Register forum user name Search FAQ

Gammon Forum

Notice: Any messages purporting to come from this site telling you that your password has expired, or that you need to verify your details, confirm your email, resolve issues, making threats, or asking for money, are spam. We do not email users with any such messages. If you have lost your password you can obtain a new one by using the password reset link.

Due to spam on this forum, all posts now need moderator approval.

 Entire forum ➜ MUSHclient ➜ Suggestions ➜ Is it possible for the GUI to be updated?
Is it possible for the GUI to be updated?

It is now over 60 days since the last post. This thread is closed.     Refresh page

Pages: 1  2 3  4  

Posted by Worstje   Netherlands  (899 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #15 on Thu 02 Oct 2008 12:35 AM (UTC)

Amended on Thu 02 Oct 2008 12:38 AM (UTC) by Worstje

Message
Cage_fire2000:

There is indeed quite a big change in the underlying architecture. Operating systems work with a good number of layers, and programming .NET is a far different layer than a device driver which goes in a far lower layer. Windows 9x is old and crap for todays standards, and crashes due to those lower layers being quite unrefined compared to todays standards. They were revised, updated, upgraded, rewritten until it became more solid. Think back: when those versions were designed, the Internet was just getting a hold. It wasn't setup for multi-user environments, whereas 2000 and higher are. And that is not all that changed.

In the old days, things crashed and a reboot followed... and if things worked, people were happy. Nowadays, people expect their equipment to work, be easy to use and require little knowledge to operate. It is an entire change in philosophy.

Let me ask you a question. Would you like to drive around in a car of 40 years ago? They are quite difficult to maintain and lack all the comforts we take for granted in cars nowadays. Sure, there are fanatics for everything, who enjoy maintaining them and dealing with problems as they arise (parts aren't being made anymore, etc). Computers are the same - except that things just move faster. Blame Moore's law.
Top
Posted by David Haley   USA  (3,881 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #16 on Thu 02 Oct 2008 03:11 AM (UTC)
Message
I've actually written something that approaches a device driver -- except that I was writing something on top of the actual device driver (in this case, the serial port driver). Serial ports happen to be dirt simple in that you're just shuffling bytes around, but even so you depend on the functionality exposed by the OS. If a different OS has a different API, then sure, you might only need to change a few lines of code, but you have to figure out which lines exactly you need to change, and what to change them do. This can be several days' worth of work, at best. For more complicated drivers -- or if you start using modern layers to make your life easier, let alone modern languages like .NET -- who knows how long it could take?

Besides, even simple things like having a multiple user computer can totally change how you write a driver, because you might have to set everything up to talk to the OS's security layer, for example. Supporting an older OS would mean figuring out a whole new set of things to do or not do.

And then there's still the basic question: how many people do you really think are in your shoes? Clearly that are some, but do you really think that number exceeds a few percent? I don't have any data, and I suspect nobody here does, but Win '98 is becoming a pretty rare beast.

And finally, just a brief repetition because I think it was missed: MS isn't even supporting development on older platforms anymore. So somebody who wants to write code for them has to either already know how to do it, or learn via other means, and you also need to get older versions of the various runtime libraries (the whole libcrt.dll thing).
David Haley aka Ksilyan
Head Programmer,
Legends of the Darkstone

http://david.the-haleys.org
Top
Posted by Shadowfyr   USA  (1,790 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #17 on Thu 02 Oct 2008 04:11 PM (UTC)
Message
Oh, don't give me the "mojave experiment" BS Larkin. I laughed my ass off the first time I saw the commercial. Some clowns from Microsoft get what ***has to be*** optimized, or at least sufficient, machines, stuff Vista and a bunch of their own programs on it, then sit a bunch of clueless rubes down to use it, under carefully controlled conditions, in which they can stack the deck any way they want, and this is **supposed** to address all the statements ever made by people in the real world, running *other* non-Microsoft applications, trying to deal with its screwed up security model, trying to configure it in ways that are not "standard", trying to install it with other OSes, and every other damn thing you know bloody well they where neither allowed to do/try, never mind was done or tried, by the people setting up the "experiment". It might as well have been you in a car with a salesman, taking a "test drive" for a few blocks around the sales lot (don't worry, the plastic pegs holding all the panels on won't break for 6 months and the engine is guaranteed to not fall out for "at least" 500 miles). lol

Seriously, I didn't think anyone would fall for that nonsense, it was so blindingly obvious that they would have near complete control over what got put on the machines, what hardware it ran on, etc. They might as well handed everyone a fracking XBox 360, where things work perfectly (well at least the OS, though the hardware is a bit iffy) then claimed "that" was Vista.

Oh, and.. Just to be clear, what "features" of the new GUI are so great that you need them, or, more to the point, haven't been basically stolen from some version of Linux that was testing them 5 years before Vista was ever released? ;)
Top
Posted by Larkin   (278 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #18 on Thu 02 Oct 2008 07:44 PM (UTC)
Message
To each his own then. Maybe I'm just the only person who doesn't work for Microsoft and loves Windows Vista. Not worth the time and effort to explain why I love it to people who are most definitely not going to agree. :P
Top
Posted by Cage_fire_2000   USA  (119 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #19 on Fri 03 Oct 2008 03:04 AM (UTC)

Amended on Fri 03 Oct 2008 03:13 AM (UTC) by Cage_fire_2000

Message
Darn it, you guys took away my main justification for hating the guys that no longer do older OSes. I just thought they do 2-3 different versions, what is the trouble of one more, but I guess I was wrong. I can't exactly hate them for not making them for my OS, after all, MS released XP soon after and just abandoned it, it was only bad timing I got my current OS instead of XP, if I had gotten my computer from Dell just a short time later I would have XP on it right now. Oh well, it was a gift from my uncle kind of, so I can't complain too much. I have another better speced computer I got from a garage sale that has XP, and I've been meaning to copy my stuff over onto it, but I haven't had free time, and I'm a bit concerned about a mild burning smell I noticed when I turned it on, I assume it was because it hadn't been used for a while and had dust in it. Also, I really didn't feel like resetting up all my apps. Moving to a new computer is a bit of a chore, kinda like starting over after a reformat and OS reinstall, it really sucks, especially when you've spent years getting all the programs and shortcuts and settings just how you like them. Especially when your old computer already had 2 HDDs which makes it a lot harder than just taking the old HD out of the old one, installing it in the new one as a secondary drive, then being able to access all your files while copying stuff over.(Still have to reinstall all the programs and such.)

I suppose I'll eventually have to get around to moving my stuff over to a new PC(either when I have the time or when my current computer breaks down, if it's the former I'll give my current computer to my brother, it's more than enough for what he uses the computer for, and it'd probably be able to access the wireless network better than his current one.(It keeps getting a BSOD at odd times, BTW, Win 2000 really sucks, on older BSODs you could just hit enter to try to recover, in Win 2000 it seems it gives an obscure message and you have to reset your computer using the reset button, or maybe it's just my brothers computer)).

Anyway, I drifted way off topic, but my point still stands, there might not be a great number of people still stuck on older computers, but they do exist, older computers that can't handle newer OSes don't just disappear, they're either sold at garage sales, perhaps refurbished, maybe donated somewhere like maybe a thrift store, I just can't imagine people throwing away perfectly working computers just because they won't run the newest stuff. I mean Commodores are still drifting around everywhere and their specs completely suck relative to new computers, I mean I'm not sure the processor speed, but they only had 64-128 /K/ of RAM, I still find it amazing they still were able to run so many games with cool graphics with only that much RAM.

Edit: BTW, Win XP sucks in some places too compared to older OSes: 1.) Alt-Ctrl-Del doesn't freeze running apps and allow you to end task anything, it keeps running and you have to wait for the dialog to come up(because one of the main reasons to end task is it's lagging the computer). 2.) I once tried to end task something as Admin, and it said I didn't have permission, who the heck thought of putting permissions in to end task, and why did they allow it to be made so even the admin couldn't do it? I almost had to pop out the batteries and unplug the darn laptop. 3.) File/Folder sharing, by default there's no security, anybody on the network can access it, the only control is whether it's read only or full. You have to find an obscure setting to enable any kind of security, and then it's per user, and the per folder passwords are gone, which I suppose now that I think about it allows more specific control over who has access to what from the computer doing the sharing, but I had to setup identical user accounts on all computers involved, which was annoying. Alright, end rant, need to get sleep for work tomorrow.
Top
Posted by David Haley   USA  (3,881 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #20 on Fri 03 Oct 2008 05:47 PM (UTC)
Message
Quote:
and I'm a bit concerned about a mild burning smell I noticed when I turned it on, I assume it was because it hadn't been used for a while and had dust in it.

I'd suggest opening it up and using one of those compressed air canisters if you have one, or if not, a vacuum cleaner or even good old fashioned blowing (just make sure you close your nose/eyes...). If the burning smell continues, it might be more serious. But it could just be the layers of dust/dirt/etc. that are burning.

Quote:
I once tried to end task something as Admin, and it said I didn't have permission, who the heck thought of putting permissions in to end task, and why did they allow it to be made so even the admin couldn't do it?

It's weird that an admin couldn't do it, but this is one of the realities of multiple-user computers. If you and I are sharing a computer, I sure don't want you to be able to arbitrarily kill my programs. ;)
David Haley aka Ksilyan
Head Programmer,
Legends of the Darkstone

http://david.the-haleys.org
Top
Posted by WillFa   USA  (525 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #21 on Fri 03 Oct 2008 06:53 PM (UTC)
Message
Quote:
It's weird that an admin couldn't do it, but this is one of the realities of multiple-user computers. If you and I are sharing a computer, I sure don't want you to be able to arbitrarily kill my programs. ;)


Actually, if you have admin rights, you have *permission* to do it. If the process is kernel mode and flagged as critical, or windows thinks a debugger has been attached to the process, windows will keep system stability in tact by not allowing the task to be ended.

If it's a random task that you're trying to kill that way, run a virus scan on your machine.
Top
Posted by Shadowfyr   USA  (1,790 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #22 on Fri 03 Oct 2008 07:18 PM (UTC)
Message
Well, at least for me Larkin, Vista is said to only make the same issues that have driven me nuts trying to get XP set up the way I wanted, worse. I am sure it would work.. OK, if I had it. I am also sure that I would have to upgrade my video, which is right now at least adequate, and that would mean upgrading other stuff too, including possibly the MB. The cost of a "decent" version of the OS, along with the price of buying **good** components (and not just some $1,000 pre-built that cuts down the standards on everything from the mother board to who knows what else to keep the cost sane), just doesn't make it viable at the moment. Its even less viable, given that an OS hasn't sunk this fast since IBM's OS/2, and that was "also" mostly Microsoft's fault, but for an entirely different reason, mainly that Microsoft was even more anti-third party at the time and between 95 and 98 opted to "break" compatibility by changing how a lot of things got loaded, and the entry points needed to use OS/2 as a shell over Windows (it basically did the same thing WINE does, but to the kernel, not just a few DLLs. (Some nice features of that OS, like proper memory safeguards, where never introduced in Windows *until* XP, and some other feature still are not at all).

It simply costs too much by itself, never mind with new hardware, and with my having to bang my head trying to "fix" things that barely work right after "fixing" them in XP as it is, just so I can maybe play some games that I can probably just buy for the XBox instead. Your argument is sort of like... "Limos are so much nicer than compacts, why doesn't everyone buy a Limo?", while ignoring all of the down sides to that theory. That they may not be down sides to you means nothing at all. Besides, like I said, nothing MS has done in the last few versions has been theirs, its been **badly** implemented versions of experimental features other OSes already had in them. Its like playing in Second Life. Lots of wonderful stuff, if it worked perfectly, but almost ***none*** of it ever works 100% right, 100% of the time (or even 80% right 50% of the time, in some cases). I have to deal with that with a virtual world, I don't need to deal with it in my real world OS as well. ;)
Top
Posted by Cage_fire_2000   USA  (119 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #23 on Fri 03 Oct 2008 09:35 PM (UTC)

Amended on Fri 03 Oct 2008 09:39 PM (UTC) by Cage_fire_2000

Message
The process I was trying to kill was the Norton AntiVirus installer I got when I signed up for DSL. It hung in the middle of installation and it wouldn't let me kill the task, I could swear it said something like not having permission. I think I managed to stop it by hitting Start menu Shutdown, and restarting the computer that way. Then I installed it little by little instead of all at once, which seemed to work, BTW, does anybody know a good Antivirus program as good or better than Norton that could possibly run on Win ME and is free? Just a long shot there. Edit: I tried installing the version that came with my DSL on my desktop but it slowed the entire computer down to a crawl to the point I had to disable it. Then I just installed it on my laptop where it seems to work just fine. Also, it overwrote the old version of NAV I had and for some reason the new version doesn't have the ability to set reminders which I used a lot. You know, schedule a message to be displayed at certain times, I coded my own program for my brothers computer, but since I'm not sure how to create a new scheduled task using Windows task scheduler from within VB6, I had to set the message time and text manually.
Top
Posted by Nick Gammon   Australia  (23,133 posts)  Bio   Forum Administrator
Date Reply #24 on Sat 04 Oct 2008 03:21 AM (UTC)
Message
I am using AVG:

http://www.avg.com/

That seems pretty reasonable, and they have a free (limited) version.
- Nick Gammon

www.gammon.com.au, www.mushclient.com
Top
Posted by Zyj   (1 post)  Bio
Date Reply #25 on Fri 12 Dec 2008 06:03 AM (UTC)
Message
I know RAM is getting cheaper, but I wonder what on earth the core operating system needs to do, that it needs another 600 Mb of RAM compared to XP?
Top
Posted by Curious2   (47 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #26 on Mon 26 Jan 2009 12:11 AM (UTC)
Message
Wow you guys just totally sidetracked the orginal statement. You know I get annoyed when people say "I could care less". So what! Everyone else is not you! Maybe some people like decent looking interfaces. It's the same way with graphics games. I'd much rather play graphic games on an Xbox 360 or some of the newer games on my PC that require at least 1GB RAM than some ancient game where the graphics suck. I pulled out one of my old Rainbow Six Rogue Spear games the other day and the graphics suck so bad I just stopped playing. Maybe its because I got used to the newer graphics of games like Rainbow Six Vegas.

I think being able to have a newer looking them would be nice.
Top
Posted by Nick Gammon   Australia  (23,133 posts)  Bio   Forum Administrator
Date Reply #27 on Mon 26 Jan 2009 02:18 AM (UTC)
Message
I tried to add the manifest file to update the look of the GUI, without success.
- Nick Gammon

www.gammon.com.au, www.mushclient.com
Top
Posted by Zeno   USA  (2,871 posts)  Bio
Date Reply #28 on Tue 27 Jan 2009 06:58 PM (UTC)
Message
Being a Windows 7 user now, I'm in support of a updated GUI. :P
Zeno McDohl,
Owner of Bleached InuYasha Galaxy
http://www.biyg.org
Top
Posted by Nick Gammon   Australia  (23,133 posts)  Bio   Forum Administrator
Date Reply #29 on Tue 27 Jan 2009 09:04 PM (UTC)

Amended on Wed 28 Jan 2009 05:30 AM (UTC) by Nick Gammon

Message
See this thread:

http://www.gammon.com.au/forum/bbshowpost.php?bbsubject_id=4782

I got an updated look by making a file called MUSHclient.exe.manifest containing the following:


<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?>
<assembly
   xmlns="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:asm.v1"
   manifestVersion="1.0">
<assemblyIdentity
    processorArchitecture="x86"
    version="5.1.0.0"
    type="win32"
    name="MUSHclient.exe"/>
    <description>MUSHclient</description>
    <dependency>
    <dependentAssembly>
    <assemblyIdentity
         type="win32"
         name="Microsoft.Windows.Common-Controls"
         version="6.0.0.0"
         publicKeyToken="6595b64144ccf1df"
         language="*"
         processorArchitecture="x86"/>
    </dependentAssembly>
    </dependency>
</assembly>


Save this file (as MUSHclient.exe.manifest) in the same directory as MUSHclient.exe. In other words, put the above text (in a file named MUSHclient.exe.manifest) into the same directory as the MUSHclient executable.

Screen shot follows.
- Nick Gammon

www.gammon.com.au, www.mushclient.com
Top

The dates and times for posts above are shown in Universal Co-ordinated Time (UTC).

To show them in your local time you can join the forum, and then set the 'time correction' field in your profile to the number of hours difference between your location and UTC time.

148,004 views.

This is page 2, subject is 4 pages long:  [Previous page]  1  2 3  4  [Next page]

It is now over 60 days since the last post. This thread is closed.     Refresh page

Go to topic:           Search the forum

[Go to top] top

Information and images on this site are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia License unless stated otherwise.

Home