By default, typically, numeric keypad (numlock) is On/Off?

On my Intel mainboard, the numeric keypad is on by default, so it does
not type numbers. Is that typical for most personal computers?

Thanks.

John Doe wrote:
> By default, typically, numeric keypad (numlock) is On/Off?
>
> On my Intel mainboard, the numeric keypad is on by default, so it does
> not type numbers. Is that typical for most personal computers?
>
> Thanks.

Can't you change it in the BIOS?

--
SteveH

"SteveH" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> John Doe wrote:

>> By default, typically, numeric keypad (numlock) is On/Off?
>>
>> On my Intel mainboard, the numeric keypad is on by default, so it
>> does not type numbers. Is that typical for most personal
>> computers?
>>
>> Thanks.
>
> Can't you change it in the BIOS?

I need to know whether the default numeric keypad state for most
systems causes printing numbers or whether it causes executing
function keys like left/right and pageup/pagedown.

"John Doe" wrote:
> By default, typically, numeric keypad (numlock) is On/Off?
>
> On my Intel mainboard, the numeric keypad is on by default, so it does
> not type numbers. Is that typical for most personal computers?

When my "NumLock" is "ON", it *does* type numbers. Unless that was a typo,
your keyboard logic is backwards.

Jon

"Jon Danniken" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

....

> When my "NumLock" is "ON", it *does* type numbers. Unless that
> was a typo, your keyboard logic is backwards.

That was not my main question, but I was wondering about that. Actually
I was referring to the BIOS setting, since I do not have lights on this
cordless keyboard. So I did some research and found out that Windows XP
remembers the last state of the numeric keypad and applies it on boot,
ignoring the BIOS setting. So I figured NumLock was on when in fact it
was off. I found an ultra tiny utility/script that displays the three
major locking keys status on the system tray, that might be useful for
a cordless keyboard user.

On Thu, 28 May 2009 17:46:26 GMT, John Doe <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>"Jon Danniken" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>...
>
>> When my "NumLock" is "ON", it *does* type numbers. Unless that
>> was a typo, your keyboard logic is backwards.
>
>That was not my main question, but I was wondering about that. Actually
>I was referring to the BIOS setting, since I do not have lights on this
>cordless keyboard. So I did some research and found out that Windows XP
>remembers the last state of the numeric keypad and applies it on boot,
>ignoring the BIOS setting. So I figured NumLock was on when in fact it
>was off. I found an ultra tiny utility/script that displays the three
>major locking keys status on the system tray, that might be useful for
>a cordless keyboard user.

My Logitech wireless keyboard tells you onscreen whether numlock is on
or off when you press the key. I reckon you're right about XP
remembering, because I can always tell when my wife has used the
computer: she always sets numlock on and I prefer it off.
--
Robin
(BrE)
Herts, England

DJT <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> John Doe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> I found an ultra tiny utility/script that displays the three
>> major locking keys status on the system tray, that might be useful for
>> a cordless keyboard user.

> Where did you find the utility.
> I use MS Excel to tell me the status of the keyboard lights at the
> moment. A seperate utility would be handy

I found it on some Web forum. It is < 200KB if you want me to e-mail
it to you.

If you want to search...

The filename is
KeyInfo(WithErrorLevel&Tooltips7).exe

The other version is probably just "KeyInfo".

It comes with eight ICO files, 32 x 32. With an icon editor, you can
make those look however you want.

http://www.donationcoder.com/Forums/...php?topic=4181

Strangely... Another utility I have that displays a stroke information
is also named KeyInfo.

I would avoid the other ones.

Unfortunately, I am getting some negative indications about that file.

The file "KeyInfo(WithErrorLevel&Tooltips7).exe" near the bottom of the
mentioned web page appears to be much cleaner than the shorter named
version. I have a feeling that the virus scanning stuff is somewhat
faulty. My guess is that they do not like script files.

Just be sure to scan whatever/if you decide to use a file from that web
page.