-I-

netfirms may even work for you, as it seams they support CGI (perl) witch like PHP is a scriptable interface and even though id have to look some stuf up (its been very long since my last encounter with perl) i might be able to write a simple script to write an outpout of any file in youraccount.netfirms.com/files (with the excaption of index.html and maybe .htaccess ofcaurse. but im not verry shure if its gooing to be this weekend... i do recomand you to change the topic of this tread to [howto] list all files of a dir in perl it will me more specific and probably will atract more perl programmers to this topic ...

i current form i tested litestep (even though it look not bad at al) i think we'd at leas nead to ask and look for ways to change the Rclick menu as i think rclick on desktop now shows the exact same as klicking the <start> button but i for one rather have as short rclick menu as possible me just wants a menu like this... ----------------------- view - like in windows expl refresh - like in windows expl ---------------------- <clipboard - copy - cut - paste ------------- < zip - open zip - extract zip - add to zip ---------------- < new file - list of diferent to create files - text - text - ect ---------------- view properties ----------------- info: (<) are items with a submenu (-) item

true, but 3disk is triple the chance i had softwware version of raid 5 setup in ata100 5400 rpm and had to wait 3q of an hour for restoring + windows error checking an aray of 5 9gb disk (35gb) so (probably 1min per gb) but that was a looong time ago, i think allen has a good guideline for the little more expansive versions, btw allen could you tell what yours has costed you?

@ScubaSteve like stated i agrea with you that vista is not, and will not be, the best OS in the world. That is simply something we nead to face, but i do hate it (but i might mis understood you), flaiming for no reason. like i said in my posts it actualy IS in a few rather important parts quite an inmprovement in coparison to XP because the drivers won't load from inside the kernel, windows wont crash anymore at hardware failure so actualy that IS realy is an improvment, also said before vista is actualy a BIG dis-apointment in terms of what was promised v/s what wil be released but even inspite of that, an upgrade (if you can afford it) will be worth it verry mutch. this is what i tell a friend of mine working at some company who are thinking to upgrade to xp (from 2k) after recently buying a couple of 100 workstation replacement, "dont, just wait for vista" and i can say this, in those days xp came out i would have never dreamed of saying so... aspecialy regarding to the fact that a short after release update is asking for installing about 100 security patches in the first 3 months. @Mr Snrub I havn't tested vista yet on 64bit (as my computer isn't delivered yet) and earo is just a thing of tast, but i do believe that office 2k7 wil improve some parts, but it was said that some parts of the UI will change in ribbon style (what ever that may be), and not specificly because of it, but still, i already had desited that id rather use the OpenOffice Suite plus that i rather use the ISO certified ODT than MS's XML

you are comparing two completely non-related things. because even as you are probably right, this argument doesn't realy fit in. as it seams you are now talking (in terms of security features), let me ask you this than Do you even care about security, or do you just use it as a lame exuse to flame against MS? because if you realy do care you probably better dont use windows at al, now do you? and to get things clear, i myself going for vista not because of winFS, not because of earo (i even hate earo), > but because of the better suspected x64 optimization > and the splitted drivers from kernel > and the isolation in ram use for every program, > and as a last (i even forgot to mantion this before), because of the less requirered reboots (i so realy hope it will make a real difference) and ofcource because vista will (even if it is not the best or safest OS in the world) be better and safer than XP

so why doesn't anyone create a 7zip installer for shell intergration only... id do it if only i know how... 7z is one of the best and strongers in win32 archive managers .. and in xpize forum also has new and good loking iconset. so want i wonder, how hard can it be to create some sort of addon for windows (like nlite addon-packs or simular) whats neaded: [list] [*] 7z.exe 113kb (uncompresed), [*]diferent file icons for zip rar 7z and others [*] the right registry settings for a shell item to > add this file to archive > extract this archive (if file is an archive file) [/list]cons about this is that it seams to only support creating 7z zip Gzip Bzip and tar. but seams to be able to read the rest. with in the end would have zip support in about 50kb but than i ask why not spend the full 4mb (with filemanager), its sometimes realy favorable to be able to like inside archive with an easy interface. and its 100% free and updated often so new features like iso support are added on regular basis. and on those moments you dont nead the FM just just the shell extentions it offers....

just a Q. whats that about Nlite, i always use it. usualy i removed a few options like printerdrivers scanner drivers and modem drivers (as i dont use those devises or prefer to install from winupdate or the original driver cdrom), for the rest i delete code pages of all but my own language and some smap aps like convert.exe (as i already use ntfs for all drives), and i not ever, ever ever ever, had any problems at all, after this and using the twaek and patches like tcp and spfc and utxtheme so i think that as long as your not bold (or stupid) or how ever else you want to call it, nlite can perfectly create a clean stable and desired system. at least it doesn't make you patch or remove anything you dont want.

whoops somebody didn't do his homwork... even though vista, doesn't have the full new 3d inteface but just the earo part instead, and even though WinFS is just PARTLY inplemented, some big improvements are: Vista will no longer run interface drivers (like vga, sata or lan) inside the kernel, but instead they will be loaded by a module in about the same way linux does. Vista will run IE7 from a sandbox (restricted) enviroment Users will no longer need to be an Admin (or priviledged) user to run normal software, and MS will try to support (but meanwile force) external software developers to comply to this non-admin policy in vista (again just like in linux). every aplication should be running in a dedicated and isolated part of the RAM- memory so óne program cant interfear with the other. vista's 6.0 kernel also 'most likely' will be the first version to run 64bit optimized (instad of ported like xp64 and server2003 64bit edition). and probably lots of things i forgot about at this time... anyways. most of these features will seriously increase safty, stabillity, and speed. but, even though it probably will be a better OS than XP, its sadly not the gigantic leap forward like we were prommised, when they spoke of 'longhorn' about 3 or 4 years ago. but to answer they orrigional question, No i did not take vista's minimal spect into concideration when i bought my new computer about 2 weaks ago (no i dont have it yet i'm still waiting for delivery, at the time of this writing) even though my new pc will probably run vista like a charm being based on the Nforce 430 chipset, 2gb ddr400 ram and a 64bit 1.8ghz dualcore opteron processor, (excapt maybe for earo since i dont know if my onboard GeForce™ 6100 vga chip will support DX10) but i dont care about earo anyways. i didn't chose this setup to run vista on it, even though i eventualy desited to wait with buying a 64bit optemized OS until vista release. so i geuss for me this time it is the other way arround, i neaded a new pc, and i bought me the strongest i could afford, and desited to run either beta's or 64bit linux versions until Vista release, for those wanting to know, im either going to buy VISTA 64bit Home basic N (european only no WPM version), or Vista 64bit Profesional basic N (also without WMP).

i guess what he means is somethink like direct listing, but its not something netfirms will support (neighter the FTP nor the HTTP way). if they support php he might want to use that. but i honnestly dont think netfirms would apreaciate downloadsites. but in any case there is a php way if netfirms support it. and there is always the notepad+ way..

i knew there where some, theme managers like desktop archited that could force 2k to should transperant font, but are you now saying its also posible to do that without those, if im not mistaking, win2k has a build-in theme engine that shouldn't nead anything like DeksArchitect (if you enable it by regtweaks), but if this is true, id love to gather some diferent collored themse, 1 default win2k 2 win XP like, 3 win vista like, 4 ice theme (white theme), 5 maybe 1 or 2 others. and after that delete all windows collor shems from the reg.

true, but i wouldn't know how to get it as a variable in windows, another dis-avantage is that its a verry long nr. with no real asosations for Your company, Asus has mylogo and this is actualy realy usefull for these kinds of tasks, im realy not sure if there are other manufacturers that have a simular feature, setting the key in windows would only work IF the user won't re-install themeselves (or that nephew of thairs), otherwise you could just create a reg entry in windows... for example in: \HKLM\OEMINFO\ $date $system $clientID $ect. witch of cource you might also want to put in oem.ini (for easy enduser access to the info).

Neptune (at least not the most comon version), hasn't got it yet. (and im not even sure if and in what build Whistler has it... what i would encurage though, is that someone would gather some windows 2000 .themes to enable mouse pointers, font properties, and collor shemes. (to fully replace the default MS versions found in the reg). anyone who'd want button skinning whould just have to runn the extra addon for matching start button and stuff.

i read about this on a dutch techsite, a few days ago, they also said that if this in fact is true there going to force some of the corporate devellopers to fix bugs (mostly accouring on older hardware) by just NOT adding new features until al or most of the old longstanding bugs are fixed, and i realy think this would be a good way to go, for one or 2 release cycles.

true, - but what most forget is that a system partion should NOT be used for pagefiles.... and aren't ment for spead but for safety (as a system might nead re-installing, and you dont want to copy all your data away from your machine everyttime, reinstall is recomanded). Running xp als a server is, indead is NOT a good idea, a short tail... When MS desited to got NT, they already know that a server- ready OS also neads a client that works in pretymutch the same way, therefor a shared base-system (as has linux / unix) is prefered. Normaly they would optimize the kernel for both projects, (witch makes swapping a Deskop version to a server) not hard at all.. but than 98 outlive its use, and MS was initali geared toward Neptune (a home version of windows 2000). the problem than was that they had been to ambitious, and would have never made it in time, so they instead release ME But than came the realy big trouble, many of the features already working in Neptune they ported to 9x/ME kind of collaped in the real world, and MS had a REAL problem, so eventualy they scraped nearly all feature that where to be part of nepute, and overhastly fixed the last bugs, for XP, at least it was better than ME ... but the endless list of patches and bugs in xp tells us that even though better than ME it was FAR from perfect (or maybe even release ready, at first). but in the NT5.1 they had to make some big desicions to get it ready on time, nearly al memory adressors and many other parts of the kernel and base system where patched (and later optimized) for Desktop use, so when eventualy XP server (windows server 2003) was release with kernel version 5.2 this now also showed 2 diferent forks. in the end it came out pretty well because after the long period of fixing problems 2 quite optimezed kernels came out, that both on a specific user-erea where faster and more stable than 2k (but also less all-round-capable). windows 2k is lighter than xp, by default, but xp has for a fact some better feature (witch btw are NOT on places youd see them. i have some old hardware too, a celeron 1,7ghz laptop and i wouldn't dream of running xp on it. (even though it works quite good, realy good actualy), but that doens't mean i HATE xp...

Q: Resources only patch, (for those who dont want a shel replacement, or task skinning.. like make it with diferent installers, 1 to patch, 2 for theme skinning 3 for extra's...

if im not mistaken its an outdated patch. (and outdated xml version, SP5 should use a newer version i believe, But to be sure id have to check...

just send me a PM and we'll set something up (havn't got the darn thing yet though, (thay said i should expact it this week), by the way: as soon as i have in ill add the specs to a siggy (with a link to som pick LOL (benchmark-scores included ofcaurse)

last time I checked, was with Freiser FS 4 (and there were even though in beta creating write access for windows (witch by the way isn't that hard as all RF specs are open.. bootscreens were just to get poeple to do something better, am sorry though no mutch luck for an official sp5 bootscreen ..... for rest, 'm working long hours 6:30am to 8:30pm Mon/Fri and 07am to 03pm on sat for a few weaks so im quite buisy but will at leas keap up the reading...

the quote you are refering to is about spyware malware and stuf like that.. not about alpha or beta stage, - it doesn't even meen that this software actualy works, even though, softpedia guys dont spill bandwidth so you could think it at least works without HUGE buggs..

you should post that q on the programming forum...

RELEASE NOTES (just an idea), Gurgle id like you to check this link it shows self containing excutable test version of how id feel about stuf like release notes (for those who may have Nlited windows it would be a PRE... LINK to example of wat it can create, by the way the app witch created this seams to be some sort of no-nags shareware or something. link to official website of the program HERE

READ before posting LOL

yup, even though true 64bit handling most likely will at best start from introduction of vista Q2 (or Q3) 2007, it still will handle your RAM better alos it will handle some tasks mutch faster, (example: compression (with 7zip), webbrowsing with Firfox, (not office though, nor MS nog OO.org have 64bit versions, n'or will the arive soon, some other sofware have ports to 64bit, but most are just ports and not otimized versions. another thing though is that xp64 is based on the NT5.2 kernel (where is xp32 stil uses 5.1).

i completely disagree, for one if you want support on a redhat server, try reading about 1k diferent mailinglists forum posts and get nowhere, than contact redhat witch tells you to buy a version, only fo find out later that there are a lot of small usergroups, that are far more willing to help your avarage linux newbee ... Heck is how i started...

NT4 explorer crashes way to mutch, i did actualy got it stable once, than was forced an update (and even though it didn't contain any of the swaped files) id made the system highly unstable, i once thught about the eplorer from windows NT clone ReactOS, but thats still in verry early beta and for some reasons seams quite deed to me... at least i havn't seen a single update for ages..