked away). :-\ As such I expect one of the future Windows versions to have a default configuration that prohibits the user from running any executable (of any kind) that has somehow been copied into it (downloaded, thumbdrive, etc). Regards, Rudy Wieser
Back to alt.comp.os.windows-10 | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-28 12:39 +0100
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-07-28 08:18 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-28 16:46 +0100
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-28 18:51 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-28 19:10 +0100
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-28 22:18 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-29 01:37 +0100
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-29 09:10 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-29 18:46 +0100
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-07-29 13:58 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-29 20:21 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-07-29 15:20 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-29 21:47 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-29 22:38 +0100
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-30 08:57 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-07-29 22:02 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-30 09:54 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Philip Herlihy <nothing@invalid.com> - 2025-07-30 14:24 +0100
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-07-30 09:55 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-07-30 13:44 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-07-30 23:33 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-29 10:03 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-29 10:15 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-29 22:51 +0100
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-30 09:42 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-07-30 10:02 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-30 17:04 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> - 2025-07-30 21:49 +0100
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Mark Lloyd <not.email@all.invalid> - 2025-07-30 18:15 +0000
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-07-30 23:37 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-07-29 06:26 +0000
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2025-07-29 12:06 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Philip Herlihy <nothing@invalid.com> - 2025-07-28 13:40 +0100
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? knuttle <keith_nuttle@yahoo.com> - 2025-07-28 12:43 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-28 14:49 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2025-07-28 08:53 -0400
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? Herbert Kleebauer <klee@unibwm.de> - 2025-07-28 17:01 +0200
Re: Creating new files of indeterminate sort? "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-07-28 17:21 +0200
csiph-web