Absolutely, but I can restart explorer in a few seconds, thanks to Process Explorers 'restart' function. Sure it's not ideal, but I can work with it, unlike the functional differences in the newer explorer, especially where it tries to "do what I mean" rather than "do what I say"... I want my computer to do what I say, not try to second guess what I want, which is a primary complaint with vista, but not with 2003.
A slashdot poster who only sees what he wants to see and makes wildly inaccurate inferences from that, huh? We have a name for people like you around the world... f*cktard.
My 2003 is nlited, I also go for pretty minimal (process explorer currently reporting process/thread count at 30/405, which includes some UI enhancements I've mentioned in other posts).
When you say Win2K interface, does that include explorer? I don't like how populated the left hand side gets; I use the 'explore from here' powertoy, so I can right click My Computer and do Explore from here, so I just see My Computer and my drives beneith it, without all extra stuff like Desktop, My Documents, Recycler et al. The command line options passed to explorer.exe that allowed it to do this in Win'95-2005 no longer work in 7, and so you end up with loads of crap in there. I'd love to know how to revert that behaviour... oh, and revert the "you seem to be looking over there, let me scroll for you" bahaviour as the expanded tree gets wide, as opposed to the horizontal manual scroll bar you get at the bottom of the tree view in earlier versions.
Damn you got me all excited then... rebooted into Win7 (don't have vista installed, is far too power hungry for my laptop) and gave it a go... dragging the folder icon to the edge of the screen just seems to accomplish moving the icon to that edge... no docking. Maybe it will be in a later release, but build 7000 seems to have the feature lacking (again, if someone can correct, please do)
"But at least for the way I used those things, the Vista start menu more than makes up for their loss"
But if you look at the way I use them, you'll see that they're basically like multiple start menus, doing different things. Sure you could have these as submenus, but that's slower.
"and they had some security problems"
So have them disabled by default but let me turn them back on. I don't have security problems, I'm far too good for that. I don't even mind downloading the feature as a powertoy or equivalent, but I do need it (where need is equal to very high levels of want)
KDE4 had huge chunks of code rewritten from scratch, so obviously early versions were going to be functionality limited... just as early KDE3 was, simply because the code hadn't been written yet. The problems I have (which include Win7, which I have installed on my laptop, something I wouldn't even bother trying with Vista, which is far too power hungry) are features that have been removed one at least that's been there since Win95, not merely left out of a rewrite that might find their way back in. (see a couple of my examples)
Take a pre-vista Windows. Make sure the taskbar is unlocked (in right click menu), and add a new toolbar such as the Address or Quick Launch (if you don't have one). The left hand side of this bar has a drag bar, which you can move it around, or pull it out of the taskbar and dock it to the top or sides of the screen, creating a new dock bar which you can populate. This, along with freelaunchbar I find very useful (example, my desktop: screenshot).
Argue or not whether this would be useful to you, the fact is that Vista/7 just won't let you do it*. You can move your taskbar, sure, but all my attempts to create a second, as in my screenshot, have failed*.
I also use a tool called xneat which allows the rearranging of task buttons on the taskbar. This has been "superseded" in 7 (perhaps vista too?) - but, as far as I've found, buttons move with other buttons in the application (so moving one messenger task button moves them all with it). I group task buttons by task, not by process (so my work related chat windows go next to my work related putty windows for example, then chat windows to my friends next to browser window containing facebook). You can do this in 2003. 7, however, enforces grouping based on its own metric of what a group should be. I've not been able to break them apart so I can group them as I want.
Again, arguments whether this would be useful to you or not aside. It is to me, it's functionality that was there, and has been removed*.
(*If I am wrong on any of these, please somebody correct me, because this is a showstopper for me, I would really like to be able to do these!)
2003 dude, all the way. Switch to windows classic (start menu, taskbar, window decoration, folder views) and disable the 'themes' service which seems to intercept graphics calls and the result is snappier than 2000, esp with boot/shutdown times taken into consideration (with concurrent service start/stopping that came in 2001's XP).
Throw a couple of UI enhancements on (launchy, freelaunchbar) and you're away. Nothin beats it. One of my problems with 7ista is that you can't create a second bar on the screen (eg, add quicklaunch toolbar, and try drag it to the top or side of the screen. You now have a new bar, great for adding an address toolbar, a freelaunchbar, website bookmarks etc). I don't understand the mentality behind removing functionality.
I want Windows 7... kernel... I don't want its shell (explorer et al) though. The idea of moving to an interface that does things differently, I don't have a huge aversion to. The idea of moving to an interface that can't do the things I can do now in Win2003... well that's just plain silly.
"a 4 year old court decision said that there is no binding between application and RDMS if the same code can be used on other databases. With the special notation, it is not possible and hence constitutes a GPL binding"
If your wording of the court case is accurate and complete (enough) - no it's doesn't mean that. If the court case has ruled on a situation where there is 'no binding', then that court case will only apply to other cases where there is similarly 'no binding'. Reversing a condition doesn't necessarily reverse the outcome.
Generalising from own limited experience, well that's a first on slashdot.
I run stuff that's more than 20 years old under windows no problem. I've also hit problems getting old code to compile under linux today, that I used to be able to compile before no problem. My experiences proves the opposite to yours, which can only mean that the universe must not exist. Either that, or they're just limited experiences which do not prove a rule.
Whilst I know you're jokin (before some idiot thinks it's clever/original to say 'whoosh') but this needn't be the case. With a decent scalable processor (that can clock down) and operating system support (I recommend rmclock for windows, dynticks + conservative processor scaling governor for linux, or a sledgehammer for mac) the processor can slow down 'n sleep when it's not being used, then wake up when processes are scheduled to run or interrupts occur, rather than sitting in the systems idle process. Rightmark clock for windows will let you configure different voltages for the processor to draw at different frequencies (where processor support is available) too which can bring your cpu temperature right down and extend battery life.
"3) Not sure about this: I think that people need to take immunosuppressants for a LONG time after the transplant"
AFAIK ('tho there're bound to be exceptions maybe?) - you take them for as long as you don't want your immune system to attack the new organ, which'll basically be, for the rest of your life.
Usually when I hear people say they get through loads of water, it turns out that they're living a vew low salt intake diet. You need salt to be able to absorb water, without it, it mostly flushes straight through ya. If you feel like you're drinking loads of water, and are going the toilet loads, and are easily feeling dehydrated even though you're not sweating loads, then look into your salt intake and make sure you're getting enough.
Also, if your water has floride in it, if you can afford to, switch to a source that doesn't have floride. The kind of levels you can get in 4l of water are on a par with prescription level doses of the stuff (when it was thought to be safe enough to prescribe people) used to treat hyperthyroidism. If, like me, you struggle to keep weight on, then this may be considered a good thing (unless you're feeling lethargic all the time, in which case, cut out the floride). If you struggle to keep weight off, have an underactive thyroid, then floride is your worst enemy. Water filters don't work.
But the sample size (on the effectiveness of radon emission levels as an earthquake prediction tool) there is 1... prediction that the gas levels meant an earthquake was imminent for march 29th. For more data points on the validity of using radon gas as a means of predicting earth quakes, one would need to take more predictions, and see how often the prediction's realised. For each "yes this was accurate", "this was fairly accurate", "this was not accurate", "holy s#^t, quit your job" result you get is another sample.
And bare in mind that it's not even a good sample if he would have evacuated the wrong city at the wrong time.
Yes, the one data point on the effectiveness of prediction by radon emissions is in itself an amalgamation of lots of other data, but that doesn't make it a sample size greater than one within the context. If you escape to a wider context, I think there may be more validity to what you're saying, but still not enough (although enough that my post you replied to does seem a little harsh, so appologies for the rudeness)
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely, but I can restart explorer in a few seconds, thanks to Process Explorers 'restart' function. Sure it's not ideal, but I can work with it, unlike the functional differences in the newer explorer, especially where it tries to "do what I mean" rather than "do what I say"... I want my computer to do what I say, not try to second guess what I want, which is a primary complaint with vista, but not with 2003.
A slashdot poster who only sees what he wants to see and makes wildly inaccurate inferences from that, huh? We have a name for people like you around the world... f*cktard.
"Windows 7 has almost the same kernel as Vista SP1"
Almost.
"If you want Windows 7 kernel then use Vista"
Erm... or Windows 7?
My 2003 is nlited, I also go for pretty minimal (process explorer currently reporting process/thread count at 30/405, which includes some UI enhancements I've mentioned in other posts).
When you say Win2K interface, does that include explorer? I don't like how populated the left hand side gets; I use the 'explore from here' powertoy, so I can right click My Computer and do Explore from here, so I just see My Computer and my drives beneith it, without all extra stuff like Desktop, My Documents, Recycler et al. The command line options passed to explorer.exe that allowed it to do this in Win'95-2005 no longer work in 7, and so you end up with loads of crap in there. I'd love to know how to revert that behaviour... oh, and revert the "you seem to be looking over there, let me scroll for you" bahaviour as the expanded tree gets wide, as opposed to the horizontal manual scroll bar you get at the bottom of the tree view in earlier versions.
Damn you got me all excited then... rebooted into Win7 (don't have vista installed, is far too power hungry for my laptop) and gave it a go... dragging the folder icon to the edge of the screen just seems to accomplish moving the icon to that edge... no docking. Maybe it will be in a later release, but build 7000 seems to have the feature lacking (again, if someone can correct, please do)
"But at least for the way I used those things, the Vista start menu more than makes up for their loss"
But if you look at the way I use them, you'll see that they're basically like multiple start menus, doing different things. Sure you could have these as submenus, but that's slower.
"and they had some security problems"
So have them disabled by default but let me turn them back on. I don't have security problems, I'm far too good for that. I don't even mind downloading the feature as a powertoy or equivalent, but I do need it (where need is equal to very high levels of want)
KDE4 had huge chunks of code rewritten from scratch, so obviously early versions were going to be functionality limited... just as early KDE3 was, simply because the code hadn't been written yet. The problems I have (which include Win7, which I have installed on my laptop, something I wouldn't even bother trying with Vista, which is far too power hungry) are features that have been removed one at least that's been there since Win95, not merely left out of a rewrite that might find their way back in. (see a couple of my examples)
"For example?"
Take a pre-vista Windows. Make sure the taskbar is unlocked (in right click menu), and add a new toolbar such as the Address or Quick Launch (if you don't have one). The left hand side of this bar has a drag bar, which you can move it around, or pull it out of the taskbar and dock it to the top or sides of the screen, creating a new dock bar which you can populate. This, along with freelaunchbar I find very useful (example, my desktop: screenshot).
Argue or not whether this would be useful to you, the fact is that Vista/7 just won't let you do it*. You can move your taskbar, sure, but all my attempts to create a second, as in my screenshot, have failed*.
I also use a tool called xneat which allows the rearranging of task buttons on the taskbar. This has been "superseded" in 7 (perhaps vista too?) - but, as far as I've found, buttons move with other buttons in the application (so moving one messenger task button moves them all with it). I group task buttons by task, not by process (so my work related chat windows go next to my work related putty windows for example, then chat windows to my friends next to browser window containing facebook). You can do this in 2003. 7, however, enforces grouping based on its own metric of what a group should be. I've not been able to break them apart so I can group them as I want.
Again, arguments whether this would be useful to you or not aside. It is to me, it's functionality that was there, and has been removed*.
(*If I am wrong on any of these, please somebody correct me, because this is a showstopper for me, I would really like to be able to do these!)
2003 dude, all the way. Switch to windows classic (start menu, taskbar, window decoration, folder views) and disable the 'themes' service which seems to intercept graphics calls and the result is snappier than 2000, esp with boot/shutdown times taken into consideration (with concurrent service start/stopping that came in 2001's XP).
Throw a couple of UI enhancements on (launchy, freelaunchbar) and you're away. Nothin beats it. One of my problems with 7ista is that you can't create a second bar on the screen (eg, add quicklaunch toolbar, and try drag it to the top or side of the screen. You now have a new bar, great for adding an address toolbar, a freelaunchbar, website bookmarks etc). I don't understand the mentality behind removing functionality.
In the OSS world it's called "release early, release often" (example)
But hey, one mans 'terrorism' is another mans 'shock and awe'.
I want Windows 7... kernel... I don't want its shell (explorer et al) though. The idea of moving to an interface that does things differently, I don't have a huge aversion to. The idea of moving to an interface that can't do the things I can do now in Win2003... well that's just plain silly.
"My experience, in general, has been that people moving from..."
Shows what you know. I use postgrexperience, cuz myexperience is somewhat limited...
Or go the Coke route, call it MysQlassic
"a 4 year old court decision said that there is no binding between application and RDMS if the same code can be used on other databases. With the special notation, it is not possible and hence constitutes a GPL binding"
If your wording of the court case is accurate and complete (enough) - no it's doesn't mean that. If the court case has ruled on a situation where there is 'no binding', then that court case will only apply to other cases where there is similarly 'no binding'. Reversing a condition doesn't necessarily reverse the outcome.
Generalising from own limited experience, well that's a first on slashdot.
I run stuff that's more than 20 years old under windows no problem. I've also hit problems getting old code to compile under linux today, that I used to be able to compile before no problem. My experiences proves the opposite to yours, which can only mean that the universe must not exist. Either that, or they're just limited experiences which do not prove a rule.
Whilst I know you're jokin (before some idiot thinks it's clever/original to say 'whoosh') but this needn't be the case. With a decent scalable processor (that can clock down) and operating system support (I recommend rmclock for windows, dynticks + conservative processor scaling governor for linux, or a sledgehammer for mac) the processor can slow down 'n sleep when it's not being used, then wake up when processes are scheduled to run or interrupts occur, rather than sitting in the systems idle process. Rightmark clock for windows will let you configure different voltages for the processor to draw at different frequencies (where processor support is available) too which can bring your cpu temperature right down and extend battery life.
hehe nothing says "correctness!" like a typo in the subject line...
"even the PETA retards aren't that rabid"
Wanna bet? :-p
Pay more attention to nature?! You should try google fighting it before making those kinds of statements.
fantastic :-)
"3) Not sure about this: I think that people need to take immunosuppressants for a LONG time after the transplant"
AFAIK ('tho there're bound to be exceptions maybe?) - you take them for as long as you don't want your immune system to attack the new organ, which'll basically be, for the rest of your life.
"No, it's not.
The recent events are a sample size of 1."
And that is what you offered. That one point. Which is what I commented on.
Usually when I hear people say they get through loads of water, it turns out that they're living a vew low salt intake diet. You need salt to be able to absorb water, without it, it mostly flushes straight through ya. If you feel like you're drinking loads of water, and are going the toilet loads, and are easily feeling dehydrated even though you're not sweating loads, then look into your salt intake and make sure you're getting enough.
Also, if your water has floride in it, if you can afford to, switch to a source that doesn't have floride. The kind of levels you can get in 4l of water are on a par with prescription level doses of the stuff (when it was thought to be safe enough to prescribe people) used to treat hyperthyroidism. If, like me, you struggle to keep weight on, then this may be considered a good thing (unless you're feeling lethargic all the time, in which case, cut out the floride). If you struggle to keep weight off, have an underactive thyroid, then floride is your worst enemy. Water filters don't work.
But the sample size (on the effectiveness of radon emission levels as an earthquake prediction tool) there is 1... prediction that the gas levels meant an earthquake was imminent for march 29th. For more data points on the validity of using radon gas as a means of predicting earth quakes, one would need to take more predictions, and see how often the prediction's realised. For each "yes this was accurate", "this was fairly accurate", "this was not accurate", "holy s#^t, quit your job" result you get is another sample.
And bare in mind that it's not even a good sample if he would have evacuated the wrong city at the wrong time.
Yes, the one data point on the effectiveness of prediction by radon emissions is in itself an amalgamation of lots of other data, but that doesn't make it a sample size greater than one within the context. If you escape to a wider context, I think there may be more validity to what you're saying, but still not enough (although enough that my post you replied to does seem a little harsh, so appologies for the rudeness)
Scientists don't make mistakes now?!!