Messages - Sentinel [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: prev1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 25next
51
Living Room / Re: Curiouser and curiouser ...
« on: September 11, 2005, 06:52 AM »
This is another of those 'known' software bugs that Microsoft seem unable or unwilling to fix.  I get this sometimes, especially if my system has been running for some days/weeks.  As Veign mentioned, dragging the taskbar elsewhere and then back tends to fix it, otherwise the more extreme terminating and restarting explorer fixes it (which works rather nicely as a scheduled task but may mess up your taskbar icons in some cases).

52
Convergence is the bane of the software and hardware world at the moment.  Why specialise and do a task really well when you can do a dozen things in one package really badly?  Sadly market trends seem to be dictating this misguided notion and companies are so scared of specialising into an evolutionary dead end they blindly follow.  Thinking about it though, if anything should be an evolutionary dead end it should be Anti-Virus software and evidence is suggesting that this may be the case within a matter a few short of years.

I've used both Outpost and NOD32 for some time because they both do what they do really well without all of the extra 'value added' baggage like some of the competitors.  If that changes then I'll have no alternative then to change to a competing product.  If I can find one that hasn't followed suit that is....

As for Outpost discounts, I'm led to believe Agnitum's store used to allow you to initially purchase an 'upgrade' license (50% cheaper than a normal purchase) without having previously been a customer, which would then act as a full license within Outpost.  I wouldn't recommend this though as Agnitum has probably figured this out and blocked it by now AND it is probably dishonest, or something.  ;)

53
Screenshot Captor / Re: Screenshot Captor - License file
« on: September 09, 2005, 01:09 PM »
Mouser, perhaps your software should be called 'donateware' to help clarify matters.  Free to use if you want to jump through a few *minor* hoops or you can donate a trivial amount and never be hassled again.  At least then people cannot negatively misinterpret DC's position.

Uwe, I'm afraid my attitude is always somewhat harsher than mouser's.  Judging by your original post, you may be angry with the situation but perhaps you should ask yourself a couple of questions: -

Can I find a better alternative without having to do anything at all but download and use it?

Is my use of the software worth more to me than the effort taken to freely register at a site and download a key every six months?

If you are still not satisfied with your responses to the above then walk away.  You have gained nothing, but you have also lost nothing.

In the end, the choice is yours.  Use the software under the specified terms or go and find an alternative.

The unfortunately fact of life is that sites like this are not 'free' to run, developers cannot live on fresh air alone and why should you unquestionably get the benefit of several hundred man hours of development just because you have a need to use a certain type of software?

If someone doesn't want to donate and isn't prepared to significantly contribute to the community (and I'm not saying that you are either), then they have to put a little more effort into ensuring they can use the software available on this site.  Where is the problem with that?  It is 'free' in that there are no limitations, but you will have to occasionally do something to remind you that the people making the software and running this site should be recompensed, if not rewarded.  If you were to calculate an hourly rate for some of the software on this site I'm certain it would be classed as slave labour.
 
Sure, there may be reasons why you cannot donate cash, but mouser is an easy going guy, in my opinion too easy going.  If you contribute significantly to this site he will give you an unlimited key, if you donate a dollar he will give you an unlimited key, if you convince him that you've had a hard life and you are a good person I'm sure he would also give you an unlimited key.

Frankly I believe mouser's current approach is fair, balanced, correct and beneficial for everyone in the community, even if he still isn't convinced.  ;)

54
Best Archive Tool / Re: New Review (09/05/05) - Best Archive Tool
« on: September 07, 2005, 04:55 AM »
Just a quick note on using UPX as a precompressor -- it is not a reversible operation, and as such would not be lossless compression.

UPX in theory should be reversable (giving exactly the same pre-compression binary after using -d to decompress it) as it is one of the few exe compressors which stores a copy of the exe's original relocation table etc.  Of course, although files can often be decompressed back into the same exe, if they are left compressed after unzipping the archive (I'm not entirely sure of how ZipGenius works having never used it) there is a chance the will not work when run in a compressed form.

Here is an example of UPX decompressing properly: -

D:\TEST>copy buildwiz.exe before.exe
D:\TEST\buildwiz.exe => D:\TEST\before.exe
     1 file copied                                                             

D:\TEST>upx --best buildwiz.exe
                     Ultimate Packer for eXecutables
         Copyright (C) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002               
UPX 1.24w        Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer & Laszlo Molnar         Nov 7th 2002

        File size         Ratio      Format      Name
   --------------------   ------   -----------   -----------
    462848 ->    126976   27.43%    win32/pe     buildwiz.exe

Packed 1 file.

D:\TEST>upx -d buildwiz.exe
                     Ultimate Packer for eXecutables
         Copyright (C) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002
UPX 1.24w        Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer & Laszlo Molnar         Nov 7th 2002

        File size         Ratio      Format      Name
   --------------------   ------   -----------   -----------
    462848 <-    126976   27.43%    win32/pe     buildwiz.exe

Unpacked 1 file.

D:\TEST>md5sum *.exe
b385e22beec3e37250b8ccf7d86e916c *before.exe
b385e22beec3e37250b8ccf7d86e916c *buildwiz.exe


That being said, there is no guarentee that the file will decompress accurately back to the original as UPX works on processing information within the exe (Jibz could tell us a lot more on this) rather than an archiver which will just treat the exe as a raw data file.  From experience it seems that generally only older/simpler exe files decompress back correctly as UPX does seem to mangle, or at least misunderstand, the headers of many newer exes.  This is probably due to it not having been updated in many years (except some dodgy Alphas) so has problems with some of the tweaked formats generated by newer compilers such as Visual Studio 2003 onwards and may even refuse to compress them in some cases unless you force it to.  Here is an example of UPX mangling a newer exe: -

D:\TEST>copy Tsizepro.exe before.exe
D:\TEST\Tsizepro.exe => D:\TEST\before.exe
     1 file copied                                                             

D:\TEST>upx --best Tsizepro.exe
                     Ultimate Packer for eXecutables
         Copyright (C) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002               
UPX 1.24w        Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer & Laszlo Molnar         Nov 7th 2002

        File size         Ratio      Format      Name
   --------------------   ------   -----------   -----------
   2338816 ->    841216   35.96%    win32/pe     Tsizepro.exe

Packed 1 file.

D:\TEST>upx -d Tsizepro.exe
                     Ultimate Packer for eXecutables
         Copyright (C) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002
UPX 1.24w        Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer & Laszlo Molnar         Nov 7th 2002

        File size         Ratio      Format      Name
   --------------------   ------   -----------   -----------
   2338816 <-    841216   35.96%    win32/pe     Tsizepro.exe

Unpacked 1 file.

D:\TEST>md5sum *.exe
fdb6a21d4bf28ac48386e39b231ae6d9 *before.exe
e416ee063fd5f278a1b9391fae658b40 *Tsizepro.exe


I wouldn't risk using this ZipGenius compression option personally, it seems to be a poor kludge to work around compression limitations in the Zip format, and I doubt it gives much real world compression gain as well as potentially mangling some of your executables.  If you are going to make a non-standard format archive (Matteo said they were non-portable) the programmer might as well use a better compression algorithm such as LZMA and not mess around with risking user's executables.

55
Best Archive Tool / Re: New Review (09/05/05) - Best Archive Tool
« on: September 07, 2005, 04:33 AM »
I use rar.exe extensively and can second that RAR has excellent command-line support and even has a few features that the GUI version doesn't.  For example, the rather useful 'L' command for creating listings of archives.


Pages: prev1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 25next
Go to full version