Jump to content

Context menu - Move "Rename" away from "Delete"


emarkay
 Share

Recommended Posts

Surely SOMEONE has (and I have been looking for about a year) has figured how to move, add a space, or even better, allow a complete "hack" of the basic Windows Explorer Context menu, so I don't try to DELETE something when I just want to RENAME it?

Anyone? :)

MRK

post-85824-1225129689_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I know what you mean. I wish I could remove some items from Firefox's context menu as well. I always end up accidently emailing things to people, which is bad because my computer gets all retarded because I don't have any email clients installed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely SOMEONE has (and I have been looking for about a year) has figured how to move, add a space, or even better, allow a complete "hack" of the basic Windows Explorer Context menu, so I don't try to DELETE something when I just want to RENAME it?

Well, when you say the Explorer Context menu be aware that there are different menus shown depending upon what type of object is right-clicked. From your picture you may be right-clicking almost anything, although it is likely a file. What is actually shown there is a hodgepodge from different areas in the registry of separately defined handlers all strung together by the core Context Menu handler.

That lower section of a Context Menu is displaying extensions defined as ShellEx subkeys (some recent discussion found here), and to quote myself: ... they are assisted by custom DLL files and are called by CLSID. These ShellEx entries appear below Shell entries and can use icons alongside the text and can even insert divider lines and use flyout sub-menus.

The short answer is that some things can be re-arranged. But the longer answer is that it is tricky as they are displayed in the sequence that are stored in the registry within their respective groupings. Re-arranging can best be described as similar to a top-down stack, to move one up you delete the one above it (and re-insert it, now it is below). That is how normal registry extensions are manipulated. This is how you move WinRar underneath WinZip (or vice versa) for example.

However, there are other things inside there besides Shell and ShellEx. I am not sure where those core extensions (Create Shortcut, Delete, Rename) are defined. But I suspect they are actually hard-coded into the DLL that actually generates the Context Menu itself. This could be proven by flushing (deleting) all extensions manually and seeing what still shows up in a Context Menu. I suspect those three, and Properties will still be there. If I am correct, only a serious hack of a core Windows file (whichever provides the Context Menu functions) would be necessary. Either that or a replacement.

Having said all this, I think you will definitely want to take a look at that 3rd party freeware extension I mentioned in that linked page, it is called Fast Explorer Context Menu Extension DLL. This may provide you with another idea. It looks very cool to me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can do quite a lot with the oddly-named Mmm. One solution would be to create a submenu with "delete" tucked away safely on it.

Look here

Danger Will Robinson! Beware of files from HACE. Be on the lookout for spyware!

They used to have some Context Menu extensions called OOC (Out Of Context) and ShellGEM. They were very good looking programs for adding custom sub-menus to Context Menus. However, they had a payload of spyware.

Sometimes these companies realize the error of their ways and reverse course, and apologize to their customers. Both GetRight and CuteFTP did just this, and they are now safe. I do not know if HACE has done such a mea culpa recently, but I remember going back there a year or two ago and seeing that spyware was still available in some downloads.

So do tread very carefully! Scan the extracted (but NOT installed) downloads and then cross-check them again with another scanner. Picking up spyware in this manner is very easy and very common!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes these companies realize the error of their ways and reverse course, and apologize to their customers. Both GetRight and CuteFTP did just this, and they are now safe. I do not know if HACE has done such a mea culpa recently, but I remember going back there a year or two ago and seeing that spyware was still available in some downloads.

These rumours start so easily. CuteFTP was never spyware. Do a search or check here http://kb.globalscape.com/article.aspx?id=10193

So can you tell me exactly the evidence you have that HACE's Mmm is/was spyware?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes these companies realize the error of their ways and reverse course, and apologize to their customers. Both GetRight and CuteFTP did just this, and they are now safe. I do not know if HACE has done such a mea culpa recently, but I remember going back there a year or two ago and seeing that spyware was still available in some downloads.

These rumours start so easily. CuteFTP was never spyware. Do a search or check here http://kb.globalscape.com/article.aspx?id=10193

So can you tell me exactly the evidence you have that HACE's Mmm is/was spyware?

First of all to be crystal clear, I think both GetRight and CuteFTP are great, I still have them and use them.

Secondly, to be clearer, GetRight and CuteFTP and the HACE utilities (that I'm aware of) are not spyware. I clearly said that HACE had payloads of spyware. The applications themselves (as is almost always the case) are clean programs that are bundled with spyware to reduce or eliminate the price to the user. GetRight and CuteFTP did this only for a short time, most notably the GetRight author apologized and removed the payload.

Since you apparently misunderstood what I posted, I repeat, CuteFTP was never itself spyware. CuteFTP did include adware/spyware. This was years before there was any Adaware or Spybot around, those of us who actually had the Aureate and Timesink garbage from CuteFTP had to remove it manually. Their adware payload, like all adware payloads, kept track of clicks and that is what we objected to. I couldn't care less about weasel words such as No personally identifiable information was collected or transmitted. The speed with which these companies ran away from adware/spyware is all the proof I need. But if you need to see more, read here and here (just two quick google hits, you can easily find more!).

HACE is another story however, be very careful with them. I managed to locate an archived readme for ShellGem v1.5. Here is a direct rip ...

IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THIS SERVICE, WEB3000.COM, INC. WILL COLLECT INFORMATION FROM YOUR WEB USAGE THAT WILL BE ANONYMOUS TO THIRD PARTIES. WEB3000.COM, INC. MAY DERIVE CONSUMER OR CONSUMPTION PREFERENCE PROFILES FROM YOUR BASIC CONTACT INFORMATION AND WEB USAGE

I just went poking around their website and see that both ShellGem and OOC are still available for download. Suspiciously their respective FAQ webpages are 'unavailable'. Hmmm. But what about their new utility? From what I can see on this page about their new Mmm it looks suspicious, here is an interesting section ...

So, Mmm does not spy. Then why is my firewall warning me that Mmm tries to access the internet all the time?

Mmm is looking for an update of itself. It will do that once every day. If during the daily check there is no internet connection available, Mmm will try again every hour. Once it has checked for an update it will remain quiet for another 24 hours. There will be bug-fixes and minor updates also for Mmm FREE. Mmm does not spy. No information about you or your system is transmitted during this check. You can turn the Auto-check for updates option off if this bothers you.

No Adware? But Mmm FREE it is filled with ads?

Those 'ads' in Mmm FREE are just humorous hype of Mmm+. The space was available, so why not push Mmm+ there. It could do with the monetary support. There is absolutely no external adware/spyware delivered with Mmm.

I also looked at their sitemap and there is no prominent spyware disclaimer to be found. After getting caught in the past, the sensible thing to do is to own up and correct the situation. IMHO, they have not done this. So, based on this admittedly quick research and that snippet of info from their own Mmm FAQ my recommendation is not to trust them. You are free however to stick your neck out. :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had looked at MMM a while ago and was unimpressed; there were things I didn't like about it's implementation - I'm a Linux person an d also a pretty paranoid Windows user, so I am alert for strange Dll's , registry entries and all that. But I never investigated MMM, I just didn't like it.

IMHO in the Win environment ANY "heads-up" is welcome - clueless users will shrug their shoulders, devotees will scream, power users will just reinstall Win, and folks like us will investigate.Thanks!

BTW, CTH, in my system I only see you as the Harl... :) (See image.)

I grabbed Fast Explore and will investigate.

MRK

post-85824-1225372242_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had looked at MMM a while ago and was unimpressed; there were things I didn't like about it's implementation - I'm a Linux person an d also a pretty paranoid Windows user, so I am alert for strange Dll's , registry entries and all that. But I never investigated MMM, I just didn't like it.

IMHO in the Win environment ANY "heads-up" is welcome - clueless users will shrug their shoulders, devotees will scream, power users will just reinstall Win, and folks like us will investigate.Thanks!

BTW, CTH, in my system I only see you as the Harl... :) (See image.)

I grabbed Fast Explore and will investigate.

LOL, CharlotteTheHarl... that's all I see in the left column also.

As protected as we are on Win9x with Opera/Firefox, we can still pick up a buttload of spyware/adware from running older program installers like those mentioned above. My best method of tracking changes involves snapshots made before/after doing anything risky. At the very least there must be a complete registry export and complete filelist. Doing this allows you to backstep manually to the previous condition.

As I mentioned in that other thread, I have no experience with that Fast Explorer thing. And no-one else jumped in yet with personal experience. But the thing looks pretty dang cool to me. Please let us all know how it works out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
Surely SOMEONE has (and I have been looking for about a year) has figured how to move, add a space, or even better, allow a complete "hack" of the basic Windows Explorer Context menu, so I don't try to DELETE something when I just want to RENAME it?
Golly! Someone other than muself finally asked this question.  :thumbup I wish I had a dollar for everytime I deleted something when I just wanted to rename it.  :realmad:

But, there is still no solution to the OP?

Edited by videobruce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Surely SOMEONE has (and I have been looking for about a year) has figured how to move, add a space, or even better, allow a complete "hack" of the basic Windows Explorer Context menu, so I don't try to DELETE something when I just want to RENAME it?

Sorry I didn't see this post earlier... I'm on Win98SE... not XP... so I don't often look around in the XP section...

I modified my Explorer menus a few years ago... for the reason you have stated...

On Win98SE, you can use RESHACKER to modify menus 210 & 216 in Shell32.dll to move "DELETE" away from "RENAME"...

It may be different on XP... and probably is... but this will give you the basic idea...

Hope this helps...

post-58269-1240005114_thumb.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use to use that program to change the splash screen within the ntoskrnl.exe file when I ran 2k.

Now I use TuneUp Utilities ability to just add different splash screens to that file (or how ever it is done).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...