Windows Longhorn and Drive Letters

I read that by default in Longhorn that drive letters are now hidden. Being brought up on computer technology during the DOS faze, I didn't really like this idea, but come to think of it, I think its not bad considering the number of flash and "hard disk" like things you can attach to a PC these days. Eg. MP3 players, digital cameras, stick readers, USB hard drives, firewire drives, it would be nice to just use volume names. What do you guys think?

By the way I think its good that PCs are finally starting to get rid of legacy components like the parallel port, serial port, PS/2 mouse and keyboard connectors, etc. Legacy software components like drive letters is probably the next thing.

Drive letters make me feel happy. ARRRRRRGH.

Even Macs still use drive letters... Right?

I don't think drive letters are used by Macs. At least not on Macs that I have used. They are labelled hard disk and floppy. Lol, I didn't know how to eject a Mac floppy, was looking around for the eject button on the computer, then I checked the help section, and it said to drag the floppy icon to the trash and then it popped my disk out. But I never referred to a Mac floppy as the "A" drive.

From an admin point of view, I don't like it. It would mean that we have to retrain users on local data managment because the terminology will change.

Using Linux & UNIX regularly, it's easy to adapt to a file structure without volume names. But traditional Windows doesn't lend itself easily to that concept because it grew up under DOS. In the long run, whether it's a mount point under /dev or some archiac letter to designate the volume, it would all work.

One headache could be support for legacy programs -- but if they're just 'hidden' and still exist, there's hope those of use who like drive letters can still use them.

I don't really use multiple drive letters because every drive I have is either mounted on the root drive or in an array. Mounting volumes has been a part of Windows since NTFS came out in the early 90's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashpool

Even Macs still use drive letters... Right?

---

Macs have never used drive letters.

I don't mind drive letters going away so long as there's still a way for items to be addressable via scripts and such. I really don't even care if it's a drive letter, UNC path, or some type of mount point.

I'm used to drive letters and prefer them. I guess I could stick with XP for a while longer to see how that all pans out.

longhorns gonna be a system whore anyway...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rabidmoose171

longhorns gonna be a system whore anyway...

---

I wonder what it will offer that will make it worth getting?

I wonder if MS will shove it down our throats like they did with XP and drop support/patches/service packs for previous releases to force us to change?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bearded Kirklander

I wonder what it will offer that will make it worth getting?

I wonder if MS will shove it down our throats like they did with XP and drop support/patches/service packs for previous releases to force us to change?

---

That's pretty much how it goes.
Or they could switch to the OSX deployment platform. Force you to upgrade ever year for $130.

:( Goodbye Windows 2000 Professional

I really like Win 2k Pro. I think that "rollup" pack is out on Betanews. It sucks that they won't maintain 2k Pro.

I can understand the 9x argument, but XP is based on 2k Pro, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bearded Kirklander

I really like Win 2k Pro. I think that "rollup" pack is out on Betanews. It sucks that they won't maintain 2k Pro.

I can understand the 9x argument, but XP is based on 2k Pro, right?

---

Yeah. They killed 2kPro when 2003 server didn't support it. Really, 2kPro is already dead.

I just don't get it. Maybe I'm being dense, but I honestly think that Win 2k Pro is the best of the Corporate End-User OS's. If you are a corporation, ya probably don't want MSN Messenger, the Video editor, extended Media Player, fancy themes, etc. Right?

I just don't get it. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bearded Kirklander

I just don't get it. Maybe I'm being dense, but I honestly think that Win 2k Pro is the best of the Corporate End-User OS's. If you are a corporation, ya probably don't want MSN Messenger, the Video editor, extended Media Player, fancy themes, etc. Right?

I just don't get it. :(

---

Yeah. I thought the same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ashpool

Drive letters make me feel happy. ARRRRRRGH.

Even Macs still use drive letters... Right?

---

Nope. OSX is going to address storage volumes as a device name mounted to directory like any other unix-like system. And btw, I don't think NT does drive letters on the inards, it is all just presentation: so that idiot dos and 9x users could figure out what to do. Also, nt is capable of mounting volumes to any directory as ua mentioned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ua549

I don't really use multiple drive letters because every drive I have is either mounted on the root drive or in an array. Mounting volumes has been a part of Windows since NTFS came out in the early 90's.

---

Thank you! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bearded Kirklander

I just don't get it. Maybe I'm being dense, but I honestly think that Win 2k Pro is the best of the Corporate End-User OS's. If you are a corporation, ya probably don't want MSN Messenger, the Video editor, extended Media Player, fancy themes, etc. Right?

I just don't get it. :(

---

I'd agree. I prefer 2k in a lot of ways. 2k3 is also a nice step in the same direction 2k was going in. At where I work, they have a lot of 2k machines, and a good few xp machines (I have one) which are pretty stripped down. No themes, no stupid effects, nothing. I can tollerate that.

My company is all Windows XP with a few NT4 machines lying around. The XP machines run just fine, and don't have stuff like Messenger installed, they just deploy whatever they want with the OS, XP installs are easily done this way. I am sure Windows 2000 was too, but Windows 2000 is 5 years old now, you can't really expect Microsoft to support it forever. But I do agree that is was such a great OS when it was out, I jumped to it over 98 and never looked back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ImaNihilist

That's pretty much how it goes.
Or they could switch to the OSX deployment platform. Force you to upgrade ever year for $130.

---

But apple doesn't do that exactly. Tiger isn't a necessity these days, just a luxury. Only the mac fanatics seem to think it's necessary. Most applications run just fine on OS 10.x, which released in 2001 IIRC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SprySpectre

But apple doesn't do that exactly. Tiger isn't a necessity these days, just a luxury. Only the mac fanatics seem to think it's necessary. Most applications run just fine on OS 10.x, which released in 2001 IIRC.

---

Huh. I was under the impression that things like FinalCut needed 10.4, least that's what it says on the box.

Even the latest version of iLife says 10.3.6 on the box.

iLife will run on 10.2.6, and Final Cut can run on 10.3.9. Yeah, I guess they do it more than I realized. I was under the impression that the more commonly used apps work through 10.x. I guess I never realized that most of the people that have bought these already had 10.2 or higher running. I work at a store that sells computer stuff, including macs & mac software...most of the people I saw were the fanatics, and when I say fanatic it's an understatement. I got yelled at for being out of stock of 10.4 the day it came out...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SprySpectre

iLife will run on 10.2.6, and Final Cut can run on 10.3.9. Yeah, I guess they do it more than I realized. I was under the impression that the more commonly used apps work through 10.x. I guess I never realized that most of the people that have bought these already had 10.2 or higher running. I work at a store that sells computer stuff, including macs & mac software...most of the people I saw were the fanatics, and when I say fanatic it's an understatement. I got yelled at for being out of stock of 10.4 the day it came out...

---

Lol. See, the only reason for me to have a Mac is to use the latest Apple software. Most of the actually Apple software requires the latest version of the OS to run.

You can probably run non Apple branded software on OSX 10.0 and 10.1. I don't really know as it only says on the box. I don't know if that means it actually won't work on an older version of OSX or not.

No one is continuing to shove new software down anyones throat. If you like Windows 95, then fine, use it. There is nothing wrong with it.

Just because MS says, "Ok, we are done with that, we are not going to devote any more resources towards improving it" doesn't mean you can't still use it. They are simply not going to provide FREE updates to a piece of software.

If you want the newest security updates and features, then buy the newest OS. Get over this already.

Hey BK, you bash MS enough and constantly discuss "corporate issues". Do you even work in the IT industry? Just curious.

Hey Vertecies, I agree with you for the most part. But I don't see why they are going to do that with 2000. Sure the os is about 6 years old, but their isn't a whole lot that sets it apart from xp (as far as running software, and drivers). I mean I think it is fine if they don't add any more noticable features or service packs, but I'd wish they'd just backport the latest security patches to it. There are still lots of 2k workstations and servers out there. At the place I work, almost everyone runs 2000. The newer machines are xp, but it is still almost totally 2000. I actually wouldn't even care if they say (well, your support is over but the security updates for xp should still work on 2000). Now I don't know the specifics of what is gonna happen, but I would be ok with that kind of compromise.