Where do these sounds come from?

[Char Jackson]

Indeed. But doing it silently, i. e. such that it updates without asking
_unless_ you've turned it off, worries some people.

There have always been a small percentage of people for whom the sky
is about to fall. The rest of us don't live our lives that way.

 

[BillW50]

In Char Jackson typed:

There have always been a small percentage of people for whom the sky
is about to fall. The rest of us don't live our lives that way.

Actually some of us realize that older versions worked better.

"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when
there is nothing left to take away."
Antoine de Saint-Exupery - French writer (1900 - 1944)

 

[Nil]

I see a time coming soon that the user will no longer have a choice.
Heck it is already this way for server installs. Like for example you
can have the Windows Live 2008, 2009, or 2011 server install, and all
you will install is the latest and greatest version anyway. Times are
changing for sure.

If you're trying to tell me that Windows Server constantly updates
itself, uncontrollable by the adminsitrator... I don't believe you for
a second.

If you are trying to tell me that an administrator has no control over
what version of Server he installs, I don't believe that, either.

Anybody who has ever run a production server knows that you don't
update anything without careful consideration, testing, and means of
recovery.

 

[BillW50]

In Nil typed:

If you're trying to tell me that Windows Server constantly updates
itself, uncontrollable by the adminsitrator... I don't believe you for
a second.

If you are trying to tell me that an administrator has no control over
what version of Server he installs, I don't believe that, either.

Anybody who has ever run a production server knows that you don't
update anything without careful consideration, testing, and means of
recovery.

I think we are talking about two different things. There are installs
that doesn't have the actual applications, drivers, etc, but rather send
you to the manufacture's server instead. For example, if you want to
download Windows Live Mail 2009 and you download it and install you
usually get this today:

http://www.w7forums.com/upgrading-wlm-2011-wlm-2009-a-t12671.html

And Boris says: "Should I run into trouble in either event, I have
looked for WLM 2009 on the inet, but even when it says 'download WLM
2009 here', it always turns out to be WLM 2011. Anyone have a URL for
WLM 2009?"

And this problem is coming up more and more. I just tried Logitech
SetPoint driver and it is also the same. The install sends you to
Logitech's server and all you can get is Logitech's latest driver. Which
doesn't work on this Windows 2000 machine.

 

[Char Jackson]

In Char Jackson typed:

Actually some of us realize that older versions worked better.

There are some examples of that, but by and large it's not true.

 

[Char Jackson]

It's no longer there.

Didn't you say earlier that "they _haven't_ (yet?) removed the feature
(blocking third-party) - they've just made it difficult to invoke."?
And now you're saying it's no longer there? Which is it?

available through about:config, then it's obviously not intended for

That's it.

the average user, in which case the add-on is available to all. I
really don't have a problem with that.

[]
But why is it there at all if it isn't to be used? Who _is_ it there
for?

I assume that's rhetorical.

 

[Nil]

But why is it there at all if it isn't to be used? Who _is_ it
there for?

It's vestigial. Like your tail bone.

 

[Paul]

It's vestigial. Like your tail bone.

Firefox has 1.2 million lines of code. A convenient excuse is, they forgot.

If you look at the source of Firefox, it's plain horrible. I've built (compiled)
a version of Firefox here, using Visual Studio, and it took me the better
part of a day getting all the stuff together to do it (perhaps 2GB of
downloads, with some of the downloads turning out not to be necessary).

I happened to look through their print and print preview code, and
found myself going around in circles. What was interesting, is I was
Googling around for some advice, and someone happened to have also reviewed
some of the print code, and noticed that a different number of lines
from about:config are read, versus written (now, I never noticed that).
Which means at some point, it's just possible they lost track of some
of them.

I wouldn't say it's spaghetti code exactly, but I keep running to the
kitchen looking for some meatballs to throw into the mix The reason
I did the build, was so I could get "debug" output from Firefox while
it was running. It will display cryptic messages into its own console
window, which I was hoping would help with my printing problem.

The Mozilla folks are undoubtedly "doing evil", but if you were
trying to determine that from looking at the source code, you'd
be hard pressed to make sense of it (i.e. what their objectives
might be).

Paul

 

[micky]

| If you don't like the feature, turn it off.
|

See below in my post to J. P. Gilliver.

I appreciate your nice replies to some of my posts, but even as I read
them I wondered why they were chopped off at the top.

| Please consider using attributions, so people know whose words you
| are quoting.

This has been discussed in the past. I'm not

I didn't participate in any prior discussion, and this is my first,
maybe only post in this one.

going to keep debating it. Since you seem to
have some sort of very good archive search
feature I suggest you look for the thread between
J. P. Gilliver and myself, in which the pros and cons
of different approaches were discussed at length.

I have a good seearch archive, but doing what you suggest would still
be a lot of work.

If you really can't tell who I'm responding to then
I can only suggest that you get a real newsreader
(not webpage news feeds) that provides a "treeview"
display that graphically shows the order of posts.

I use an excellent newreader, Forte Agent, but it still takes a lot
more effort to hunt for attributions, and then to verify that I'm
corect by comparing text**. I do this in another group for an old
woman who doesn't have a real computer, only has Webtv, and can barely
post at all, but need I do it for you too?

** And this assumes I dl'd all the prior posts. I don't dl every post
in every group I read.

Then you don't need to do any guessing and you
don't need to open any extra windows to see the

One still has to change windows, unless he uses windows with 2 or 3
sections. I never do that because 15 years ago I decided it worked a
lot better for me to keep only the message or the TOC open, so what
I'm looking at is full size. . Plus, I'd have to start a reply, even
if I don't plan to reply, to avoid losing my position on your post,
while I go to other posts to see which ones you're quoting.

course of the discussion.
In the above I see like so:

- Mayayana
- Nil
- Char Jackson
- Mayayana
- Nil

...etc. It's very clear to me who is responding to
whom, and I'm just using OE6.

When I r eply to a post that's too long, I delete the middle, but
leave the text I want and the attibutions for it.

If you use OE6, you must go out of your way to delete the
attributions. Why do you do that? If you have a good reason, I'd
be more sympathetic. Since you haven't given a reason, it seems to
me that while you complain about sniping here, this seems to be your
own version of sniping.

Plus everything Nil said.

I hope you won't leave, but it would be nice if you left that
attibution lines.

 

[BillW50]

In

I often do that, too, but I tend to keep the number
small so I won't lose track. I avoid tabs for the same
reason. Most people seem to prefer tabs. I find it
harder to keep track of open windows with tabs. I prefer
a separate window for each page. When doing a search
or clicking links I'll also almost always open them in a
separate window. Then when I decide to clean up the
open windows clogging the taskbar I discover the articles
I forgot to read.

That is interesting Mayayana. Tabs in almost application makes more
sense to me. For example, I wish Word 2000 had tabs. Anyway do you use
grouping in the taskbar? If so, now that bothers me. As that seems like
more unnecessary work to me.

Another thing that bothers me are too many things in the taskbar and you
need to scroll the list or expand it. But there are lots of solutions to
that problem. Like virtual desktops and desktop shell replacements.

 

[Char Jackson]

I see Forte Agent doesn't recognise a proper .sig separator.

Actually, it does. Micky may have (unintentionally?) overridden that
behavior by highlighting the text before hitting reply.

 

[micky]

Actually, it does. Micky may have (unintentionally?) overridden that
behavior by highlighting the text before hitting reply.

It was intentionally, because I wasn't quoting Mayanyana anyhow, so I
might as well quote Bill's sig, whilch is quite small.

 

[richard2]

Or is there a way to turn off the sound from all of IE or all of FF,
without turning off the sound from Windows Media Player or Real. which
I want to listen to?

Why not just turn off or unplug your speakers. Personally, I hate a
noisy computer. I only turn on the speakers when I want to listen to
music or a video. Otherwise they are shut off.

*** Computers are meant to be seen, and not heard!!!!

I never understood why MS never put one button in their OSs that will
disable ALL their stupid beeps, clicks and other annoying sounds.

 

[Henry]

Why not just turn off or unplug your speakers. Personally, I hate a
noisy computer. I only turn on the speakers when I want to listen to
music or a video. Otherwise they are shut off.

*** Computers are meant to be seen, and not heard!!!!

I never understood why MS never put one button in their OSs that will
disable ALL their stupid beeps, clicks and other annoying sounds.

Why don't you click on the speaker and check Mute?

Henry