Talk:Program Files

Short names

For what I know, 64-bit systems does not supports short names for Program files and Program files (x86). --82.226.255.74 (talk) 21:57, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Progra~1 applies to the x86 program files directory I have on D drive, as there is no "Program Files" directory.

So the blanket claim that Progra~1 and Progra~2 apply to specific directories is false in this case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.144.127.200 (talk) 18:55, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

To obtain the short name you should execute the command dir /x~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmz668 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

This was useful information I thought and I tried to clean the page up a bit, but it still needs references...feel free to make edits or suggestions of such!

--Curttyl1 (talk) 05:49, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

64-bit versions of Windows support short names just as well. --Joshua Issac (talk) 10:00, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Request for Comments: c: link prefix for Wikimedia Commons

There is a cross-wiki discussion in progress as to whether c: should be enabled globally as an interwiki prefix for links to the Wikimedia Commons. If the proposal gains consensus this will require the deletion or renaming of several pages on the English WIkipedia whose titles begin with "C:", including one or more redirects to this page. Please take a moment to participate in the discussion.
There is also a related discussion on the English Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 February 16#C:ATT to which you are invited to contribute.
Thank you. Thryduulf (talk) 15:33, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

" are typically stored in the 'Common Program Files' directory" - I think this folder name is "Common Files" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.1.240.177 (talk) 19:46, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Certainly

" are typically stored in the 'Common Program Files' directory" - I think this folder name is "Common Files" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.1.240.177 (talk) 19:47, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Environment variables

Please do not delete text from Wikipedia just because there are no "references", as anyone can easily test with their own Windows 7, 8, 8.1 or 10 installation that everything works as written. (Win XP or older are not that important, as those operating systems do not get security updates, with rare exceptions).

But if you have time to add references, copy-paste from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environment_variable

Interestingly, I did not find much references with Google or Windows 7 Help (Press F1 from Desktop, first press Windows-D).

88.192.39.165 (talk) 07:37, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Wikipedia is meant to keep its contents for the next 100 years. Without reference, the contents are doomed anyway. Even today, I cannot verify stuff written about DOS 1.0, because the damned thing doesn't run on any virtual machine; the difficulties of finding a copy of it is not withstanding.

So, that explanation aside, I'll abide by the policies regardless of your pleas: Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research. Better to cry today over lost contents than tomorrow. It is more humane. Article history and sources are both available today but the sources may not be so tomorrow.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 09:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Umm, MS-DOS 1.x runs fine in VirtualBox (speaking from personal experience here).

But agreeing with Codename Lisa regarding WP:V and WP:NOR; they're policies for exactly the reasons she/he/insert desired pronoun here states, which happen to–mostly–be good ones, and, even if you disagree with them, they're still policies, which means that you have to follow them even if you disagree with them. The only exceptions to WP:V and WP:NOR are those outlined in WP:BLUE—namely, that there is no need to provide citations for facts that are one or both of the following:

• universally or near-universally known facts (for instance, that Earth's daytime sky, when not obsured by clouds–water, smoke, or otherwise–or darkened by a total solar eclipse, appears blue in colour to the properly-functioning visual system of Homo sapiens), or
• mathematical or logical truisms for which, by their very nature, it is impossible for them to be false (for instance, that 1+1=2).

The second of these can be immediately dismissed; it would be an absurdity to try to claim that anything regarding the name of Windows, or of any particular version thereof, or of any folder or component of Windows, is the subject of any mathematical or logical truism decreeing that it be so. The first of the two exceptions comes much closer to applying, given Windows's extremely high market share, but not close enough to be used (Mac, Linux, Solaris, or BSD users can't just "easily test with their own Windows 7, 8, 8.1 or 10 installation that everything works as written"–they'd have to go through the trouble of setting up a virtual machine in the hypervisor of their choice and then installing Windows on said VM–while Wikipedians using a mobile device, or a desktop or laptop with a non-x86-family CPU, don't even have that option), and, as the saying goes, "close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and tactical nuclear warfare". Whoop whoop pull up ^{Bitching Betty | Averted crashes} 20:42, 5 January 2018 (UTC)