|
anandcoral
|
 |
« on: November 07, 2011, 12:22:48 PM » |
|
DescriptionMany a times I run a program which does some process and displays a report/log etc. This program just shows a spinner/marquee which means I may have to wait 1/10/30 etc. minutes depending on the process. It also happens that I need to take next step after it has completed the process. Some programs do show some notification alert if it is in the background but many do not. Now while watching the spinner, I feel like having a quick look at my Twitter stream/ Facebook notification/ New unread mail etc. So I just switch to another window do the look and switch back to find that the process is still going on. I do this switching and at one time get so engrossed in reading new mail and its link that I forget when 20 minutes has gone by. I suddenly realize and switch back to find the program has done it's processing long time back. Enough. I am the master of the computer and not the other way around. I want all programs to tell me when it has done it's process, so that I can concentrate on useful work instead of looking at a spinner. Tell When Done is born. Pressing Win+t (changeable) hotkey on the program which is doing some process, activates it to watch it and tell me when it has done the process. The notification is displayed above all windows so that I can not miss it. Regards, Anand
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 12:21:45 PM by anandcoral »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ath
|
|
« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2011, 01:18:52 PM » |
|
That's quite useful  I have a lot of tasks just like that, and waiting for them to finish, twiddling my thumbs, is quite annoying. I'll try TellWhenDone and report my findings here. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ewemoa
|
|
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2011, 03:28:45 PM » |
|
This sounds great!
Any chance of recording and reporting the total time related to observing the processing?
On a tangential note, I didn't find a checksum on the download page (e.g. MD5, SHA1, etc.). Is there something there?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ath
|
|
« Reply #3 on: November 07, 2011, 03:37:08 PM » |
|
I'm curious how the activity is measured.
Is it based on CPU load or something else? as I use quite some Client/Server apps, where the load is on the server (ofcourse) so the client isn't very busy, but I still have to wait for it to finish. And there also isn't a wait cursor in all cases.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
anandcoral
|
|
« Reply #4 on: November 07, 2011, 08:35:47 PM » |
|
@ewemoa, I will put the checksum on the website next time, also will change the App to report the total time, thanks.
@Ath, it is based on CPU load, as that is the only measurement for all process in general. I will like to hear how it works in client/server setup.
Regards,
Anand
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ewemoa
|
|
« Reply #5 on: November 07, 2011, 11:53:44 PM » |
|
Thanks for the response! Looking forward to the updates  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ath
|
|
« Reply #6 on: November 10, 2011, 10:05:53 AM » |
|
As I expected, testing 'reveals' that Tell When Done isn't going to work on Client/Server applications. The client isn't busy enough, while waiting for the server to complete, to trick TWD into thinking it's still busy  Q: Would it be possible to add a/some test(s) for alternate waiting methods, like a wait/busy cursor being active, or some control (avi, gauge) or window being shown (depending on the exe-name), to let TWD know it's still busy? Ofcourse I'll assist in testing  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
anandcoral
|
|
« Reply #7 on: November 11, 2011, 12:59:23 AM » |
|
Thanks @Ath for the feedback.
Adding some alternate method is good suggestion and I will try to implement it. "Window title shown" is easier alternate and I will first try on it.
Regards,
Anand
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
skwire
|
|
« Reply #8 on: December 25, 2011, 04:44:26 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
anandcoral
|
|
« Reply #9 on: December 26, 2011, 02:03:39 AM » |
|
Thanks skwire and also thanks to DC that Ghacks found this one useful, though I still have some ironing on it to do.
Regards,
Anand
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
anandcoral
|
|
« Reply #11 on: December 30, 2011, 01:01:49 AM » |
|
Ahh my.. I am overwhelmed by the writer's and commentators points. What more a developer will want.
It is like an energy boost to me. Thank you mouser for the link.
Regards,
Anand
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
anandcoral
|
|
« Reply #12 on: January 01, 2012, 01:06:56 PM » |
|
I have updated the version and made as final release the original post.
Regards,
Anand
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tinman57
|
|
« Reply #13 on: January 08, 2012, 07:32:16 PM » |
|
What would really be great is if it had an alarm so you know when it's done while in another room (or not looking at the monitor).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
((((TINMAN))))
|
|
|
|
Curt
|
|
« Reply #14 on: January 09, 2012, 01:18:22 PM » |
|
What would really be great is if it had an alarm so you know when it's done while in another room (or not looking at the monitor).
I have the exact same request; play a tune when done :-) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Remember what you said, because in a day or two, I'll have a witty and blistering retort! You'll be devastated THEN!
|
|
|
|
anandcoral
|
|
« Reply #15 on: January 10, 2012, 10:33:04 AM » |
|
Hi Tinman57 and Curt, I had more plans for TWD along with the sound option. But it looks like this is a basic feature and should have been from the initial release. I have found two sound (mp3 files) which I will include in next release, hope fully this week end. One is of short length and the other is a bit longer, so that one does not miss it from next room It will also be possible to play you choice mp3, wav etc. file, instead. Regards, Anand |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 08:18:21 PM by anandcoral »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
anandcoral
|
|
« Reply #16 on: January 10, 2012, 08:19:06 PM » |
|
Version 1.6.0 uploaded.
Changes,
- Plays a sound when watched program has done its process.
- Sound file can be defined in Settings.
Its a great feeling to see satisfied users.
Regards,
Anand
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ewemoa
|
|
« Reply #17 on: July 10, 2012, 01:57:51 AM » |
|
I will put the checksum on the website next time
Thanks for doing this. I just downloaded the zip file for 1.6.0, and computed some checksums for it. Unfortunately, what I got: MD5: 5816907e299cc6798c2a2df83322f404
SHA1: fcda32396572c0f009c21e4db399de90fb29be24
differs from what I see at the Download section: MD5: B730B35429820D191F1E76CFB5367E6C
SHA1: CFE68189D4DD9C53899958C316F27C2E235A7FF2
Any ideas as to why there appears to be a discrepancy? I decided to check for 1.5.0 as well and also ended up with different results: MD5: 9daa9a8098c53dcde3a3915d4f799d96
SHA1: fe9f4d664920504ed0cc59bbfe68c8ea6d6755ec
What I see at the site is: MD5: 92075C9913F83A09E3F6148D0073AAA1
SHA1: 0886E3D2B6619DD2B9A83B7DAF20F15B52F51700
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
anandcoral
|
|
« Reply #18 on: July 10, 2012, 11:05:41 AM » |
|
Hi ewemoa, Thanks for your feedback. I downloaded the "Tell When Done.exe" from the zip file of version 1.6.0 (Google sites, opened the zip file in web and allowed me to download just the exe ). Ran again HashMyFiles v1.72 (from http://www.nirsoft.net). It gave same result. The full text is as below, ================================================== Filename : Tell When Done.exe MD5 : B730B35429820D191F1E76CFB5367E6C SHA1 : CFE68189D4DD9C53899958C316F27C2E235A7FF2 CRC32 : C3F79B42 Full Path : Tell When Done.exe Modified Time : 7/10/2012 9:23:40 PM Created Time : 7/10/2012 9:23:37 PM File Size : 454,863 File Version : 1, 0, 48, 05 Product Version : 1, 0, 48, 05 Identical : Extension : exe File Attributes : A ================================================== (Please ignore the version number shown above) I am running WinXp 32 bits. Can you please check it with Nirsoft exe ? if you are using a different one, please tell me the name. Also please tell your Os version and 32/64, though this should not be the problem. Please revert back. Regards, Anand |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ewemoa
|
|
« Reply #19 on: July 11, 2012, 03:21:43 AM » |
|
I have an idea about what may be going on. I am computing the checksums for the zip files. From your post it looks like your computations are for the exe files. A test here appears to be consistent with this view.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
anandcoral
|
|
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2012, 05:12:02 AM » |
|
Yes, the checksum is for the exe, as the values are also in the hash.txt file in the zip file, for anytime reference by the user.
I will mention so on the website, to clear any misunderstanding in future.
Regards,
Anand
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Ath
|
|
« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2012, 05:22:55 AM » |
|
Yes, the checksum is for the exe, as the values are also in the hash.txt file in the zip file, for anytime reference by the user.
I will mention so on the website, to clear any misunderstanding in future.
Regards,
Anand
It would be more helpful to (also) publish the md5/sha hashes for the zipfile, as I'd be (theoretically) able to replace the exe, update the txt file with new hashes and publish a new zip-file... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
anandcoral
|
|
« Reply #22 on: July 11, 2012, 07:58:09 AM » |
|
Good idea, thanks Ath.
So the website will have the hash for zip file and also the exe ; and mention so.
The zip file will have hash text for the exe, as usual. This to help if a user's machine gets infected, and he/she wants to verify the exe.
Regards,
Anand
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ewemoa
|
|
« Reply #23 on: July 11, 2012, 08:25:50 AM » |
|
So the website will have the hash for zip file and also the exe ; and mention so.
Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
