azagahl

Do you have problems opening TXT files with PFE whenever the file paths have a space in them? That bug was fixed recently.

but I heard that a swap file should be on the same drive as Windows... The swap file is better on a seperate drive. That way you don't have to have one disk seeking back and forth constantly between two different points. Does it hurt to have the swapfile and the OS partition on the same IDE channel? Or is it better to have one IDE channel per drive? I'm not sure how much it matters...

Make a logical partition at END of disk-space I thought the beginning of the disk was the outer ring of the disk, which spins the fastest and thus is the most rapidly accessed part of the disk. Putting your swap partition at the end of the disk would make access to it as slow as possible

Should I use Fat32 or Fat16 for my swap partition? I have a 1 GB swap partition and FAT16 can support up to 2 GB - more than enough. Also, I don't have a problem with slack (wasted space) because the whole partition is full of just one file. So FAT16 is still fine. Furthermore, FAT16 extended can have long file names I believe. Still, I don't care because i just have Win386.swp there and nothing else. Finally, I've heard that Fat16 is faster than Fat32 and NTFS. With Format /Z, I can only go up to 8 KB clusters on my FAT32 partition. Fat16 defaults to 32 KB clusters which means it should be faster, right? If so, perhaps one should be using Fat16 for their swap partition?

I found one site recently where someone claimed to have installed Windows 98 on a RAM DISK. It took 325 MB. They said they couldn't get Win2000 to install on a ram disk though. It would be cool to mount a drvspace volume on a ram disk (using scandisk.exe /mount), install Windows 98, and then just copy the drvspace volume file whenever you want to backup your OS.

Hm, would like to try if VC++ 2003 compiles this... It does. Also, template member functions are supported: class C { template <class T> foo() {} }; Also static integral constants declared inside your class are supported: class C { static int const i = 5; }; Also, this is supported (no idea what its called ) struct S {int x, y;}; //This works for POD (plain old data) only S *s1 = new S; //Create uninitialized instance S *s2 = new S(); //Create instance and initialize its members to 0 Also the wierd agressiveoptimize.h pragmas and stuff to optimize your executable size are no longer needed. Unfortunately VC++ is more bloated than ever

Is there a good P2P for finding obscure, ancient files? I don't want music/movie/warez.

Hey guys how can you possibly not like Outpost Firewall? I'm trying it out and so far it looks way easier to use than Sygate and less annoying problems (stuttering / crashes / nagware). Also the ad blocking rocks.

$80. 4 years of operation. Man, Microsoft must be subsidizing it where you live. Where I live, it is about 3x that.

Nope. Because main is returns an integer, it´s not optional. You couldn't be more wrong. int main need not return a value in Standard C++. This works fine in MSVC++ .NET 2003, but not VC6. (VC6 has worse standards support.) ...but VC++ is know for its OWN standards Actually I think MSVC++ .NET 2003 does a good job of supporting the Standards. Much better than VC6. The missing export keyword is the most glaring deviation.

Windows XP can be bought for right around $250 According to Microsoft, it costs $299: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/how...cingretail.mspx And I swear I could have seen it at retailers going for $400. The OS is almost 4 years old though; maybe the price has come down.

Anyone who has to spend the kind of money that adobe premiere demands, has to be doing pretty high-end jobs..You wouldn't buy program X for half a grand Is that how much Premiere costs? That's about how much Win XP costs. Do you think if I just want to surf the web, I have no reasonable choice but to buy OS with a professional-level price tag? I have to shell out as much money as a professional video-editor?! Or should I buy an OS at a garage sale for $10 that works just as well? Do I really need Resultant Set of Policy to play a game on my PC? Do I need Integrated CD-burning in order to download Nero?

FixitMad, please look here http://exuberant.ms11.net/neededupdates.html Gape *almost* has all the patches.

Under Explorer, if I do Tools/Folder Options/View, under "Hide protected operating system files (Recommended)" there is an option called "ioaiooiaioeoieioaoie...." except there are strange marks over the ioaea and eaoieo parts I know I've been installing a lot of different things, but I was wondering if anyone else has seen this.

#include <stdlib.h> You can also use <cstdlib> srand((unsigned)time(0)); Should be done in main probably, why reseed the random number generator every time you create a Gun? int go; Completely unused. char lock; You say "type in lock" later, and then you do cin>>lock. So this should be string, not a char (single letter). Same thing with load. cout<<"Welcome to gun control!\n\nToday you will learn how to aim, draw, and fire a gun at" " a target. Good Luck!\n"; Use << endl to flush output; \n does not flush output. if (lock = lock) This assigns lock to lock, and then tests the value of lock. Maybe you want (lock == "lock") instead. Same problem with load. return 0; Returning a value from int main is optional.

What the hell do you mean? I want a custom task manager to appear when I press ctrl-alt-del.

WTF?! I had to reboot crappy XP twice in the last half hour. My CPU usage is a couple of percent and my keyboard works fine but after about 10 minutes of usage, my mouse cursor is UNBELIEVABLY slow, jumping a few pixels every few seconds (if I'm lucky). The good thing is, after spending a couple of minutes waiting for my 3.0 GHz CPU to reboot, the problem with the multiple locked PDB files that I could rename, but could not delete, cleared up. Unfortunately I still have files called "deleteme", "deleteme2", etc. littering my HD. I thought XP was supposed to be easy to use and stable! I am so angry about this OS!

I think it's easier for everybody to offer links to good frewares than trying to do the same while losing time hacking M$ monkeyware You might be right; freeware is great. But what if I want to have freeware hooked up to Ctrl-Alt-Del keystroke? I believe Tihiy mentioned he had a hack for that.. BTW, does Xplorer2 allow you to view file size in BYTES (not KB), and in hexadecimal bytes? That would be nice IMHO.

867282 IE 5.5 SP2 update. Um, where can one find this?

Some of my thoughts about the 98 SE / XP differences list: System Restore - Don't know what this is but I hear only bad things about it. Windows Firewall - There are plenty of free firewall programs, why pay $350 to get the monopoly-designed one? Also I heard that this does not check outgoing packets which is a security risk in my view. Integrated CD Burning - Also a case where there are tons of free alternatives. Multilingual Support - I do not want strangers using my PC. Resultant Set of Policy (RSoP) - No idea what this means, I will administer my own PC thanks. Safe Mode Startup Options - Still not as good as booting to DOS in 98 SE. Remote Desktop - The client CAN be installed on 98 SE, and I do not want the server component (another security risk) Enhanced Online Conferencing - I'll never use this. Sounds like more bloat to clog my system with. Unified Wireless LAN Client - No use for this; I'm not going to lug my desktop around. Also hotspots are another security risk. Bluetooth 2.0 Update - Another security risk; also I don't want to have to charge batteries constantly just to operate my PC. Unattended Installation - If I were installing multiple PC's all the time this would be great. I don't do that though. Internet Explorer 6 Administration Kit - I prefer Firefox, not IE.

Couldn't you assume that with 1GB Windows XP will run pretty fast? The Win XP PC I use has 1 GB and it is a bit sluggish It is an Intel CPU though. BTW speed is not the main reason I dislike XP; activation is. Did you look into the videos I posted? Not yet. Or the page full of differences between 98 and XP? I glanced at it. Frankly, I don't know what most of it is, or it looks to be of little benefit (I'm not an IT admin or even in IT). I'll read it more thoroughly though. I have no problem accepting that XP can do more, I just am not sure whether I need any of it. Actually, DOS support is probably better on 98 SE and that's another reason for liking 98 SE. On 98 SE you still have the ability to boot into DOS (real) mode for a further speed boost, for playing old DOS games, or for easy troubleshooting. The partition imaging software I use runs in DOS mode.

What I meant is surely you didn't read the article I posted. Take a minute and actually read it... That will explain why your system appears to be using your full RAM, when in fact it isn't. Dude, did you even read your article? It says the following: Use the MaxFileCache setting in the System.ini file to reduce the maximum amount of memory that Vcache uses to 512 megabytes (524,288 KB) or less. So it suggests using 512 MB or less for your file cache. Note that this is an arbitrary number and is JUST a suggestion. Most likely 511 MB or 513 MB will not crash the system! Especially when I can install 98 SE on a fresh 1 GB PC without any file cache setting, and have no problem with the default max file cache of 800 MB! And what is this about Windows 98 SE it not utilizing all my memory, un4given1? If I have a 512 MB cache like the article says, and its full of cached data, are you saying my system can't run because there is not a single byte of physical RAM left to use? Of course not, I can have a full 512 MB cache plus 128 MB AGP aperture plus 200 MB of programs plus 100 MB of soundfonts plus etc.. all in physical RAM. All 1 GB being utilized by Win98 SE, with 0 MB swap used and no disk activity. And I don't mind being limited to a 512 MB cache (if that's even a true limit), in fact I think that's an insane waste and I prefer to limit myself to 128 MB. This leaves nearly 900 MB of physical RAM to play with. I suggest you do a bit more thinking before your next post. Like the ranting you posted about 98 SE being six years old and how I need to go back to school for math or something, a little more research on your part will make things clearer and help prevent further embarassment to yourself. Also in your article - posted nearly a year ago before all of the wonderful SP's that we have now: "Just to let everyone know I installed 1Gig of ram without a single issue and performance is 1000% better" Answer truthfully, did you even read your own article?

Windows 98 does not support more than 512MB of RAM. While you may have more than that installed, your system will not utilize it. What are you talking about? Can't you read? What part of my statement don't you understand? You claim my system can't utilize more than 512 MB. As I posted earlier, I have 1 GB installed, and varying amounts from 0 MB to 1024 MB are in use, depending on what is loaded, while 0 MB of my swap file is in use. Therefore my system is regularly utilizes more than 512 MB. And it's Windows 98 SE. How many times do you need this explained? I don't understand how someone in IT can struggle so hard to grasp something so simple.

Windows 98 does not support more than 512MB of RAM. While you may have more than that installed, your system will not utilize it. I'm not wrong. Unbelievable. Refusing to admit a mistake no matter what. Talk about immature.

Please drop the mem issue. You were wrong. I was told... You were also told 1 GB works fine on an unpatched, fresh 98 SE install. This is the case on my PC anyway. If you look at your own link you have the one line fix if there are any problems. As we've established that you are Bill Gates' personal IT admin, you should have ample resources to try this out yourself (but my guess is you won't). I agree there is a mem limit but I don't know what it is - apparently some people use 98 SE with 1.5 GB RAM. 98 SE is already 5 years old and I still don't have enough RAM laying around to reach the limit.