Ah, there's your problem. You're not supposed to press Esc, v, j, j, j, E, ", +, y, Shift-Down, e, *damn*, k, ", +, g, P and i all at the same time! (Relax, I use it too when I can't use Kate or Textpad or Scintilla or EDLIN.)
I had (and now have again) an 030/50MHz A1200 with HD and 18 MB RAM. But it's possible that I last tried these things back in my 1MB A500 days, yes. Wasn't exactly wizardlyr either, mostly just futzing around with DPaint, trackers and Kick Pascal.
A500 has same paula sound chip wich ALL classic Amiga's have!
Wing Commander sounds about right. I played it on my dad's PC and later bought it for my A1200. I had the Blizzard 50MHz 68030 board with 16 MB extra RAM which made it quite playable, but it was still clunky. (Then again, it was a clunky game, wasn't it.) Also seemed to use just 16 colours; not sure but they certainly weren't 256 (as AGA would have provided). There were some rather pretty AGA games though that still made the Amiga look good; it's the 3D craze that brought it down. With a few not-so-fully-3D exceptions like NEMAC those just didn't run well at all on student-affordable Amigas. (IIRC etc.) Trapped was painful on my Amiga and I never saw Gloom or any of the PC game ports (Doom, Quake have been ported, right?)
(That was one nice way to get PC users to shut up, playing their 24 channel 16-bit XM music on a bog-standard A500....)
24 channel 16-bit... really? Mind telling me how? I kept running out of channels in Protracker and faintly remember trying out Oktalyzer (?) and OctaMED (double-?), but they sounded awful even at 6 channels IIRC. Just not the same punch and clarity.
Why is it that every time the topic comes up (i.e.: often), there're a couple comments that make it look like the only alternative to big-boobed, very-young-adult-looking dolls was another extreme, namely fat and mousey (and therefore ugly, it would seem)?
I suspect that if that's really how these people think, they're going to have a hard time outside where a lot of people actually manage to be attractive in their own ways (including some whose balance centres are not located in their breasts).
Is there really an outcry for "ugly" characters? I haven't exactly asked around, but I doubt it. Most people would rather look good, obviously. It's just that there're too few kinds of non-ugly and too few lovable characters, too few memorable faces. Wouldn't those, eh, benefit that supposed target demographic of hormone-crazed 16-year-old males as well? I don't really remember, but I don't think I was that unsophisticated at that age.
(Even the vaguely okay LOTR movies suffered from this problem by mistaking elves for dolls. Granted, Tolkien's originals don't exactly suggest "wild creature of the woods" but there might have been another way to make them look beautiful but not like fashion models. But maybe I'm weird just for thinking that there're other kinds of beauty. Give me some quirky wallflowers with frazzled hair or yes, somebody who's not actually tall and thin but has an interesting, expressive face.)
Well, I shouldn't care, I don't play these games/watch these movies/read these comic books anyway. If anything that's to my liking would be so off-putting to the rest, it probably doesn't matter what I want.
The current location of X is revealed every five-or-so turns, as are the travel tickets X uses (every however many turns, I forget). So the detectives can try to deduce where X could have gone next and have to ensure it's somewhere with fewer and fewer travel options (such as close to the Thames, or a corner). Eventually, X "could only have gone here, there, or there" and the three-to-one advantage leads to situations not entirely unlike that of a beleaguered chess king. Or something. This is me recalling a board game I played twenty years ago, so...
I know they were culturally promiscuous and saw parallels between theirs and the Greek pantheon... but I was thinking Latin would nonetheless be using a "luna-" word rather than replace theirs with the Greeks'... I'm just guessing, though, really.
Then I could easily email anything, so the sneaker net died.
You know, you might one day find yourself in a hospital in some sort of occupational therapy, and you'll not only be given a pocket calculator to calculate the data you're supposed to enter into Excel spreadsheets, you'll also be using floppies to transfer the spreadsheets from one PC on the LAN to another... </true-but-dull >
And how's this better-looking than XP? Cloying as Luna might be, it was a tad more consistent and less busy and distracting than this (the Luna window decorations are tacky, but considering I willingly use "Plastik" in KDE I'd still say they're almost good enough).
Here: Fashionably round navigation buttons clashing with tacked-on min/max/close widgets that look like they were pried off some early 90s car stereo over assorted clean and business-like panels, some of which are rather too boldly dark blue for what're essentially footnotes....I dunno. It's quite the jumble, at least at this point.
And it looks like MS is making further progress in their "hide the cold hard truth of the directory structure, but only half the time" scheme. I understand it's supposed to give you quick access to commonly used stuff but all Win95 did to me (Amiga user) at first was confuse me thoroughly. ("Control Panel" or "My Computer" aren't "folders", dammit, nor do they reside within the "Desktop" directory...). What look like blue folders in the "Administrator > Pictures" window must be different metadata-based views, or and maybe that's to do with WinFS but then haven't we had that in XP already? I remember grouping mp3s nicely by "Artist". (No ogg support, IIRC.) Maybe they've just moved that from the menu into the explorer sidebar and the common tasks into a horizontal toolbar? They couldn't have made those not look like folders, could they? Why does everything have to be so diluted? *foams at mouth*... yes, yes, I know, I probably shouldn't care about such things.
Those icons are extremely fiddly, too. What's the deal with the nearly photorealistic icons? They're supposed to be easy to recognise, and at different sizes. Any file icons that are about as tall as the font used for the filename next to them better be clean and simple. You know... like icons rather than show-offy little digital still life paintings.
Looks like the %USERPROFILE% directory has been renamed from "Documents and Settings" to "Users"? Good idea if true. Most useful feature I could glean from the screenshots. But after the "edit" session, you're still left with "ADMINI~1" in the prompt. Heh.
I don't know if this is the case with Quicken, but some software is distributed as MSI packages, and those aren't.EXEs. You might have to "runas" msiexec.exe on them. This article might help, dunno.
This is NOT an option available for the control panel, but in reality -- how often do you muck about in the control panel anyway?
All the time:)
Just runas into a cmd prompt and type sysdm.cpl or whatever. The control panel applets are all in System32. Alternatively, start an explorer process as Administrator and click your way to the control panel.
Yes, it's all sort of cumbersome and there're too many apps that need tweaking to work for non-admins, but it's not that bad.
In Windows, when you want to do some admin work, you have to log out of the non-admin account and into the admin account to do the work. Then you have to log out of the admin account when the work is done and back into the non-admin account.
Never tried "runas"? Put a "runas/user:administrator cmd" script in your path and you've got something like a makeshift "su -".
Windows doesn't have true accounts anyway. I can log into any account and view/edit/delete the files and folders in other user accounts
I'm not going to reboot into Windows and check now, but I'm more or less convinced this is not possible "here".
and Windows doesn't seperate the Start menu across accounts
It does for me. "%USERPROFILE%\Start Menu", or something like that.
Much of this sounds like you're either using a non-NT Windows, or using one but on FAT32 disks, or your permissions are weird. (They're rather fine-grained, actually; though I don't know about XP Home.)
ZOO-zeh or -zuh is more like it anyway. At least that's the only way I ever hear it pronounced in Germany; definitely two syllables and voiced (soft) "s"es.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, there's your problem. You're not supposed to press Esc, v, j, j, j, E, ", +, y, Shift-Down, e, *damn*, k, ", +, g, P and i all at the same time! (Relax, I use it too when I can't use Kate or Textpad or Scintilla or EDLIN.)
Okay, I suppose "classic" means something like all "original Commodore" 68k-based Amigas up to the A4000. Right.
I had (and now have again) an 030/50MHz A1200 with HD and 18 MB RAM. But it's possible that I last tried these things back in my 1MB A500 days, yes. Wasn't exactly wizardlyr either, mostly just futzing around with DPaint, trackers and Kick Pascal.
A500 has same paula sound chip wich ALL classic Amiga's have!
Were there better Paula chips in later Amigas?
Ah, yes; Hippo/Deli/Eagle I think claimed to play various PC tracker formats... I just didn't know at the time (nor where to get such modules)
Wing Commander sounds about right. I played it on my dad's PC and later bought it for my A1200. I had the Blizzard 50MHz 68030 board with 16 MB extra RAM which made it quite playable, but it was still clunky. (Then again, it was a clunky game, wasn't it.) Also seemed to use just 16 colours; not sure but they certainly weren't 256 (as AGA would have provided). There were some rather pretty AGA games though that still made the Amiga look good; it's the 3D craze that brought it down. With a few not-so-fully-3D exceptions like NEMAC those just didn't run well at all on student-affordable Amigas. (IIRC etc.) Trapped was painful on my Amiga and I never saw Gloom or any of the PC game ports (Doom, Quake have been ported, right?)
(That was one nice way to get PC users to shut up, playing their 24 channel 16-bit XM music on a bog-standard A500....)
24 channel 16-bit... really? Mind telling me how? I kept running out of channels in Protracker and faintly remember trying out Oktalyzer (?) and OctaMED (double-?), but they sounded awful even at 6 channels IIRC. Just not the same punch and clarity.
Why is it that every time the topic comes up (i.e.: often), there're a couple comments that make it look like the only alternative to big-boobed, very-young-adult-looking dolls was another extreme, namely fat and mousey (and therefore ugly, it would seem)?
I suspect that if that's really how these people think, they're going to have a hard time outside where a lot of people actually manage to be attractive in their own ways (including some whose balance centres are not located in their breasts).
Is there really an outcry for "ugly" characters? I haven't exactly asked around, but I doubt it. Most people would rather look good, obviously. It's just that there're too few kinds of non-ugly and too few lovable characters, too few memorable faces. Wouldn't those, eh, benefit that supposed target demographic of hormone-crazed 16-year-old males as well? I don't really remember, but I don't think I was that unsophisticated at that age.
(Even the vaguely okay LOTR movies suffered from this problem by mistaking elves for dolls. Granted, Tolkien's originals don't exactly suggest "wild creature of the woods" but there might have been another way to make them look beautiful but not like fashion models. But maybe I'm weird just for thinking that there're other kinds of beauty. Give me some quirky wallflowers with frazzled hair or yes, somebody who's not actually tall and thin but has an interesting, expressive face.)
Well, I shouldn't care, I don't play these games/watch these movies/read these comic books anyway. If anything that's to my liking would be so off-putting to the rest, it probably doesn't matter what I want.
Though frankly what the "reality" version sounds like is an exciting game of Wait For The Bus...
The current location of X is revealed every five-or-so turns, as are the travel tickets X uses (every however many turns, I forget). So the detectives can try to deduce where X could have gone next and have to ensure it's somewhere with fewer and fewer travel options (such as close to the Thames, or a corner). Eventually, X "could only have gone here, there, or there" and the three-to-one advantage leads to situations not entirely unlike that of a beleaguered chess king. Or something. This is me recalling a board game I played twenty years ago, so...
Informative review
Well, it matters cuz I don't want to go around spouting misconceptions ;)
I know they were culturally promiscuous and saw parallels between theirs and the Greek pantheon... but I was thinking Latin would nonetheless be using a "luna-" word rather than replace theirs with the Greeks'... I'm just guessing, though, really.
The original poster seemed to be thinking of "tidal forces" or something similar and those didn't seem psychological.
i wouldn't be surprised if the phases of the moon (and subsequently our lunar calendar of months) influenced women at the dawn of history.
That is/i> an interesting thought...
I thought Selene was the Greek moon goddess (the Greek Luna so to speak)?
Apes also menstruate, but their cycles last longer than humans'/than the lunar month. So is the 28 coincidental?
Then I could easily email anything, so the sneaker net died.
You know, you might one day find yourself in a hospital in some sort of occupational therapy, and you'll not only be given a pocket calculator to calculate the data you're supposed to enter into Excel spreadsheets, you'll also be using floppies to transfer the spreadsheets from one PC on the LAN to another... </true-but-dull >
That etc directory's been there all the time.
The window contents aren't transparent? It's just the frame. Not sure if Nview does that, though.
And how's this better-looking than XP? Cloying as Luna might be, it was a tad more consistent and less busy and distracting than this (the Luna window decorations are tacky, but considering I willingly use "Plastik" in KDE I'd still say they're almost good enough).
...I dunno. It's quite the jumble, at least at this point.
Here: Fashionably round navigation buttons clashing with tacked-on min/max/close widgets that look like they were pried off some early 90s car stereo over assorted clean and business-like panels, some of which are rather too boldly dark blue for what're essentially footnotes.
And it looks like MS is making further progress in their "hide the cold hard truth of the directory structure, but only half the time" scheme. I understand it's supposed to give you quick access to commonly used stuff but all Win95 did to me (Amiga user) at first was confuse me thoroughly. ("Control Panel" or "My Computer" aren't "folders", dammit, nor do they reside within the "Desktop" directory...). What look like blue folders in the "Administrator > Pictures" window must be different metadata-based views, or and maybe that's to do with WinFS but then haven't we had that in XP already? I remember grouping mp3s nicely by "Artist". (No ogg support, IIRC.) Maybe they've just moved that from the menu into the explorer sidebar and the common tasks into a horizontal toolbar? They couldn't have made those not look like folders, could they? Why does everything have to be so diluted? *foams at mouth*... yes, yes, I know, I probably shouldn't care about such things.
Those icons are extremely fiddly, too. What's the deal with the nearly photorealistic icons? They're supposed to be easy to recognise, and at different sizes. Any file icons that are about as tall as the font used for the filename next to them better be clean and simple. You know... like icons rather than show-offy little digital still life paintings.
Looks like the %USERPROFILE% directory has been renamed from "Documents and Settings" to "Users"? Good idea if true. Most useful feature I could glean from the screenshots. But after the "edit" session, you're still left with "ADMINI~1" in the prompt. Heh.
As an INFP, I agree ;) (Granted, I've also not had virus issues for at least 15 years so I can't say I'm boiling over with rage here)
Wasn't it a picture of a brain and the slogan "We stick our graphics where the sun don't shine"? *g*
I don't know if this is the case with Quicken, but some software is distributed as MSI packages, and those aren't .EXEs. You might have to "runas" msiexec.exe on them. This article might help, dunno.
This is NOT an option available for the control panel, but in reality -- how often do you muck about in the control panel anyway?
:)
All the time
Just runas into a cmd prompt and type sysdm.cpl or whatever. The control panel applets are all in System32. Alternatively, start an explorer process as Administrator and click your way to the control panel.
Yes, this could be easier.
Yes, it's all sort of cumbersome and there're too many apps that need tweaking to work for non-admins, but it's not that bad.
/user:administrator cmd" script in your path and you've got something like a makeshift "su -".
In Windows, when you want to do some admin work, you have to log out of the non-admin account and into the admin account to do the work. Then you have to log out of the admin account when the work is done and back into the non-admin account.
Never tried "runas"? Put a "runas
Windows doesn't have true accounts anyway. I can log into any account and view/edit/delete the files and folders in other user accounts
I'm not going to reboot into Windows and check now, but I'm more or less convinced this is not possible "here".
and Windows doesn't seperate the Start menu across accounts
It does for me. "%USERPROFILE%\Start Menu", or something like that.
Much of this sounds like you're either using a non-NT Windows, or using one but on FAT32 disks, or your permissions are weird. (They're rather fine-grained, actually; though I don't know about XP Home.)
You're lucky you misspelled fthagn... oops.
ZOO-zeh or -zuh is more like it anyway. At least that's the only way I ever hear it pronounced in Germany; definitely two syllables and voiced (soft) "s"es.