Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> Don't even *start* talking about sound being poorly supported on Windows 
>> until you've made sound work on Unix.
>>
> Oh, give me a break. Sure, there may be issues, especially with newer 
> cards, 

No. I'm talking about 25 years of UNIX not supporting sound properly. 
How long ago did UNIX start supporting sound when logged in from an X 
terminal? How long ago did UNIX start supporting mixers?

Trust me. I worked at Bellcore in the 90's. UNIX didn't "support" sound 
for long, *long* after Windows did.  And it's still a kludge on Linux.

Yes, Vista fucked up sound, but they did it on purpose.

>> Well, why are you even supporting Windows, then? It's a commercial 
>> product. If you want to work on stuff for free, there are excellent 
>> alternatives available.
>>
> Going to cover both of these at one time, since your contention makes no 
> damn sense. 

I don't see what's nonsensical about it. If you're making a commercial 
product and that's why you need to support Windows, then shell out the 
$100 and recoup it with your first couple of sales. If you're not 
planning to sell the results, why are you complaining that Windows 
development software is expensive? It's a hobby. Use Linux. :-)

> product in the first place. To me this makes about at much sense as if 

Makes sense to me. They don't want you developing to old APIs. The 
longer people use the old stuff, the longer they have to support it. If 
it isn't worth money for you, it's not worth them supporting it.

>> How does this differ from UNIX saying you're not allowed to delete 
>> something out of /bin for your own good?

> Wasn't aware that there was a huge threat of someone "outside" your 
> system deleting /bin, 

You'd be surprised. cf "the Morris worm" for example.

> or that you might not be the one doing it."

That's really the problem, I think. There are way, way more people using 
Windows who don't know what they're doing than there are people using 
UNIX who don't know the difference between "firefox" and "firewall".

> You would be wrong. You just can't do it anymore. They changed it so 
> that the packet management in Winsock, or some other key component 
> detects that the packet doesn't "look" like its big enough, contains the 
> right sort of data, or "something" when using certain protocols, then 
> simply doesn't send it, without warning, without an error, and without 
> any indication that it didn't work, other than the discovery that the 
> application isn't doing anything any more.

'k.

> I have no clue how people even figure out what half the damn 
> settings where that I ended up tweaking to make the OS run better.

They either ask someone at Microsoft, or they figure it out the same way 
they find buffer overflows. :-)

> Neat. Had no idea that was there. Makes things nicer. 

Google for "Windows command line" and find a whole bunch of good stuff. 
Also, read the documentation for "find" and "for" in the CLI, which do a 
lot more than you probably know.

Now, if I could find a command line to "eject" a USB device, I'd be 
happy. :-)

> Yeah. I need to adjust mine back to that. Got annoyed with having that 
> show up, when the patch took hours to download. Dialup remember... It 
> was easier to "let it" install and do things, than have to deal with it 
> when I finally realized it "had" patched. lol

No. Set it to download, then inform you. Then you can just turn off the 
machine, and it'll install the patches as it shuts down.

>> Go to the control panel, under automatic updates. If you want it to 
>> reboot after installing patches, tell it when and on what day of the 
>> week in the drop-downs. Otherwise, set it to "download updates but let 
>> me pick when to install them."  Or "notify me but dont download them."
>>
> What is it with people that use Windows that they tell you where to 
> change a setting in the control panel, by referencing it as though its 
> an option *in* the main page of the control panel? They do it on 
> websites too. The real method is like, "open bing in the control panel 
> and select bong, then pick the ding tab.", but all they give you is "Go 
> to Ding in the control panel and change these setting." I just don't get 
> it...
> 
> And don't bother being more specific. I figured out where it was. lol

The icon at the top level of the control panel is called "automatic 
updates". It's a one page panel with three radio buttons. I fail to see 
how my description was confusing?

> 
>>> Instead it keeps popping up 
>>> ever 5-10 minutes to ask you, "Heh! You done yet. Want to reboot?" No 
>>> frell you!!
>> If you let it get to that point at all, you can stop it by (surprise) 
>> stopping the windows update service.
>>
> Which I don't really want to do...

Uh, why not? Note I didn't say disable it. I said stop it. Then it wont 
bug you, until you reboot, which is all it's going to do until you 
reboot anyway.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     "That's pretty. Where's that?"
          "It's the Age of Channelwood."
     "We should go there on vacation some time."

Post a reply to this message