i have a list of song lurics in a folder on my desktop. Recently some of the
list is in blue text. Can anyone tell me why and how to correct this?

myst wrote:
> i have a list of song lurics in a folder on my desktop. Recently some of the
> list is in blue text. Can anyone tell me why and how to correct this?

Play one and it will change back to black. XP compresses files after a
certain length of time if they are not used. It's nothing to worry about.

M

M wrote:
> myst wrote:
>> i have a list of song lurics in a folder on my desktop. Recently some
>> of the list is in blue text. Can anyone tell me why and how to correct
>> this?
>
> Play one and it will change back to black. XP compresses files after a
> certain length of time if they are not used. It's nothing to worry about.
>
> M

Oh, list of songs. Open one.

Alias

myst wrote:
> i have a list of song lurics in a folder on my desktop. Recently some of the
> list is in blue text. Can anyone tell me why and how to correct this?


By design, WinXP automatically compresses files that do not get used
frequently, and, if you've left the default settings intact, displays
those files in blue. If you wish to change this behavior, in Windows
Explorer, click Tools > Folder Options > View > Advanced settings: Show
encrypted or compressed NTFS files in color.


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

"myst" wrote:

> i have a list of song lurics in a folder on my desktop. Recently some of the
> list is in blue text. Can anyone tell me why and how to correct this?

This mean that these files/folders are compressed and nothing to worry about.

It looks like when you did run Disk Clean up you selected to compress the
system files/folders to save space.

You can uncompress these files/folders by right click on the file and select
properties then Advanced Tab and you can uncheK:

[ ] Compress content to save disk space.

Click [OK] then [OK] again to close the window of the file properties.

Or Open a folder or windows explorer click Tools, select Folder Options and
then View. From there scroll down and find the check box that says
[ ]Show encrypted or compressed files in color << = remove the check mark.

HTH,
nass
---
http://www.nasstec.co.uk

myst wrote:
> i have a list of song lurics in a folder on my desktop. Recently
> some of the list is in blue text. Can anyone tell me why and how to
> correct this?

You have not used some of those in a while, they were compressed to save
space - there is nothing really to correct.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Correct what?

myst wrote:
> i have a list of song lurics in a folder on my desktop. Recently some of
> the
> list is in blue text. Can anyone tell me why and how to correct this?

"myst" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:40D30657-6A01-4826-915B-(E-Mail Removed)
> i have a list of song lurics in a folder on my desktop. Recently some
> of the list is in blue text. Can anyone tell me why and how to
> correct this?

What the ??

Bruce gave a rudimentary but correct response though he neglected to
mention that no fix was necessary and couldn't be bothered with any kind
of interpersonal skill.

Nass gave a full, satisfactory response and covered the bases that
needed covering, including addressing the OP's concerns. Clear, concise
and polite.

Shenan came along with a more or less rudimentary "me too" response,
briefly reiterating what was in the previous posts. There was no reason
to make that post.

The PA comes along and smarts off with a "correct what" totally uncalled
for response. There was no reason to make that post.

Except for nass, you guys always plug up legitimate threads from
perfectly fine questions posed by possibly less experienced querants.
Why?
Why do all of you *except nass* feel the need to make useless,
repeat, nonsense and otherwise silly reiterative posts?
What, were you just too lazy to read nass's post and notice that he
covered off the question quite well? Even if nass had been the first
response, the only difference in the thread would be that Bruce's post
was below nass's. What sort of ego causes otherwise half-fast thinking
people like you to operate in such inane ways SO many times in SO many
different groups? Are you all attached at the hip or something (I said
"hip" to be polite)? And if you're going to claim to be an MVP, that
was pretty stupid of you Pennsylvania.

If you're going to put a limit on experience of querants before you
consider them acceptable queries, I respectfully suggest you go to where
there are no newbies. Start your own forums and "me too" yourselves all
you want.

Twayne

<snipped>
<since Twayne did nothing but stroke their own ego by attempting to belittle
others>

Twayne wrote:
> What the ??
>
> Bruce gave a rudimentary but correct response though he neglected to
> mention that no fix was necessary and couldn't be bothered with any
> kind of interpersonal skill.
>
> Nass gave a full, satisfactory response and covered the bases that
> needed covering, including addressing the OP's concerns. Clear,
> concise and polite.
>
> Shenan came along with a more or less rudimentary "me too" response,
> briefly reiterating what was in the previous posts. There was no
> reason to make that post.
>
> The PA comes along and smarts off with a "correct what" totally
> uncalled for response. There was no reason to make that post.
>
> Except for nass, you guys always plug up legitimate threads from
> perfectly fine questions posed by possibly less experienced
> querants. Why?
> Why do all of you *except nass* feel the need to make useless,
> repeat, nonsense and otherwise silly reiterative posts?
> What, were you just too lazy to read nass's post and notice that he
> covered off the question quite well? Even if nass had been the
> first response, the only difference in the thread would be that
> Bruce's post was below nass's. What sort of ego causes otherwise
> half-fast thinking people like you to operate in such inane ways SO
> many times in SO many different groups? Are you all attached at
> the hip or something (I said "hip" to be polite)? And if you're
> going to claim to be an MVP, that was pretty stupid of you
> Pennsylvania.
> If you're going to put a limit on experience of querants before you
> consider them acceptable queries, I respectfully suggest you go to
> where there are no newbies. Start your own forums and "me too"
> yourselves all you want.

Twayne,

Look at the times.

If the time between postings is less than a few minutes - there is a good
chance someone was answering at the same time and it is just getting
synched/noticed. The time varies - but with human factors only - I'd say 10
minutes, add in server synchs, 20 minutes?

Example: I go to a newsgroup - click on it and start reading/answering
posts. My newsreader (Outlook Express in this case) will not update the
posts with anything on the server *until I tell it to do so*. So in the few
moments I take to answer a post - someone else could give the same answer.
I won't know until I refresh that particular group/leave and come back
later.

Example: I use one news server - you use another. It will take time for
those to synch - if ever. So I could answer a posting and 10 minutes later
you answer a posting and until 30 minutres later - neither of us will know
the other answered.

Question asked at 11:26AM Central time.

First two answers show to be posted at 11:44AM, mine at 11:48AM and only
then do things start spreading out a bit.

The only completely useless response that made no effort beyond trying to up
their own ego that I see - yours.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

Besides a registry cleaner tout you're now a newsgroup editor???????
"Twayne" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> "myst" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:40D30657-6A01-4826-915B-(E-Mail Removed)
>> i have a list of song lurics in a folder on my desktop. Recently some
>> of the list is in blue text. Can anyone tell me why and how to
>> correct this?
>
> What the ??
>
> Bruce gave a rudimentary but correct response though he neglected to
> mention that no fix was necessary and couldn't be bothered with any kind
> of interpersonal skill.
>
> Nass gave a full, satisfactory response and covered the bases that needed
> covering, including addressing the OP's concerns. Clear, concise and
> polite.
>
> Shenan came along with a more or less rudimentary "me too" response,
> briefly reiterating what was in the previous posts. There was no reason
> to make that post.
>
> The PA comes along and smarts off with a "correct what" totally uncalled
> for response. There was no reason to make that post.
>
> Except for nass, you guys always plug up legitimate threads from perfectly
> fine questions posed by possibly less experienced querants.
> Why?
> Why do all of you *except nass* feel the need to make useless, repeat,
> nonsense and otherwise silly reiterative posts?
> What, were you just too lazy to read nass's post and notice that he
> covered off the question quite well? Even if nass had been the first
> response, the only difference in the thread would be that Bruce's post was
> below nass's. What sort of ego causes otherwise half-fast thinking people
> like you to operate in such inane ways SO many times in SO many different
> groups? Are you all attached at the hip or something (I said "hip" to be
> polite)? And if you're going to claim to be an MVP, that was pretty
> stupid of you Pennsylvania.
>
> If you're going to put a limit on experience of querants before you
> consider them acceptable queries, I respectfully suggest you go to where
> there are no newbies. Start your own forums and "me too" yourselves all
> you want.
>
> Twayne
>
>
>
>