 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Only "6 minutes" to go now... heh. Can you tell how interesting this isn't?
The installer completed. Huzzah!
Now just got to wait for the backup process to complete, and then I can
run the user setup wizzard. Yay me...? :-/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> Tom Austin wrote:
>
>> I like the time left shown for copy in Windows - or a install.
>>
>> 3 minutes remaining
>> 10 minutes remaining
>> 4 hours remaining
>> 2 days remaining
>> 1 day remaining
>> 2 minutes remaining
>> 10 seconds remaining
>> 15 seconds remaining
>> done
>
> I remember when progress bars used to tell you how long something would
> take. Now it seems fashionable for the bar to instantly fill to 99%, and
> then lock up for 20 minutes or something. And how many programs have you
> seen where the bar repeatedly fills and empties, seemingly at random? Hmm?
>
> My God... I'm old! o_O
On some recent installs I watched the progress bar fill up and start
over - again and again....
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> I remember when progress bars used to tell you how long something
>> would take. Now it seems fashionable for the bar to instantly fill to
>> 99%, and then lock up for 20 minutes or something. And how many
>> programs have you seen where the bar repeatedly fills and empties,
>> seemingly at random? Hmm?
>>
>> My God... I'm old! o_O
>
>
> On some recent installs I watched the progress bar fill up and start
> over - again and again....
One of the more amusing things I've seen in my career is the Outlook
2000 installer. When you install it, the progress bar slowly fills up
(multiple times). But when you uninstall it, the bar starts full and
gradually empties instead!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Tom Austin" <taustin> wrote in message news:48d24a3c$1@news.povray.org...
> Invisible wrote:
>> Invisible wrote:
>>> QEMU virtual machine running the Windows XP installation procedure
>>> (which now has only "37 minute remaining")
>>
>> Only "24 minutes" now - yay!
>
>
> I like the time left shown for copy in Windows - or a install.
>
I had a copy yesterday (copying from a shadow copy 'previous version'), that
said it would take 65782 years to complete. I went to get coffee and it was
done by the time I got back.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail wrote:
> I had a copy yesterday (copying from a shadow copy 'previous version'),
> that said it would take 65782 years to complete. I went to get coffee
> and it was done by the time I got back.
LOL!
That's just *advanced*! I've never seen it get it quite that wrong...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-Sep-08 16:26, Invisible wrote:
> Gail wrote:
>
>> I had a copy yesterday (copying from a shadow copy 'previous
>> version'), that said it would take 65782 years to complete. I went to
>> get coffee and it was done by the time I got back.
>
> LOL!
>
> That's just *advanced*! I've never seen it get it quite that wrong...
I did, even negative times. It happens when people count the number of
bytes to copy in 32 bit integers, or something like that.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel nous illumina en ce 2008-09-18 19:31 -->
> On 18-Sep-08 16:26, Invisible wrote:
>> Gail wrote:
>>
>>> I had a copy yesterday (copying from a shadow copy 'previous
>>> version'), that said it would take 65782 years to complete. I went to
>>> get coffee and it was done by the time I got back.
>>
>> LOL!
>>
>> That's just *advanced*! I've never seen it get it quite that wrong...
>
> I did, even negative times. It happens when people count the number of
> bytes to copy in 32 bit integers, or something like that.
Or take the time it took for a single, huge, file, and multiply that by the
number of files left to process, with an average size of less than 10K...
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
Coming soon: Windows for Nintendo!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] dev null> wrote in message
news:48d2652b@news.povray.org...
> Gail wrote:
>
>> I had a copy yesterday (copying from a shadow copy 'previous version'),
>> that said it would take 65782 years to complete. I went to get coffee and
>> it was done by the time I got back.
>
> LOL!
>
> That's just *advanced*! I've never seen it get it quite that wrong...
I suspect it had something to do with the copy coming from the shadow copy.
Usually I get fairly 'accurate' time estimates on copying.
I say fairly, cause Vista spends the first half of the copy calculating the
time and hence when it finally does give a time it's reasonably accurate
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail wrote:
>
> I had a copy yesterday (copying from a shadow copy 'previous version'),
> that said it would take 65782 years to complete. I went to get coffee
> and it was done by the time I got back.
And your boss won't complain that you're taking too long coffee breaks?
Can I come to work there too?
--
Eero "Aero" Ahonen
http://www.zbxt.net
aer### [at] removethiszbxtnetinvalid
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
> One of the more amusing things I've seen in my career is the Outlook
> 2000 installer. When you install it, the progress bar slowly fills up
> (multiple times). But when you uninstall it, the bar starts full and
> gradually empties instead!
All MSI-based installers do that when rolling back an installation (if it
fails halfway, once you close the error message it undoes what it did and
the progressbar goes backwards). But I never saw it on an uninstaller...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
