avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Sunday April 11, 2021, 11:27 am
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Jakeman [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: [1]
ProcessTamer / Re: UAC still requires permission...
« on: July 10, 2017, 11:35 PM »
No, it didn't.  But it was informative, nonetheless, and something to try if I have to uninstall ProcessTamer and need to dampen the cpu drain - I think!

My drive also has several partitions and I didn't think having this program on my installations partition was the issue.  Getting confirmation of this was useful.  Yet now I'm still at a loss how to fix the issue of the UAC requiring permission every time I start or restart the computer.

I'm missing something here and I appreciate the help.  Thanks.

ProcessTamer / Re: UAC still requires permission...
« on: July 10, 2017, 05:13 PM »
Good question!  No, I hadn't changed that shortcut, but just now did - no effect.  Unchecked all the Run As compatibility boxes to where they were at installation, leaving all Run as Administrator boxes checked - also no effect. 

I do have the program installed on a different partition than my main drive (C) - could that be part of my issue?

ProcessTamer / UAC still requires permission...
« on: July 10, 2017, 02:00 PM »
Hi Mouser,

Still running an older Gateway (GT5268E) with an Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 (1.86GHz), Win 7 Home Premium 64-bit, and 6 GB of RAM, so even Firefox and Bitdefender can hog all the CPU at times, especially if Windows Update is running.  Thought that Process Tamer would be perfect in this situation, and so far it's been extremely helpful.

My problem, though, is that every time I start the pc I have to deal with the User Account Control popup no matter what I've tried to avoid it.  I did what your instructions said and elevated all the shortcuts to Admin rights, even going to the program files themselves and doing it there to the Tray, Config, and Update exes. 

I found that you'd added the 64-bit beta so I removed the other version and installed it, also raising all the property files to run as administrator. Restarted, but still get the popup, although it's a different color, probably signifying the 64-bit change in program.  Tried to change compatibility mode to Win 7 - no joy. Vista mode either.

What am I doing wrong, or not doing?  Very frustrating, and enough of a hindrance to uninstall the program altogether, or not have it start with Windows and just run it when needed.

Any help much appreciated!  Thanks.

General Software Discussion / Re: Magic Jack Phone ?
« on: October 10, 2008, 01:17 AM »
This seemed, at first, to be one of those "too good to be true" products to stay away from, but I'd been trying to find a way to eliminate the long distance fee from my phone bill ($20/mo.) without causing a lot of inconvenience, and this was one of the possible options.  Can't remember where I'd first read about it online, but the link led me to a free 30 day trial offer that I felt safe checking out as it would only cost me the return shipping if I didn't want to keep it.  Arrived within 2 days and was easy to set up; I even found a good 2.4 GHz cordless phone on sale to hook up to it - had to make sure it worked throughout my home.  I got a phone number with my area code which shows up on Caller IDs, but without my name, which is ok. 

Seems to work just fine, but the jury is still out, and until I'm certain of its reliability I'll keep the long distance service with the phone company.  I've been using it occasionally for the past 3 months, and need to make sure it'll work with a new wireless router that I just picked up, but haven't yet installed. 

My primary concern was that it kept causing my computer to reboot at least once whenever I first turned it on, but that was apparently resolved once I moved a few start-up programs into the delayed startup category provided by WinPatrol. 

Yes, you do need to keep the PC on all the time if you plan on using it as a total phone alternative, and I think that that's what the developers had in mind, so you're not warned about the reboot issue.  I intend to use it solely for long distance calls, and if I can continue to make it work, that will save me a lot of money in the future.

I am also concerned about a reported lack of customer service and that alone may be the deal-breaker.  At this point, if I so choose, getting a refund would prove difficult, though certainly not impossible; I'll get my money's worth regardless, and I don't have to renew unless I want to.

While this might eventually become the incredible product it's hyped-up to be, approach it as you would a "beta" offering.  Here are a few places to see the problems that others have encountered and endured with magicJack - you'll have to sort the bs from the truth yourself, but it's a good starting point:

If you decide to pursue this, even if it's the 30 day trial, just make sure to use a major bank credit card, and definitely not a debit card!

Hope this was helpful...

Living Room / Re: download all updates for XP in one go?
« on: August 31, 2007, 01:57 AM »
In issue #144 of his SupportAlert Newsletter, Gizmo Richards (also a supporter of this site) mentions all of this and then some, but the neowin and autopatcher links are now moot, as PhilB66 just pointed out.  You have to subscribe to the Premium Edition to see the whole write-up, so I can't share it with you, but it was a follow-up to a mention in the free version, #128, that I think I can:

"2.4 Guide to Building an Unattended XP Install CD

This site offers a clear how-to guide with separate instructions for beginners, intermediates and advanced users. When completed you'll have an unattended Windows XP install CD that includes SP2 and all subsequent hot fixes."

I just "graduated" from Win 2000 to XP and remembered this as something to look into; maybe it will help...

Jakeman, are you using win9x or winMe?  process tamer is only for Win 2K/XP, so that might explain the problem.

Hi Mouser!

Thanks for the quick response; after I sent my post I realized the omission but wasn't sure of it's importance.  I'm running Win 2000 (SP4), but on an older PC (Dell Optiplex G1) with a Pentium II (350 mHz) and 256 MB of RAM.  Is this enough for your program?

I had done some "housekeeping" yesterday and got rid of some old files, then I upgraded my browser to Firefox just prior to downloading the Process Tamer software.  Could some residual crap on my hard drive (80GB) have interfered with it?  When I started the computer today, that same error message appeared after the system came up.  Haven't checked into this any further yet, and I'm off to work...

Appreciate it,

I'm a member of this site as a result of a previous posting by Gizmo in one of his past issues of TechSupportAlert, but until I read the current issue earlier today, I wasn't aware of this software.  Finally got around to downloading and installing (and registering) at this late hour, but I got an error message upon launching it for the first time.  I captured the screenshot with WinSnap, but I'm not sure if I did what was needed to pass it along to you.  So just in case it didn't work, the message read:

"The instruction at '0x7c5ae578' referenced memory at '0x7822e496'.  The memory could not be read."  Then it said it was terminating the program.

Any idea what the heck this is?  The program seems to be active, and I can access it from the system tray icon, but then I get the same message again.  Should I uninstall and start over?

Sorry to interject this technical junk here, but wasn't sure where else to do so.  Regardless, I wanted to say thanks for the software and I hope a lot of fellow Gizmo supporters find their way to this site...

I'll try to figure out what my problem is, but any insights would be much appreciated.


Pages: [1]