Mistakenly changed ePUB file association

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by magmanpi

I'm so sorry if I offended you with my lack of computer knowledge. I thought this site was for people who enjoy e-books and like to share their knowledge. I asked my questions very politely and thanked the people who were kind enough to help me.

I thought this was a friendly site where no question was considered too dumb to ask. From your reaction, apparently I was mistaken.

You didn't do anything wrong. It's just me. Sorry if I gave the wrong impression.

[calvin-c]

Originally Posted by theducks

The trend seems to be "Isolate the user from the OS core".

And that's a good thing. If the user doesn't know what they're doing they should either let a professional do it or let a professional teach them how to do it. Do note that 'OS core' isn't the same as the command line. File associations shouldn't be part of the core IMO-but M$ doesn't seem to listen to my opinions very much. Wonder why that is?

[calvin-c]

Originally Posted by magmanpi

I thought this was a friendly site where no question was considered too dumb to ask. From your reaction, apparently I was mistaken.

Please don't confuse the site with the users. In general this is a friendly site-but sometimes the users aren't that friendly. (And from previous experience with JSW I think you probably just caught him on a grumpy day. Or maybe on a pet peeve. Whichever it was he really is usually friendly & helpful.)

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

And that's a good thing. If the user doesn't know what they're doing they should either let a professional do it or let a professional teach them how to do it. Do note that 'OS core' isn't the same as the command line. File associations shouldn't be part of the core IMO-but M$ doesn't seem to listen to my opinions very much. Wonder why that is?

One thing MS does so very wrong is they have file extensions for known file types turned off by default. It just is wrong. You give directions to someone and they get it wrong not because of poor directions or the person did it wrong but because what they see is not what really is. MS should have file extensions on by default. There shouldn't even be an option to turn them off.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

One thing MS does so very wrong is they have file extensions for known file types turned off by default. It just is wrong. You give directions to someone and they get it wrong not because of poor directions or the person did it wrong but because what they see is not what really is. MS should have file extensions on by default. There shouldn't even be an option to turn them off.

I absolutely Agree.
Virus writer exploited this: FreeEBook.EPUB.EXE
The Exe is hidden by default, but the psychology say 'EPUB'. <click>

W7 (?not sure if Vista does this) at least treats the filename and extension as 2 separate entities, so you don't have to remember to always include the extension on rename, if you have the extension always visible.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by theducks

I absolutely Agree.
Virus writer exploited this: FreeEBook.EPUB.EXE
The Exe is hidden by default, but the psychology say 'EPUB'. <click>

W7 (?not sure if Vista does this) at least treats the filename and extension as 2 separate entities, so you don't have to remember to always include the extension on rename, if you have the extension always visible.

W7 does this as well on a rename. But, it Windows should show the extension. Someone needs to be fired for this decision.

[JimmyR]

Originally Posted by theducks

W7 (?not sure if Vista does this) at least treats the filename and extension as 2 separate entities, so you don't have to remember to always include the extension on rename, if you have the extension always visible.

I was very glad to discover that after upgrading my windows box to 7.