Talk:PowerShell

message: The MS-DOS and NT command-line shells (and QDOS before them) were based on CP/M, not UNIX.
:Response: Then update the article!
:Pipelines were. 24.87.114.179 17:33, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  COMMAND.COM is based on CP/M, with extra commands added through the versions.  CMD.EXE for OS/2 is an extention of COMMAND.COM dos 3 or 4, with some features from unix (pushd, popd, extproc), and some SAA features (REXX /* commands).  NT's cmd is based on OS/2's 1.1 version.  COMMAND.COM continued to diverge from CMD.EXE (lh, loadhigh).  After IBM and Microsoft split, their Command.com continued to diverge (DOS 7 has by IBM, rexx, by Win9x, lock, lfnfor).  NT 5 (2000 and later), introduced some extentions to overcome the serious limitations of no access to the CMD environment, but some concerted effort is to make other languages more acceptable through greater accessability to the operating system. --Wendy.krieger (talk) 11:01, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Based on UNIX?" 

message: There are various "proof-of-concept MSH viruses" that have been floating round (and that a few people have tried to add to the article).  I would argue that these are not notable: they have not been made possible by any new feature or flaw of MSH, they are merely straightforward ports of existing trojan scripts, which exist for pretty much every shell and scripting language there is.
Given that there are as many AppleScript "proof of concept viruses" out there as MSH ones, and yet nobody seems to be trying to add that fact to that article, I am forced to conclude that the people adding details of MSH "viruses" to this page are vandals.  If any contributors actually believe in good faith that MSH "viruses" are sufficiently notable to deserve mention in an encyclopedia, I request that they attempt to justify their belief here before making edits. Haeleth 23:15, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  A note on viruses 

message: I'd like to see some short example scripts. I don't know enough about MSH to do it myself. --68.198.246.166 16:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples? 

message: I thought the name MSH was excellent, why'd they have to go Marketize it? "PowerShell" sounds like a lame gas station. --Disavian 14:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, this explains why the name was changed :-) --soUmyaSch 15:03, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, those marketing types inflicted this upon us :/ -Disavian 13:46, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change 

message: The title says it all.the1physicist 20:38, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiBook Link Broken 

message: I don't notice that the irony of the name has been pointed out sufficiently.  On the wiki page for this topic there is some mention of Leibniz and how his monads are in "pre-established harmony", and then some blather that attempts to connect that concept to the PowerShell idea.  But that's not where the name comes from.  Leibniz's monads are said to be "without windows," meaning that they have no ability to communicate between each other and that all correspondence of perspective between them is due to that same pre-established harmony.
So, if you're working in Vista, and you want to change your interface to a shell interface, so that you can work "without windows," where do you go?  Into Monad, of course.
: Good catch (not many people pick up on that one).  That said, the primary reason I chose the name was because of the compositional nature of Monadology and what we were doing.  Jsnover 18:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Leibniz

message: Where can people submit PowerShell Scripts? --FreAsQ 04:13, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  PowerShell Scripts? 

message: "One option for dealing with errors is to invoke a "suspend" feature which allows the user to enter a new command shell, investigate a problem, and resume the original command. A simple mechanism lets the programmer define the prompts to be shown in such circumstances."
Isn't this just "job control", or am I missing something exciting and new? - Francis Tyers · 16:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Job control

message: It seems that there isn't enough knee-jerk criticism of Microsoft in this article. Perhaps the POV rules of wikipedia could be waived so that the article can be made, I dunno, more sneery. I just think it's a bit unfair to all the people who dont like MS that they have to read this article and as a result get all agitated and generally butt-hurt that it doesnt conform to their worldview. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.189.46.50 (talk • contribs) 12:13, 22 February 2007
:How about... no. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 16:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd go a small way in the direction you propose.  I'd eliminate the marketing phrasing like "Windows PowerShell is the foundation of the administrative experience..." and "scripting language with many power user features".  By that argument, I'd be tempted to remove "PowerShell" but that is going too far.  DHR 04:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree to getting rid of the marketing phrases like "foundation of blablabla". PowerShell in itself is already a marketing phrase, no need to further expand on the terminology. However, at the same time, I propose to remove all the lines which state "citation needed". It disturbs reading the article if there are so many "lacking citations" IMO.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.108.103.172 (talk) 12:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

text: This is what I hate about the *Nix enthusiasts who come and read MS-related articles; they start accusing the editors of being on MS payroll and blah blah blah, without any evidence whatsoever. Why not show some respect and assume that these things do not stand out to the regular editors because of their extreme familiarity with the text? Things would be much better if instead of whining you do a polite and constructive criticism by doing an unbiased review of what is problemmatic (I am talking about articles that are "maintained" by experienced wikipedia editors; a quick test - if the talk page is full enough, the article probably is). The whining gets you nowhere, it only irritates the editors to be dismissive of you. --soum talk 06:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Just do it.  If they're not appropriate content then edit it.  Feel free to also include negative aspects with cites from elsewhere, (like extremetech or haacked or exploit-monday,) you are not limited to MSDN. Put in what you think significant whether that's security flaw reports or limited usage or whatever. Markbassett (talk) 13:29, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Whining

message: is there any information on the reception and/or usage of this shell?
: Yes - it is being adopted at quite a clip.  In 6 months there were a million downloads.  There are more details in this post on the PowerShell team blog: .  Jsnover 18:49, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  reception/usage 

message: Why can't this be added? 
|influenced_by             = bash, zsh, Perl, Ruby, .NET, DOS
and is it correct?
:Do you have a reliable source that says the same? Failing that, it is just unverifiable original research. No matter how similar they look, it will not be obvious to all of the readers of this article. As such, claiming this requires a citation. --soum talk 23:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Jeffrey Snover, Microsoft PowerShell Architect, named C#, DCL, KSH, Perl and Ruby/LISP (link). PowerShell also comes with quite a few pre-defined (read-only) command aliases and functions that come directly from the COMMAND.COM/cmd.exe command shells. The AS/400 Control Language (CL) and SQL (select, where, sort, group) are also frequently mentioned in many early slides and interviews. Maybe we should update the Software infobox template. The Programming language infobox does have the influenced/influenced_by rows. We could also just add this infobox because the article covers both, the command shell itself and the command shell language. Ghettoblaster (talk) 14:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Replacing the infobox would cause a lot of problems, like where to position the screenshot etc etc. Thats why I left it like that. But adding a second infobox may be a good idea. Be bold and add it. With the ref. --soum talk 17:55, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Fixed. Thanks for pointing that out! Ghettoblaster (talk) 23:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: However, the "ref" given is an offhand comment that doesn't really support the statement.  A good ref would point out some syntactic influence, or structural, rather than just a kilroy-was-here-first.  Tedickey (talk) 23:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influenced by 

message: In the example titled "Download a specific RSS feed and show the titles of the 8 most recent entries", there's an icon which I would guess should not be inside a code snippet. But I dunno. 192.114.175.2 (talk) 05:54, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed now. Ghettoblaster (talk) 17:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  link in code snippet 

message: Does the "1" in the .PS1 extension stand for V 1.0 ?
Will this change when V 2.0  is released?
If it doesn't stand for V 1.0, then why "1" ? - Bevo (talk) 00:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This blog post from the team explains the versioning: http://blogs.msdn.com/powershell/archive/2007/11/02/ctp-versioning.aspx Ghettoblaster (talk) 09:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why .PS1 ? 

message: Maybe it would be worthwhile to add a section comparing it to the standard Windows command shell? I'd add it except I came here to find out... Rafael 01:29, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a look at the comparison of command shells. Ghettoblaster (talk) 11:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison with "cmd"? 

message: The Reception section is mainly a set of quotations of opinions of reviewers of this product.  Sure, there are citations to the reviews, but they are still just a revewer's opinion.  How can this be encyclopedic content? - Bevo (talk) 14:28, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception section 

message: This link in the Further Reading section seems to be broken: 
--Davidmcb64 (talk) 22:55, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken link in Further Reading section 

message: I think there should be mention of PowerShell Community Extensions (PSCX) in the article.
http://www.codeplex.com/Pscx
What do you think?
--Mortense (talk) 19:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  PowerShell Community Extensions 

message: I'm not really seeing how the section on Pash is relevant to the article.  The project isn't feature complete and hasn't been updated since its initial release in 2008. - 24.211.30.90 (talk) 16:44, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have restarted development on Pash. See the GitHub project . I'm not sure what should go in the Wikipedia page, though. Maybe nothing until I get some press. — JBazuzi (talk • contribs) 21:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pash 

message: The "bash" column in the Section "Comparison of cmdlets with similar commands" shows commands, which are not part of bash itself. They are separate commands, from different software packages, like GNU Coreutils for example. Although some external commands are silently replaced by builtin commands of bash, this is not the case with many of those listed in this column, like cat, ls, man, cp, mv, rm, ps and grep for example. So I suggest renaming the column header to something like "UNIX-Style" or something like that, since this seems the easiest way of fixing this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.222.202.219 (talk) 19:01, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  That would be good change.  Picking up on the title of the the 1984 K&R UNIX Programming Environment (Prentice-Hall) book, I suggest "Unix Environment" or perhaps "Typical Unix Environment", if that works for you and others.  Msnicki (talk) 20:03, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Comparison of cmdlets with similar commands" "bash" column shows non-bash commands 

message: From Windows PowerShell in Action by Bruce Payette:
"PowerShell uses the “at” symbol (“@”) in a few places, has $_ as a default
variable, and uses “&” as the function call operator. These elements lead
people to say that PowerShell looks like Perl. In fact, at one point, we were
using Perl as a root language, and these elements stem from the period. Lat-
er on, the syntax was changed to align more with C#, but we kept these elements because they worked well. In Perl terminology, they contributed significantly to the “whipupitude quotient” of the language."
"The core PowerShell language is based on the POSIX 1003.2 grammar for the Korn
shell. Originally, Perl idioms were appropriated for some of the more advanced con-
cepts such as hash tables. However, as the project progressed, it became clear that
aligning PowerShell syntax with C# was more appropriate. If nothing else, this would
facilitate migrating code between PowerShell and C#. The major value this brings is
that PowerShell code can be migrated to C# when necessary for performance
improvements, and C# examples can be easily converted to PowerShell. This second
point is important, since the more examples you have in a new language, the better
off you are."
--174.31.83.131 (talk) 19:42, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Perl, C# and Ksh 

message: Not sure how useful this might be, but Microsoft's information on the subject is confusing and abysmal. Seems like Powershell 4 installation requirements are contradicting each other in each page. Could we set MS straight in this article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.31.85.141 (talk) 02:17, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Version installation requirements 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb978526.aspx. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Codename Lisa (talk) 18:33, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Windows PowerShell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070819233213/http://msdn2.microsoft.com:80/en-us/library/aa347685.aspx to http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa347685.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:53, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Windows PowerShell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080506150324/http://www.microsoft.com:80/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=7c8051c2-9bfc-4c81-859d-0864979fa403&DisplayLang=en to http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=7C8051C2-9BFC-4C81-859D-0864979FA403&displaylang=en
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:26, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Link seems to work. Dhtwiki (talk) 20:11, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There's no command called cURL used in Unix shells – it's the name of a computer software project – which provides a command line tool called curl. I have replaced "cURL" with "curl" in the "Comparison of cmdlets with similar commands" section. However, my edit was undone: . 91.224.129.184 (talk) 18:13, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edit seems appropriate. User:S.Örvarr.S didn't explain their edit. Perhaps the pipe seemed redundant, the two elements identical, except for the case of some letters. Dhtwiki (talk) 23:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The name of the Unix shell's command provided by the [[cURL]] project 

message: Hello
I made a partial revert to 's edit and I feel I should give an explanation. The edit has added Red Hat Linux to the list of operating system because Microsoft Azure Blog has said so. But apart from the fact that it is the only source that mentions Red Hat (Ars Technica, and PowerShell Blog don't), there is no release or even instruction for Red Hat on the GitHub repo.
Best regards,Codename Lisa (talk) 06:51, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red Hat release is not yet ready