How do I delete a shortcut from the desktop?
When I try and delete it Vista tries to delete what the shortcut points to, not the shortcut itself. It doesn't show up when I do a dir in the terminal
Printable View
How do I delete a shortcut from the desktop?
When I try and delete it Vista tries to delete what the shortcut points to, not the shortcut itself. It doesn't show up when I do a dir in the terminal
Right Click > Delete
It won't delete the program, in fact the message that pops up tells you quite specifically that it is only deleting the shortcut. Perhaps you misunderstood the dialog.
Nope, the dialogue specifically asked me if I wanted to delete the file that it linked to. C:\Programs\Adobe\Adobe Acrobat Reader.exe
Is it trying to make you uninstall the actual program?
Right clicking > Delete should tell you if you want to just delete the shortcut, or uninstall the program...
Or atleast that's how it is on XP.
http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/2...teshortcut.jpg
http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/7852/deletefile.jpg
Both move only the shortcut to the recycle bin, not the file, even though it says 'file'. Stupid Vista?
http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/1665/...dshortcuts.jpg
[excuse the change in icon]
It clearly says "Deleting the shortcut does not uninstall the program, only deleting the shortcut". So no, it's not "stupid Vista", you read it incorrectly. The thing was telling you what it was a shortcut to, not what it was going to delete.
I think the point was that the second dialog clearly appears to be saying it is going to delete the file "Internet Explorer" in complete contrast to the first dialog saying it is just going to delete the shortcut.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
Stupid Vista shouldn't set up a convention where it says specifically when it is deleting a shortcut, if it is going to violate that convention on some other random shortcut, causing the user to think "WTF, is it trying to delete the file? I just want to get rid of this shortcut".
This is what I was getting, so even though the dialogue says that it's trying to delete the application itself, it's really only deleting the shortcut? Then why does it ask me for the administrator password? It says the folder is inaccessible because the admin password is needed. You need an admin password to delete a desktop shortcut? Stupid Microsoft.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClouD
Just go back to XP. It's much less stressful.
I need to enter the admin password to 'restore' some shortcuts, others not the case. I'm assuming it's the same with deletion.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Windows has always just deleted the shorcut. The whole point of that dialog is to inform idiots that it's a shortcut to the actual program, because you know there are people out there that think the icon is the whole program. Why do you even bother reading it anyway, it's just asking for a conformation. If you don't understand the way Windows deletes files, or how files work, you shouldn't be bothering with anything but a Mac. A shortcut is just a .lnk file on your desktop, there's no way deleting it can cause the real thing to be deleted.
epic thread.....
Thank god I have XP...
And I just read an article on how the Mighty Mouse made Mac secure from Windows users, because they'd never be able to figure out how the damn thing works.
What Tony said; epic thread.
By the way, who the hell thought up the "All Users/Desktop" folder, where icons in there show up on every user's desktop - and it takes administrative privileges for a user to remove them. No, I don't want your crapware on my desktop. No, moving the icons off the edge of the screen isn't a solution...
EDIT: oh, maybe that's what you are getting, ninja. The shortcut doesn't appear in terminal because it's actually in "All Users/Desktop" maybe?
Then why did they change it to no longer tell me that it's just the shortcut?Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
Does it matter? I'm surprised you even read the notifications that Windows pops up. Those are only there for people who don't know how computers work...Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Computers =/= OSQuote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
When Windows Vista starts saying 'delete file' (with a description of the file) as opposed to the 'delete shortcut' (with clear explanation that it's not going to delete the file), then it is obviously going to incite some confusion, especially given Vista's reputation.
Ninja, I believe that Vista doesn't like you messing around with OS applications like IE. The thing is though, that if there is a small bend arrow in the lower right corner of an icon, it's always a shortcut, and deleting a shortcut will never delete anything more than that.
I understand that a computer is not an OS. I was saying that the thing is there for people who don't have an understanding of how any OS works, whether it be OS X, XP, or Vista.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClouD
I never read those pop-ups. They're pretty crap explanations too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
I think Linux is much easier.
Reading the pop-up messages that Windows shows is sometimes a good idea.
Depends on what you are doing.
And the reason I never read them is because I'm never on Windows.
We are aware that you use Linux.
I use Linux, in case you didn't know.
I deleted a shortcut for MS Paint and it deleted the entire program. I didn't realize what had happened in time to restore it and it is now lost forever.
That has happened to me more than once.
Zhaylin: Press the Windows button and R. Type paint.exe . It should work. Deleting the shortcut only deletes the shortcut, no matter what program it is.
I've tried, and I'm told it doesn't exist.
Then you didn't delete the shortcut, you deleted the .exe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhaylin
isn't that the whole point of this thread.....
deleting the shortcut deletes the shortcut & the target
In Vista maybe, I have no experience in it. In XP, it doesn't delete the target.
That's messed up if it deletes the entire thing instead of just the shortcut.
Call microsoft about this and complain to them.
Ha, yeah, that'll workQuote:
Originally Posted by slayer
They won't talk to you unless you have a support contract
That won't get you anywhere...hehe.
If only they listened...
Really?! Well I guess that terminates the old myth that windows is better than <insert free OS here> because you can expect company support... (ignoring redhat, suse, canonical, etc. for the moment)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Er, yeah, anyway... :P
No, Vista does not delete the target and the shortcut, and this has never happened to me when using it. You're obviously fucking something up really bad to do that, and if you think it's the fault of the OS and not you, you should go use OS X or something.
calm down
it's probably just a bug
No-one said it was done maliciously
*edit*
quick google certainly throws up a lot of problems with deleting shortcuts
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...ista+delete+sh
Most of those have to do with hard drive problems, or the desktop needing a simple refresh. It doesn't say anything about Vista removing programs when you delete the shortcut.
Also, to the person who is trying to say Paint got deleted, it didn't. There is no "paint.exe", it's called "mspaint.exe". Since you're on Vista, you can even use the live search bar in the start menu to search for any program with the word "paint" in it.
I'm confused, deleting a alias on OSX just deletes the alias :?Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
If you spotlight paint.exe, mspaint.exe will show up in it :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
you can make a shortcut from paint.exe -> mspaint.exe
But whatever you do just don't delete it !!
Do people even use paint anymore? It's useless for everything.
It's good if you want to quickly save a print screen picture. Even then, snipping tools are better and automatically create and save images, so I personally have no use for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
I usually don't even use paint to save print screen images anymore...
yay photoshop and easy image resizing!
No, crap computers stuck with Paint for small jobs!
The new paint in Windows 7 is definitely better, but still nothing compared to Photoshop :(
Never used Windows 7 extensivley either...I did see that the taskbar look secksayer though. But I still like Vista's setup more.
I haven't used Windows 7 yet, how much more like OSX is it than Vista? :P
Ugh, do all programs now use that annoying Office tabbed bar now?
Yes, Ninja. It's called Ribbon and it's mostly annoying.
I hate the Ribbon so much, I found it so hard to use when I'm on Windows. Grrr.
It also messes up some things in Windows 7, which is pretty annoying.
That's why I'm saving up to buy a macbook pro, but that may not happen. Can't wait until the summer, Job=Money =]
I'm buying nothing for now...I'm a poor boy. Computer-wise.
Oh well, I'm sure you've got computer labs.
"Bill Gates turned 50 this week, I was going to send him an e-card but I couldn't get my Windows Vista to Work" - Jay Leno
Hahahahaha!
Vista fail.
Lol ninja, awesome quote.
Paraphrasing, as I can't find the actual quote
Jeremy Allison - Google employee and lead Samba developer
Quote:
Listening to Windows users complaining about their platform, is like watching someone wade through a sewer. They're down there complaining about the filth and muck (viruses, and whatnot)
All the while, you're watching them from the sidewalk, and you're like "Why are you down there? You don't have to be. Just come up here, and walk on the sidewalk"
That's as good one too, just less funny.
Are DirectX games like Crysis and all Steam games compatible with the sidewalk?
:?Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
games are almost a non-issue
this is productive computing,
not leisure
as I've said before
games will pop up on any platformQuote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
there's no technical restrictions
The crux, is work related computing
Marvo: You can use WINE for Steam, buddy.
Very few companies use DirectX, there's just too small of a market for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
I'm not about to go through learning how WINE works and crawl forums with commands, just so I can play games with bad performance and graphics. Until developers like Valve, Adobe and Blizzard start developing for Linux, I'm not changing operating system.
I gave Linux another chance some time ago on my laptop, and it was still shit. Couldn't really get anything to work with WINE, performance wasn't stunning, my battery was getting sucked dry within 30 minutes and the system generally seems more complicated than windows. By more complicated, I mean that Windows gives you a lot more easy to understand information, whereas on Linux you'll have to talk to people on forums and whatnot.
Linux is for Developers, OSX is for people. It's soooo much easier to use than windows, everything is right where you're expect it to be and all apps work exactly the same way.
I haven't used one of the newest apple products...but there quite a few things that annoy me with Macs at my school. I'm not sure how old they are, but there are things that really annoy me...and sometimes I just don't know how people say "Photoshopping is better on a Mac than a PC."Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
I mean, I've been using a mac for a few years now at my school, and I'm a quick learner, but it's these little things that always get me when I'm trying to photoshop on a mac.
Like for instance, the desktop. I hate how all the program icons are in the taskmenu thing at the bottom (or on any other side, it's just that thing they're in). Whenever I'm trying to photoshop and go near the bottom, I will sometimes move my mouse over the taskmenu and accidentally click on a program and open it up. Now, that may just be a problem of my own, but I think some will agree that thats a problem with macs.
Again, it may just be my school's computers that suck with that taskmenu thing, but when I use Photoshop on my Windows XP, I don't have to worry about accidently selecting the desktop to minimize Photoshop, or click on a program on my taskbar since everything is on the desktop.
But then again...I am using a Windows XP, which is a bagillion times better than Vista imo.
Photoshop was better on the Mac because it was 64-bit and the Win version was 32 bit, much much faster for image manipulation. Now they've completely swapped that, the Mac version is 32 bit and slow as fuck while the windows version is 64 and faster :( I like the layout much better on the Mac, all the useful toolbars and windows are right up at the top with the menu.
Might I recommend autohiding the dock? :P
I've tried auto-hiding the dock but I still manage to put my mouse down far enough for it to come up and annoy me XDQuote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
What do you mean the useful toolbars and menu is right at the top? You mean where you can select File/Edit/Image etc.?
Windows has that too .__.
Strange, here I am using RocketDock to emulate the Mac Dock. :P
I dunno, I never have that problem, slayer. I'm not sure on Mac, but can't you alter the show/hide time in milliseconds or something? I can with mine on Windows... That way it only shows if I hover at the right spot for the right amount of time. I've got it set so it's just right and ntuitive for me personally. Because I don't like having to show the desktop just to find my program icons. :D
No, I mean the feathering options, the tools. I don't remember photoshop in windows, but doesn't it also have a menu in every single window instead of one nice clean one at the top? that's annoying as fuck.Quote:
Originally Posted by slayer
I like RocketDock, I have it at work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Man of Steel
I think I know what you're trying to say, and the Photoshop for windows is very similar to that of Macs.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
The only difference is that on Windows, you have a background on it, and on Macs, you don't (unless you full-screen, but then you don't have those little bars to move your image around. I assume you can still use the hand tool, but I never use that tool. It's the same with Windows if you full-screen.)
And this really surprises me when I see people using Photoshop on Windows. They never know how to minimize one image. They know how to do it on a Mac, but they never look right under the red X to notice the minimize and close button for the picture they're working with.
They always seem to close out of Photoshop, then open it back up...I'm always having to tell people in my school that they don't have to close out of Photoshop just to open another image...
Then again, our teacher who uses the Macs tells us to always quit out of Photoshop before opening a new picture...she tells us that for every program we use. It's really annoying...sometimes I don't think she knows what she's talking about...
And there is only one menu bar with all the options like feathering and stuff. It carries over to all other images your working on just like a Mac.
I also hate that Windows has no differentiation between closing a window and closing an application. Why is it that when I close the AIM window on Windows, the whole program stops? That's just stupid. If I wanted to quit the program, I would.
It's probably just the people who made the AIM program itself. Things like MSN, Limewire, and Steam will still be running when you hit the X button at the top.
Have you tried pressing the little minimize button at the top? Some programs (like MSN, Limewire, Steam) will appear as an icon in the little corner where it shows the time if you click the X button. I'm assuming you don't have a problem with using Firefox (or IE) on a windows, since it doesn't need to load up or anything when you click the X button.
But things like Internet Explorer and Chrome disappear completely if you close the window. Minimizing it puts it on the taskbar, it doesn't close the window, it still wastes processing power.
So what happens if you close a window in OSX?Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
I'm not really sure what your trying to say?
I think I get what your saying...in a Mac, if you open up IE, it opens up the entire program, and from there, you can open multiple windows. So if you close out of all the windows, the IE program itself is still running right? That sounds like it would be wasting power to me.
Exactly what you'd expect, the window closes. But the program stays open. No, closing the window doesn't waste power, you would quit the program if you weren't doing something. It's nice to listen to music without an iTunes window open, or it's nice to let a Blender animation or a Quicktime export run without any windows open.Quote:
Originally Posted by Man of Steel
Ah yeah, your right about that.
But again, it would have to do with some of the programs on Windows. I can see how Itunes would be nice for a Mac, but with Windows, you could just get a program like Limewire, and drag all your music files into it's folder (or download them or whatever...) and close out of it without having to worry about a window and your music quit playing. It'd be a nice little icon in the corner.
But yeah, I would say it really just has to do with different programs with the Mac and PC. With a Mac, you'd have to get used to quiting out of a program when your done with it completely (like IE), and with a windows, you'd have to get used to not closing out of the program when your not done with it (Like Photoshop) :P
Ah, I see.
Limewire, slayer? Use foobar2000 for playing music, man. And get Frostwire for P2P.
Yeah you know, that's developers doing stupid things. Windows can fully support programs that do not have windows, but are still engaged, like Live Messenger.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Well then Developers should do that, at least Microsoft developers should. Especially for things that people want to run in the background like media playing / formatting.
Well, as I said, foobar2000 does it. In fact, I've got it playing right now with no window open.
but does it play mp4s or does it require you to downgrade all your music to mp3 or god forbid the windows audio format
It plays MP4, Ogg Vorbis, AAC, FLAC . . . pretty much everything. Has a very small footprint, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Nice, I'll use that at work. Does it have a clear way of organizing data? That's iTunes biggest thing, it's organizational tools.
I seem to have a problem with Itunes...Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Sometimes, I'll be working on one of the Macs at school with Itunes open listening to some of my game sounds for some project I'm working on.
I'll have Itunes open, and as one of the sounds are playing, another one will play half-way through.
The sounds are .wavs and both .wav's and .mp3's will both play through sounds that are already playing.
I'm not sure how to fix that. Another problem is that after one sound plays, the one under it plays, and so on.
I've tried changing the play settings to turn off shuffle and what not, but they keep playing on and I can't get them to stop D:
It's option in the perferences. Turn off cross-fade songs, by default it's set to fade in the last 5 seconds of one song and fade in the first 5 of the next song. It's nice for song, but not for what you're using it for.
This is one of the dumbest arguments I've heard in awhile. I actually laughed at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
You sure you're not grasping at straws here? Holy shit, closing the window closes the window! Also, that would be AIM's fault that it doesn't do everything you want the way you want it, not Windows.
Demon, if you've ever used a Mac, you would know why having it act the way it does, can be somewhat annoying.
I have used a Mac, and it's overpriced garbage. It doesn't handle IM clients any differently, almost all of them go to the system tray when you press X. If it's not doing that, you need to go into the settings and change it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
Well, it's a very minimalist player. Organizational tools aren't really a minimalist feature. It does have tagging, the ability to rename and move files and such, but it is not a full-blown media player—it's a lightweight music player. However, it works just fine for me. It does all the usual, basic things, but its claim to fame is how small and simple it is. If you want fancy, foobar2000 is probably not for you. To give you an idea, it's smaller/simpler than WinAmp or Quintessential Player. However, it sounds better. As in, it sounds noticeably better. Has a much smaller memory footprint as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
It's very customizable, with plugins and such to boot, though I don't bother with them much.
No, that's the problem. Closing the window in Windows does close the window, it closes the program.Quote:
Originally Posted by Demon Parasite
While I do agree that Apple laptops are overpriced, I wouldn't say they're garbage. OSX is so much better than Windows in many ways.
Uhm, WINE works fine. No commands for Steam. In fact, it is in my Applications menu, and I had an icon on my panels. No terminal to type into, at all. Don't know what you are talking about. And, games on WINE run with normal graphics and performance, so again, either I don't know what you're talking about, or you don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvo
Couldn't get anything to work with WINE? I fail to see how you can't get WINE to work. It's very simple. As for the battery, I can't say anythng on that, my battery has always been shit. Can't tell a difference, because it's always plugged in :P. As for Windows giving easier information? How? What information do they give you? The number for a help line? How about ubuntuforums.org, post a thread, get a quick fix in minutes. I did that just yesterday, actually. Within ten minutes, someone helped me. Isn't that actually easier than Microsoft?Quote:
I gave Linux another chance some time ago on my laptop, and it was still shit. Couldn't really get anything to work with WINE, performance wasn't stunning, my battery was getting sucked dry within 30 minutes and the system generally seems more complicated than windows. By more complicated, I mean that Windows gives you a lot more easy to understand information, whereas on Linux you'll have to talk to people on forums and whatnot.
I don't need to go on ubuntu forums, I can just make a google search. What I mean, is that Windows is sometimes easier to handle. About WINE, I tried using the commands that people said I should use for WoW, and then it just told me that the graphics driver wasn't properly installed (which it was) or something along those lines.
You don't understand though. I don't want to use WINE, I just want everything to work. Something that Linux has never been able to do for me, but Windows and to some extent OSX has.
Games like WoW (and others that provide native OpenGL engines) is where Wine shines
Especially with an nVidia card
OpenGL under Unix performs substantially better than OpenGL under Win32 (mainly due to superior memory management)
Couple that with an nVidia card, that use an OpenGL-like interface at the hardware level, so OpenGL can communicate directly with the hardware
By contrast, DirectX needs a translation layer (it's done in the driver, so it's damn fast - but it's an extra step)
My laptop has an ATI card, I guess that could be the reason it didn't work too well?
yes,
there's numerous bugs filed against the ATI proprietary driver
but, being closed source, there's nought to be done except complain to AMD/ATI
nVidia, at least, fix bugs wihin a month
ATI just seem to leave them
Hopefully the open source 3D drivers for ATI cards will supersede the closed ones in terms of performance and card support
but it may take a while (6 months, a year ??)