Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 30th Jul 2006 15:41 UTC, submitted by danwarne
Windows Vista has an inbuilt undelete system based on Windows Server 2003's versioning file system, Microsoft has revealed. The technology, which is automatically switched on in Vista, will be a boon for anyone who has accidentally overwritten their PhD thesis with a BPAY receipt.
Order by: Score:
How about....
by Brad on Sun 30th Jul 2006 15:52 UTC
Brad
Member since:
2005-07-06

How about "Un-Close" So when you accidentally close an app, you click it and it opens with everything as it was. Would be real nice for web browsers. Not to much of an issue on Windows, but on Mac apple has decided the close button should be right next to the back button on browsers (among other things the close button is to close to). "Un-close" would be nice there. No more loosing all the pages you had open.

Reply Score: 4

RE: How about....
by Thom_Holwerda on Sun 30th Jul 2006 15:54 UTC in reply to "How about...."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

I actually proposed a sort of 'window-manager-undo' to Robert Szeleney of SkyOS, and he found it an interesting idea, and he would look into it. I need to ask him about this one of these days, thanks for reminding me ;) .

Reply Score: 1

RE: How about....
by Shkaba on Sun 30th Jul 2006 19:57 UTC in reply to "How about...."
Shkaba Member since:
2006-06-22

Opera has this feature ... undelete is nothing new, just a slight modification of an exisiting technology coupled with increased usage of data storage which are getting cheaper by day. I really don't see the point of this article. It is not news, nor it is amazing ... could it be that somebody is missusing OSNews for marketing???

Reply Score: 2

RE: How about....
by Cloudy on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:58 UTC in reply to "How about...."
Cloudy Member since:
2006-02-15

This is called "saved session state" in the OS literature, and operating systems have done it in various ways over the years. The two best examples I'm familiar with are the Smalltalk machine and the Lisp machine. I believe that Squeek (the current opensource implementation does it.)

Typically, it's not a feature implemented at the OS level because the OS has to save a huge amount of state to accomplish it, so it becomes a feature of the application -- and few application writers ever bother, unfortunately.

Reply Score: 1

RE: How about....
by Brmbolec on Mon 31st Jul 2006 18:38 UTC in reply to "How about...."
Brmbolec Member since:
2005-07-23

And how about uncrash? I'm gonna like that ;)

Reply Score: 1

YAY!!!
by Anonymo on Sun 30th Jul 2006 15:53 UTC
Anonymo
Member since:
2005-07-06

A built-in keylogger for word.

Reply Score: 4

v RE: YAY!!!
by karudzo on Sun 30th Jul 2006 17:12 UTC in reply to "YAY!!!"
RE: YAY!!!
by aquila_deus on Tue 1st Aug 2006 05:19 UTC in reply to "YAY!!!"
aquila_deus Member since:
2005-10-02

A password logger ;)

Reply Score: 1

Excellent idea
by Bit_Rapist on Sun 30th Jul 2006 16:04 UTC
Bit_Rapist
Member since:
2005-11-13

Its nice to see MS server side technologies work the way down to the consumer OS.

I like volume shadow copy vs. pulling up a 3rd party undelete application and hoping the data I want has not been overwritten yet. ;)

Reply Score: 4

Viva Versioning Filesystems!
by zielaj on Mon 31st Jul 2006 05:53 UTC in reply to "Excellent idea"
zielaj Member since:
2006-01-11

As a version control enthusiast, I'm really glad to see it happen.
Storage is cheap enough these days to afford the keep-all-changes,
never-delete policy for every user. Yet most people don't use version
control simply because it's not part of the OS. Embedding version
control in mainstream OS's will change this; it will give users the
feeling of safety and control through unlimited storage undo. Access
to the contents of their computer not only in space but also in time.

Versioning filesystems make life easier also for those who already use
revision control to keep track of their documents. With implicit
versioning embeded in the OS, you don't have to bother with typing
"svn commit" every time you hit "save". You don't have to browse the
manual every time you want to retrieve an old revision. Moving some
of the svn functionality to the file system seems very natural and
useful to me.

I'm very excited about this because it is an excellent chance to make
versioning filesystems mainstream. Of course, many issues might and
will appear (security for one), but I really hope they'll get it
right. It's worth it.

Reply Score: 2

Yes!
by rayiner on Sun 30th Jul 2006 16:09 UTC
rayiner
Member since:
2005-07-06

Good job Microsoft! This is a desperately needed feature, especially on Windows where certain apps (*cough* Internet Explorer *cough*) make it particularly easy to lose or accidentally delete your data.

If it's implemented well, it could be a significant advantage for Vista. It's a tricky feature to implement, though, so I hope they get it right.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Yes!
by PlatformAgnostic on Sun 30th Jul 2006 17:33 UTC in reply to "Yes!"
PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02

I'm curious. How does IE make it easy to delete your data?

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Yes!
by rayiner on Sun 30th Jul 2006 22:14 UTC in reply to "RE: Yes!"
rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

One example. If you click on a link to a Word document in IE, it'll open it inside the IE window by saving the document to a temporary local folder. If you then edit that document and close the IE window, your document is lost in that temporary directory. Compare that to what Safari and Firefox do by default. Instead of allowing the user to edit the document while it is in some nebulous no-man's land, they'll download the document to the user's default download folder, so edits are not lost.

Windows users will argue about how these things are just protection for stupid users, but that's a poor argument. Well-designed products protect the user in the case of exceptional circumstances, while simultaniously staying out of their way during normal use. Historically, Apple is just better with this sort of design than Microsoft.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Yes!
by StephenBeDoper on Mon 31st Jul 2006 07:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Yes!"
StephenBeDoper Member since:
2005-07-06

In a similar vein, there's the way that IE saves EVERY download to a temp folder first, regardless of where you tell it to download the file. It wouldn't really be a problem, except for the way it pops up a dialogue when the download finishes, notifying you that the file is being copied to the actual download destination. And an extra nice touch, the "Cancel" button is selected - so if you happen to be typing when it pops up, and hit the space bar, you cancel the copy process. I've had that happen several times over the years, and on a few occasions I had no luck locating the original in Temporary Internet Files. At this point, I avoid using IE for downloads if at all possible.

Of the "big" browsers available for windows, it also has the least functionality in terms of download management (compared to Opera and Mozilla / Firefox). Hell, even the ancient NetPositive 2.2.1 has a better DL manager than IE 6 (and better PNG support, pathetically enough).

And while I'm ranting about IE 6, here's two more complaints: it's the main reason I still use table-based layouts (yes, I know they make baby Jesus cry) with CSS for formatting. I made an attempt to learn CSS for layouts, but was discouraged by the pattern of "here's the two lines of code to perform this task.... and there's the 12 lines of code you'll need to make it work in both IE and Firefox." Separation of layout and design is a nice idea and all, but it doesn't absolutely require CSS layout - you could do that 15 years ago with CGI scripts, a PH database, and HTML templates. And that's not mentioning the lazy web coder's best friend: virtual/server-side includes.

And last, while IE's rendering engine may be fast, the actual UI is dog-slow. Opera 4 running on a P90 responds faster than IE 6 on my Athlon64 3000+. Scrolling is the action I find most painful in IE - your options are basically "smooth" scrolling (aka, the mode where scrolling lags behind arrow key-presses so you often end up scrolling further than intended), or jump/jerky scrolling mode. I can scroll more smoothly in a 100MB Photoshop/Illustrator file than I can in IE with a 30kb page.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Yes!
by MollyC on Tue 1st Aug 2006 14:23 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Yes!"
MollyC Member since:
2006-07-04

"One example. If you click on a link to a Word document in IE, it'll open it inside the IE window by saving the document to a temporary local folder. If you then edit that document and close the IE window, your document is lost in that temporary directory. Compare that to what Safari and Firefox do by default. Instead of allowing the user to edit the document while it is in some nebulous no-man's land, they'll download the document to the user's default download folder, so edits are not lost. "
--------------------

I greatly prefer IE's way. First, I'm not often going to edit an online file. If I do, then I can easily save the file to the local location of my choice and then edit it.

More importantly, after using IE, I've come to despise reading pdf files in Safari. In IE, clicking a link to a pdf file opens the pdf file within IE via Adobe's Acrobat ActiveX control. If I then want to save a local copy of the pdf file, the Adobe ActiveX control allows me to do so via the Save button. So, navigating to and optioally saving online pdf files is exactly the same as doing the same for any web page. And it's great, because I normally don't want to save a local copy of the pdf file.

But when I'm on my Mac (as I am now), every time I click a link to a pdf file, Safari downloads the file to my desktop (or wherever my default downloads folder happens to be at the time), then opens the local copy with Preview (or Adobe, if that's been set as the default pdf handler). I then need to clean up by going to the download folder and explicitly deleting the damn thing. A few months ago, I found approx. two dozen pdf files in one of my old downloads folders, none of which I wanted on my local harddrive; I only wanted to browse those pdfs, not save them; just like a normal web page. IE's way is better. And "innovative". The other browsers are primitive by comparision wrt to clicking links to pdf, doc, xls, ppt, etc files.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Yes!
by MollyC on Tue 1st Aug 2006 14:44 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Yes!"
MollyC Member since:
2006-07-04

Above, I referred to Adobe's Acrobat ActiveX control, but I misspoke. In the above case, Adobe's ActiveX control isn't handling the pdf file within IE, but the Adobe Acrobat or Reader app itself is handling it via IOleDocument, et al. The same mechanism is used by IE to get Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and other IOleDocument supporting apps to host doc, xls, ppt, etc files within IE.

(I think Adobe's ActiveX control is used for handling pdf content embedded inside html pages (same as the Adobe plugins used by other browsers.)

On a side now, how do you edit you posts on this forum? I think I've seen others do it, but I don't see how they did it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Yes!
by eMagius on Tue 1st Aug 2006 16:15 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Yes!"
eMagius Member since:
2005-07-06

On a side now, how do you edit you posts on this forum? I think I've seen others do it, but I don't see how they did it.

Click Reply. Above the box for the response, you should see that Reply has been replaced with Edit.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Yes!
by orestes on Sun 30th Jul 2006 18:32 UTC in reply to "Yes!"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

It would be a nice feature if they did it properly. I'm not getting my hopes too high though. If they can't even implement something as simple as sudo without making it a massive pain to use why should we expect they'll get the undelete right?

Reply Score: 1

... not to be cynical
by sig33kde on Sun 30th Jul 2006 16:18 UTC
sig33kde
Member since:
2006-04-04

... but I sure as hell hope that there is a secure delete along with this tool, because there are times when you want something truely deleted, and not have someone coming up behind you to find your private infomation (banking, etc) - I think this feature lends itself more to law enforcement than it does home users?

Reply Score: 5

RE: ... not to be cynical
by Morin on Sun 30th Jul 2006 16:23 UTC in reply to "... not to be cynical"
Morin Member since:
2005-12-31

"Normal" delete doesn't delete either, so a "secure" delete would be nice anyway.

Reply Score: 4

Hmmm...XP has undelete
by jessta on Sun 30th Jul 2006 16:35 UTC
jessta
Member since:
2005-08-17

Some time around 1995 microsoft realised that people don't think about what they are doing and tend to do stupid things. So they stole the idea of the 'trash can' from apple.

I remember deleting stuff and forgeting to remove it from the 'recycle bin'.

I'm sure this versioning is going to be awesomely confusing for users. Just like the inbuilt versioning in Microsoft office documents.

Hopefully it won't be unabled by default, but I'm sure it will.

Reply Score: 1

ok, I'll be cynical
by somebody on Sun 30th Jul 2006 17:05 UTC
somebody
Member since:
2005-07-07

isn't this just another...

MS Boss Department:
"huh, people seem to respond very badly on our unsure comments when Vista will come out. Lets throw in some completely stupid and not usefull feature for them to write about instead of bad publicity! (*shouting..*) Hey which feature would be easiest to copy/paste into Vista and our PR department didn't promised it yet?"

Hell, VAX had this feature. Linux had this feature and god knows only how many others. And unless this feature is not controllable and contained it is more a nuissance than a good thing.

Edited 2006-07-30 17:06

Reply Score: 2

About time
by MikeGA on Sun 30th Jul 2006 17:25 UTC
MikeGA
Member since:
2005-07-22

Finally! A feature in Vista that seems reasonably useful to people!

Reply Score: 4

RE: About time
by ValiantSoul on Sun 30th Jul 2006 17:57 UTC in reply to "About time"
ValiantSoul Member since:
2005-07-20

Yea - let's just see how long it takes for them to say nevermind! undelete will no longer be in vista, just like all of the other technologies we said we would put in it

Reply Score: 5

v RE[2]: About time
by suryad on Sun 30th Jul 2006 19:36 UTC in reply to "RE: About time"
Apple stole the wastebasket from Xerox
by NotParker on Sun 30th Jul 2006 17:49 UTC
NotParker
Member since:
2006-06-01

Apple stole the wastebasket from the Xerox Star.

You can see it in this screenshot:

http://www.guidebookgallery.org/articles/thexeroxstararetrospective...

Article:

http://www.guidebookgallery.org/articles/thexeroxstararetrospective

As for complaints that versioning will be "unsecure" or "confusing" ... that is so moronic.

Versioning is a superb idea well implimented in OpenVMS that saves IT Departments a ton of time. Retrieving deleted files is a huge waste of resources.

Longhorn server has network undelete. Yay!

Reply Score: 5

sogabe Member since:
2006-04-27

Yes, Apple "borrowed" many ideas from Xerox. I used a mouse to control a graphical interface that included icons and windows in a Xerox Star system way before the Apple Lisa even existed.

Reply Score: 2

MonkeyPie Member since:
2005-07-06

All I can is this...

Apple may have borrowed it from Xerox but how long did Apple borrow it from Xerox before Microsoft borrowed it from Apple?

The recycle bin came a long time after the Mac OS. I remember the MS guys saying something like this to the Apple guys:

"You have to delete things twice? How stupid!"

Then Windows 95 came out with the borrowed Recycle Bin. Something tells me that Microsoft wasn't actually borrowing the idea from Xerox directly.

Reply Score: 0

the__dude Member since:
2006-02-27

LOL.

So if Apple "borrows" and idea, then its all good. Let Microsoft do the same thing and suddenly they just stole an idea.

Double standards. Gotta love em!

Reply Score: 5

PowerMacX Member since:
2005-11-06

Actually, Apple made a commercial arrangement with Xerox so they'll show them what they had, and later hired several members of Xerox' development team. So, I wouldn't so much say "borrow" as "bought/hired/further developed Xerox technology" ;)

Reply Score: 1

the__dude Member since:
2006-02-27

Again, MS could do the same thing and the same people who would defend Apple in such a move would blast MS for just buying/borrowing technology from someone else.

Reply Score: 1

MonkeyPie Member since:
2005-07-06

I think some people have completely and totally have misunderstood what I was saying. In NO WAY did I put Microsoft in a negative light here when it came to using the Recycle Bin. I was responding to the comment about Apple "stealing" the idea of Trash from Xerox. I merely said that Apple implemented the idea well before Microsoft did. I didn't even use the word "steal" anywhere in my comment.

The quote was from Windows USERS to Apple USERS. Not the companies themselves. I had heard this I don't know how many times and I wasn't even very old when I heard it.

In no way was my observation meant to be inflammatory, so why did I get modded down? And double standard? In what way is my comment a double standard?

Reply Score: 2

zephc Member since:
2005-07-06

Apple gave Xerox a sizable chunk of shares for get inside look. But anyway, Xerox didn't make up the mouse - check google video for: englebart demos (from the late 60s)

Reply Score: 1

r2d2d3d4d5
Member since:
2005-12-31

Seem to remember Undelete being part of Windows OS (or at least MS DOS) a long way back. Perhaps a more appropriate name would be NeverDelete or Can'tDelete (as in: if you're a novice MS won't let you delete your old files).

At least the HDD manufacturers will be happy.

Reply Score: 1

siki_miki Member since:
2006-01-17

Yes, (MS)DOS had several good third paty undelete tools. The default one also kinda worked, but not reliably: you had to specify first letter of the file and it couldn't restore deleted directories, and if any chunk was overwritten, complete file was lost.

Today disk space is cheap, so Vista should really destroy data only if it needs space for something else (or if a deleted file is really big). Makes sense, and I wonder why they didn't have that option even in XP.

Reply Score: 1

Virii
by p13. on Sun 30th Jul 2006 19:05 UTC
p13.
Member since:
2005-07-10

Yay, yet another way for virii to just merilly restore themselves after a successful removal.
System restore anyone ?

Reply Score: 5

RE: Virii
by sappyvcv on Sun 30th Jul 2006 21:39 UTC in reply to "Virii"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

If a virus is removed, how exactly would it restore itself?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Virii
by postmodern on Mon 31st Jul 2006 10:56 UTC in reply to "RE: Virii"
postmodern Member since:
2006-01-27

By it's or another running process, or by some script hidden in the startup sequence. Just look at how viruses made use of Windows Restore Points and NTFS Volume Shadows.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Virii
by sappyvcv on Mon 31st Jul 2006 22:36 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Virii"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

But if you remove it, usually you remove it via an application that should usually remove *everything*.

If you remove it manually, it's your own damn fault.

Reply Score: 1

wow!
by Caspian on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:04 UTC
Caspian
Member since:
2006-01-01

What a brand new an innovative idea that hasn't been implemented in every other OS forever!

I can't wait to see IE7 final also! With other innovative features that Microsoft has created, such as tabs, rss feeds, and png transparency support!

This is great news indeed, and SUPER innovative!

Reply Score: 1

RE: wow!
by devtty on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:07 UTC in reply to "wow!"
devtty Member since:
2006-04-02

What a brand new an innovative idea that hasn't been implemented in every other OS forever!

What is the name for the similar feature in GUN/Linux?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: wow!
by Caspian on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:10 UTC in reply to "RE: wow!"
Caspian Member since:
2006-01-01

you can undelete with midnight commander if you want. Heck, if you know what you are doing, you can do it in the console.

In fact, here you go.

http://recover.sourceforge.net/linux/

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: wow!
by Bending Unit on Mon 31st Jul 2006 04:41 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: wow!"
Bending Unit Member since:
2005-07-06

That isn't even remotely usable.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: wow!
by devtty on Mon 31st Jul 2006 06:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: wow!"
devtty Member since:
2006-04-02

you can undelete with midnight commander if you want. Heck, if you know what you are doing, you can do it in the console.

In fact, here you go.

http://recover.sourceforge.net/linux/


Well, it is as capable for an average user as a three leg dog

From Recover website

[In order to undelete a file, you must know the following things:

On which device your file was stored
What kind of file system was used (eg. ext2, reiserFS, vfat) ]

Reply Score: 2

RE: wow!
by Bit_Rapist on Sun 30th Jul 2006 23:42 UTC in reply to "wow!"
Bit_Rapist Member since:
2005-11-13

What a brand new an innovative idea that hasn't been implemented in every other OS forever!

Really? So using this *feature* which reportedly has been implemented in every other OS, where can I go in say Ubuntu to get a list of recently deleted files and pick from different dates/times from which to restore?

I'm using ubuntu right now and unless I've missed something deeply hidden you cannot do this.

Don't reply with links to a bunch of CLI voodo because I've already been there.

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: wow!
by sbenitezb on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:16 UTC
sbenitezb
Member since:
2005-07-22

Recover is only for ext2. You should try better Foremost.

http://foremost.sourceforge.net/

But this is only for desperate tech people. And takes a *lot* of time and knowledge to recover a file.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: wow!
by Caspian on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:17 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: wow!"
Caspian Member since:
2006-01-01

Not ext2:

* Read your file-system's manual
* The unix way

http://recover.sourceforge.net/unix/

it works for reiser.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: wow!
by sbenitezb on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:20 UTC
sbenitezb
Member since:
2005-07-22

Linux doesn't need such "feature". If you have enough knowledge to do rm file.ext in your console, then by explicitly doing this you are telling the system you really want to delete that file. Most people delete files with their filemanagers, GUI oriented, that put "deleted files" in the trash can. Why would you need to have that "feature" then? I find backups a better alternative to conserve file versioning safe and restorable.

Even if it's not a so useful feature, file versioning is.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: wow!
by sbenitezb on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:22 UTC
sbenitezb
Member since:
2005-07-22

"Not ext2:

* Read your file-system's manual
* The unix way

http://recover.sourceforge.net/unix/

it works for reiser."

Read again, it says for ext2. That page only makes use of grep to "recover" some text from the partition. It doesn't recover the file, only the text.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: wow!
by Caspian on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:27 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: wow!"
Caspian Member since:
2006-01-01

Then I guess formost will do it also.

Either way, Microsoft has copied a feature, is saying it's innovative, and then, probably will do a poor job at it. Virus deleted? I don't think so!

Reply Score: 0

RE[7]: wow!
by sappyvcv on Sun 30th Jul 2006 21:42 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: wow!"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Where are they saying it's innovative?

This isn't just undelete. It's versioning in a sense too. Who cares if other places have had it. If it's useful to people, there is no reason they shouldn't be allowed to implement it without idiots like you accusing them of "copying".

Reply Score: 5

RE[8]: wow!
by Caspian on Sun 30th Jul 2006 23:07 UTC in reply to "RE[7]: wow!"
Caspian Member since:
2006-01-01

No, I am irked because they are just now implimenting it, when it should have been implimented oh so long ago like every other OS has.

Reply Score: 1

RE[9]: wow!
by sappyvcv on Sun 30th Jul 2006 23:47 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: wow!"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Windows has it too, as third party apps.

Why do you care? They are implementing it now, so stop complaining.

I can understand if maybe you complained before that they didnt have it and had no plans to.

Some people just want anything to bitch about..

Reply Score: 3

RE[9]: wow!
by Tom K on Mon 31st Jul 2006 05:34 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: wow!"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

"Like every other OS"?

Do tell me ... what popular OS out there supports file undeleting out of the box?

Reply Score: 1

RE[9]: wow!
by Rayz on Mon 31st Jul 2006 10:00 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: wow!"
Rayz Member since:
2006-06-24

How do I do this in OSX?

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: wow!
by sbenitezb on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:35 UTC
sbenitezb
Member since:
2005-07-22

I remember Novell Netware had/have undelete implemented in their filesystem. Once a customer's user deleted a couple of files from a Payroll database because he didn't get to complete his work on time. The Payroll system was known to crash and corrupt files, but not delete them. When I came to the company's office and talked to the manager he told me they never made a backup. After trying to find out what happened for a while, my boss informed me of that "feature" netware had. I went to the server and all deleted files where marked with an *, so I undeleted them and told the manager what user, terminal deleted the files. I don't know what was of that guy, but the manager was really happy to get their system working again.

Forgive this offtopic post, but sometimes file recovering is useful.

Reply Score: 2

Pandering?
by Kroc on Sun 30th Jul 2006 20:37 UTC
Kroc
Member since:
2005-11-10

Not everyone will agree, but I prefer not overcomplicating things by forever losening the definition of "delete" in the OS, it only goes to add more confusion.

When you empty the trash in Mac OS, it's gone, no coming back. If you make mistakes, you learn from them.

You should be trained to understand when something is properly deleted. The Amiga went one better - it didn't ask "Are you sure you want to delete?", you learnt to only delete files when you were absolutely sure the first time, not the third or fourth step down the line :/

Reply Score: 3

RE: Pandering?
by sappyvcv on Sun 30th Jul 2006 21:42 UTC in reply to "Pandering?"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Sometimes things happen. I've deleted files I didn't mean to.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Pandering?
by Kroc on Sun 30th Jul 2006 22:27 UTC in reply to "RE: Pandering?"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

Everyone needs to be reminded to back up more often :3

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Pandering?
by sappyvcv on Sun 30th Jul 2006 22:49 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Pandering?"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Sometimes I delete the kind of thing I wouldn't normally back up though. Stuff like things I've downloaded recently but don't plan to keep around for very long.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Pandering?
by Bending Unit on Mon 31st Jul 2006 04:44 UTC in reply to "Pandering?"
Bending Unit Member since:
2005-07-06

Why?

Do you work for a file recovery company?

Reply Score: 1

probably good for the average users...
by l3v1 on Sun 30th Jul 2006 21:03 UTC
l3v1
Member since:
2005-07-06

...who also always use(d) the recycle bin or other non-deleting safekeeper apps ;) You can call me anyway you like, but I always turn off the recycle bin, and for versioning I use svn. When I delete something, I want it to be deleted, I had to think hard but I'm sure I never deleted "accidentally" anything during my 15+ years around computers. In fact, I never delete anything until I have space left, only such things which were useless in the first place, but I do cleaning around my disks every few months - and even then I mostly archive and don't delete.

My reason for the above ? Not deleting, using svn, archiving more and less important stuff is still better than having a trash can or recycle bin with stuff laying in heaps.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Pandering?
by RandomGuy on Sun 30th Jul 2006 22:18 UTC
RandomGuy
Member since:
2006-07-30

"You should be trained to understand when something is properly deleted. The Amiga went one better - it didn't ask "Are you sure you want to delete?", you learnt to only delete files when you were absolutely sure the first time, not the third or fourth step down the line :/"

Well, I have experienced both situations, being annoyed by endless questions like "Now, do you really really REALLY want to delete?" as well as being very happy that I could restore the files I just deleted...
Can happen quite easily if you navigate mostly with your keyboard where "del" and "enter" are not even an inch apart...
Nearly impossible if you use the mouse, though...

I think the best solution is easy delete (no damn dialogue) and easy undelete as well as a relatively simple "save delete" option
Remember: easy things should be easy and difficult things should be possible...

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Pandering?
by alex on Tue 1st Aug 2006 14:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Pandering?"
alex Member since:
2005-07-06

>The Amiga went one better - it didn't ask "Are you sure you want to delete?", you
>learnt to only delete files when you were absolutely sure

But when the Amiga was first produced, the norm was to store files on floppies - while you could move files to the trashcan if you wanted to, this would take up valuable bits. Computers nowadays don't have this problem, and in my opinion small files should generally just be archived for a while (like GMail) rather than being deleted, unless they contain sensitive information. What Windows needs is a better organised recycle bin and a harder to find method of deleting files forever.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Pandering?
by RandomGuy on Sun 30th Jul 2006 22:21 UTC
RandomGuy
Member since:
2006-07-30

sorry, should be "safe delete" and not "save delete"
Why don't I ever catch any typos while proof reading? ;)

Reply Score: 1

Diff trees
by monodeldiablo on Sun 30th Jul 2006 22:36 UTC
monodeldiablo
Member since:
2005-07-06

ZFS does this the most elegantly, in my opinion. Deletions and alterations are simply branches in the block tree. Blocks are checksummed. It's as simple as pie, quick and light on disk space. Sure, it's filesystem versioning, which is slightly different from 'undelete', but it accomplishes the same aim without significant overhead and is much more flexible.

I keep dreaming of the day when I fire up Finder/Explorer/Nautilus/Konqueror and there's a little slider on the bottom of the window. Deleted a file three months back and now your boss "needs" it for a presentation? Simply scoot that slider back three months and PRESTO CHANGE-O, there's your restored file sitting there. I then imagine a little 'Restore' button next to the slider that appears when a previous version of a file is highlighted. Clicking on this button copies the versioned subtree to the present tree.

The technology exists today. The only thing keeping us back is, as usual, willpower. DragonflyBSD's Matt Dillon is busy porting ZFS over to his OS. This will likely make it easier to port to the other BSDs. An unofficial port or clean room implementation could be done for Linux.

Idiots and sysadmins alike can appreciate the utility of such a cool filesystem mated with a usable interface.

Reply Score: 4

ZFS is amazing
by zielaj on Mon 31st Jul 2006 08:10 UTC in reply to "Diff trees"
zielaj Member since:
2006-01-11

I didn't know about ZFS until I read your post. Thanks!

This is amazing! Creating a new filesystem as expensive as a new directory, copy on write semantics, many filesystems with the same storage, instantaneous snapshots ... the list goes on and on.

ZFS is great because it might change the way we think about filesystems. For example, a new filesystem for every user would make it so much easier to install new software without being root. A new filesystem for every project would enable them to use different versions of compilers/libraries. In Plan 9, you could even have a different filesystem for every process.

It's great that the functionality provided by filesystems is becoming more and more user-oriented rather than hardware-oriented. I might only hope that ZFS will be available for Linux soon.

Reply Score: 2

RE: ZFS is amazing
by monodeldiablo on Mon 31st Jul 2006 11:23 UTC in reply to "ZFS is amazing"
monodeldiablo Member since:
2005-07-06

Don't hold your breath for Linux inclusion... the license, from what I hear, is incompatible for a kernel module. It may be available as a third-party module, though. A clean-room port could have whatever license it chooses, I suppose. Perhaps all those FS aficionados out there in kernel-land could quit re-resurrecting ext3 (man, I hate that FS) and focus on putting a cool FS in Linux without the "performance issues vs. reliability" dichotomy.

Also, I never even thought about the one FS per process in Plan 9 idea. Man, Plan 9 is another phenomenal idea that just never gathered enough steam. Perhaps I should start a nerd marketing campaign...

Reply Score: 1

Another step
by John Nilsson on Mon 31st Jul 2006 03:21 UTC
John Nilsson
Member since:
2005-07-06

I long for the day when the system doesn't want me to do memory managment. The "Save button" is so low level it just isn't funny.

At least MS has taken the next step. I think that in a not to distant future there'll be UI paradigms for branch management that'll will replace the "load/save/copy/move/delete" stuff of today.

Reply Score: 1

v RE: Another step
by TDavis on Mon 31st Jul 2006 05:02 UTC in reply to "Another step"
overwrite?
by sithgunner on Mon 31st Jul 2006 03:35 UTC
sithgunner
Member since:
2006-02-16

unless someone deletes and pastes the reciept in his important document file, how do you overwrite a file like that?

it first might sound funny, but its far from a practical way.

Reply Score: 1

Move on to some new ideas...
by proforma on Mon 31st Jul 2006 11:09 UTC
proforma
Member since:
2005-08-27

yeah Linux is the best OS yeah!

Microsoft sucks and they never can get security right!
Open source Linux for the Win. It's all been done before on linux a long time ago and it's better and more secure.

It's the same bullshit over and over again!
Find some f--king new material!

damn, it's every f--king day.

I came here to read about something cool and I find 50 kids that are under 20 acting like they know how to f--king run a server.

It gets old after the first thousand times people

This entire forum has become nothing but just anti-microsoft bullshit. If you don't like Microsoft fine run Linux and shut the f--k up.

I am not trying to be a troll, but doesn't this crap get old on every f--king post!

We know that you don't like Microsoft.
We know that you love Linux and open source.
We know that you think that Linux has come up with all the good ideas in the history of computing.

We know that you think Microsoft can't make any product secure, good or otherwise.

WE DO NOT NEED TO BE REMINDED DAILY OF HOW YOU THINK.
WE KNOW ALL OF THIS ALREADY A BILLION TIMES OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

ITS f--kING OLD. Move on with something else and get some new material.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Move on to some new ideas...
by davyc on Mon 31st Jul 2006 11:44 UTC in reply to "Move on to some new ideas..."
davyc Member since:
2006-07-20

Hear hear! Before I even read a Microsoft related posts comments now, I know it'll have a million off topic Linux trolls banging on about how Linux is best, Microsoft sucks, ya boo hiss. Yawn! Truly tedious and childish. I like Linux but I just hate these little boys banging on and on about it in every post.

One day they'll grow up and realise it's just an OS, not a religion and that there are way more important things in life.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Move on to some new ideas...
by Shkaba on Mon 31st Jul 2006 15:13 UTC in reply to "Move on to some new ideas..."
Shkaba Member since:
2006-06-22

Really deep ... and mature! Just like any other 14 year old would post. What is so f-king (to use your language) cool about undelete? This article is not worth to be posted on OS news, it is just one of the typical marketing moves to keep the hype about viste going on. I am seick and tired of MS terminology and play of word that keeps showing up over and over and over .... MS lends itself to be disliked, by lying, cheeting, abusing its position and distributing an inferior product through unethical business practises. And then somebody posts about a GREAT "undelete" feature that is going to be included in vista. What news is this? To quote you:
ITS f--kING OLD!!!!

Reply Score: 0

A new question
by bolomkxxviii on Mon 31st Jul 2006 15:27 UTC
bolomkxxviii
Member since:
2006-05-19

OK, fine, storage is cheap. But what about the network? Won't this increase the amount of traffic over the network for those companies that save everything on servers? We have 11,000 employees, and this can make a big difference.

Reply Score: 1

RE: A new question
by Shkaba on Mon 31st Jul 2006 15:35 UTC in reply to "A new question"
Shkaba Member since:
2006-06-22

Network bandwidth should not be affected by this "undelete/versioning/shadow copy" feature. Windows 2003 server had this implemented, and in your case all the files residing on the server would be "shadow copied" locally. In your case (when user files are on the network ) I would try to disable "undelete" running localy on the workstations, why vaste resources if it's not needed.

Reply Score: 1

Windows needs UNDELETE desperately
by MysterMask on Mon 31st Jul 2006 17:11 UTC
MysterMask
Member since:
2005-07-12

Since MS still has not managed to implement a proper trash (one that works in a consistent manner on local *AND* networked drives!), they are desperately in need of an UNDELETE feature for just this situation: when you delete a file on a network drive and expect the system to behave the same way as on a local drive.

Beside that - from my own experience with SCO OS versioned file system ('HPFS' as far as I remember), UNDELETE is more a problem than a solution.
1. Users get too careless and ..
2. .. sooner or later, you'll run out of disk space. So either you disable the versioning or you spend extra time to clean your disks to gain space (and you can bet that as soon as you are in need of an old version, it is the one that you just removed).
So all-in-all: persuing a good backup strategy is far more worth than this feature.

Reply Score: 1

NotParker
Member since:
2006-06-01

Restoring from tape takes a lot of operator time. Tapes have to be found in the safe, moved to the tape drive, files restored, tapes moved back to the safe.

We have about 1500 employees. If even 1 of them needed a restore every day, it would be a nightmare.

SO now we are staging to disk before we backup to tape. Having it built into the OS will be a huge benefit. Sure, it will take some up front management. But it will save time, a lot of it, and our help desk/operator is short of time.

Reply Score: 2

Cost?
by aquila_deus on Tue 1st Aug 2006 06:28 UTC
aquila_deus
Member since:
2005-10-02

It says versioning, so I guess modifications to files are recorded as well and you may revert changes at any time?

If yes, how does it manage this witout consuming huge amounts of disk space? Does it trace changes rather than making copies of files? But what about moving a 1gb block one byte forward in file?

Reply Score: 1