topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

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

Login with username, password and session length
  • Sunday November 16, 2025, 11:57 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

Recent Posts

Pages: prev1 ... 114 115 116 117 118 [119] 120 121 122 123 124 ... 310next
2951
For anyone that is interested I got an answer from Surfulater support.

You can download the Firefopx Extension here (look for attachments at the bottom of the post - if you click the link in the post it just takes you back to the main download page on the website which doesn't have a link).

Not exactly obvious!
2952
I got an email today announcing the release of Surfulater 3.

Rather surprised at the pricing. When I purchased a copy in 2006 the full cost was £21.10 (I got a DC 30% discount so I paid £17.36) - today the full cost of the software is £56.30. Even with a 50% discount for upgrading that means it would cost £28.15.

Is it me or does this price hike seem a little much ???

Personally I won't be upgrading. I have downloaded the final version 2 release and installed it (though I haven't used it in ages).

On another matter does anyone have a recent copy of the Firefox add-on for Surfulater version 2 with Firefox 3? I only have old copies on my hard disc and they won't install in Firefox 3 (even with version checking disabled). For some reason the download is not on the Surfulater website any more (it seems to be integrated in the version 3 installer - I suppose I could install version 3 and then roll back to version 2 but it would be easier just to install the FF add-on).
2953
My shredder recently got totally clogged and I had to take it to pieces to clear it. It was an interesting experience - undo all the screws and lift the top off - so far so good and then a whole pile of little bit fell on the floor including 2 x 3 inch metal bars - took me ages to work out they were spacers to provide support and stop the lid from deforming !! Good luck with the 3D jigsaw (got there in the end and works like new  :Thmbsup:)
2954
I was thinking of the VM being more like the current compatibility layer (only a version that actually works) for 32 bit software. During installation the 32-bit could be set and then load the compatibility layer automatically as required.

I am not sure I understand the current VM models well enough but AIUI stuff like VMWare doesn't actually emulate a CPU - it makes use of the CPU to execute code (which is why if you have a multiple core system you can choose which cores to use and leave alone - and even run different machines on separate cores). VMWare isn't slow - but it would be a hell of a lot faster (probably faster than most current machines) if it were coded for 64-bit and run on a version of Windows that doesn't carry all the baggage.

The question is how do you get people to migrate to 64 bit without the big stick approach? Visiting people's homes to fix problems I see all sorts of things (including lots of Windows 98/ME which are no longer supported) still out there. I don't usually like the heavy handed approach of Microsoft but there comes a point where something drastic is needed. I suspect that most larger companies have contracts with MS and so they will be supplied with new server software on a regular basis without further cost (and probably desktop operating systems).

The lack of take up of Vista can be put down to three major issues: software compatibility (this could be easily solved in all future versions of windows with good quality and transparent VM support), lack of any appreciable advantage to business of Vista and the terrible press and bug ridden release pre-SP1. If MS are to maintain any sort of market confidence Windows 7 (and server 2008R2) are going to have to address these issues big time and win customers back - I can't see them doing that if their operating systems continue to grow in hardware demands exponentially - Windows XP came on a CD and could be up and running in less than a couple of gigs of disk space and no huge hardware demands, Windows Vista came on a DVD can take up to 12Gb just to install and has made huge hardware demands (as far as businesses are concerned) - and for what business gain? Are business really going to make the leap because you can't use DX10 on Windows XP, or for the Aera interface in its current incarnation?

One method for reducing the OS overhead and actually getting bang for your buck with all this fantastic hardware that is coming out is to make the OS as unintrusive as possible. No one runs a machine for the OS - they run it for the apps and when a 64 multicore system with oodles of memory runs slower than the previous incarnation on 32bit tech, small hard disc and minimal memory something is wrong somewhere. The only way forward is to get Windows out of the users' faces and reduce the huge footprint and the obvious way to do that is to cut the chord with the past in a planned way. MacOSX did it and haven't suffered (and by the way left MacOS 9 support in the form of some sort of VM model). The key is being planned about it - Microsoft plan loads of stuff and then simply don't deliver - Vista is a case in point. We had years of hype about all the new and improved technologies (not least a new filing system) and almost none of them were delivered. They even promised ultimate addins for people who bought the ultimate version and none of it has happened. How is this helping the consumer experience?

My experience of moving XP onto a 64 bit dual core system is a bit of an improvement in speed (and that is good) but it hasn't given me anything else. My experience of Vista on the same hardware was a huge loss of speed and no particular advantage in any way.

Sorry started to rant ...
2955
General Software Discussion / Re: Any good free OCR software?
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 12, 2008, 05:57 PM »
Anyone any idea where "Microsoft Office Document Imaging" tool has gone in Office 2007?

In 2003 it was under the Office Tools menu in the Progams menu but it doesn't seem to be there in 2007?

Microsoft Office Imaging is a optional installation. In Control Panel,
Add/Remove Programs, select Microsoft Office and click on Change and then
select add features. You will find Office Imaging under Tools.

from this forum: http://forums.techar...e-support/691788.htm

Thanks - I thought when I installed Office 2007 that I had installed all the tools!
2956
General Software Discussion / Re: Any good free OCR software?
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 12, 2008, 03:47 PM »
Anyone any idea where "Microsoft Office Document Imaging" tool has gone in Office 2007?

In 2003 it was under the Office Tools menu in the Progams menu but it doesn't seem to be there in 2007?
2957
One way MS could encourage this is to provide a free (or at least extremely cheap - say media costs) crossgrade to all versions of 64 bit OS versions and make it worth it for the business desktop, consumer and server markets by providing so killer free 'ultimate' addons (for all versions of Vista64 and Windows 7-64) that really appeal to the targetted markets.

It is ironic that when Vista was originally announced MS said that all versions of Vista would come in 32-bit and 64-bit form and be supplied together in the same package - did this ever actually happen? AIUI if you buy a retail 32-bit version you can get a free 64-bit version but you have to request the DVD, and if you have OEM versions then forget it.

One big change they could make is to say to OEMs that from Windows 7 on only 64-bit is going to be available for OEM builds. That would give some real incentive for manufacturers to get hardware compatability in the pipeline and also force software companies (large and small) to start developing for the 64 bit platform and porting older software for new OS versions. Effectively this would force the change to 64bit in one generation of Windows.

I also figure if people shout loud enough and long enough "CUT THE F****ING CHORD ON COMPATIBILITY" MS might eventually get the message. It isn't rocket science and it is simple to provide backward compatibility through VM - they could even supply it preinstalled with VMs for common operating systems (Win98, Win XP and Win Vista would cover it).

If they feel unable to cut the chord with Windows 7 why not have a timetable to cut the chord or at least say that from Windows 7 the following technologies are considered obsolete and will not be included from Windows 8 ?

As things stand it is like expecting every car manufacturer to be able to use Model-T Ford parts in every car on the production line.
2958
The question that doesn't seem clear is what happens to 2008 32-bit users? Does R2 automatically update them to 64-bit or are they simly dead in the water.

I presume that once 64 bit only appears then 64 bit workstation OSes will also start to become the norm and the tools will become stable when they don't have to cope with separate code bases.

Can't help but feel that this is the way forward. Now all we have to do is convince MS that only one version of the workstation OS is required in Windows 7 - ie. a single 64 bit OS for users and a server version.

Now wouldn't that be nice?  :Thmbsup:
2959
WIndows Server 2008 R2 is due for release and looks like a hefty update - the most striking feature is that from this version 32-bit servers are history ..

See: http://windowsitpro....your-average-r2.html
2960
Version 3 is still in beta (isn't it?) I'm sure the storage options (and probably the version 3 software) will incur charges when it gets into general release.
2961
Plus there is a known bug in the networking in Vista which seems to affect laptops badly. Basically if you have more than one network adapter Vista can't decide which one you want to connect with - even if only one network is actually connected and consequently refuses to connect to anything. The only workaround is to disable unused adapters - hardly useful on a laptop where you may wish to choose wired or wireless depending on your location! As far as I know this has been a known issue since RC1 and still isn't fixed.
2962
Carol, look at the time difference between windows xp and windows vista. Of course XP is going to be faster. It's been around 5 years longer. I really dont think you can compare XP on a modern system to Vista on a modern system. XP might be faster but it also does not take advantage of newer hardware like vista does. Thats like saying Windows 3.1 runs faster on my pentium 200 than windows 95 does. You simply can't use a blanket statement because you will be sacrificing a lot when you make the move from one generation of an operating system to another. There is a lot of nice functionality in vista and a lot of new features which are more under the hood which make the user experience that much better.



Interesting point of view - precisely what do I get extra with Vista (apart from DirectX 10 which I don't need and has been artificially denied to WinXP users) ?

As far as resource hungry, in this day and age, WHO CARES? I mean really. Unless you are a gamer, which you can then tweak vista to use quite a bit less, why have all of those resources just sitting around doing nothing? Microsoft realized this and now make the OS take advantage of the hardware. Yes, memory light programs are nice but you pay for that in performance unless the program does ONE TASK like utorrent or calculator. I would rather my hardware be put to use than just sit there idly in CASE I might, for one hour, require every bit of power it has.

Sorry I care - why should users buy faster and faster hardware and bigger and bigger hard disks just so that the operating system can suck up the resources like a sponge. Personally I want Windows to get less resource hungry and allow my applications to take advantage of faster CPU and memory and larger faster hard disks rather than have every generation of windows use more and more resources and systematically throttle my applications. This isn't just to do with gaming but if you deal with large video and photo files and want to process them it does make a huge difference.

Having played with Vista over the last few months the only things that seem to have changed between XP and Vista are:

  • Huge amount of resources required to install Vista
  • Direct X
  • Ruined Windows Explorer
  • Settings for things like networking made much more difficult to track down
  • Clickfest to find or do anything
  • AERO interface (so what  - it doesn't add much of interest if anything but demands huge resources)
  • A few security features (which many users simply turn off because they drive you nuts)

Have I got something wrong?

At least with Windows 7 they seem to be taking a radical approach to the GUI but I really wish they would be much more radical and provide a transparent VM environment for backward compatibility. Trouble is it will be the worst of both worlds - people will be complaining like mad with Windows 7 as software is broken in the new GUI and yet we will have yet another layer of compatabilty crap to install.

Before long it si going to take a BluRay disk just to provide the installation media!
2963
Maybe everyone should get a free upgrade to Windows 7 to make up for the Vista and Home Server debacles [Carol runs for cover ...] or maybe Apple should challenge MS and release MacOS X for general PC hardware (now that would cause a stir).

Seriously though I cannot believe that Vista runs faster than XP on any hardware. It is so much more resource hungry. I purchased a new laptop with 1Gb of memory and Vista Home Premium pre-installed with a load of crap. It ran like a slug on vallium. I contacted the laptop manufacturer and they sent me an OEM Vista disc (and also an OEM XP Pro disc as compensation for the wrong WiFi card being installed on delivery). I installed both operating systems as a dual boot system. There was just no comparison XP was much, MUCH fast at everything and disc thrashing was reduced from constant in Vista to occasional in XP. I still have both installed an use both for different things but I had to upgrade to 2Gb of memory to make Vista even vaguely tolerable speedwise.
2964
Living Room / Re: R.I.P. Michael Crichton
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 07, 2008, 04:25 AM »
That is really tragic - he has probably done more than any fiction writer to raise a genuine interest in real science. OK his early books were probably better but I for one will really miss his writing.
2965
Found Deals and Discounts / Re: 30% price reduction on Microsoft home server
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 06, 2008, 07:51 AM »
Does this mean they have fixed the data corruption bugs now?
2966
Living Room / Re: Apologies
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 05, 2008, 05:45 PM »
Carol! Awesome design. I want one.

Actually, if I was any good at paint programs - rather than just adding a pair of red horns I would of deformed the ears into semblance of horns and given them a red blush towards the tips.

Much more aesthetically pleasing - no offense Carol  :D

Sorry not enough time to deform anything convincingly but how about ...

The DC Tee.jpg

2967
Living Room / Re: Apologies
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 05, 2008, 05:13 AM »
Here is my version:

The DC Tee.jpg
2968
Living Room / Re: Apologies
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 05, 2008, 04:13 AM »
Nice - how about meking the eyes demonic and a couple of sweet red horns?

The where do we order?  :Thmbsup:
2969
Living Room / Re: Apologies
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 04, 2008, 01:12 PM »
I propose a new T-shirt for totally addicted members:



It needs a cat with horns, trident and a red cape to be totally effective! Then I want one too  :-*

Ask Mouser to pose for it ...
2970
General Software Discussion / Re: Magic Jack Phone ?
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 03, 2008, 03:40 AM »
EDIT:
Good grief, there are a lot of cynics around here. A review has to be negative to validate it? Lighten UP, people. Some of you sound like you haven't been out dancing for months!

It isn't cynicism it is a fact of life these days. We are recently getting a lot of people who sign up and post one single comment promoting a product and are never heard of again. If you then stick the message text (in quotes) in google you find identical messages all over the place. This is just regular spamming and it is very annoying. The trouble is that companies who use this method to promote their products don't build up trust for potential customers. We don't mind people promoting products provided it is done openly and with a clear statement - in fact if you look around the boards here you will find lots of developers that have built up a trusting relationship with potential customers.
2971
General Software Discussion / ASUS mobo dead
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 02, 2008, 07:35 AM »
Done - I have edited the whole thread.
2972
General Software Discussion / ASUS mobo dead
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 02, 2008, 06:30 AM »
Yep - I discovered that the hard way!
2973
General Software Discussion / ASUS mobo dead
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 02, 2008, 03:08 AM »
That's interesting - it is the same board that I have returned as faulty. Having said that I bought two of them and have been using them both for 2 years with no problems (except that on one of the boards one of the SATA ports has never worked) until one pretty much died on me.

I did buy one of the ASRock GLAN boards when I returned the ASUS board for replacement so in a way I don't really need a replacement but it is the principle of the thing. No motherboard stays in production for 3 years (you are lucky if they stay in production 6 months) so the guarantee system is totally meaningless. A refund on a motherboard is OK except that you don't a have a computer any more - imagine taking a car into a garage any they say sorry folks we can't supply a new distributor so we will refund the cost of the distributor .... The motherboard is fundamental to the kit you buy for a system so if they can't supply a replacement they should supply a more upto date model and compensate for the useless hardware by at least supplying a new CPU and memory of similar spec. Personally I would be happy with an equivalent spec/price AM2 motherboard as it is far cheaper and easier to soucre a new CPU and memory - and there is no reason why they could give an 'at cost' discount to compensate for the hassle. If I had been relieant on this system I would have been without it for well over a month now (and it still isn't resolved) - I can't imagine how I would have dealt with a customer if I was trying to fix their system!
2974
General Software Discussion / ASUS mobo dead
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 01, 2008, 02:47 PM »
It's not really a big problem but it is more a matter of principle. If companies offer 3 year guarantees they should be able to honour it and if not offer a new up to date motherboard and include any necessary upgraded hardware.

What I have said to overclockers is that  would accept either an AM2 motherboard with similar spec and a discount on new CPU and memory - or alternatively a low end built computer (they actualy have one that is an AM2 boards with an Athlon64 X2 CPU and 2Gb or DDR2 memory for only £20 more than the mobo I returned) that costs a simlar price to the mobo combo I purchased.
2975
General Software Discussion / ASUS mobo dead
« Last post by Carol Haynes on November 01, 2008, 12:38 PM »
OK - they have admited the motherboard was faulty and suplied a replacement.

I sent them an ASUS Socket 939 (supporting Athlon64 X2 chips) board with PCIe SLI support etc.

The replacement is a Socket 478 Intel board with AGP graphics!!

They have agreed they got it wrong but say they are unlikely to be able to source the correct board for replacement. How can a company offer 3 years warranty and not have access to replacements for the period of the warranty? They now plan to offer a refund on the mobo - but then what do you do with a 939 CPU and DDR memory?

Talk about frustrating!
Pages: prev1 ... 114 115 116 117 118 [119] 120 121 122 123 124 ... 310next