henrypootel wrote:better tell that to the blues before it's too late . . .
Sounds like another good reason to stay away from Christchurch!
~/archiben
~/archiben wrote:Don't feel bad henrypootel. . . I use the folders idea to. For me it is nor organized. It allows you to search for a specific file in a large folder. The company I do work for is the only company but i have subdivisions for the community the house is going in and then i have a Archicad folder and a Plotmaker folder to hold all the drawinngs I export for plotmaker.henrypootel wrote:ah! you're the sort of bloke who'd have a billion job folders all with "floor plan.pdf" files in them?
I would have thought that office, job number, and project name would all be folders.
the unwritten rule amongst the secret brethren-of-people-who-want-to-find-anything-again in the future istagit with as much explicit information as possible!
i'd have you hung, drawn, quartered and your head hoisted up the flag pole if you did that here . . .
~/archiben wrote:I also insist on project specific information in all file & folder names, but like to keep them short as well. It's usually just a 3 or 4 character code added to the standard names. I rarely exceed 27 characters, but I REALLY DON'T LIKE being told that I CAN'T. I especially don't like opening a file only to be told that some library part that was previously working just fine cannot be read because the file name is too longhenrypootel wrote:ah! you're the sort of bloke who'd have a billion job folders all with "floor plan.pdf" files in them?
I would have thought that office, job number, and project name would all be folders.
the unwritten rule amongst the secret brethren-of-people-who-want-to-find-anything-again in the future istagit with as much explicit information as possible!
i'd have you hung, drawn, quartered and your head hoisted up the flag pole if you did that here . . .
Matthew wrote:I agree, Matthew! What worked before should NEVER be broken! We should be going ahead, not backwards...
I rarely exceed 27 characters, but I REALLY DON'T LIKE being told that I CAN'T. I especially don't like opening a file only to be told that some library part that was previously working just fine cannot be read because the file name is too long
MarinRacic wrote:Oh come on! It's fun when things suddenly stop working for no reason!Matthew wrote:I agree, Matthew! What worked before should NEVER be broken! We should be going ahead, not backwards...
I rarely exceed 27 characters, but I REALLY DON'T LIKE being told that I CAN'T. I especially don't like opening a file only to be told that some library part that was previously working just fine cannot be read because the file name is too long
TomWaltz wrote:Absolutely so! Especially with an expensive piece of software...
Oh come on! It's fun when things suddenly stop working for no reason!
MarinRacic wrote:It's even more fun when a service pack that is supposed to FIX problems creates new ones. Especially when it INTENTIONALLY causes a problem....TomWaltz wrote:Absolutely so! Especially with an expensive piece of software...
Oh come on! It's fun when things suddenly stop working for no reason!
TomWaltz wrote:It's the "intentionally" part that is really vexing. The fixes that break stuff are old news to MS customers.MarinRacic wrote:It's even more fun when a service pack that is supposed to FIX problems creates new ones. Especially when it INTENTIONALLY causes a problem....TomWaltz wrote:Absolutely so! Especially with an expensive piece of software...
Oh come on! It's fun when things suddenly stop working for no reason!
