Why were file extension still hidden in Vista?

That was kind of shizophrenic: Microsoft included UAC into Vista (which was pretty annoying in the pre-SP1 version), but file extensions were still hidden by default!

That was a major blunder, IMHO. MS could have finally get rid of that unholy default setting, by showing that Vista was all about security.

Maybe computer illiterate people don't like file extensions, but they don't like UAC even more so.. UAC annoyance would have completely overshadowed the file extension "issue".

Because during user trials Microsoft found that people renaming "Grandchildren's birthday party.docx" to "Grandchildren's birthday party 2011" meant that they couldn't open the document anymore, and some people found this annoying (since it basically amounts to content destruction if they can't get the document back again)

Microsoft also found that people who wanted file extensions enabled tended to find the setting and turn it on, and thenceforth never be bothered by the issue ever again.

400 million windows 7 licenses later your tales of imminent destruction by USC seem completely misjudged, don't you think your obsession with uac is bordering on schizophrenia?

I am ever so thankful for the feature in Windows 7 that when I select to rename a file, the extension is not part of the selection. In pre-Windows 7, I got into the habit of automatically holding down the shift key then hitting the left arrow key 4 times, then typing in the new name.

@evildictaitor:

7 hours ago,evildictait​or wrote

Because during user trials Microsoft found that people renaming "Grandchildren's birthday party.docx" to "Grandchildren's birthday party 2011" meant that they couldn't open the document anymore, and some people found this annoying (since it basically amounts to content destruction if they can't get the document back again)

But Vista doesn't let you rename the file extension that easy and it gives you a warning if you change a file extension to something else.

It's just an odd decision that they went with the "annoying" UAC but then forgot to close a "hole" which was partly responsible for several virus outbreaks.

7 hours ago,vesuvius wrote

400 million windows 7 licenses later your tales of imminent destruction by USC seem completely misjudged, don't you think your obsession with uac is bordering on schizophrenia?

Yeah, I admit, my panic was unjustified.

I fully expected that some installers would use that flaw by now.

I guess some viruses use that mechanism though. That UAC evelation example program gets flagged as malware by anti virus programs nowadays.

You have my respect for owning up to getting things wrong, I wish more people did, keep posting

7 hours ago,Ion Todirel wrote

@evildictaitor:maybe they should change the shell so that the extension part of the file can never be modified as part of a file rename, and add a separate command to handle extensions, tricky

Better idea: add a "File Extension" column in Details view that is always visible when extensions are set to hide, and show the same information in other views somehow.

Of course this is kind-of moot, the only reason to show file extensions to less-literate users is so they can recognise the difference between an executable program and a data file, and we discussed this in the past and we agreed that the shell should embellish executable files' icons somehow (such as adding a border or rendering their names in a different colour, or a bold typeface).

@W3bbo: How would this File Extension column be different from the Type column?

There are some very important differences between extension and type.  An extension could map to multiple types (*.log is one that gets abused for lots of formats often), and multiple extensions can map to a single type.  For example, there are many different extensions that all map to the type "text", but that doesn't mean I want to treat them all the same, open them all with notepad, etc.  (Yes, associations can deal with some of that, but I don't want to get into the shortcomings of that here.)  A bigger issue, for me at least, is the ability to sort by extension instead of type.  I frequently have cases where sorting by extension would give me what I need, but sorting by type definitely does not.  (Another thing missing from the old Norton Commander days.)

That does not mean I want an extension column, necessarily (any more than I want a type column).  I DO want more control over filtering/sorting in explorer.  The current system probably serves well for the average user, but not if you have to handle a lot of conflicting data formats.

2 minutes ago,ryanb wrote

There are some very important differences between extension and type.  An extension could map to multiple types (*.log is one that gets abused for lots of formats often), and multiple extensions can map to a single type.  For example, there are many different extensions that all map to the type "text", but that doesn't mean I want to treat them all the same, open them all with notepad, etc.  (Yes, associations can deal with some of that, but I don't want to get into the shortcomings of that here.)  A bigger issue, for me at least, is the ability to sort by extension instead of type.  I frequently have cases where sorting by extension would give me what I need, but sorting by type definitely does not.  (Another thing missing from the old Norton Commander days.)

Ah yes, this is the sort of thing in Windows that bugs me still.

I want the extension/type system overhauled and replaced with a simpler "file extension -> MIME Type[]" mapping. Whereby a MIME type is associated with a program. If a file extension has multiple mappings then either the default is chosen or a disambiguation prompt is shown. I don't want anything more beyond that: no custom right-click menu actions, no custom icon handlers, no "Use an online service to determine what program opens this file".

...

 no "Use an online service to determine what program opens this file".

I dont think that case is related at all to the thread but what should windows do if i try to open a PDF and i have no software installed that can handle it?, open it in notepad?, show me a window with 5 programs in no particular order that can open a PDF to avoid a lawsuit?

2 hours ago,JuanZamudio wrote

I dont think that case is related at all to the thread but what should windows do if i try to open a PDF and i have no software installed that can handle it?, open it in notepad?, show me a window with 5 programs in no particular order that can open a PDF to avoid a lawsuit?

Windows should just throw up its arms and say "I can't let you do that, Dave".

If Windows is going to suggest programs, it should use a Microsoft-ran online service that actually works. So far it's been linking to a horribly undermaintained and undercontributed third-party service that runs adverts. What the fark is up with that?

23 hours ago,W3bbo wrote

Better idea: add a "File Extension" column in Details view that is always visible when extensions are set to hide, and show the same information in other views somehow.

I suppose if Microsoft can somehow make the shell behaves that, when I highlight an executable file, or a link to executable file, the border will have different color then when I highlight other types of files, lots of trouble will be mitigated.