D
Donald Anadell
Greg Russell said:
I have no idea where you are going with this statement, so if it's just the
last word you want...you win.
Donald Anadell
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
I have no idea where you are going with this statement, so if it's just the
last word you want...you win.
Donald Anadell
G
Greg Russell
In
You're the one who introduced the phobia comment.
Donald Anadell said:I have no idea where you are going with this statement, ...
You're the one who introduced the phobia comment.
D
dadiOH
Jerry said:Thanks, but I don't have 'column headings' in my folders.
You said,"I know that you can add to this list from the menu bar by
choosing
View/Choose details." Details = column headings.
If you prefer to NOT view by details do so temporarily, add the column
headings you want to eventually have in the right click list then go back to
whatever "view" you want. No more columns but they will be in the list for
you to choose how to sort.
dadiOH
____________
D
dadiOH
Jerry said:My PC, XP SP3 and all updates, but Classic Windows appearance, must be
different to yours.
I can access the menu to choose the attributes in any type of folder
view by going to the Menu Bar, View, Choose Details.
OK, do it that way then...
1. Select a folder
2. "Choose details"
3. Tick them all
4. Apply to all folders
The whole boogie should now show up in "Arrange icons by..." for every
folder, any "view".
--
dadiOH
____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
T
Twayne
In
No, you are incorrect. Check any mainstream dictionary for the definition of
"guy" when it's used in the plural form. Assuming of course, that didn't go
too far over your head.
You're so far off track it's almost laughable:
-- You've clipped the part of the text that was relevant
-- You've removed the relevant "OT" lable for your post, which is OFF TOPIC.
-- You seem to think "on topic" means whatever YOU choose to talk about
when in fact it is information relevant to the OP's query be on topic.
Commenting on his grammar and word usage etc is OFF TOPIC; NOT related to
the Subject line OR the OP's query.
-- I don't mind being "as bad as" the OP because the OP committed no sin. I
know a lot of people who refer to a group as "guys" regardless of the number
of women in it. And, it is correct. I suspect you might be from a group of
"would of" and the like who murder the language at nearly every turn.
From Merriam Webster's Online Dictionary:
"
3 a : man, fellow b : person -used in plural to refer to the members of a
group regardless of sex <saw her and the rest of the guys>
"
-- You seem to think your opinion makes something a law for the rest of the
world.
-- And finally, as noted in the dictionary entry above, you are WRONG!. The
OP was RIGHT.
So all the above pushes you into the seedy categories of guys that:
-- Don't fact-check
-- Spew mindlessly
-- Assign their own meanings to words due usually to their ignorance of the
actual details
-- Attack others for your own feelings of powerlessness and inadequacy
-- and finally look foolish not that you have submitted your post and it is
recorded at Google and many other sites which will show your error and your
obvious lack of scruples, intelligence and interpersonal skills for as long
as those lists may last, which is longer than you will live, even though you
are naught but a teenie-bopping wart on someone's ass.
I shall not troll around with you as I only respond once to trolls, finding
it more intresting to watch them squirm as they work to elicit further
responses they can continue to troll to.
Twayne
Greg Russell said:In
If you think addressing the OP's behaviour of excluding
women is somehow "off topic" when he specifically mentions
it, then you're just as bad as he is. Worse even, for
pretending that what's right in front of your face doesn't
exist.
No, you are incorrect. Check any mainstream dictionary for the definition of
"guy" when it's used in the plural form. Assuming of course, that didn't go
too far over your head.
You're so far off track it's almost laughable:
-- You've clipped the part of the text that was relevant
-- You've removed the relevant "OT" lable for your post, which is OFF TOPIC.
-- You seem to think "on topic" means whatever YOU choose to talk about
when in fact it is information relevant to the OP's query be on topic.
Commenting on his grammar and word usage etc is OFF TOPIC; NOT related to
the Subject line OR the OP's query.
-- I don't mind being "as bad as" the OP because the OP committed no sin. I
know a lot of people who refer to a group as "guys" regardless of the number
of women in it. And, it is correct. I suspect you might be from a group of
"would of" and the like who murder the language at nearly every turn.
From Merriam Webster's Online Dictionary:
"
3 a : man, fellow b : person -used in plural to refer to the members of a
group regardless of sex <saw her and the rest of the guys>
"
-- You seem to think your opinion makes something a law for the rest of the
world.
-- And finally, as noted in the dictionary entry above, you are WRONG!. The
OP was RIGHT.
So all the above pushes you into the seedy categories of guys that:
-- Don't fact-check
-- Spew mindlessly
-- Assign their own meanings to words due usually to their ignorance of the
actual details
-- Attack others for your own feelings of powerlessness and inadequacy
-- and finally look foolish not that you have submitted your post and it is
recorded at Google and many other sites which will show your error and your
obvious lack of scruples, intelligence and interpersonal skills for as long
as those lists may last, which is longer than you will live, even though you
are naught but a teenie-bopping wart on someone's ass.
I shall not troll around with you as I only respond once to trolls, finding
it more intresting to watch them squirm as they work to elicit further
responses they can continue to troll to.
Twayne
T
Twayne
In
Homophobic? Never! Why, some of my best friends... <g>
It's national Take a Shower with a Homo week! Get to showering quickly!
Just keep your little finger straight & down; it'll hide you plenty well
from their smiling stares.
Twayne
Donald Anadell said:Actually, I've never been San Francisco.
Amazing how quick you are to call the OP a sexist, but yet
you ignore your own homophobic tendencies.
Donald Anadell
Homophobic? Never! Why, some of my best friends... <g>
It's national Take a Shower with a Homo week! Get to showering quickly!
Just keep your little finger straight & down; it'll hide you plenty well
from their smiling stares.
Twayne
G
Greg Russell
In
You sound like the resident expert.
Twayne said:It's national Take a Shower with a Homo week! Get to showering
quickly! Just keep your little finger straight & down
You sound like the resident expert.
V
VanguardLH
Jerry said:VanguardLH wrote ...
As I said, this is not the usual question.
I know how to apply a particular view to all folders.
That is not what I am asking.
Please re-read:
Boiling away the dross, your post boils down to:
What I want to be able to do is to select ALL the available details, and
to apply this to ALL folders, so that in future I can select the arrange
option I want from the right-click menu.
So what you asked is what I stated. No one here is a long-distance
mindreader and being an atypical post as you think it may be doesn't alter
what interpretation is possible from what you actually wrote.
You want ALL the available details (Details is a field definition all by
itself and does not equate to all *fields* available for display). I told
you how to do that (which you already knew). You want to apply that
detailed view to all [Windows Explorer view of] folders. Told you how to do
that (which now you claim to already know). "Select the arrange option".
You specified WHAT is that option (other than the one already there and
which has nothing to do with the view setting). Not my fault that you are
vague and cannot adequately describe what you want so someone ELSE knows of
what you are really asking.
If perhaps you meant that you want to add ANOTHER entry in the submenu for
the "Arrange By" context menu to include a "By Details" selection, that is
superfluous. In fact, the entire top half of the submenu under the "Arrange
By" context menu is superfluous (the bottom half gives you grouping, auto
arrange, and align to grid). All the sorting entries in the Arrange By
context submenu are already available in Windows Explorer. Just click on
the header row. If you want to arrange by Filename, click on that header.
Click again and the sorting order toggles. To sort by Type is just one
click on the Type header. The sorting is already available by clicking on
the header by which you want to sort. It's already there.
If you want more details in the display (on which you can sort) than add
more fields (headers). Right-click on any field in the header row and add
more fields, or click on More if you want to add a whole bunch of fields at
once.
V
VanguardLH
I see in your other posts that you claim that you have to Details view which
would show the header row with the fields available in that Details view.
There is no "Details" selection under the View menu? One you select that
view, the folder/file pane on the right should show a header row that lists
all the fields current selected to be displayed. If you want different or
more fields, right-click on any field and select/deselect some of the
fields, or use More to select/deselect several at once.
So now seeing how you further explained yourself in subsequent posts which
was lacking in your original post, it seems you want "Arrange By -> Details"
in the right-click context menu. Not possible. The Arrange By menu lets
you select by which *field* you want to arrange (sort). It does NOT let you
switch between *views*. You can change the view (to select the Details
view) by either:
View menu -> Details
Right-click, context menu, Views menu, submenu pick Details.
Again, in the context menu:
- Arrange By: for sorting on an available field.
- Views: Pick a view, like Details.
would show the header row with the fields available in that Details view.
There is no "Details" selection under the View menu? One you select that
view, the folder/file pane on the right should show a header row that lists
all the fields current selected to be displayed. If you want different or
more fields, right-click on any field and select/deselect some of the
fields, or use More to select/deselect several at once.
So now seeing how you further explained yourself in subsequent posts which
was lacking in your original post, it seems you want "Arrange By -> Details"
in the right-click context menu. Not possible. The Arrange By menu lets
you select by which *field* you want to arrange (sort). It does NOT let you
switch between *views*. You can change the view (to select the Details
view) by either:
View menu -> Details
Right-click, context menu, Views menu, submenu pick Details.
Again, in the context menu:
- Arrange By: for sorting on an available field.
- Views: Pick a view, like Details.
M
mm
In
If you think addressing the OP's behaviour of excluding women is somehow
"off topic" when he specifically mentions it,
He didn't mention anything. He used "guys", which word has been used
to refer to girls also at least since 1960 (Sixty) when I saw a girl
use it to address a group composed only of girls.
How old are you that you don't know this? How old are you that you
engage in silly questions?
G
Greg Russell
In
That might be the crux of his problems. Have you read the about the issues
with the Catholic Pope and his brother, as well as the Irsish cardinal? They
all used guys too, or at least covered-up their actions for them, using
Microsoft software.
mm said:He didn't mention anything. He used "guys" ...
That might be the crux of his problems. Have you read the about the issues
with the Catholic Pope and his brother, as well as the Irsish cardinal? They
all used guys too, or at least covered-up their actions for them, using
Microsoft software.
J
Jerry and Ce
Thanks to everyone who has replied (except the troll), I now have what I
asked for.
Mostly.
There seem to be some folders where I am still only getting the standard
Name/Size/Type/Modified options.
I'll try to work out what makes these folders different from the rest.
Thanks again,
Jerry
asked for.
Mostly.
There seem to be some folders where I am still only getting the standard
Name/Size/Type/Modified options.
I'll try to work out what makes these folders different from the rest.
Thanks again,
Jerry
A
Anthony Buckland
Greg Russell said:In
You sound like you're from San Francisco ... not that there's anything
*wrong* with that ...
I know various straight Vancouver women who address each
other or a mixed group as "guys".
G
Greg Russell
In
It's probably the only thing you have going for you.
Anthony Buckland said:I know various straight Vancouver women who address each
other or a mixed group as "guys".
It's probably the only thing you have going for you.