Gape Posted November 8, 2004 Author Posted November 8, 2004 what type of icons are u going to be using?I think lots of users don't need these new icons. So I think I can remove this feature. What do you think?In 1.x, new icons were from Windows 2000.
eGo®Z Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 it looks good and MS has made it in 2 OS (WinME and W2K) - i think it can be used as an option.
MasterT Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 I like very much the look of the desktop with the new icons taken from win 2000 so I sugest that they can be added as an option so that the ones who don't like them coul disable this option.
ssmokee Posted November 8, 2004 Posted November 8, 2004 I think lots of users don't need these new icons. So I think I can remove this feature. What do you think?In 1.x, new icons were from Windows 2000.I much prefer the win2k icons and colour scheme. Im using a Samsung LCD monitor and I find win98 colour scheme to be way too over-bright. I vote to keep it, or atleast make it optional.
Sonict Posted November 9, 2004 Posted November 9, 2004 I agree. It makes the OS look professional. Please keep it.
azagahl Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 Hi, the Sp 1.6.2 is great, am using it currently.Maybe 2.0 should include these:-True Type font properties extension (ttfext.exe)-DOS prompt here (doshere.exe)BTW, does 1.6.2 include the effects of VXD fix (vdx_fix.bat)? Does it actually help or is it superstition?
celtish Posted November 12, 2004 Posted November 12, 2004 I suggest replacing windows notepad with metapad.exe. It's a straight drop-in replacement, just change its name to notepad.exe and slip it into the windows directory. It's can handle large volumes and is very versatile and also shows URL addresses as hyperlinks, very useful. PS - Incorporating explore-from-here (and removing explore) and move-to and copy-to in the right-click menu would also be good.
soldier1st Posted November 19, 2004 Posted November 19, 2004 replace the taskmanager that comes with win 98 se with a w2k style one
Tarun Posted November 19, 2004 Posted November 19, 2004 BTW, does 1.6.2 include the effects of VXD fix (vdx_fix.bat)? Does it actually help or is it superstition?I recently looked into this and found it is all just a rumor. By loading the one vmm32.vxd file you actually save load time and resources, along with memory.I ran a series of tests and found that just having the vmm32.vxd file loading was faster, and much more efficient.
kurt476 Posted November 19, 2004 Posted November 19, 2004 how about a new task manger? here is the site i gave some1 it on this threadhttp://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=32174
soldier1st Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 what about adding the AlwaysUnloadDll Registry Tweakif you run 32 bit apps then it's worthwhile but if you run 16 bit it might complain n give errors
kurt476 Posted November 20, 2004 Posted November 20, 2004 true soldier1st but it always good because like when you run win 32 bit apps you need to unload i think there is a tweak to unload 16 bit apps too
azagahl Posted November 21, 2004 Posted November 21, 2004 >I ran a series of tests and found that just having the vmm32.vxd file loading was >faster, and much more efficient.What about when vmm32 is largely full of useless files? It seems like in a patched system with a lot of vxd files, vmm32 is going to be largely a waste, full of obsolete files. It might even be better to have an empty or non-existent vmm32 (if that's possible).Would it make sense for sp 2.0 to automatically update the vmm32?
chankya Posted November 21, 2004 Posted November 21, 2004 Dear Gapewhy are u too vary about adding me and xp's file in unofficial ver. u don't have me or xp ver or any thig else.why don't u add http://www.mdgx.com/ address in u'r link so that every body find the great idea of converting 98 to me and xp.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now