| 1 |
On Wednesday 24 November 2010 00:39:04 Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
> Apparently, though unproven, at 02:19 on Wednesday 24 November 2010, |
| 3 |
> Peter Humphrey did opine thusly: |
| 4 |
> > Just, if you happened to have 24 partitions, Windows would be ready |
| 5 |
> > to label them all. Foresight? Windows? Must be a mirage. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> No it won't label them, it will give them some arbitrary name ordered |
| 8 |
> in some arbitrary fashion and make that your de-facto access method. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Silly me. I meant "label" in the ordinary sense of offering a way of |
| 11 |
referring to them, not adding a partition label. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> It's perfectly reasonable to predict the user would want to name a |
| 14 |
> disk by any name they chose, and for the vendor to have made this |
| 15 |
> possible right from the very beginning. But no, it worked for |
| 16 |
> floppies so we'll just keep using for everything else even when it |
| 17 |
> makes no sense at all... |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Who knows what makes sense to a couple of college dropouts working all |
| 20 |
hours in a garage? Hindsight is a wonderful thing - even when it has |
| 21 |
640KB in its sights. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Rgds |
| 25 |
Peter. Linux Counter 5290, 1994-04-23. |
Archives