File Explorer

[my.forhon.zapoz]

Hello everyone,
I'm from indonesia and a new user of Lumia 710, could you all help me about Lumia 710 file manager/explorer ?

thanks.

 

[alex6272]

Windows Phone does not have a file manager on the devices. Sorry

 

[Dave Blake]

Moving of files in and out of your phone is done through Zune of Skydrive. Other than that there is no file manager per say.

 

[my.forhon.zapoz]

ooh isn't there 3rd party software or anything ???

 

[emmatorg]

If you can't copy files and manage files on the LARGE 16GB or 32GB in some cases, then what is the use of having this large storage in the first place? Microsoft should solve this problem as it would move people away to Andriod.

 

[a5cent]

If you can't copy files and manage files on the LARGE 16GB or 32GB in some cases, then what is the use of having this large storage in the first place? Microsoft should solve this problem as it would move people away to Andriod.

The idea is that you shouldn't need to manage files on your phone! Waste of time.

What you can do is plug your phone into a USB port and use it as a thumb drive or sync music and video/image files, but that is it.

Or use SkyDrive, as Dave mentioned.

 

[conanheath]

I have Skydrive and love it. But, I also have a huge customer base with excel files containing pertinent, sensitive info for these customers and I don't always have access to data. It would be nice to copy/paste these files to my phone and be able to open them. As it is right now, can't be done through file manager or dl thru Skydrive for local storage. I can email them as attachments and open them, but no local storage option. I left iPhone years ago because of this issue. I can't believe there is not a way to store documents local to phone short of email and access them on phone.

 

[emmatorg]

The idea is that you shouldn't need to manage files on your phone! Waste of time.

What you can do is plug your phone into a USB port and use it as a thumb drive or sync music and video/image files, but that is it.

Or use SkyDrive, as Dave mentioned.

I think most people using Windows Phone are power users, who have moved over from Windows Mobile 6.5 to Windows Phone 7 and 8. Microsoft is not telling us how we should use our phone.
Save files to skydrive. What about if you are in an area where there is no signal and would like to have that data? Also moving this data up and down uses a lot of data plan. Android is popular beacause it give people the choice to use cloud or local storage.

 

[Anas Zarifah]

Dears,

There are many ways to receive many types of files to the phone; email attachments, messaging applications, downloading from the web, and at last we can't find those files on the phone and we cant explore the folders where are those files saved!,
Only the .JPG files (pictures) can be shown in the albums. .. but nothing else..

PLEASE ADVICE...

 

[ohgood]

Dears,

There are many ways to receive many types of files to the phone; email attachments, messaging applications, downloading from the web, and at last we can't find those files on the phone and we cant explore the folders where are those files saved!,
Only the .JPG files (pictures) can be shown in the albums. .. but nothing else..

PLEASE ADVICE...

You are correct, this is the current state of usability and file access. There has been no reaction from microsoft about accessing files, other than finally allowing bluetooth transfers of somee file types. Your answer is 'not at this time'.



Also, my tat client had a brain fart on dates just now and I lol'd because of it. Computers are funnay !

 

[a5cent]

I think most people using Windows Phone are power users, who have moved over from Windows Mobile 6.5 to Windows Phone 7 and 8. Microsoft is not telling us how we should use our phone..

If you're trying to say WP is targeted at consumers that are particularly technically literate, who want to use their smartphone more like a computer than anything else, then I would strongly disagree. That is what Windows Mobile was, and what Android is today. It's not at all what WP strives to be.

Also moving this data up and down uses a lot of data plan. Android is popular beacause it give people the choice to use cloud or local storage.

We share the belief that WP needs more flexibility. I just strongly disagree that a file explorer is the way to do that. It's just an unimaginative solution that would completely circumvent WP's security model. I've already argued the issue in this thread (unfortunately, my "opponent" and all his posts vanished into thin air by the end of the thread, but you should be able to follow along since I quoted him most of the time). However, you will need to read the entire thread for it to make sense.

 

[emmatorg]

If you're trying to say WP is targeted at consumers that are particularly technically literate, who want to use their smartphone more like a computer than anything else, then I would strongly disagree. That is what Windows Mobile was, and what Android is today. It's not at all what WP strives to be.

I don't think you get my point. You can survey and you will find out more than 70% of people would like to manage their files on the device. Is this compromising security on Android phones?
They are growing bigger and stronger. Microsoft should find away to make this work as it is on Android phones. If they can do this the phone will get more attraction than it is now.


We share the belief that WP needs more flexibility. I just strongly disagree that a file explorer is the way to do that. It's just an unimaginative solution that would completely circumvent WP's security model. I've already argued the issue in this thread (unfortunately, my "opponent" and all his posts vanished into thin air by the end of the thread, but you should be able to follow along since I quoted him most of the time). However, you will need to read the entire thread for it to make sense.

 

[emmatorg]

I don't think you get my point. You can survey and you will find out more than 70% of people would like to manage their files on the device. Is this compromising security on Android phones?
They are growing bigger and stronger. Microsoft should find away to make this work as it is on Android phones. If they can do this the phone will get more attraction than it is now.

 

[pedromsouza]

The same logic applies to the "keep wifi active while screen is locked" issue. Microsoft should let the user decide it. Instead, it turns wifi off automatically and you need a 3rd party app to do the trick.

There's an app called "Phone Explorer" avaliable, but I didn't download it yet.

 

[a5cent]

I don't think you get my point. You can survey and you will find out more than 70% of people would like to manage their files on the device.

Firstly, in the 1850's, a majority of southerners supported slavery. The point being, that majority support isn't always a good indicator of how best to do something. I would say this problem is compounded, when few actually understand the implications of what they are asking for, as it is with a file explorer on WP.

Secondly, you are confusing the problem with the solution. The lack of a file manager isn't the problem! Introducing a file manager is just a proposed solution for problems nobody in this thread has yet defined! Until we've defined exactly what those problems are, any discussion of a solution is simply premature. That is why I provided you with a link to a thread in which this was previously debated. You didn't read it, but I'll be glad to further discuss the issue once you've read up. I'm not trying to be rude. It's just that it is a big topic and I don't want to repeat everything again here.

Is this compromising security on Android phones?

Yes. Android is by far the most insecure mobile OS in existence. Security researchers all over the world have confirmed this a hundred times over. Note that it isn't the file explorer per say that is causing security issues, but all the API's and features that must be in place to support the development of a file explorer.

I don't think you get my point.

Well, read the thread I linked to. Until you have I'm going to assume it's the other way around. ;-) If you are really interested, I'll be glad to discuss the issue afterwards.

 

[a5cent]

The same logic applies to the "keep wifi active while screen is locked" issue. Microsoft should let the user decide it. Instead

Wrong. There are no security issues related to keeping WiFi active. Apparently, tests have shown that battery drain is also not a problem. At this point, there aren't any reasons left not to implement this feature, which is why Microsoft has done it in Portico. Yet there are dozens of reasons not to implement a file explorer. Just because consumers don't understand those reasons doesn't mean they don't exist.

 

[ohgood]

Wrong. There are no security issues related to keeping WiFi active. Apparently, tests have shown that battery drain is also not a problem. At this point, there aren't any reasons left not to implement this feature, which is why Microsoft has done it in Portico. Yet there are dozens of reasons not to implement a file explorer. Just because consumers don't understand those reasons doesn't mean they don't exist.

Its always a hot topic... would you mind listing half a dozen reasons how its insecure please ?

 

[a5cent]

Its always a hot topic... would you mind listing half a dozen reasons how its insecure please ?

I wish it were so simple, that I could just spit out a list of bullet points. It isn't, but I'll try. Again, note that it isn't the file explorer per se that is the cause of security issues, but all the API's and features that must be in place (at low enough privilege levels) to support the development of such an app.

Take, for example, the iOS security problem Coolknight1968 mentioned here. This iOS security issue exists due the availability of an API that allows any app to read the owners inbox. WP deliberately omits such an API, but a programmatically accessible file system would allow access to the file in which mails are stored. That isn't quite as simple to exploit as on iOS, but nevertheless good enough to facilitate misuse given a determined enough attacker. Accessing such a file on the file system doesn't yet constitute an attack. For that, we must also consider intent. A corporate app that spies on employees mails is one attack (One). A similar app that facilitates corporate espionage is another (Two). An app that attempts to relay personal mail communications with your bank or your physician in the interest of perpetrating fraud or extortion is another (Three). The same applies to any other kind of data on your smartphone. Once it is accessible to other apps by any means, it instantly becomes a target for attack. The ability to access calendar data may allow apps to determine when you are home or on holidays. The lure of attacking banking or stock trading apps is obvious, etc. etc. etc.

The typical response is to suggest that security must be managed on the basis of individual files. Although possible, that just isn't a realistic proposition for a consumer oriented device. It also implies that OS developers hand over the responsibility for security to app developers, which most would agree isn't a good idea considering the level of quality smartphone apps typically achieve. The basic problem remains, which is the eternal conflict between usability and security. That conflict will always sway some developers to err on the side of usability, when they really shouldn't. That is how security holes appear. Over time, and given enough apps, thousands of them come into existence just waiting to be exploited.

Incorporating the ability for apps to access data at what is almost the lowest level of the operating system (the file system), amounts to ripping a huge hole in a bank vault, and hoping nobody of ill intention finds it. That is why neither iOS nor WP allow it, and it is also why Android is pretty much screwed in that regard.

EDIT:
Well then, why isn't it a problem on desktop computers and servers where the file system is accessible? Well, actually, it is a problem. Why do you think our desktop computers get updates almost weekly. One side develops new methods of attack while the other side develops new methods of defence... it's a never ending cycle, and Microsoft not being at the very front end of that cycle is what caught them their bad rep back in the early 2000's. That is where Android is heading now, but Microsoft, having learned their lesson, buttoned up WP nice and tight to ensure they don't need to engage in such an arms race again. WP simply must be more secure than a desktop computer, from the outset, by design.

 

[ohgood]

Mmm. Your edit brought my next point to light:

Desktops. They allow file access. Either wp is secure, or w8 is insecure, given the current excuses / reasons for lacking / including filemanagers.

I know everyone will say "android is crap, and/or terribly insecure!" given the forum we're on. I'm fine with that, just don't see the issues happening with my desktops, laptops, phones or tablets.

Ill throw wp a bone, too: I don't believe there is a virus circulating yet for the platform. I'm truely amazed by this. Maybe, just maybe the micrsoft fans were right with one bit of reasoning: (this was 'why' macs never got viruses)

"The user base is too small to write for."

Iff they were, android should be crashing and I shouldn't be able to type this entire message while connected to the internet, without my bank account being drained, gas turned off, or car reposessed.

Some humor, there at the end.

 

[a5cent]

Either wp is secure, or w8 is insecure, given the current excuses / reasons for lacking / including filemanagers.

Not really. What you are missing are all the shades of grey between those two extremes. No system is 100% secure. No modern OS is entirely insecure either. The question is where an OS lies between those two poles. As it turns out, WP8 is much more secure than W8. That W8 software "enjoys" almost unrestricted access to the file system is just one part of what makes it so.

I know everyone will say "android is crap, and/or terribly insecure!" given the forum we're on. I'm fine with that, just don't see the issues happening with my desktops, laptops, phones or tablets.

Since we're conversing in a public internet forum, your scepticism is more than justified. On the other hand, it appears you would prefer to question my credibility over considering what I've made an effort to communicate. Unfortunately, I have no way of proving anything to you. I would if I could. So, if you are going to take anything away from this debate, you must ultimately convince yourself . At some point, you must choose to just believe me (bad idea), just ignore me and continue with unchanged beliefs (waste my time) or you can take it upon yourself to independently verify what I'm spending my time to explain at your request. In this case that isn't difficult. Search for companies that specialize in computer security, or researchers working at technical universities, and you will find more than enough material to conclude I'm not BS'ing you. It is also quite easy to find material that is somewhat simplified for consumption by the general public, such as this (I dislike the Inquirer, but Mikko is very well respected in the industry), this, this or this.

Might it be that you need to revaluate you own biases, or change your method of approaching this topic? I don't know...

These days, Windows is an extremely secure OS. Unfortunately, all the improvements Microsoft made over the last decade fail to address the single biggest threat to the integrity of any Windows installation... the user him/herself. You stated that you haven't experienced any security related issues first hand. I believe you. Generally, people who know what they are doing, don't. Unfortunately, that is a small minority of the general public. Many people will gladly install a "free player" to stream a movie online, install pirated software, double click on files strangers sent them by mail, or literally do hundreds of other things anyone with some common IT sense would never do. The most problematic security issue W8 faces, is that it was never designed to protect users from themselves. Unfortunately, that can't be fixed after the fact without severely compromising compatibility. On the other hand, WP8 is designed to do exactly that... protect users from themselves. That is the main difference between the two OS' in terms of their security models.

Ill throw wp a bone, too: I don't believe there is a virus circulating yet for the platform. I'm truely amazed by this. Maybe, just maybe the micrsoft fans were right with one bit of reasoning: (this was 'why' macs never got viruses)

"The user base is too small to write for."

True. Malware that targets WP is yet unheard of. Theoretically, WP could completely break down when the first trojans come knocking. Although I must admit to that possibility, I find it highly unlikely. To date, every security researcher that has looked at WP has come away saying it is likely to remain the safest mobile OS out there, while acknowledging that Android comes close to being a malware incubator.