Never understood why Windows' explorer hides extension by default. Does MS fear it would confuse their users?
Yes, they think their users will be confused by and accidentally remove extensions. To be fair that might happen sometimes but it's nowhere near worth it
They already have a confirmation box when you try to change the extension. And could just as easily move it into another column where it's harder to change (explorer was like this once, a long time ago).
And yet, they keep hiding the on the rationale that it confuses the users. The most common thing on explorer is some user being confused because they can't understand what clicking on a file is supposed to do, but that's not an argument for showing them...
So, yeah, that's the surface-level explanation. But there's a deeper reason.
You seriously underestimate the stupidity of 80% of windows users. They could put multiple warnings and people would still click past them without reading then bitch to their IT team when they break something.
Ah, right, in the context that Windows determines filetype only on extension.
Btw, there's a bunch of mimeopen implementations for Linux. Is there something like that for Windows too?
I don't think that anything like that exists in Windows. Generally that's my least issue with windows honestly. It's a POS on so many levels
What do you mean? linkin_park_-_numb.mp3 clearly has an extension, it's all the other files that don't!
One time I struggled debugging a program on a clean Windows machine. For some reason it seemed like it couldn’t find a JSON file that’s obviously in the system. I could even open the file on my own and view its contents.
Turns out after much frustration that the file was actually a json.txt file. I didn’t notice because the extension was hidden, so I only saw .json and thought it was fine.
Step 5 in meme: add '.txt' to seemingly text files.
The OS designed to prime the population into bad cyber security practices so they are more easily able to exploit and scam later on.
takes off tinfoil hat
You have a point though. Why hide file types by default unless you believe the users are too dumb to ever learn what a few letters mean.
You can’t imagine how much I hate this setting. A couple of weeks ago I helped a guy install some specific software on a windows machine provided by the customer. It’s like one exe with a config file. Pretty basic. My instructions were:
The exe was throwing errors because of the missing config file. Of course the filename was abc.xml.txt 💩
This is part of what helped the I love you virus to spread. Not too many idiots would open a file titled ILoveYou.txt.vbs, but even some smarter people will turn their brains off if they get a file titled ILoveYou.txt, possibly even me, except the first thing I do with a new computer is unhide file extensions.
This gave me PTSD
It's not like I want to defend windows, but If it needs admin permission you usually can't start it without confirmation.
Here's the problem. So many legitimate things need elevation, and often multiple times in a single install. Guess what most Windows users do, when they see an elevation prompt. What do you reckon?
Honestly I don't think it's that bad. I have to use sudo just as often on linux as I have to accept the elevation box on win. Win11 has some serious issues but UAC is harmless.
Everyone knows most people turn UAC completely off after it nags them for the 10th time and they get frustrated and dump it.
I turn UAC off before it nags me for the 10th time.
The only nag I want to see is the one right before it gets turned off.
I hate things that just throw up nag screens that users get desensitized to and just click through anyway. It hasn't increased security at all.
Looking at you "do you trust the authors of the code in this workspace folder" VSCode. Yes I effing do, that's why I opened it to begin with!
Don't forget: Files have execute permissions by default!
Windows moment 🤗
where Linux?
50% of being a Linux user is hate towards Windows so I'd say it fits
the other 50% is hate torwards nvidia
And 100% of it is fair
Just hijacking a discussion about security. I would think that Linux users would be more security conscious. But I found in my buildings trash a bunch of HDDs, some 1TB and a 5TB, so I took them to see if they were ok (and recycle properly if not).
All ext4 formatted and with lots of personally identifiable information including emails and photos and stuff.
The previous owner was an early Linux dev, wrote stuff that is still in the kernel. Yet unencrypted drives just thrown in the trash.
I've cleared the drives and now use them for myself, after I searched for a wallet.dat file.
Maybe he knew none of the information could harm him if someone got hold of it?
I could have brute forced his password, there were SSH keys to various servers, I probably could have done something to him.
Possible they passed away suddenly and a tech-illiterate family member threw them out while cleaning out their place. Not great there was no encryption but people often overlook making plans for their eventual death, we mostly just don't like to think about it.
I'm literally trying to get into Linux and one of the first things was installing software, which involves copying and running random bits of code from whatever website has the highest search result. I would say a lot of software is running code you have no idea what it does.
I ask this with full sincerity - are you unaware of the package manager?
He has a point tho. The amount of copy pasting random shit from the internet into the console is way too comon if you go down the rabbit hole on some issues with the system and find a solution on some abandoned by god itself linux forum. To be fair its usualy just a comand that does shit for you in 5 seconds so you dont have to use gui buuut it does happen and i can tell what this stuff does but the average user likley dosent . Alghtough it might be less common today. Its been quite a long time since i last broke my system.
Installing software on Linux almost never involves "copying and running random bits of code" unless you have a need for some really obscure program. Learn how to use your distribution's package manager.
Learn how to use your distribution's package manager.
Also
sudo apt update
sudo apt upgrade
covers what, about 60% of Linux desktops?
Those are just tutorials showing how to install something. Typing flatpak install firefox is one and the same as going into the app store, searching for Firefox and clicking "install". Tutorial websites would just show terminal as it's more universal.
If they ask you to actually download some file there is something very wrong.
I often see people overwhelmed by universality of some things. Instead of searching "How to install Firefox on Linux?" what should be learned is "How to install software on Linux?" and, unless met with something badly ported, never do the search again.
But what my meme is about is Windows-only style of having some file and by default having no idea if that's going to run in some program or be a program.
While I totally agree with you about package managers, I still run into a lot of apps that the only install option is a .deb downloaded from a webpage. Which is comparable to running a .exe on windows.
At a conference recently, one person accidentally sent the organizer a pdf of their presentation with their notes underneath each slide, instead of the presentation itself, but it was super confusing because the file was "presentation.pptx.pdf" which of course got displayed by windows as "presentation.pptx". The person who decided to hide extensions by default must be so proud of pulling off such a wide reaching prank
Spoderman.mp4.exe
I use Arch btw
Sister communities:
Community rules
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
