101–110 of 364 posts
This backwards compatibility chain reminds me of the age old tale of how rockets are the width of two horses... (1) (1) http://astrodigital.org/space/stshorse.html
tale it is https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/railroad-gauge-chariots/
Teams is so weird, “ Number of org-wide teams allowed in a tenant” is limited to 25. So my company can only have 25 “general” teams. I think it would be neat to learn the rationale behind some of these settings.
Perhaps they should rethink the use of numbered superscripts for notes in that table....
I sort of get most of these - they're internal to various bits of Microsoft technology. 'CON' plus the ones ending in $ are internal device names dating back to MS-DOS, 'desktop.ini' is a magic file that Explorer uses, '_vti_' is something I've seen but can't remember what it was from. But 'forms'? Why is 'forms' a bad word?
This backwards compatibility chain reminds me of the age old tale of how rockets are the width of two horses... (1) (1) http://astrodigital.org/space/stshorse.html
This is a classic joke, but settling on a common gauge was really difficult, it was not just copying some old Roman standard. There were even riots when different railways started to standardize because common rail gauge meant you can move through the town without engaging with the local economy, see Erie gauge war. Russia still has a wider gauge than Europe and Australia has 3 different ones.
Why is it that most "chat/conference" apps become horrible sooner or later? I still remember when teams used to be an OK app. It even had a Linux desktop client. I remember when slack was actually fast, I remember Skype out being more reliable to make phone calls than my mobile/cell service. Today slack is extremely slow if you add few organisations to it (but at least you can add more than one). Teams has deprecated…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the usual forbidden path and filename characters. It’s pretty irritating when files and folders on my Mac can’t be uploaded to Teams due to this limitation. It’s only forbidden for Windows users.
It’s only forbidden for Windows users. I think the only character that Macs don't allow is the colon. AFAIK, everything else is fair game, even emojis. I just created a project with "ê" in the title. I wonder if I'll be able to share that with my Windows coworkers on Teams.
FWIW, I generally expect emojis to be more compatible than other symbols, because they have no legacy meanings - ex. ™ has never been a path separator, or indeed anything else.
If this IS a case where the title of a channel is used as a SharePoint folder, I’m surprised there isn’t some standard way to escape specifically these strings? I know it would break compatibility for applications that rely on these magic device files, but SharePoint should NEVER actually want to speak to COM1. Weird to me it isn’t handled already in SharePoint!
This is such a Microsoft thing to do. DOS compatibility will haunt us for the rest of this century at least.
Sometimes I wish we had fresh clean slate OS. Not the baggage of DOS or Unix... Something modern and sensible without insanity of either system.
The older I get, the more I realize that we don't need a clean slate OS. If you pick any modern OS right now, the most annoying parts are never the parts that were from 30 years ago; it's almost always the newest thing.
I can't be the only one thinking that generally MS Team is offering probably worst experience in the messaging market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Brevity forces thought, which I prefer to "Putting a Sentence in a File Name.docx". FORTRAN originally had the same limitation for function names, and that lead to some classics such as GEMM and SAXPY.
Very loosely related, but I really dislike the excepted design pattern for that cases where functions names are something like AssertThatOnePlusOneIsReturnAlwaysTwoAndNeverFive. It looks ridiculous, smells like a hack, and I cannot think of any reason why giving a description of the test couldn't be handled by the testing framework in a more graceful way.
All kidding aside, but I gave up on this argument because I think people either get it or don’t and aside from trying a little conversation or something with guidance it’s a “can’t fix stupid” situation.
People usually want to explain why it’s so important and that’s worse than suffering their long function name.
I think it’s better to just accept ridiculous than to try to get consensus on what’s ridiculous and a spiral of wasted time.
The upside is that it doesn’t matter any more since long function names are supported and work. And autocomplete means it’s just as easy to use as “ATOPOIRA” or whatever madness they would name it with some restrictions.