In alt.comp.os.windows-11, on Sat, 14 Mar 2026 22:56:33 +0100, "Carlos
E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2026-03-14 17:25, micky wrote:

I went to visit a friend in NJ and someone in his family brought up
Google Docs, and recommended it for him I thought the major feature of
Google Docs was that files were stored in the cloud but the wikip
article doesn't even mention that (or barely if I missed it).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Docs

Okay "while collaborating with users in real-time." implies that it's
online, at least during editing.

Doesn't one have to learn at least a few things about google docs to use
it. My friend, 83 yo, can learn new things, but doesn't really want to.

IIRC he hasn't wanted to for 10 or 20 years, so it's not just that he's
old now.

If someone only works at home or at work or when he takes his laptop
with him, and when none of that is true, he wants to be "on vacation"
and free of computer chores, there is no point to google docs, is there?

I use google docs solely for one purpose: documents that I want to
access on my phone. Like a spreadsheet of car expenses. I also access
the same docs on the computer.

I thought that's the sort of thing it was good for.

Once I used a text document, a list of things to do, me in Europe, my
cousin in Canada. It was curious when we both were writing, we could
chat using it.

You can export the file to local storage, too.

For normal usage on the computer, I use Libre Office alone.

I've been copying my friend's old hard drive to a flash drive and his
own files are mostly .docx . I think that is the default for Word, but
I don't know if his new computer includes Word. If he has to buy it, he
won't be happy. Maybe he will switch to Libreoffice.

I rarely care if something looks nice, but when I do, I use Libreoffice
too.

Not a pending problem, just FYI: I've copied about 35,000 files that he
wrote, he downloaded, or which have a user extension, and every one of
35,000 copied fine on the first try except the only two .doc files,
which, strangely enough, worked fine when I clicked on them on his
harddrive (which I removed from the laptop with the broken screen). (He
wrote those two files too, with the same name, found in a directory and
its sub-directory, only 4 short lines long.)
I am curious what would make a file NOT copy with XXCopy (which I
think uses Xcopy for the actual copy step), whether or not it could
actually be read, especially since it could be read with no problem.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.13
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On Sat, 3/14/2026 6:56 PM, micky wrote:

<<snippage>>

Not a pending problem, just FYI: I've copied about 35,000 files that he wrote, he downloaded, or which have a user extension, and every one of
35,000 copied fine on the first try except the only two .doc files,
which, strangely enough, worked fine when I clicked on them on his
harddrive (which I removed from the laptop with the broken screen). (He
wrote those two files too, with the same name, found in a directory and
its sub-directory, only 4 short lines long.)
I am curious what would make a file NOT copy with XXCopy (which I
think uses Xcopy for the actual copy step), whether or not it could
actually be read, especially since it could be read with no problem.

Windows is case insensitive. However, you can flip that and make
it case sensitive. Then note.txt and NOTE.txt can be stored in
the same directory, in case sensitive mode.

Some tools may be old enough, they may not be "aware" programmatically,
that case sensitivity is ON.

Normally, you would suspect a file ownership or permissions issue,
prevents copying. Try copying the System Volume Information folder
on the root of a disk. How did that go ? Was that fun ?

When you copy files from one C:\users\micky\Downloads to another C:\users\micky\Downloads , and you're not in a domain or anything,
those files would benefit from different SIDs (Security ID). Each home
user OS has a custom SID number for "Micky".
You can get some flavor of what a SID is, from the identifiers
you may have seen that are associated with the Recycle Bin.
Doing a Takeown allows assigning a new SID to a thing.
It might even remove that accursed green bar from File Explorer :-)

*******

One way I can do a copy here is:

1) Do a Macrium backup of Old_C:
2) Bring the Macrium MRIMG file to my pen drive preparation machine.
(On your current setup, there would be "nothing to do to achieve this".)
Use the Macrium Explore function and mount the MRIMG C: as K:
and "remove restrictions" tick box in the interface of the mounting dialog.
Now, you are working with a copy of the goods and not the original goods.
3) Then, if you xxcopy K:\users\micky\Downloads to P:\your-recovered-files\
there would be no problem with the permissions. The permissions and
SID of the person doing the xxcopy would likely be the only possible
assignment.

The OS is capable of doing implicit Takeown (and presumably when you are
a member of the administrator group -- don't assume that unelevated
users like the LowBoy account I use for test on machines, would be able
to do this). The itsmine.cmd shows an explicit way of doing ownership,
but do not be applying this to the entire C: drive, or there will be
"severe tire wear" :-/

The itsmine.cmd file is two lines only:

takeown /f %1 /r /d y
icacls %1 /grant administrators:F /t

*******

When designing a "best practices" way of copying a friends
files, you have to be aware that the disk could be on its
last legs. Your first step is doing a low-stress forensic backup
without unintentionally overheating the drive (keeping it
in an insulated place with no airflow). A "dd.exe" run
can do this for you. If the "dd.exe" finishes, it means
there were no CRC errors during the run. If the drive were
to later croak on you and stop responding, the dd output file
is your copy of the goods.

A dd.exe copy can copy a dirty partition, a partition in
need of a chkdsk.

Since chkdsk /f is potentially destructive, you don't
run one of those, until you have your dd.exe disk image made.

I could add more steps, but you get the basic idea. You use
low stress methods that check for trouble and make a forensic
copy first. Then, if you have a "handling accident" while working,
your goose is not cooked, and you have alternatives.

Rather than change the recipes you are comfortable with, I
would add steps for insurance purposes.

Most of the time chkdsk /f is safe. But it can and has
completely and utterly destroyed a partition, so as your
insurance agent, I would say to you "you could use some insurance".

Paul

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.13
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)