Peewee

Heyho, First, I think we are missing a basic Forum, "Cross Platform Issues" OR "All Platform Issues". I often have problems that exist in both of my Operating Systems(OS), and would exist in all others. I've checked all the Forum titles and found none suitable. I'm here in XP purely because that is now where I'm coming from, but the same problems exists in 7, my other regular OS. Anyway. I'm in the UK. I have often wanted to watch TV stuff, only to be told that because I am in the UK I cannot. These messages appear to be flagged by my IP address. Is there any way I can disguise my IP address so I can watch what people in the States can legally watch. This is not a request for help with piracy, so calm down. Quick, fan over here!. Americans can watch it legally. This is, as many of you know, is just retard, stupid, limiting international law. I am quite surprised that I get this from US sites, where capitalism is king, and every chance to grab a dollar is deemed a veritable Right. If I could watch such which was accompanied by adverts that I HAD to watch before the main show, then payment/contribution would be satisfied. It is a waste of a potential source of income, frankly. I am truly surprised about this, and find it difficult to believe that your Philadelphia lawyers haven't killed this nonsense. (Yep, everything I know about the States is from Film and TV.) In this instance I just wanted to view a bit of nostalgia. Rhoda. This excellent series was aired in the UK in the 70s/80s, free - if you ignore the compulsory BBC licence fee - with adverts, so why it should be denied me now is just daft. It's not as though the western world is clamouring for it, and billions of dollars will be lost if one user in the UK (me) watches it. Few people in the entire world probably remember it, or want to watch it. It's not going to impact on DVD sales, which is probably zero. Yes, it's the first time we heard the gravelly future Marge Simpson, but it's hardly collectible. I'd love to hear Carlton's drunken dulcits again. So, how can I fool* LEGAL sites into thinking I'm in America, and watch a bit of nostalgia? Thanks. Cheers Friends (two other excellent series. Wonder how long this could go on? - Hello to Laverne, Shirley, Phil at Hill Street, and his colleague Officer Dibble, Sugarfoot, Hoss, the gang at F troop, the girls at Petticoat Junction, Jethro and Jed, Frasier, Diefenbaker, ... and on and on. Make it all available,) * Fool, trick, deceive, con. None of those apply here. I don't want to deceive anyone, I just want to bypass stupid and unnecessary limitations. SIDESTEP!, That's it! Sidestep. I just want to sidestep the guards at the castle gate. Don't mean no harm.

Thanks for wrecking a humorous thread. Not coming back. Mark it as closed. No wonder they call you nerds. Have you no sense of humour or frivolity?

Scroll bug sounds about right. Thank you for your acknowledgement. Sadly, fixing (this apparently known BUG) in Windows 8 (Any) has no effect on what it does in Windows 7. And that was rather my point. I don't really care what it does in Windows 8, as I am using Windows 7. Thank you for your response, though. I haven't checked the provided link as your post suggests it is only relevant to Windows 8 - which I haven't got. But thanks anyway. Anyone got anything relevant to Windows 7. This is a really annoying bad thing, error, mistake, failure. Oh so annoying. Ta.

7. Windows Explorer. Left-hand pane. Click on a + and the Directory Title shoots down to the bottom of the screen obscuring every subdirectory. This has been referred to before in many different posts here and elsewhere. But this is such an obvious error that I wonder why MSoft hasn't sorted it - it is NOT a feature, it is extremely annoying and wrong. Has anyone reported it to them? 7 has installed hundreds of updates since I started with it, but this really annoying thing remains. Anyone got any voice on this? Obviously an error, but why has it remained for so long? Any ideas how we can get Msoft to repair it? Obviously, the clicked + should send the Directory Title to the TOP of the pane - if it moves anywhere. Obvious. So why is it still here and wrong and very much getting on my nerves? I use Explorer constantly, and this is doing my head in. I'm looking at third party progs, but I like Explorer - apart from this Grrrrrthing. It really is most annoying. I constantly have to move the vertical bar down, to get the things I want up. ANNOYING. I can't find a way to contact MSoft. They hide themselves from us punters as much as possible. But surely, they are listening in the Forums? Maybe there is somewhere we can shout - like Rocky to Adrian's dad. Whatever... Please make them stop. Someone will have a go at me, I know. I tried searching but it is an obscure thing, difficult to explain via search terms, and I did not find any replies suitable.

As computing moved out of the hands of hobbyists, and computers became commonplace household items, control, via the Operating System, has been increasingly removed from the user. In DOS and DRDOS we had the single, and benign, (Are you sure? Y/N). That was it as far as interference and control went. Useful for capturing accidental keypresses - unless one accidentally then pressed Y, of course..., and completely powerless following its appearance - I seem to recall that sometimes pressing the Esc key would send it away, without either a Y or an N to its name. Poor thing. Now we're up to 7 (I have never seen 8) and we've got UAC, Permissions, Ownership, Administrator status, and probably more I have yet to encounter. Initially these things sent me into a fury of, "How dare they!" frothing, and much, much worse. But I do understand that they help protect those things that need protecting. However, they do often seem like overkill, and they are far, far too complicated and involved to get around following procedures that Windows allows, and some of the boxes offered for completion speak in meaningless tongues, words of mystery and confusion, and display empty spaces that seek similar words of some kind, but what those words could be, I mostly haven't a clue. When attempting to take ownership, for example, what does, "Enter the object name to select" want from me? (Rhetorical question. I no longer care. Further, if it needs further explanation, then it was badly worded in the first place.) They have here helpfully laid alongside it a link, "examples", which presumably contains examples of what the box wants. Sorry, absolutely none the wiser. Meaningless. Gazed at it all for a while, then a bit longer, thought about making a cup of tea, then clicked on a few Cancels, shuddered, and then wandered off to perform said task. Tea is always an option. Sometimes, though, there's clearly been a lack of thought. I tried to use chkdsk in a CMD window, and got this wonderfully OTT snotty, finger-wagging message. Sit back, you're gonna love this. "Access Denied as you do not have sufficient privileges. You have to invoke this utility running in elevated mode." Elevated mode? Is this like God mode? How do I get that? This I want. Is this one of those things I have yet to encounter? Sounds like a QuakeII\Half Life cheat, not that I ever used such things. It is so very snotty that my initial annoyance quickly turned to sniggering amusement, and I wondered what total plantpot at Microsoft came up with such a pompous and condescending message. Wouldn't you hate him for a dad, or a mum. Worse, what if he's a manager - pity his inferiors - for that is truly what they will be made to feel. Or, maybe it's a joke ridiculing other equally lengthy reprimands that Windows is capable of turning up. That'd be nice. I believe a few of you who visit this forum live in Americania, you know, that little country squashed between Canadia and Mexicania. Anyone know him? Can you ask when you next see him? Anyway, the lack of thinking bit. Back in Windows. Right-click on a drive, Properties\Tools\Error-checking\Check now, and off pops chkdsk, happy as you like. So, there was no need to either deny me use, nor to insult me. Also, isn't limiting use of what is a non-destructive, useful system tool somewhat excessively overzealous? (I'm being kind) Format, both destructive and dangerous, I can use anytime, anywhere, but chkdsk limits me from a command line. Soz, but this does deserve a Homer - Doh! Then, if I want to do other things like deleting directories or files, or opening files, which 7 won't let me do, I just boot into XP next time and do it from there - from where I can also use command line chksdsk with switches willy nilly. Then there is the ease with which one can invoke the hidden Administrator account. From where I can do everything. Matter of seconds. So, given that getting around a great deal of the security is not hard by not unknown back doors, Win 7 really should have put the lot in a bunch in Control Panel with tick boxes, and let us just wade in - pick and mix security (perhaps best not to refer to it as PMS). I do find the attempt at control a little galling though. Never mind the curious morality that requires me to shell out a not insignificant sum of money for the product, which then happily denies me access to much of something I actually own in law, but for we who are sole-users, it's all totally pointless (excluding single-user schizophrenics, that is - boy, those alternate personalities can really mess with my security). Then there is the condescending implied insult of the whole thing; that we obvious thickos would blow everything up if left to our own devices. In Explorer\Tools\Folder Options\View, despite selecting everything that gives me maximum information and control, I always leave "Hide protected operating system files" checked. Stops accidents, always a good idea. I don't need to see them or do anything to them. Not stupid, see? I can see the value of things. Not going to blow things up. Nope, not gonna happen. No explosions here. I can see how all this security would be extremely valuable in a corporate environment, but should such heaviness not be an opt-in thing rather than a blanket assignment? I mean that we all buy the basic doodah, and those that need this higher level of protection add it as an optional extra? Given the ease of back-door bypassing, this must be the only way to go. Add ons. Basic pick and mix for all of us, but if you want this extra security, you get it as a module. I don't, and so I just install the doodah and boogie on down, and mess everything up if I want to. Choice. I'm still struggling with some security things, but it only comes up when it comes up, which, in truth isn't terribly often, but it is then important, and by then I've forgotten what I did last time and where I found the right advice, and have to search all over again. Tedious. Must make notes. I haven't turned UAC off, incidentally, I've just set it the next level up from the bottom, and so I just get a box that is really just the 7 equivalent of the good old, (Are you sure? Y\N). I'm still happy with that. I like that. Makes me feel loved. But... I have invoked the hidden Administrator for when I feel oppressed.

Jaclaz, many thanks for your reply. Been offline for a while, hence the tardy response. Some of this reply concerns human interaction, as well as technical stuff. You suggest that I am "seemingly missing the main point". Such a statement is semantically wrong. I cannot miss any point if I made the point in the first place. I am not missing even "A" point, never mind "THE" point or "THE MAIN" point. I made the main point, and so the main point is mine. And so I cannot miss the main point. Logic. But, to explain - again... The actual MAIN point is not what the test programs return, instead that, in the past, bad sectors were simply marked bad in the FAT, and the drive always went on to succeed - something I can no longer find a way to do, hence the post. The main point. Further, if the manufacturer's utility says that the drive has "failed", but subsequently offers "passed" for the same drive, then the utility is obviously flawed, as I said, is evidently useless, and, importantly, the drive's "failed" status is then questionable; as indeed is its "passed" status also. Meaning the drive may not be beyond recovery. Fail, pass, fail, pass. Which is it? Surely one should expect a disk utility from a disk manufacturer to be consistent, and actually know what is what? They don't know. And therefore should we not question everything that the program produces\returns\does? I absolutely do. All those I tried continually and sequentially offered conflicting summations, and so they were\are useless. Could, might, possibly, not sure. Useless. You offer that there do exist trivial, fixable errors on drives. Well, that's where I want to go. Clearly, I didn't make myself clear, clearly. My use of Format was purely an example - for illustration, to suggest why Format does not; perhaps cannot, suggest a drive is a write-off. There has to be both read and write processes, and many of each, before a judgement can be made. Norton Utilities was particularly useful in this. Sadly, that no longer exists, and Norton's name is no longer held in high esteem. Perhaps they could revive their past status by producing a new set of Utilities? It is plain that someone ought to fill this evident gap. You offered, "The way DOS marked bad sectors as bad is still effective, but generally speaking never has a chance to "kick in" as the drive firmware will prolly re-map the defective sector in a way that is transparent to the OS and filesystem utilities before they can detect it." Perfect. I was asking if there was a program which could do this. You agree it is possible. I'm glad you agree that something (the firmware) is stopping good practice. All I want is for good practice to be restored, and find a program which offers such. It must be asked, though, why the firmware would remap, and ignore important information. As for partitioning outside of bad sectors, and thereby excluding bad sectors, my point about lack of useful information, surely, explains why this cannot be done. If any of the programs gave me detailed information concerning geography of bad sectors, I might have a chance to use this approach, but they don't, and so I can't. How can I create a partition that excludes bad sectors when I do not know which sectors are involved? I can't, obviously. Poor programming. There is no guarantee that ANY drive won't just fail now, tomorrow, in ten years time. However, as I stated, in the past, when some percentage was deemed acceptable, and provided it was due to manufacturing processes supplying surface defects, and not caused by physical damage, everything worked fine until I dissed them to get a bigger drive. No, I'm talking about 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, 250MB drives, way, way smaller than 250GB. Regardless, size always follows technology - not the other way around. Improvements in technology enable larger disks. Everything progresses; except rap, boy bands, TV, and jean's with a long inside leg. Manufacturing methods (must) have improved, obviously. So we are here talking about technology, microtechnology, and engineering, not percentages. Since I had those tiny drives, we've experienced two and a half inch floppies, CD, Minidisc, DVD, and BlueRay - a veritable ton of surface technology advancement. I expect better because I know that better exists now. By any calculation a percentage failure now, would, at the very very worst, be an equall percentage failure as in the past; though if that were the case, given improvements in technology, I would shout, "Shame!" No, sorry, technology has moved on, and that suggestion is specious. But thank you for your reply. I will look up the programs you mention.

Much obliged, thanks.

Heyho. Bought a 250Gig SATA drive for buttons on Amazon. Connected it up and installed 7. Things started going haywire so I checked it with Seatools and others. It FAILED. I used KillDisk to write zeroes, and then formatted it and tested it again. PASSED. I installed XP. It went wonky again. Tested it. FAILED. Did the above again and installed 7. It went bad again. FAILED. All the tests used were useless in terms of information; I just got "FAILED" or "PASSED". The only really helpful information came from one of the progs which offered, "An error occured while attempting to repair bad sectors" - but that's not really much, is it? So, the drive clearly has bad sectors which are evidently irrepairable. It's a start. The drive has bad sectors which only come to light when the drive is actually used. The FORMAT process, I believe, doesn't perform any READ tests, and so I understand why it will return no errors. But chkdsk also always reports "0 bytes in Bad Sectors" Many years ago when hard disk technology was still relatively young, a small percentage of Bad Sectors was deemed acceptable provided they were due to manufacturing defects in the platter surface and were not due to damage caused by platter/head collision. At that time many programs (mostly DOS) would simply mark those bad sectors in the File Allocation Table (FAT) as bad, and then the system simply never again bothered to use those sectors, and just got on with it, usually (always, in truth) without subsequent problems. Thing is, the current batch of Hard Disk "Utilities" are, frankly, pretty useless. Not only do they give no useful information and not a single one of them - Seagate, Maxtor, Fujitsu - will even format a drive (DUH!), but none offers a way to mark bad sectors as bad in the FAT (NTFS), and so I go around in a circle. All this problem might need is a program that marks the bad sectors as being bad in the FAT, and maybe the drive will be useable - unless it is damaged, as stated earlier. So, does anybody know of a decent hard disk utility that will just note the bad sectors, mark them as such in the FAT, and let me use this disk? It was a doddle 20 years ago, how come it's now impossible? I must add that I have NEVER had a single IDE drive die on me in all the years I've been using them; I just dissed them as I moved on up in size. But 50% of all SATAs I have owned have died young deaths (2 out of 4). Newer, younger, clearly doesn't equate with better. Also, don't suggest returning the drive - it was bought for me by someone who I now wish to never have to see ever again - I would sooner throw the drive in the bin. Thanks.

Heyho, Am I imagining it? I'm sure that this forum used to have a "View your posts" link at the home page. It now tells me the number of posts by me, but only the number - not the actual posts, and I can't find those posts. When I post, I add it to Favourites, or whatever passes for that in whatever browser I was using at the time (mostly Sea Monkey). Sadly, Favourites or whatever can get lost or be deleted. I know I posted a specific, but I can't find it - and I've searched - trust me. I've lost all my favourites/whatevers, and searches here are not producing anything useful. Can I find a list of my posts anywhere? Probably lose this one sometime down the line. Tut. Ta.

Hi, I've had 7 for quite a while, but had endless problems getting online, and so used it rarely - I dual boot with XP. I recently bought a painfully cheap USB WiFi adapter from China, via Amazon, which fair blisters along. So, I'm using 7 much more. I've been looking at Voice Recognition, and was wondering if anyone uses it usefully, and what for. Is it just a novelty? An advanced search here for "voice recognition" didn't get a single hit. Is that already telling me something?

Again, still reading. Thanks for all your replies. My widescreen monitor opened up many possibilities, and that and your mostly positive replies mean I'm definitely going to connect up the old monitor as 2, and see what else I can do. Cheers. And a Happy New Year.

Many thanks. Those links produce more links, so I'll study them. Again, much appreciated.

Hiya, I'm fairly new to 7. I dual boot with 7 and XP. Because I could never get online with 7 with my WLAN card, I rarely booted into 7. A new USB WLAN has given me internet accesa, and so I am now using 7 frequently. I have searched this forum, honest, but have not found what I want. I have turned off UAC completely. I understand that security might be important in corporate situations, but I am the only person who ever uses this computer, and want (demand) complete and total control of this MY computer that I have paid for and own. I do not want anything telling me what I can and can't do. Despite turning off UAC I am still getting messages telling me that I don't have access to this that or the other. What I am asking for is the definitive process(es) for removing all such controlling security, and giving me access to, and total control of everything. I want to OWN my computer, you know, the one that I own. Your detailed response is hugely appreciated. Many thanks. 7 64 bit.

Me again. Meant to ask, forgot, is VM = Virtual Machine? Does that mean you are running programs like Sandboxie on other monitors, as virtual machines dedicated to that monitor? I can see how that would be useful. I was recently grabbing some screenshots and editing them. I then had to re-edit several of them. Trying to remember what was in the original and needed changing was impossible, and the flipping back and forth was a pain. What I did was manually split the screen in two, using the central on/off button as the centre guide, and used the right window to display the JPG that needed editing, and the left window to make the changes. It made life really so much faster and easier. I could not have done this with the previous monitor. Similarly, since I got this wide monitor, I have often split the screen with two instances of Explorer, and it does make manipulating files a lot easier. Can such file copying and moving be done between monitors? A side issue, but to me just as interesting. Earlier I said that I split the screen in two for editing of JPGs, with the right screen showing the original - only for consultation, and the left where the editing actually takes place. Is this the same for you? Do you work handed? Again, many thanks for your contributions, Peewee.

Hiya, Just letting you know that I am reading these, and am finding them interesting. Please continue responding. Many thanks, Peewee.