Sharon F wrote:
> It illustrates another important point in file management which is to keep
> the structure simple. Simple structure = regular backups. Complicated
> structure = "oops, I haven't done a backup in 3 months."

Not necessarily true if you just back up all files on the system.
IMHO, this is the only way to go; anything else and when it comes
time to restore, you go, "Oh crap -- I never did add that to the
stuff I back up." And then you are missing some important file.

Yes, you can just make a rule that a certain directory gets backed
up and everything important must go in there, but as soon as you
do that, you've got some config file or (on Windows) registry tweak
that took you time to track down how to accomplish, and you can't
put that into your special backups folder.

But then, when they say "back up your work", my theory is that time
spent configuring the machine the way I need it to be counts as work,
so all that data should be backed up.

- Logan

On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 08:57:13 GMT, Logan Shaw wrote:

> Not necessarily true if you just back up all files on the system.
> IMHO, this is the only way to go; anything else and when it comes
> time to restore, you go, "Oh crap -- I never did add that to the
> stuff I back up." And then you are missing some important file.
>
> Yes, you can just make a rule that a certain directory gets backed
> up and everything important must go in there, but as soon as you
> do that, you've got some config file or (on Windows) registry tweak
> that took you time to track down how to accomplish, and you can't
> put that into your special backups folder.
>
> But then, when they say "back up your work", my theory is that time
> spent configuring the machine the way I need it to be counts as work,
> so all that data should be backed up.

Logan, I agree with that too. I have multiple partitions. C: the main drive
with Windows, gets imaged in entirety. 5-10 minutes to make an image. 5-10
minutes to restore an image. Without imaging software, it can take days to
restore Windows and reinstall all of my programs. I prefer the shorter
route of minutes instead of days.

I think there's always an "oops" with data backups. They can happen an hour
after a complete backup is made. If you're more comfortable imaging or
copying data drives too - great! That's what works for you. The objective
is not to be 100% always up to date but to keep the "oops" factor as small
as possible and at a level you can live with comfortably.

--
Sharon F
MS-MVP ~ Windows Shell/User

Sharon F wrote:
> I think there's always an "oops" with data backups.

Hi Logan and Sharon,

I understand and agree with what you say and do above. In fact, that's
why I re-use my shortcuts when I move from one system to another. All
that work is re-usable when you use the same file structure every time.

However, in the interests of full disclosure so others can learn
multiple methods of accomplishing a system restore or migration to a
new system, instead of backing up my registry, what I do is keep a log
of every change I make to the system.

It only takes a second to log each activity because I added an AppsPath
line to my Windows registry called "history" (actually it's history.exe
but that's a Microsofterism in that there is no history.exe on my
system). Whenever I change any registry setting or modify my system, I
log it simply by typing Start->Run->history->OK.

Typing "history" brings up my history.txt file to which I add a single
line (usually by cut and paste) for each action I perform to modify the
original system.

Then, when I go to the new system, I just re-read my history file (in
reverse order) so that I can quickly return the new system back to the
original.

There are advantages to your system (complete accuracy) and advantages
to mine (the new system starts cleaner), just as there are
disadvantages to your system (backup size) and disadvantages to mine
(incomplete accuracy).

I welcome other suggestions for more efficient system eimaging and
migration so we all learn from each other,

Susan

John Fitzsimons wrote:
> >The organization of the application installation hierarchy needs to be
> >as hierarchical as it needs to be ...
> I just create a "My Readers" item above my start menu. Then add
> whatever shortcuts I want. The shortcut doesn't care where the program
> is. Neither do I.

Hi John Fitzsomons,

Thank you for your respectful insight. Very many people are just like
you, perhaps tens of millions of the Windows users out there. Not many
are like I, perhaps thousands or tens of thousands, in comparison.
Neither is right. Neither is wrong. In both cases, "the organization of
the application hierarchy needs to be as organized as it needs to be".

Both Windows organizational styles have their pros; both have their
cons. It's like the difference between planning every step of a long
trip down Windows Lane versus letting the travel agent do it all for
you. The pros and cons are similar.

In your case, the application hierarchy doesn't need to be organized by
you; it's organized by the creator of the application. You spend your
time and effort organizing your Start Menu shortcuts (I think). In my
case, not only do I spend initial setup time organizing my application
hierarchy, but I likewise organize my Start Menu (and three other
areas) similarly. Not right or wrong. Just different. Each has their
pros and cons.

I would guess the major pro of your style of organization is that it is
easier to let a program install where the marketing wanted it to go
than it is to install it elsewhere; the major pro of my style of
organization is I can find anything on my system in a flash because I
know where it will be even before I install it. No matter which of my
many PCs I use, I always have the applications in the same location on
all of them.

The original problem came about when a particular application installer
only allowed your method of organization; and not mine. That was the
original problem. All agreed that was not a well written installer.
Some of us (who organize our application hierarchy) decided NOT to use
the program for that sole reason. We therefore opted for the
competitive product (which I won't mention lest I be tagged a shill).

It's good to have insight from everyone - that's what makes us a
working community,
Susan

John Fitzsimons wrote:
> >Some hierarchies require three or more levels, e.g.,
> Golly, you must spend all your day burrowing down through directories & subdirectories!

Not really.

Like you, my similarly organized Start Menu shortcuts bring up the
applications in day to day activities; but I use a simple Windows trick
to be able to go to any directory in a flash:

For example, if I need to go to the Thunderbird application directory,
I can run:
- Start, Run, Mailers
This instantly takes me to the "C:\My Programs\My Mailers" directory.

Likewise if I need to go to the Skype application directory, I run:
- Start, Run, Phone
Which instantly takes me to the "C:\My Programs\My Hardware\My Phones"
directory.

I didn't mention it until now so I thank you for giving me the
opportunity to let folks in on yet another organizational secret. My
plan of record is that I save a shortcut to all the directories on my
BLUEPRINT CDROM and I copy over these shortcuts to any new PC's
C:\Windows directory.

Note: Windows XP doesn't handle spaces well so that's why these
shortcuts omit the leading "My". Otherwise, we'd have to use quotes and
that is a no no.

By doing so, I enable all these "jump to's" to work instantly!

I hope these tricks of the trade help many others,
Susan

Susan, I dread the thought of taking you with me on my 30 minute
lunch hour! Life is too short.
--
XP-WNP
Today is the first day of the
rest of your life.


"Susan Sharm" wrote:

> John Fitzsimons wrote:
> > >Some hierarchies require three or more levels, e.g.,
> > Golly, you must spend all your day burrowing down through directories & subdirectories!
>
> Not really.
>
> Like you, my similarly organized Start Menu shortcuts bring up the
> applications in day to day activities; but I use a simple Windows trick
> to be able to go to any directory in a flash:
>
> For example, if I need to go to the Thunderbird application directory,
> I can run:
> - Start, Run, Mailers
> This instantly takes me to the "C:\My Programs\My Mailers" directory.
>
> Likewise if I need to go to the Skype application directory, I run:
> - Start, Run, Phone
> Which instantly takes me to the "C:\My Programs\My Hardware\My Phones"
> directory.
>
> I didn't mention it until now so I thank you for giving me the
> opportunity to let folks in on yet another organizational secret. My
> plan of record is that I save a shortcut to all the directories on my
> BLUEPRINT CDROM and I copy over these shortcuts to any new PC's
> C:\Windows directory.
>
> Note: Windows XP doesn't handle spaces well so that's why these
> shortcuts omit the leading "My". Otherwise, we'd have to use quotes and
> that is a no no.
>
> By doing so, I enable all these "jump to's" to work instantly!
>
> I hope these tricks of the trade help many others,
> Susan
>
>

John Fitzsimons wrote:
> >- Start, Run, Mailers
> That instantly gives me "Cannot find the file "Mailers"...." etc. On
> my win98SE system.

Hi John Fitzsimons,

You are in luck! On the older Windows systems, you could still use the
"App Paths" key. Only on the latest Windows operating systems does the
registry AppPaths key no longer work to open up a directory.

So, for the older Windows systems, navigate to this key:
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\App Paths
And add a new Apps Paths key value pair for any desired folder:
folder.exe = C:\Path\Path\Path\Path\folder

This even works for files, for example:
filename.exe = C:\Path\Path\Path\file.doc
which many of use use for quick access to our contact lists, for
example.

Note the Microsoftism that you MUST use the "exe" extension for the key
name even though this has nothing to do with executables and there is
nothing on your system of that name.

Let us know how it works for you!
Susan

I've read past where I'm hopping back in at as seems to me "who cares about
the apps themselves.". It's the data that's important, another pc can be
bought and the apps reinstalled.

My "style" still very much reflects starting back in the days of one (and if
lucky) two 360Kb drives under DOS 2. Organization of what was on which
floppy was critical to not going nuts First desktop had a 10Meg in it and
as I wrote software at the time, my organizational strategy became more of
....

Source
Souce\C
....
Source\Pascal

etc.

I still maintain that for software projects but I also have a

"Unprocessed Pics" folder and as pics are "processed" they get moved to a
"Photos" folder and as well the "Pics" folder under my "To Be Burned"
There's also a "Documents" folder. Downloads, rips, scans and pretty well
everything else go into "C:\Temp" until I decide what to do with them. I
pretty much totally ignore MS's design with my only real complaint being
stupid apps that always insist in opening in My Documents rather than last
used folder.

The key for me is ... I simply do not let it become cluttered and deal with
everything as it's created etc.

"Susan Sharm" <susanshaarm@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1131608449.607891.254030@g47g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
> pjp wrote:
>> I think one could debate the merits and faults of almost any organization
>> I'd first like to see everyone who uses a pc at least have some basic
>> "plan"
>
> Hi PJP,
>
> I agree.
> So others can benefit from what I've practiced for a decade, here is
> the two-step "plan" I offer the masses for PC organizational strategy:
>
> 1. Determine an organizational strategy you are comfortable with!
> - For example, organize all programs by task as shown below
> 2. Then, apply that organizational strategy to the FIVE key areas:
> - Applications (e.g., your program files)
> - Application data (e.g., your settings & personal files)
> - Application shortcuts (e.g., your start menu)
> - Application installers (e.g., your downloaded initial installers &
> updates)
> - Send-to menu
>
> It matters not what organizational strategy we choose; I merely offer
> one which has been in use for more than a decade and which has served
> me well (see prior posts). The point is you always know, even before
> you save or install any application, exactly where every application
> belongs, e.g.,
> C:\My Archivers\PDF Writers\PrimoPDF
> C:\My Browsers\Firefox
> C:\My Calendars\Meeting Maker
> C:\My Databases\Maps\MetroGuide USA
> C:\My Editors\Text Editors\Lemmy
> C:\My Finances\Tax Programs\TurboTax2006
> C:\My Games\Flight Simulators\MSFS2006
> C:\My Hardware\DVD\Rippers\DVD Shrink
> C:\My ISP\Dialup\NetZero
> ... blah blah blah ...
>
> While the benefits of the mindless approach of piling all applications
> into a single flat directory are debatable, notice the huge benefits of
> this simple two-step organizational process:
> - Backing up data is nearly trivial (back up C:\My Data & you're done!)
> - Recovering all programs from a system crash is nearly trivial
> - Managing & utilizing multiple machines is extremely consistent
> - Locating & updating applications and files is tremendously logical
> - Migrating to new systems over time reinforces & strengthens your
> original strategy
>
> Again, I agree with all of you that having an organizational strategy
> (any organization you are comfortable with) is the right approach ...
> all I do above that concept is to offer one that has been working for
> me for more than a decade on Windows-based PCs (all operating systems
> up to and prior to Windows XP).
>
> I hope this posts continues to add to our general knowledge,
> Susan
>