topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

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

Login with username, password and session length
  • Tuesday November 11, 2025, 7:29 pm
  • 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 ... 219 220 221 222 223 [224] 225 226 227 228 229 ... 252next
5576
Living Room / SuperboyAC's DC blog #5 (The State of MiniDisc and Sony)
« Last post by superboyac on September 11, 2007, 04:24 PM »
LogoMiniDisc200.jpg
The MiniDisc and Sony
Why Minidisc is still relevant and how Sony should move on

Sony_Hi-MD_front.jpg

For those that aren't hip to the MiniDisc scene, you aren't aware that it is on the verge of extinction.  I'm not saying it's a good thing or a bad thing.  As a fan of all things MD related (just because they are so cool!) it is sad to see the demise of the format just over the horizon.  However, I can't say it was unexpected or anything, because it just doesn't make sense for it to continue.  Sony has nobody to blame but themselves, and the story of the Minidisc is so typical of Sony.  Time after time, Sony will create a brilliant piece of hardware and utterly ruin it with poor decisions and implementations.  Well, the Minidisc is no different.  Sony made mistake after mistake after mistake with the Minidisc, and just when you thought they learned from their mistakes, they made yet another mistake.  If Sony was your employee, you would have fired him long ago.  I don't want to get too sidetracked here, but I've researched Sony a little bit over the years and it's just amazing that they have lasted this long--they have done some remarkably asinine things in the past.  Fortunately for them, they'll come up with something great once in a blue moon that saves their ass (Playstation).

By the way, I'm going to now talk a lot about the MiniDisc here as if I'm some kind of expert, but I'm really not.  The real experts can be found on the Minidisc Forum, as well as loads of other
related information.  Please check it out for more detailed and accurate information.

Well, this blog is kind of long, so here's an index of how I've organized it:

  • A Brief History of the MiniDisc
  • Why MiniDisc is Cool
  • Why MiniDisc Failed
  • What Sony Should Do


A Brief History of the MiniDisc
The Beginning:
Sony invented the Minidisc in the early 1990's to compete with the relatively new CD technology, as an alternative digital audio medium.  In addition, it simultaneously had the ability to compete with the tape-recording technology because of it also had the ability to record.  This was a brilliant move and very much ahead of it's time.  You see, even though CD's were digital, they didn't have the ability to record yet, and tape (which could record) was not digital.  So, Mindisc merged those two major features of audio years before CDR's and portable digital recorders were around.  For all practical purposes, Sony was sitting pretty and there was no reason for Minidisc NOT to be a huge success.

CD/tape alternative:
But since Sony has a remarkable tendency for exhibiting signs of corporate autism, they marketed the Mindisc in a very questionable manner.  If you remember the Beta video debacle, it was similar; and the Blu-ray experiment may very well turn into the same thing also.  In this case, Sony marketed the MiniDisc primarily as a CD alternative.  So, they tried to stock record stores with albums on little minidisc format.  So, when you walked into the old Tower Record stores to buy the newest Color Me Badd album, you had the choice of a rather large LP record, a little tape, a compact disc...and a tiny minidisc.  Doesn't seem like such a bad idea, right?  Well, maybe not, but nobody outside Japan seemed to be buying them much (Japan just likes their stuff small, i guess; not much room over there).  Despite the disappointing sales, Sony kept pouring money into marketing these minidisc albums, stubbornly refusing that people just preferred the CD.  For all practical purposes, the minidisc was actually better than the CD, but reality is reality.  The same thing happened to Beta; it was arguably a better format than VHS, but what can you do?  People wanted VHS; people wanted their CD's.
Here's an example of a commercial minidisc album (pic stolen from eBay):
85426683a.jpg

Recording:
Fortunately for Sony, this failure to compete with the CD/tape industry was the end of the line.  The minidisc was recordable!  This tiny little, durable, digital disc could record audio with exceptional quality, superior to tape quality, and it was just as portable, and much more convenient.  Sony should have marketed this aspect of the mindisc much more than it did, but it didn't.  The consumers, not about to let a good thing pass them by, developed a strong cult following for the recordable minidisc units.  The mindisc quickly became a favorite of field new reporters, concert bootleggers, and even those hipsters who wanted to make their own personal, digital mixtapes to get into the pants of their girlfriends.  Anyway, here's a cool ad for the very first minidisc unit, they even advertise it with recording as the main feature, but apparently Sony's focus changed soon after:
original-ad_mz1.jpg

Ahead of Its Time?
Continuing on, there's another subtle little thing about the minidisc that Sony failed to implement properly.  Since the mindisc was a small little optical disc, it couldn't hold as much data as the larger compact-discs (~700 MB capacity).  The minidisc could only hold about 160 MB of data.  This meant that to fit an album's worth of audio on the little minidisc, the audio had to compressed relative to the uncompressed PCM audio on CD's.  To accomplish this, Sony invented their proprietary ATRAC format, which is an audio compression format, obviously.  Why is this significant?  Remember, this was 1992; think about it.  Sony had a portable, digital, compressed audio player/recorder out in 1992!!  Ipod anyone?  This came out almost a full decade before the whole ipod craze.  This was also years before MP3 files were the mainstream compressed audio format!  Talk about a major screwup.  I'm not an expert in business and marketing by any means, but from what little I know, having an edge of even a few months on new technology is a big deal.  We're talking years here!  This, in my opinion, is Sony's most glaring blunder during the minidisc saga.  Sony had a leg up on the whole itunes/ipod thing so long before anybody was even legitimately thinking about it.  I don't know how exactly ATRAC was concieved, but I'm assuming it was a practical invention just to fit albums onto their restricted-for-size disc.  I don't know if they were thinking outside the box and thought of being able to distribute catalogs of music not just on the mindisc, but on hard drives, or computers, or whatever.  The point is, they came up with a compression format before mp3, wma, aac, all that stuff, but they didn't see the potential in it.  Instead, Sony put all of it's efforts into ATRAC to make sure to prevent copyright issues, and pirating, which they did somewhat successfully.  It was impossible to digitally transfer the ATRAC files to a computer or anything else, without using the analog output and transferring it with a conversion loss.

NetMD:
Anyway, minidisc still stubbornly continued on in existence due to it's cultish underground following, the japanese people, and it's superior recording features.  Various models of players came out over the years, always cool and always nice to look at.  The next real big development for Minidisc was NetMD in 2001.  All NetMD meant was a new line of players that could transfer ATRAC files from the PC to the player's minidisc through USB.  Before this, the only way to get audio onto a disc was to record onto it directly using a microphone, or plugging into it's line-in and recording in real-time onto the disc (much like tape recorders back in the day).  Sony put so many restrictions on this potentially useful feature that it ended up being extremely lame in the end.  Again, this all goes back to copyright issues and Sony's typically paranoid attitude towards the matter.  Here are the restrictions:
  • Only PC-to-MD transfers were allowed, not the other way around (MD-to-PC).
  • Only ATRAC files could be uploaded onto the minidisc.  Anything else had to be converted first.
  • Speaking of the conversion, if you were trying to upload a CD or something to the mindisc, the audio quality would be crippled.  Meaning, of the various quality modes available, only the lowest ones could be used for conversions.
  • You had to use Sony's proprietary software to do all this stuff, which as you can imagine, was frustrating.  This restriction just ensured that Sony would have complete control over this whole affair.
Of course, there were some workarounds to the restrictions, but they are pretty complex and PITA.  For more detailed info on NetMD, check this out:  NetMD FAQ

Hi-MD:
Sony's most significant minidisc innovation is also it's most recent one; the Hi-MD format.  Sony took it's optical minidisc, and without changing its physical shape or size, increased the disc capacity by almost 10x, making the disc capable of holding 1 GB of data now.  This came out in 2004, and was a really big deal for the mindisc community.  The impact of the new disc was not only in the increased capacity, but several associated changes that came along with it.  For one thing, the Hi-MD players could play mp3 files natively (without converting to ATRAC) which opened up the players to everyone's music library, not just ATRAC fanatics.  Hi-MD also allowed recorders to record in uncompressed PCM format, and upload those recordings to the PC using a USB cable (HUGE deal).  Also, users could now upload their older personal recordings to their PC, as long as they weren't ATRAC DRM'ed.  Of course, in typical Sony fashion, the implementation of these new features were long-winded, frustrating, and annoying, but nonetheless, they finally happened.  The peak of these efforts resulted in the most advanced minidisc recorder/player yet, the RH1 (of which I am a proud owner):
Sony_MZRH1_large1.jpg

Ultimately, it would prove to be much too little, too late.  Yes, the mindisc community was pretty satisfied with this latest offering, but the practical reasons to have one were not as convincing anymore, and it seems like the mindisc is finally on it's dying legs after about a decade and a half of questionable existence.  The ipod and itunes have a firm stranglehold on the portable audio world, there are enough portable digital recorders out there that offer more in various ways to convince all but the most passionate minidisc-o-phile.

So ends the story of Sony's minidisc (not 100% sure yet, but pretty sure).


Why MiniDisc is Cool
Digital:
As I mentioned before, Minidisc was one of the earliest consumer grade digital formats.  Now I know what you're thinking, "Weren't CD's out before Minidiscs?"  Well, hold on, let me finish (man, you guys are so freakin' impatient!).  Yes, compact discs were digital, but Minidiscs were more digital.  When CD's came out, the great thing was that you didn't have to rewind and fast-forward to find a spot like tapes.  That was pretty much it as far as the digital effects.  With minidisc, there were additional digital features, like displays that showed the song title.  No big deal, right?  Wrong!  This was way cool in the 90's.  Furthermore, you could take those old analog tapes you had and transfer them to a Minidisc and have a digital version of it now!
r50o.jpg

Small:
Another appealing thing about the minidiscs back in the 90's was how small they were.  It was smaller than tapes and CD's.  At the time, the size wasn't such a big deal because people were just glad they didn't have to lug around their LP's anymore because of tapes and CD's.  So the mindisc being a little smaller was no big deal.  But it was cool!  And we all how the ladies like it small, right?!  Right?
MZ-R2_02_low.jpg

Remotes:
I'm not positive, but I think almost all minidisc players come with a remote control.  Personally speaking, this was the coolest thing about minidiscs when I didn't have one and saw people with them as a child of the 90's.  I just love that remote control.  I was even jealous of people that had that little volume remote on the fancier headphones.  But minidisc players had remotes that controlled the basic functions of playback, and that was always convenient.  Some CD players also had this, but it wasn't as universal as minidisc players, and the remote soon became closely associated with minidiscs.
While the remotes have always been cool, I feel that Sony has slacked off on their remotes with the latest batch.  Sure, the remotes were cool in the 90's, but they haven't progressed too much since then.  Even now, the most advanced remote is pretty lame; it has a 3-line average LCD display with some buttons and a scroll wheel.  It could have been so much more with what's available these days (think color screens, OLED display).
gallery_24724_198_33818.jpg

Recording and Sound Quality:
Practically speaking, MD's recording ability is the most important feature.  This hand-held sized device can record digitally with amazing quality.  The hardware inside minidiscs are known for their superior sound quality, and truth be told, this is Sony's real strength: they create some quality components.  The preamp and whatever else goes on in there produces beautiful sound.  A lot of the bootleg recordings done in the 90's and even now were done using a minidisc recorder tucked inside someone's underwear with microphones disguised as Croakies.  No joke!  Playback on the minidisc players also had better sound quality than most tape recorders and cd players at the time.  Even though CD's technically had better sound quality than a minidisc (because they weren't compressed), the portable cd players at the time were usually so cheap that sound quality was not that great.

PS If anyone here remembers the old DC podcasts, I recorded the music for those with my minidisc recorder.
SP-EMC-1-A.jpg

The Discs:
OK, I saved the best for last.  By far, the coolest thing about Minidiscs are the discs themselves.  Think about all the audio mediums in our history:  LP's, 8-track cartridges, cassette tapes, compact discs, minidiscs.  There's no question about the coolest one.  It was small, it was indestructible because it was housed inside a case, that sweet optical disc inside was shiny and had a certain glow about it, it was perfect!  No offense, but compact discs always had that annoyingly delicate quality about it.  Most people probably think that minidiscs and compact discs are very similar because they look the same.  But they're very different.  Minidiscs are magneto-optical discs while CD's are merely optical discs.  I won't go into the details here; just know that the "magneto" makes it better.
There's a whole obsession in the minidisc community with the different type of discs.  And by different, I don't mean anything on the technological level; all mindiscs are exactly the same (except for Hi-MD).  People just love collecting the different colors and designs.  It's craziness!  But if you see them all, you can't help how beautiful they all are.
You know what else is cool about those discs?  Moving them in and out of the minidisc player is fun!  If anyone tries it and doesn't get at least some enjoyment out of it, they're probably lying.  I won't lie to you...it's borderline orgasmic.
tdk_400.jpg


Why MiniDisc Failed
Proprietary Obsession:
Sony's obsession with proprietary control is its bane.  From the beginning, Sony could never find a good balance between control and consumer convenience.  They constantly invent great equipment and consequently ruin the experience for its users.  Sony really really wanted ATRAC to be what mp3 became, but they lost.  Yet, they kept insisting upon ATRAC on its users.  The minidisc was basically a digital tape recorder, but instead of taking advantage of the digital features, like being able to upload to a computer, they crippled it for years.  They were stubborn for so long that people eventually said "screw it" and moved on to other technology, which inevitably became more and more available.
The whole copyright/pirating issue was a major concern because the mindiscs were digital and could reproduce audio without any loss in quality (think about the current HD video issues).  So Sony put DRM on their ATRAC files.  It was such a pain to transfer your audio to different media, and we're talking about legitimate audio.  Even after Hi-MD came out and allowed mp3 playback, transferring, and encoding, it still took Sony multiple tries to finally get it right on their hardware and software.  It took 3 generations of Hi-MD units to come out before users could upload their older legacy MD audio onto their computer digitally.  You could just sense their stubbornness during the whole process.  I still hate their *&^#$ SonicStage software.  For example, Hi-MD now has the ability to record and transfer uncomrpessed PCM audio.  But when it comes time to transfer it on my computer, can I simply drag-and-drop?  No!  First I have to use SonicStage to transfer on my computer, which it does by first transferring the PCM audio as an uncompressed ATRAC audio file and then converting that file into a WAV file.  It takes forever, and for no reason other than to stick their ATRAC step in there.

Marketing:
I guess I already covered this in the history section, but Sony screwed up with their marketing.  This is also related to their proprietary obsession.  Sony should have just forgotten about their commercial minidisc albums that nobody was buying and just focused on the brilliant recording ability of the minidisc.  There's a great essay written by Stanford student Brandon Seong-Shin Hong that covers a lot of what I've talked about here, but also the details of Sony's marketing and decision making processes regarding the Minidisc.  The people that did use the Minidisc mostly used it for it's recording abilities in some form or another.  Therefore, Sony should have just built upon this base, and as the years passed, the Minidisc could have evolved into the premier portable recording device.  But it never broke out of the cult community, and I blame that on Sony's poor marketing.

One Step Forward, Two Steps Back:
This Desert Rose Band song should be Sony's motto, "One step forward and two steps back.  Nobody gets too far like that."  Sony fixes one problem, introduces two new problems.  Sony adds one feature, removes two features that used to be available.  This is sadly how Sony conducts business.  I'll give you an example that I'm familiar with.  The Hi-MD units went through 3 generations before it came to the current state.  Look how frustrating it is:
  • Sony introduces the first Hi-MD units/discs.  You can now upload/download off the MD unit using USB.  Unfortunately, you can't upload your old non Hi-MD recordings.  They also introduce a cool 3-line LCD remote control, the most advanced minidisc remote ever.
  • The 2nd generation units come out.  Oddly, the 3-line remote is not available with any of these units, but a new 1-line remote is introduced.  Decent, but still feels like a step back.  For the units sold outside of Japan, the remote doesn't even have an LCD screen.  WTF?  Also, Hi-MD allows native mp3 playback.  However, users discovered that the audio quality of mp3 playback was crippled on these units, and ATRAC files sounded better.  Also, the timestamping feature that is useful for recording was removed between generation 1 and 2.  Furthermore, even though users have been dying for the units to save their settings (especially for manual recording levels), this newest offering by Sony still didn't allow for it.
  • The long-awaited 3rd generation unit comes out (MZ-RH1).  It's nearly perfect.  Mp3 playback is now fixed.  You can finally upload your legacy recordings.  Manual recording levels are saved.  Timestamping is back.  However, there are still remote issues.  Now, the units outside Japan come with a 1-line remote, but the display is made more cheaply than the Japanese one.  And where's the 3-liner?  I mean, how much money can this possibly save?!  It's mind-boggling!  Also, they went from a very cool, large display on the 2nd gen units to a still cool, but tiny display on the 3rd gen unit.  Worse, this new display won't even show the title/artist information.  Also, they removed the battery-pack add-on that extended the battery life of the unit.
See what I mean?!  They add something, but take some stuff away.  Then they add what they took away back in, but they remove another feature.  How do these decisions get made, it makes no sense?!  A lot of this stuff can be fixed by simply making the units' firmware upgradeable.  But that would make too much sense, and of course, it would be bad for business because some people may not buy the latest unit that fixes the problems.  Such childish mentality.  That is Sony.


What Sony Should Do
I wrote the following in the Minidisc forum:
I love minidisc and am very thankful for the latest offerings, however, it's evident that minidisc is on its way out with all the stuff available now. But Sony should take the strong points of minidisc and adapt it to a next generation recorder/player.

What's the main, practical advantage of mindisc? It's the phenomenal recording ability in such a tiny device. That's it. The other stuff is mainly superficial (such as the cool discs, the sound quality of the player, ability to exchange media, etc.) We all know that recording ability is what has kept minidisc around, period.

So, why doesn't Sony build on that? Take the same electronic guts of a mindisc recorder, and instead of reading/writing onto a mindisc, let it use flash cards, or hard drives, just like the ipod line.

I know we all are nostalgic to the mindisc medium, but I would still love to see this as the next evolution of this technology, and I don't see why it can't be done easily. After all, the recording capability of minidisic recorders has nothing to do with the minidisc, but with the electronics inside it.

This would open up to market beyond our little minidisc cult here, it's more practical, and it could potentially put Sony as the market leader in portable recording technology. And you know all of us RH1 users would easily convert also!

Oh, I forgot to mention the other great strength of mindisc recorders. Not only is it a great recorder, but it can be used for playback also with great sound quality. Yes, it would be no good if it were simply a recorder. The fact that it can do both extremely well is the main draw to it. Again, it's nothing that can't be easily adapted by Sony into a flash or hard-drive based device.

Sony has, in fact, been doing this.  I can't say how successful they will be, their products out right now seem to be way too expensive.  At least they are moving forward in the right direction.  I've been trying to follow up on Sony's new recording devices as well as other company's recording devices, but I hate to say that I don't know too much about them.  So, I'll just put a few pictures here of the different units I've heard about.  To me, minidisc still offers something special by being a quality recorder AND player.  Most of these units don't focus on the playback so much, but I may be wrong.  Also they just don't seem as cool and portable as the mindisc recorders.  They're all kind of funky and bulky; there's something to be said about the tiny beauty that minidisc has always been true to.
dcb5_071107_sony_400.jpg dcb5_trurl_pagecontent.jpg dcb5_zoom-h2-hand.jpg
dcb5_H4 med.jpg dcb5_r09inhand.jpg dcb5_Edirol_r09.jpg
dcb5_microtrack2496.jpg dcb5_MarantzPMD670.jpg



Concluding Remarks

That does it for my Minidisc blog.  I'm a fairly recent minidisc convert, not having gotten into it until the 2nd generation Hi-MD units, but I quickly got caught up in the craze.  I keep saying it's like a cult, because it is; the reasons to use other equipment right now outweighs the benefits of the minidisc (sorry MDers!).  However, minidisc still has a lot of good points that have stood the test of time.  I'm sure that not everything I said is completely accurate, so hopefully those who know better will correct me.  Like I said, for the real knowledge, head on over to the real Minidisc Forum.  Actually, I find the forum rather difficult to search through and navigate (it's not as nice as this forum for sure), but once you get used to it, all the information is there.  There are a lot of good pictures and detailed reviews on the different units.  I may have even ripped off some pictures for this blog, I hope nobody minds.  Part of my motivation for writing this was to present all the basic minidisc knowledge into an easy to read and understand format.


Until next time,
SuperboyAC

I love my Minidisc...
...but our parents don't approve.

dc-minidisc-blog.png

5577
General Review Discussion / Re: Customised Reviews???
« Last post by superboyac on September 11, 2007, 01:53 PM »
This is such a hard thing to accomplish.  I still think that instead of saying this is the best or this is the worst, you should just focus on what features the program has and comment on whether those features are implemented well or not.  Let the reader decide on what is important to him, and choose based on that.

I think Zaine Ridling's Great Software List is one of the most reliable and best resources for software "reviews".  I love the way he has presented the information.
5578
What's the Best? / Re: Anti-Virus Package
« Last post by superboyac on September 10, 2007, 01:20 PM »
Ooo...Kaspersky mini-review!  I'll be looking forward to that!

I use it right now (Kaspersky Internet Security 7.0).  I like it.
5579
General Software Discussion / pre-packaged web software for data collection
« Last post by superboyac on August 30, 2007, 04:33 PM »
A bunch of us here at work play basketball every lunch, and we would like to keep track of each individual's win/loss record.  Is there some pre-packaged software out there that will generate an interactive webpage where all the players can go in and edit the fields (to add in the records or change records if they think someone is cheating)?  Basically, what I need is a Microsoft Excel document that can be edited on the web.

Wait...I think I just answered my own question...will Google Spreadsheets do the trick?
5580
Living Room / Re: How do you organise your 'My Documents' folder
« Last post by superboyac on August 30, 2007, 11:58 AM »
^^^
OK, app103 gets the OCD trophy this year.  Wow, I thought I was bad.
5581
Screenshot Captor / bug report: last line of multi-line filename out of reach
« Last post by superboyac on August 29, 2007, 05:09 PM »
I posted this in the pinned thread, but maybe this is more appropriate.

Bug?
I have always had a problem with the last file in the thumbnail display:  the filename is always hidden on the bottom past the area where the scroll stops.  When I click on it to rename the file (this happens when the filename takes up two lines, which is most of the time), I can't go down far enough.  Usually, I have to use the keyboard to navigate the filename, because the mouse won't reach.  Anyway, I've attached a picture.  Anyone else experience this?  Furthermore, it happens when you single-click on the filename to rename it.  The long filename turns into a cursor-box, but the width of the box is much narrower than the width of the filename before you click on it.  So, the two-line filename is now three or four lines, and the extra lines don't fit in the two line box.  I suggest either keeping the rename box width the same as the regular display width, or making the rename box high enough to accommodate the whole filename without scrolling.  Am I anal or what?
5582
I'd consider a move to Linux or something like that (like Zaine) if I weren't so attached to my dozens of software.
5583
I see...so the drivers are still the issue.  I wasn't really planning on doing it, I was just wondering about it.  I remember being impressed by the speed.  Of course, by the time I installed all the programs I have on my XP, I guess it would revert to the same thing.  Gotta have my software!
5584
General Software Discussion / Turning Windows 2003 Server into a workstation?
« Last post by superboyac on August 27, 2007, 04:54 PM »
Hi guys, I remember right when Windows Server 2003 came out, some people tweaked it to function as a regular workstation and wrote some tutorials about it.  I used one of these tutorials and tried it, and I was really impressed with at least the speed of 2003, it seemed so much more streamlined than XP.  Eventually, I ran into trouble with driver compatibilities and some specific software.  I was wondering if things have progressed and if using 2003 as a workstation is easier now?  Has anyone tried it?

I just remember it being really fast, but probably it's compatible with everything.
5585
Thanks Mike!  That was very nice of you.

Yeah, it's a useful visual tool.  it wouldn't be that hard to implement actually.  All it would take is to add an additional item in the "color settings" dialog for active line color for wraps.  I'm surprised no one's ever mentioned it after 13 versions!
5586
No, that's not what I mean.  It's merely a visual thing, it has no functionality.  Let's say your cursor is somewhere in the middle of a wrapped line; instead of only highlighting the line the cursor is on, it will highlight the entire line (no matter how many multiple physical lines it is wrapped on).  It's just a good way of seeing the whole line when you're using wrapping.
5587
I searched through the forum, but couldn't find anything about it.  Mabe I'm one of the few that likes this, but it's interesting to see it on a lot of the freeware text editors.
5588
A lot of text editors I've tried will highlight the entire active line when it is wrapped, even though it is physically taking up the space of more than one line in the editor.  Ultraedit doesn't do this, it only highlights a single line, even if it's part of a wrapped multi-line block.  Is there a way to change this because I couldn't figure it out.

A lot of editors  (Notepad++, PSPad) will highlight all the lines of a wrapped line when the cursor is placed on it, and it will make the actual line that the cursor is on a slightly different color than the other lines so that you know which physical line you're on.  This is very nice, and i can't believe that Ultraedit can't do this.
5589
I have an ATI on the laptop...I'll check and see what settings I can mess with.  I vaguely remember seeing all the ATI options in the display properties.  I'll look when I go home, thanks.
5590
Very cool, thanks.
5591
Tray/Menu: Quick Resolution Changer
Very nice!  Thanks.  Here's a follow-up question...what's a good software that does something similar, but can also save and configure multiple-monitor setups?  Like have a different setting for a laptop-TV combo, laptop-projector combo, laptop-monitor combo, laptop only, etc.  That would be very useful also.
5592
I have a laptop with a widescreen that often gets used with projectors.  Some projectors don't support the widescreen, so it's necessary to change the screen resolution so the projector won't have a problem with it.  Is that software out there that can quickly save and restore these resolution settings easily, without having to go through all the display properties and stuff?  Thanks.
5593
nice thread, yes that answers some questions.  I forgot about the different users per computer issue.  I still hate all the folder though.
5594
I'm not a programmer, so you guys have to help me here.  How come when people write software, they don't just have all the files install into a single directory?  It would help keep the computer organized and clean, and it would make it so much easier to keep track of installs and uninstalls.  I love programs like ARSclip where you just unzip the contents to a directory and off you go.  I don't understand why:
--So many tweaks need to made to the registry
--why we have to use the folders in "Documents and Settings" (man, talk about a mess)
--why dll files have to go to a common windows system directory
--what's the point of shared files in the "common files" folder
--why do certain companies insist of branding their name across multiple subfolders
(ie Adobe) c:\program files\adobe\acrobat\acrobat 8.0\acrobat.exe  gimme a break

OK, that's enough.
5595
Living Room / Re: How do you organise your 'My Documents' folder
« Last post by superboyac on August 22, 2007, 12:17 PM »
I do something that i find useful and could be combined with whatever other approach you take.
I like to keep separate the subdirectories that are automatically created for me by programs and those subdirectories i create myself.

So for example i never actually put my file in the MyDocumentss folder.  I leave MyDocuments alone and i create a MyDocs folder for my stuff.

That means I have a MyDocuments folders, which is full of directories created by programs when they install, etc., and then I have a MyDocs folder which is all my real stuff.  I find this makes it easier for me to isolate my "real" files from files created by programs which I don't really care about.  Note that this means that the "default" folder used by programs to store stuff is not going to be the MyDocs folder so this solution is only good for people who dont mind changeing where programs you really use store there stuff, etc.  i.e. don't do this unless you know what you are doing.

I do a similar thing with:
  • C:\Program Files <--- here is the folder used by all normal installer programs
  • C:\ProgramFiles <--- i created this for any programs that DONT have installers, which i create manually; this helps me easily identify programs which i manually "installed" and keep them distinct from programs with their own installers, and has been a great help
  • C:\Programs <--- some old programs have installers and dont like long paths with spaces, i created this directory for those.


Wow, that is almost exactly what I do.  I like having complete control and it bugs me how all these programs create their own folders automatically in "program files" "My Documents", etc.  I also install my programs in a "C:\Programs" directory.  For my Documents, I have two separate folders...one for "Documents" and another for "Software files".  In Documents, there are word docs, pdf's, excel sheets, stuff like that.  In Software Files, I keep the software specific files that usually save the settings for that software.  For example, if I was using Evernote, I would keep the Evernote data in the Software Files folder, in a subfolder for Evernote.

Brett, to answer your question, I don't know how to categorize all those files.  My system above is somewhat hypocritical because I should technically keep my Excel files in an Excel folder in my Software Files folder.  But there is something different about common office documents (doc, xls, txt, pdf) and software specific files.  Right now, I'm using something similar to your option 3, because that makes the most organizational sense.  The only problem with that is that you can have a lot of subfolders to go through.  I take care of that by using flat (or grouped) file view with a program like Directory Opus, and also a Dialog Extender program like XFilesDialog to help me go to folders quickly.  This is a pretty good solution, if I do say so myself.
5596
General Software Discussion / Re: Kinship diagrams (and genealogy)
« Last post by superboyac on August 22, 2007, 10:27 AM »
Yeah, I got into this a few years ago, but never actually did much with it.  From what I remember, I thought Legacy was the best.  however, it's interface feels very old-fashioned, and I'm sure it feels even older by now.  But it had a lot of pro features.  I just looked at Family Tree Maker, and it looks really good, although I'm not sure what it has under the hood...but it's interface seems much better than Legacy.

here's a link to some rating system:
http://genealogy-sof...w.toptenreviews.com/

GenoPro looks cool, but like pro3carp3 said, it seems to lack some professional features.
5597
DcUpdater / Re: Program freezing with non-typical program directories
« Last post by superboyac on August 19, 2007, 01:20 AM »
Forget it, I figured it out...I wasn't using the available plugins tab properly.  Very cool program.  I wish I could do this with all the software on the computer.
5598
Bug?
I have always had a problem with the last file in the thumbnail display:  the filename is always hidden on the bottom past the area where the scroll stops.  When I click on it to rename the file (this happens when the filename takes up two lines, which is most of the time), I can't go down far enough.  Usually, I have to use the keyboard to navigate the filename, because the mouse won't reach.  Anyway, I've attached a picture.  Anyone else experience this?  Actually, I can't figure out how to take a screenshot of it...
Furthermore, it happens when you single-click on the filename to rename it.  The long filename turns into a cursor-box, but the width of the box is much narrower than the width of the filename before you click on it.  So, the two-line filename is now three or four lines, and the extra lines don't fit in the two line box.  I suggest either keeping the rename box width the same as the regular display width, or making the rename box high enough to accommodate the whole filename without scrolling.  Am I anal or what?
5599
DcUpdater / Re: Program freezing with non-typical program directories
« Last post by superboyac on August 19, 2007, 12:58 AM »
mmm...this is not working for me.  I've tried it with CHS and Screenshot Captor, and the programs are not detected.  I tried running the program once, and I also tried putting the directory name in the preferences dialog, but it doesn't detect the installation either way.  Maybe my versions are too old...does this only work with the most recent versions of the softwares, because some of my versions may be quite old?
5600
DcUpdater / Re: Program freezing with non-typical program directories
« Last post by superboyac on August 16, 2007, 03:32 PM »
BUT:
note that you actually dont even have to do this -- the first time you run one of these other programs from it's non-traditional directory, it will register itself.  So save yourself some trouble and just run each program once and the updater will know where to find them. (i'll try to fix this on a future update so you dont even have to run them once).
Oh really!  That's pretty nifty, how in the world does it know?  I'm assuming DCUpdater has to be running when I run the other programs, right?
Pages: prev1 ... 219 220 221 222 223 [224] 225 226 227 228 229 ... 252next