Messages

301

General Software Discussion / Re: software i love

« on: April 24, 2005, 10:33 PM »

There is no single bit of software I "couldn't live without".  I've even made a point, recently, to remove software that I didn't really need; even if I liked having it around.  But the top of my list consists of just a few applications:

Backup and restore reliability that won't nickle-and-dime you to death:
Image for DOS/Windows

Registry backup and restore (helps easily recover from shitware experiences):
ERUNT

The best HTTP-filtering application I've ever found, by far (uses Windows hooks for all-encompassing compatibility):
Ad Muncher

Firefox + 1,000 extensions - hours of your time =
Opera

The name says it all (well, almost; nothing is perfect)
Total Uninstall

302

ProcessTamer / Re: Some test?

« on: April 24, 2005, 04:40 PM »

I installed ProcessGuard 3.150, enabled all its settings (except "Execution Protection"), and didn't see a problem.  ProcessTamerTray.exe is always very well behaved for me.  I am using ProcessTamer 2.00.15, however.  And I tested this in a virtual environment that didn't have a whole lot running, so...  It may not mean much.

303

General Software Discussion / Re: anyone using a nice weather tray tool?

« on: April 24, 2005, 04:19 PM »

I used Weather Pulse for awhile, but was driven almost clinically insane by the fact that it hardly ever updated correctly for me.  Every time I'd check it, the data would be really old, and I couldn't even get it to manually refresh.

Right now I'm using the Weather Monitor plugin for True Launch Bar, which is shareware.  It works pretty well, but has shortcomings of its own.

304

ProcessTamer / Re: Some test?

« on: April 24, 2005, 04:16 PM »

The b10 use 9,5s/h on my system...

-VaMPiRiC_CRoW (April 02, 2005, 04:22 PM)

Assuming you mean 9.5 seconds per hour--which is ridiculously and anomalously-high for Process Tamer--I'll bet that it's ProcessGuard at fault.  The ProcessGuard driver can intercept the actions of applications, with the result being that the other process (in this case, ProcessTamerTray.exe) is charged for the CPU time.

I'll test it myself, if I can gather the stomach to install ProcessGuard again...

305

ProcessTamer / Re: Process Tamer at 120 DPI

« on: April 24, 2005, 04:08 PM »

Yeah, and there are a couple funny (to me at least) anecdotes behind how I came to own a 100-pound, 25" monster of a monitor.

306

Unfinished Requests / Re: monthly contest: most useless app that takes 2-5 hours to write

« on: April 24, 2005, 01:07 AM »

Thanks!  Please send it to my forum email address, [email protected] .

307

Unfinished Requests / Re: monthly contest: most useless app that takes 2-5 hours to write

« on: April 23, 2005, 08:59 PM »

That would be great.  I appreciate it very much.

308

Unfinished Requests / Re: monthly contest: most useless app that takes 2-5 hours to write

« on: April 23, 2005, 08:08 PM »

Nope; I completely misunderstood what you were saying (before you edited it!).   

309

Unfinished Requests / Re: monthly contest: most useless app that takes 2-5 hours to write

« on: April 23, 2005, 06:43 PM »

sorry

310

Living Room / Re: Who are you & what do you do?

« on: April 23, 2005, 05:06 PM »

A smart, educated guy who spends an enormous amount of time on the computer, and who has tested and used an endless list of software titles.  It's no surprise, then, Zaine, that I almost always agree with you! 

311

Finished Programs / DONE: perform random URL queries (Random Submitter)

« on: April 23, 2005, 04:56 PM »

Hmm, well, I suggest the utility I already mentioned: A little app that submits spurious searches to Google on a regular basis, to render useless their data collection.  My guess is that this app would use the MSIE engine, and would simply read an ASCII-based word list, and that it wouldn't be that hard to make.

312

Mouser's Zone / Re: Any new ideas for small utilities?

« on: April 18, 2005, 08:21 PM »

I guess my thinking was that if the goal was to make startup faster, this won't do it.  It will make startup seem more "pleasant", and your system more responsive during it, but it won't make it faster.  So, I thought the suggested utility would miss the target, hence my questioning it.

The Google utility idea--admittedly strange--would certainly work.  The thing to question about it is its very necessity.  Big difference.

313

Mouser's Zone / Re: Any new ideas for small utilities?

« on: April 18, 2005, 08:18 PM »

No problem guys; I never hang around any one forum for long anyway.

314

ProcessTamer / Re: Anyone else with this issue?

« on: April 18, 2005, 11:03 AM »

 

it's one of these bugs that makes me so grateful to have real beta testers here who are willing to help find these issues, and it is my pleasure to be able to fix them.

-mouser (April 17, 2005, 10:23 PM)

Cool, because I'm really, really good at breaking stuff, as you've found!
 

315

ProcessTamer / Re: Anyone else with this issue?

« on: April 17, 2005, 10:06 PM »

The problem has been duly diagnosed.  Only a nutjob like me would ever encounter it. 

316

Backup Guide / Re: Image for Windows

« on: April 17, 2005, 09:56 PM »

Thanks!  Looks fair to me.

Regarding the forthrightness of TeraByte Unlimited...  I agree.  One thing that has really kept me as a customer has been the fact that they don't hide things or mislead...  It's all on the table.  I don't see enough of that among software vendors.

The only thing I'd change is to correct the spelling of PHYLock (from "PHYSLock"). 

317

Backup Guide / Re: Image for Windows

« on: April 17, 2005, 09:07 PM »

I can understand being disappointed when a certain feature isn't within the click of a couple buttons, but that's where perspective needs to kick in...

From what I see in the TeraByte Unlimited newsgroups, a lot of Image for Windows users don't use PHYLock at all.  (PHYLock is the special driver that allows in-Windows backups of the boot partition under WinNT/2K/XP/2K3.)  PHYLock is a driver that runs in memory all the time, as is the case with any competing imaging software that offers the same feature.

So, I think (and this is just my guess!) that TeraByte Unlimited doesn't automatically install PHYLock because:

• Installing PHYLock requires a reboot, whereas installing just Image for Windows does not.
• If you aren't going to use a special function (i.e. imaging of the boot partition from within Windows), you don't want an unnecessary driver running all the time, even if it is totally problem-free (as PHYLock has been for me).
• If you do want PHYLock, it's free, and incredibly simple to install.
• If you ever decide that you don't want PHYLock anymore, you can easily remove it completely.
• With PHYLock being separate, customers can update it independently if the need ever arises (i.e. without downloading and installing the whole Image for Windows package).

Just a thought. 

318

Living Room / Re: Links page - suggestions wanted

« on: April 17, 2005, 08:11 PM »

Damn, and I almost mentioned Epinions.com.  But then I thought about how full it seems (to me) to be of "career reviewers", rather than typical customers, just dropping their opinions...

319

Living Room / Re: Links page - suggestions wanted

« on: April 17, 2005, 06:48 PM »

Convert just about anything to just about anything else:
http://www.onlineconversion.com/

Learn stuff:
http://www.howstuffworks.com/

Free, absolutely no-nonsense temporary file hosting, up to 25-MB per file:
http://www.mytempdir.com/

Ordered ten different things from ten different vendors?  Keep track of them all for free in one place:
http://www.packtrack.com/

All sorts of easy-to-use, web-based networking facilities:
http://www.dnsstuff.com/

Easily scan a file with over a dozen anti-virus utilities at once:
http://virusscan.jotti.org/

Before you order that mainboard and hard drive...
http://www.resellerratings.com/

320

Backup Guide / Image for Windows

« on: April 17, 2005, 05:05 PM »

After reading Mouser's comments on Image for Windows in the backup guide, I wanted to give some quick comments on it.  I've been using Image for Windows for a long time now (along with all the other TeraByte Unlimited software), and it is the most-solid utility I've ever used.

TeraByte Unlimited was the first to include full byte-for-byte image validation to their products...  I'm not sure if the others have added that feature yet, but I personally consider it absolutely essential.  (I was burned long ago while using another product that didn't have it.)

I don't understand what is confusing about using Image for Windows.  To me, it's extremely straightforward.  The interface is absolutely no-nonsense.  I can see how a couple of the options need explanation, but the PDF manual is quite good, and TeraByte Unlimited support (not to mention other users) is always quick to offer advice.

I'm not here to slam other products, nor to say that Image for Windows is perfect (no software is).  But I've seen TeraByte Unlimited respond to user issues and suggestions, and it won me over.  Any and all substantiated problem reports are met with a positive response and solution, whether it's simply advice on product usage, or an actual update to the software.  Anyone who tests the software, and sends an email to support, will see what I mean.  I think that counts for a lot.

321

Mouser's Zone / Re: Any new ideas for small utilities?

« on: April 17, 2005, 12:06 PM »

mst Defrag runs as a service, and uses very little CPU time.

322

General Software Discussion / Re: DirMS and Buzzsaw

« on: April 17, 2005, 10:17 AM »

I like to make my own decisions. 

I just tried the Buzzsaw service/GUI again last night, and it was a complete disaster.  Oh well.

323

Living Room / Re: Should I increase avatar size? Poll.

« on: April 17, 2005, 09:34 AM »

For me, the buttons are somewhat hard to read as well, mostly because of the poor contrast of white text on medium-blue backgrounds.

324

Mouser's Zone / Re: Any new ideas for small utilities?

« on: April 17, 2005, 08:54 AM »

I'll answer my own question and say that:  I guess it's a matter of how you want to use your system.

If you just want the startup process done and over with, you let it run the way it was designed to--let the disk and CPU get maxed out, because if your disk is only doing half the I/O it's capable of, and your CPU is only doing half the work that it's capable of, you're just slowing the startup process down if you take it easy on them.

But...  If you want to begin using your system before waiting for everything to load, then it makes sense to stretch the startup process out over a longer period of time.   I can see how that would be handy for some people.

325

ProcessTamer / Re: Process Tamer at 120 DPI

« on: April 17, 2005, 08:26 AM »

Because I have a 25-inch monitor which I run at 1920x1200 resolution, and also running 120 DPI strikes the perfect balance of screen space and usability.