jaclaz

Hmmm. Maybe you went for "full-fledged" distros, what you actually need may be as simple as Zeroshell: http://www.zeroshell.org/ or similar distro aimed to be a firewall/router/gateway. jaclaz

I guess someone must establish a "common line" , EITHER Windows Defender is a resource hog (as Dedoimedo and Techie007 believe) OR it is not (as NoelC believes). And no , anyone that used on his/her machine *any* version of - say - Norton Antivirus and particularly Norton 360 for more than 1 (one) week in the last 10 years is not admitted to cast his/her vote, let alone someone that actually *liked* it. jaclaz

Yet the Microsoft Disk Defragmenter, "defrag.exe" version 4.70,.belonging to Windows ME but which I use in 98SE, has a Symantec copyright that further references Intel application accelerator, iirc. I was talking of the "NT series", sorry, cannot really say about the "real origin" of non-NT versions , however the 4.70 (actually 4.70.1998) should be belonging to 98, and the Me version should be 4.90.3000, it is entirely possible that either version originated from Norton Utilities (for Windows) or some other Symantec product. jaclaz

Casually: http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/37522.html jaclaz

Well, the document seems OK to me, a Tab by default expands to (usually) up to 8 spaces, and there is a sort of "default hidden" grid (when no explicit Tab stops are set) which Word counts in cm. Example, you have: I've removed the .... For cooking oil use ... This guide illustrates ... "removed" , "cooking" and guide are aligned vertically because before them there is either "I've" or "For" or "This" (i.e. three or four characters long words). The Tab expands in the first and third line to 4 spaces and in the second to 5 spaces and the result is aligned (but actually is much more complicated than that as you are using a proportional font, so different characters may count as either "less than one" space or "more than one"). "removed" is wider than "cooking" and because of this the latter is followed on "second virtual 8 characters stop" by "oil" whilst the former goes beyond that and the following "the" is on "third virtual 8 characters stop". Then "cases", "a" and "the" are again vertically aligned, and later "pertain" "wet" and "that" are again aligned on the same vertical line. I hope to have been clear enough. It is perfectly "normal" . In a nutshell: Spaces are intended to separate words.Tabs are intended to align words to tab stops (implied or explicit)You should use them for what they are intended. And in Word you should use the button with the symbol ¶ to see (and let other people see ) spaces, Tabs and paragraph/new line/line feed. jaclaz

Word makes it a tad bit more complex than needed as tab stops are a property of each paragraph, but if you select the whole document it should work as well, see here: http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/microsoft-office/how-do-i-delete-all-tab-stops-in-a-word-document/ jaclaz

You are not doing anything wrong but you most probably have a number of "TAB stops" in the document (very likely different in different lines). The "feature" of Tabs is that if there are no tab stops a tab will expand to the given size, but if there is a tab marker it will align to that. jaclaz

Diskkeeper was seemingly VAX/VMS originated: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskeeper https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condusiv_Technologies and of course the product was on the market in 1993, but there was NO defragger shipped with Windows NT 3.x nor 4.00 by MS, the first one came with 2000: http://www.zdnet.com/article/the-utilities-that-nt-4-0-forgot-disk-defragmenter/ jaclaz

Yep, as I see it, one issue is why light bulbs would want (or *need*) to "talk to each other" but once given that this allows for *whatever* enhancement in the life of human beings, the real question is why they should chat between themselves using the same (wireless) network the human beings use to communicate and why to the same network every kind of potentially dangerous (dangerous for integrity or privacy of data, and not only) devices are also connected. It simply makes no sense, just too many things can go wrong in such a design when it comes to practical implementations of it. The hacks about cars are so serious not because of the potential risks about incidents, collisions and the like but because they show that even a "closed" environment, wholly designed by a team of (I presume capable) security oriented engineers, comprising ONLY devices provided by the manufacturer is hackable to some degree, imagine what can happen when a non engineer puts together any kind of devices from different manufacturers, all sharing the same access credentials. And I will re-state how - unlike any other physical hack which is still possible - these are "remote" ones, they can be done while comfortably seated in a car outside the house i.e. virtually undetectable/unnoticeable. On the other hand, until now an office with (say) 128 devices on a (wired) LAN was what I would call a medium/large Lan, something that was assembled with (hopefully high quality) routers and switches and that was maintained by an engineer/IT specialist. Still, it had from time to time some issue and needed to be checked/repaired (besides audited for security). What will happen when you will have 128 devices in your home? Even if they are the best quality ever seen on earth there will be issues, who will fix them? jaclaz

What is bizarre? The idea of Mr. Jordan and his fellows posing as bulbs? http://www.aliexpress.com/item/Yellow-Light-Bulb-Lamp-Bulb-Electric-Light-Mascot-Costume-Cartoon-Character-Outfit-No-3586-Free-Ship/1483118319.html Those are however old news: http://www.forbes.com/sites/leoking/2014/07/09/smart-home-these-connected-led-light-bulbs-could-leak-your-wi-fi-password/ http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28208905 jaclaz

And now it's Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/theopriestley/2015/09/21/consumers-prepare-for-an-internet-of-very-pointless-things/ jaclaz

Well on a <20 Gb partition (which is what the OP asked about) there won't anyway fit that many of them 4 Gb files, once subtracted the space needed for NTFS structures, and possibly the XP OS system files+a few programs, at the most 3 or 4 HD movies. jaclaz

Well "breaking" is maybe a bit excessive. FDV's approach (Fred De Vorck) has historically allowed to remove completely IE with only a bunch of (what I believe minor) inconveniences, just for the OP interest: http://www.vorck.com/windows/xpsp4.html http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/140941-fdv-fileset-for-xp/ but I believe nlite has similar possibilities, and Fred actually recommends it for "finer tuning". There is a learning curve with nlite, that goes through doing tests and, upon failure, re-do without removing a component you need . Of course if you remove something, that something won't be there, but the issues raise when (sometimes) there are connections between a removed component/part and a completely different feature that is needed that are not straightforward. jaclaz

Well, since there was no defragger of any kind in NT 4.00, something must have changed. The first NT OS coming with a MS built-in defragger was Windows 2000 (and the defragger was a stripped down version of Diskeeper), see: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/131017-msoft-uses-diskeeper-as-their-defrag-tool-trying-to-resize-partition/ http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/131017-msoft-uses-diskeeper-as-their-defrag-tool-trying-to-resize-partition/?p=841932 Still for the record, references (by Ninho) to Intel or Symantec seem like not accurate. jaclaz

It is I believe a "kknown issue": http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/windows_7-files/windows-7-deleting-large-files-is-extremely-slow/f2b32bf0-bab6-4935-9002-8127d9ca066a The suggested workaround (set aside the one about rebooting in safe mode and running an antivirus provided by am MS "expert" ) is to: jaclaz

OT, but not much, reportedly the average Windows 10 users are using the store 6 (SIX! ) times more than an average Windows 8 user: http://blogs.windows.com/buildingapps/2015/09/17/more-ways-to-bring-your-code-to-fast-growing-windows-10-store/ Given the minimal amount of non-games and non-gadgets on the store, I would presume that on average Windows 10 users are on average represented by non-interested-to-serious-programs people. jaclaz

Security does not really mean "a third party" antivirus. Dedoimedo thinks that the first line of defense is not doing anything silly on the PC, and the second should be (still according to him) EMET: http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/windows-8-1-defender.html http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/windows-emet-v4.html And, should any casual reader doubt it, remember how Dedoimedo is always right, by definition: http://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/windows-8-1-beta.html jaclaz

Yes and no , (with reference to "speed", not to other aspects such as "slack" or "wasted space"). In theory having a largish cluster size tends to be more efficient with large files and less efficient with small ones, while at the same time a smallish cluster size tends to be more efficient with small files and less efficient with large ones, but there are so many other factors, including the way the filesystem is designed and the actual way data is transferred on the bus and how exactly it is cached (if it is cached) on the hard disk ram or through a strategy in the OS on the motherboard ram that it is extremely difficult to say how much it affects general speed. Still as anecdotal evidence (i.e. without extensive comparison on vast amounts of hardware) we know that correctly aligning the filesystem (see the given post and provided links): http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/156829-hdd-performance-allocation-unit-size/?p=999050 provides a distinct advantage (on a slow bus such as USB 2.0) and that there are noticeable differences (still on a USB bus): http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/125116-fat16-vs-fat32-vs-ntfs-speed-on-usb-stick/ on different (but very similar, 2K vs. XP) OS's. These same differences are hardly noticeable (if noticeable at all) on faster internal devices/buses which should mean that *something else* in practice compensates them, but (see here and links within it): http://reboot.pro/topic/9897-vistawin7-versus-xp-partitioning-issue/?p=85960 if you are going to "fine tune" alignment, then you will find that there are differences also (besides the ones between non-aligned and aligned) between different alignment values. To this you add that very, very small files (up to around 750 bytes or so) are normally stored inside the $MFT record (please read are as fast as possible) in a "normal" NTFS filesystem on a 512 byes/sector device (where each $MFT record is 1024 bytes) and probably if you use a 4 kb sectored device (where $MFT recorded will be also 4 Kb) files up to 3500 or so bytes will also be resident. And then the actual on-board cache of the device might make any of the above argument m00t. In a nutshell, at least on smallish volumes, IMHO the choice between FAT32 and NTFS may be either purely "philosophical" OR provide a noticeable difference, but you will never know until you try both on a same device in the specific use it is intended for and attempt to "fine tune" the one or the other as finely as possible. jaclaz

No real problems that I remember. Which OS? The CFADISK.SYS or the DUMMYDISK.SYS may (or may not) work on 2K (they do on at least XP to 7, I seem to remember that they are OK also on 2K, but I am not too sure ), see starting from here: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/69211-a-multiple-partition-usb-stick-with-multi-boot-os/?p=922773 There is also diskmod nowadays that (if it works on 2k) might be "better": http://reboot.pro/topic/9461-page-file-in-usb-hard-disk/ http://agnipulse.com/2012/03/filter-drivers-removable-media-fixed-disk-windows/ jaclaz

Yes and no (mostly yes , as it was the "default"), but it had of course no "screen", everyone used a (cheap/old) portable TV or some green or amber phosphor display of some kind and every kind of hardware hack. And on the ZX80 there was the possibility of making a "bridge" and have either Black on white (default) or White on black, you chose which one to use: https://web.archive.org/web/20080509230050/http://www.howell1964.freeserve.co.uk/ZX81/ZX_Tech.htm Remember that the ZX80 (unlike the later ZX81) was sold (I believe mainly) as "kit to be soldered" (though a pre-assembled version was available): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZX80 And the £20 pounds difference was some money at the time. jaclaz

OT, but not much: http://oss4gov.org/unapology jaclaz

@JodyT No, IE9 won't run or install, the "spoofing" is exactly what you said, simply a change of the user agent, what will be running will still be IE8, faking that it is IE9. @Jakob99 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061722/quotes?item=qt0282091 Direct2D BTW last time this word was provided as an answer connected to IE9, here, by our friend MagicAndre: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/ie/forum/ie9-windows_other/ie9-for-xp-why-doesnt-internet-explorer-9-work-on/e8113f20-b149-4763-b4d4-562d1da524b6?page=1 it started a nice flamewar, that we may hopefully avoid repeating here. jaclaz

And some considerations on the "by design" feature that - in my simplicity - I find not exactly "desirable": http://reventlov.com/advisories/using-the-docker-command-to-root-the-host https://jmainguy.com/index.php/root-your-host-in-2-easy-steps-with-docker/ http://glaudiston.blogspot.it/2015/07/docker-security-not-so-perfect-as-it.html jaclaz

You can have a try with SRware Iron: https://www.srware.net/en/software_srware_iron.php The old versions are here: http://www.srware.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=8004 http://download1.srware.net/old/ jaclaz

There is a difference between the way you insert printer commands between Windows XP and previous ones (if this is what you are asking ). In Windows XP you enter hex codes inside "<>". Example (XP): http://support.myaxispoint.com/knowledgebase/articles/216549-tricking-a-generic-text-only-printer-to-be-esc-pos AFAICR in Win9x and previous you used the actual Esc key, like (scroll down till around page 34): http://www.ncsoftware.com/DocFiles/PrinterSetup.pdf The given PDF covers quite well the matter around "Generic/Text" printer drivers, more generally still today "receipt" printers (dot-matrix or thermal) often use plain Epson ESC commands, so often you find documentation in the actual hardware manufacturer pages. As a side note (and not really what you asked for, but possibly interesting): http://mike.bitrevision.com/blog/2015-04-getting-a-usb-receipt-printer-working-on-windows jaclaz