Re: Win2K needs visible file extensions

Howdy 'IF' in fact the files now have their extensions (.xxx) and windoze just isn't displaying them: Go to the control panel, open Folder Options, click the View tab, uncheck the 'Hide extensions for known file types' setting. This option persists through all versions of windoze, go figure.

RE: Win2K needs visible file extensions

Ah ... Steve, you're a legend. Quick test run I did looks great. Thanks everyone who assisted - as you said Onno, why re-invent the wheel. :) T. > -- > From: Steve Woods > Sent: Friday, 7 May 2004 10:38 AM > To: WAMUG Mailing List > Subject:

RE: Win2K needs visible file extensions

On Fri, 2004-05-07 at 12:13, Oldham, Toby wrote: > Hmm, I'll give it a go Onno, but I think I'll have the same issue with the > Mac files not having file extensions and thus showing up with generic icons > under Windows 2k. Don't get me wrong, I can write you a script, would take about an hour or

Re: Win2K needs visible file extensions

At Fri, May 7, 2004 10:13 am, Oldham, Toby wrote: > > Hmm, I'll give it a go Onno, but I think I'll have the same issue with the > Mac files not having file extensions and thus showing up with generic > icons > under Windows 2k. Toby, have you had a look at NameCleaner?

RE: Win2K needs visible file extensions

t; To: WAMUG Mailing List > Subject: Re: Win2K needs visible file extensions > > On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 20:00, Onno Benschop wrote: > > On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 19:10, Oldham, Toby wrote: > > > Mmm, thanks Rob. Whaddya say Onno, how much would this cost me? > > >

Re: Win2K needs visible file extensions

On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 16:21, Oldham, Toby wrote: > Mm, Under Windows? There's the option under OS X, but if the file name > doesn't already have the extension then nothing is displayed (I'm assuming > the MacOS determines what he file is by using some other metadata info). Under Windows, you can e

Re: Win2K needs visible file extensions

On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 20:00, Onno Benschop wrote: > On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 19:10, Oldham, Toby wrote: > > Mmm, thanks Rob. Whaddya say Onno, how much would this cost me? > > I haven't followed the whole tread I think, but are you moving files > from OS X to Win and need extensions added to each fil

Re: Win2K needs visible file extensions

On Thu, 2004-05-06 at 19:10, Oldham, Toby wrote: > Mmm, thanks Rob. Whaddya say Onno, how much would this cost me? I haven't followed the whole tread I think, but are you moving files from OS X to Win and need extensions added to each file name? Onno Benschop Connected via Optus B3 at S28°38'2

RE: Win2K needs visible file extensions

Mmm, thanks Rob. Whaddya say Onno, how much would this cost me? Cheers, Tobes. > -- > From: Rob Phillips > Sent: Thursday, 6 May 2004 4:53 PM > To: WAMUG Mailing List > Subject: Re: Win2K needs visible file extensions > > >Hi Rob, that

RE: Win2K needs visible file extensions

xtension in some sort of table and then add this to the file name. Someone like Onno could do this easily. Rob Cheers, Tobes. -- From: Rob Phillips Sent: Thursday, 6 May 2004 4:29 PM To: Oldham, Toby Subject: RE: Win2K needs visible file extensions I was think

RE: Win2K needs visible file extensions

hat important to see the file extension under Windows, as long as the icon's display correctly. Cheers, Tobes. > -- > From: Mark Scholmann > Reply To: Mark Scholmann > Sent: Thursday, 6 May 2004 4:03 PM > To: WAMUG Mailing List; Oldham, Toby > Subject

Re: Win2K needs visible file extensions

There's a Folder feature (tick box, see Properties of Folders) that says "show extensions or not" Mark S. - Original Message - From: "Oldham, Toby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WAMUG Mailing List" Sent: Thursday, 6 May 2004 16:03 Subject: Win2K needs visible file extensions > > Metadata wi