David W. Hodgins expressed precisely :
> On Tue, 05 Aug 2014 11:18:40 -0400, Wolf K  wrote:
>
>> On 2014-08-05 9:58 AM, FromTheRafters wrote:
>>> I disagree with this usage when in this context. These entities exist
>>> and are accessed before there is a file system extant to access true 
>>> files.
>>
>> "True" files????
>
> Now we're getting into the semantics of what a file is. I do agree the
> boot sector and bios contain data. I don't agree that they are files.
> A file has a name, that is accessible from the os. Neither of the
> above have names. While some programs can read/write them, a general
> file browser cannot.
>
> Regards, Dave Hodgins

Far be it from me to argue that the BIOS is not an OS under some 
definition of OS or that contiguous addresses containing code and data 
isn't a file system under some definition of file system - or that a 
hippopotamus is not an amphibian under some definition of amphibian.

I agree with you that the definition we should be using in the context 
of this discussion is the same one which the analysts were using in the 
original document which is being referenced in all of the FUD/fluff 
articles being bandied about. Files in the sense of what is created 
when you have the OS (Windows) create a file, is what I am calling a 
true file in this context.


--- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2