A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Windows 10 » Windows 10 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

10 Sucks !



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old January 5th 19, 09:14 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Ken Blake[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,122
Default 10 Sucks !

On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 14:00:20 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 1/4/19 5:45 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:

[snip]

Just because it's now called Edge doesn't mean it's gone.* Edge is still
here and it still sux.


Yes. While there is no major browser without problems, Firefox seems to
have the fewest.



I'm very happy with FireFox, and never run into any problems with it.


Some people like Chrome, but that is from Google.




Yes, Chrome is very popular. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that
it's from Google is irrelevant; I just don't like it at all. To me the
three worst browsers, in descending order, are

Chrome
IE
Edge
Ads
  #62  
Old January 5th 19, 09:14 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Sam E[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 205
Default 10 Sucks !

On 1/5/19 12:36 PM, KenW wrote:

[snip]

+1
& chocolate cream pie using pudding.


Carrot cake. A nasty surprise when you're expecting cake and get VEGETABLES.


  #63  
Old January 5th 19, 10:44 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Rene Lamontagne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,800
Default 10 Sucks !

On 01/05/2019 12:20 PM, Wolf K wrote:
On 2019-01-05 10:54, Ken Blake wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2019 08:47:09 -0700, KenW wrote:

It only sucks if you don't spend the time to learn it.
Just like everything in life !



Well said! A very strong ditto.



Some things suck no matter what.* Like tapioca pudding.


Yuk!!! like a clump of frogs eggs Blah. :-(

Rene

  #64  
Old January 6th 19, 12:27 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Stephen Wolstenholme[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 229
Default 10 Sucks !

On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 13:20:38 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

On 2019-01-05 10:54, Ken Blake wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2019 08:47:09 -0700, KenW wrote:

It only sucks if you don't spend the time to learn it.
Just like everything in life !



Well said! A very strong ditto.



Some things suck no matter what. Like tapioca pudding.


I haven't had tapioca pudding since I was at junior school 65 years
ago. Fried cassava chips are OK and that is the same plant.

Steve

--
http://www.npsnn.com

  #65  
Old January 6th 19, 10:51 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Mike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 172
Default 10 Sucks ! VB6

On 1/5/2019 7:36 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"Mike" wrote

| Historically, one such change was the change from
| VB6 to dotnet.
|
| You are stuck in the past, as am I, with VB6.

I see what you mean. That's an interesting issue.
Right now, VB6 and VC6 are the most widely supported
products of all. .Net was never big and still isn't. Like
Java, it's big on corporate back-ends for quickie
programming. But also like Java, it never made much
sense on Windows. It's slow and requires a monstrously
bloated runtime. And each runtime has restrictions.

That problem was why they stopped at v. 2 for awhile,
allowing later versions of VS.Net to target the v. 2 runtime.
DotNetters were frustrated with trying to sneak 1/2 GB
of slop past people who thought they were installing a
small utility program.

.Net was originally intended for "web apps". The
successor to ActiveX in IE. When web apps didn't
happen, MS pretended .Net was for Desktop, too.

http://web.archive.org/web/201011121...eliverspr.mspx

Then they tried to build Windows with it, which failed
miserably. (Longhorn.) By their own description, .Net
was far too bloated and slow to be handled by any
then-current hardware.

To this day, the only .Net software I have is the applet
for my display chip. and it takes forever to load. I
occasionally see something that wants .Net, but it
just isn't worth it in my mind to install all that bloat.
There's always a non-.Net option. And .Net usually
indicates the same problem as early VB: That the
programmer probably doesn't really know what they're
doing.

These days MS are pushing the Metro trinkets because
they get a cut. .Net is being repurposed to write what
are essentially little more than HTA webpage apps. Good
luck and good riddance. They have no market for that junk.
No one needs a Facebook or Uber app, or a flashlight
app, or an app to put kitty ears on your girlfriend's photo,
on a desktop.

But through all of that, the API for compiled software
has been dependable. If you stick with basic VB and
Windows API you can target any Windows version with
no dependencies. There's not as much commercial market
for software as there once was, but the Win95 API is
still supported. Anything that was ever made official is still
supported, with very few exceptions. For instance, in
Vista/7 with XP compat mode, GetVersionEx will lie and
tell your software you're on XP! So you have to use other
ways to find the OS version. But that kind of thing is rare.

If you target later it's even easier. For instance, I had
a Google maps program that used my own low-level
winsock code to talk to the server. It works on Win98+.
Later I decided to use winhttp. Much easier. It only
works on XP+, but that's almost everyone these days.
Each Windows version adds some conveniences.

| What isn't working is the package deployment wizard that lets me install
| the program on another computer without resident VB6.
| Got any advice on fixing that?
|

You didn't say what the problem is. A simple
EXE should work fine on any other machine,
depending on dependencies.

As for the PDW itself, see he

https://www.jsware.net/jsware/vbcode.php5#set12

The PDW just figures out what the package needs.
Then it has setup.exe to kick off the install. That was
needed in Win9x times because the runtime was not
pre-installed. So setup.exe would do the runtime
install and then start setup1.exe. Setup1.exe is written
entirely in VB6 and the project is included in the Wizards
folder (or somewhere in that tree.)

The link is to an updated setup1.exe. Setup.exe
is no longer needed and causes problems because
Vista+ won't let you install system files. So it tries
to install them, reboots, then fails and starts all over
again. But none of that is relevant any longer. The
runtime has been pre-installed since WinME.

So I rewrote setup1.exe. I cleaned out a lot of
muck and added some things, like the ability
to make a Quick Launch icon, customize the setup
window, set folder permissions, etc. If you name
your final setup with "setup", as in AcmeEditor2setup.exe,
then Windows will assume it needs admin rights. You
can then set up folders with no restrictions to prevent
problems later.
File restrictions are probably the most common
problem these days. Example: You try to put program
settings in the program folder, to satisfy the portable
app craze. But then the software doesn't have permission
to write to its own settings file. The way I do it now
is to set no restrictions on a temp subfolder, if necessary,
and a settings subfolder. Then I keep all operations
within those subfolders. Safe and functional. No
fiddling with the app data catacombs. No risking that
windows will block an operation. At the same time, no
executable at risk of corruption because only data is in
those subfolders.

You can send email if you want. I'm happy to help
if I can. Email is in the download. But it won't get through
unless you have real email. No spyware, webmail crap.
Also, the VB6 newsgroup is still active.


Thanks for the inputs.
I think I got it mostly fixed.
This was my first 64-bit OS install.
Was lost linkage to some unspecified module it needed.
I quit trying to install it on a different drive.

I did a deep dive into the registry to delete stuff and
started over.

The remaining problem is that, when I run the deployment
wizard, it hangs at "Loading Package Types".
Task manager says it's not responding, but it uses 25% of the processor.
No obvious disk activity.

I discovered by accident, when I got distracted and didn't terminate it,
that
after three minutes, it decided to move on and work.

Google found numerous incidences of that issue, but I found no
working links to solutions.

That's not a deal breaker because I do it so rarely.
Would be nice to eliminate that delay if you have any thoughts on how to
diagnose it.
Otherwise, I'm good to go.

I discovered another interesting anomaly.
My clock program stores data in a text file in the program directory.
Windows 10 seamlessly moves that file to my users directory so it can be
written. Stumped me for a while when editing the file didn't affect the
program. Now that I know what to look for...

  #66  
Old January 6th 19, 03:09 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,327
Default 10 Sucks ! VB6

"Mike" wrote

| Was lost linkage to some unspecified module it needed.
| I quit trying to install it on a different drive.
|
You could try running Procmon to see what it's trying to
access. I haven't yet tried running VS6 even on Win7.
As I understand it, one has to create a dummy msjava.dll,
but that's all I know.

| The remaining problem is that, when I run the deployment
| wizard, it hangs at "Loading Package Types".
| Task manager says it's not responding, but it uses 25% of the processor.
| No obvious disk activity.
|

Sounds like some kind of loop. I don't know where
it gets that list vb6dep.ini seems to be the only
settings file. But if you already have a PDM file in
the project folder you could try removing that to
start over.
I can't remember ever having any problems with
PDW, but I guess it's not so surprising on Win10.
VB6/VS6 is complex and it's not Win6+ -aware.

One important thing, though, is not to ship
the runtimes. That will make your install hang.

| I discovered another interesting anomaly.
| My clock program stores data in a text file in the program directory.
| Windows 10 seamlessly moves that file to my users directory so it can be
| written. Stumped me for a while when editing the file didn't affect the
| program. Now that I know what to look for...
|

Ick! Virtualization. I didn't know that it's even worse
in Win10 than in Vista/7. For what it's worth, I came up
with an approach that works for all versions without
inviting calamity from Windows virtualization or other
file restriction problems. I mentioned it above. I create
subfolders in the program folder and store things like
settings files there. (You'd want to use App Data if
you target a multi-user scenario, but I don't write
anything like that myself. I'm assuming SOHo user
who owns their own computer.)

The PDW rewrite I linked includes a function to
remove all restrictions from the created subfolders.
That could also be run as a separate EXE if you don't
want to fiddle with setup1.exe.

I find that since Vista, the biggest problem, by far,
with the actual install and with designing software is
file restrictions. Your clock program is a good example.
They didn't design it properly. As it turns out, the
virtualization problem is both a help and a hndarnce,
as usual. But the real fault is with the people who
wrote the software. (Unless the installer pre-dates
Vista.)

Also, one other note: You may know about this, but
just in case: 32-bit can't run in a 64-bit process and
vice versa. It's not a problem for a 32-bit EXE, but
ActiveX DLLs should be written as Ax EXEs in the future.

It's the same thing except that an Ax EXE runs in a
separate process. So it's OK for 64-bit. It's slightly
slower due to marshalling, but usually not an issue.
The only exception would be where only your software
will access the DLL.

Similarly, shell extensions are no longer possible
for 64-bit. That's the one thing I miss. I use an Explorer
Bar I wrote myself, that loads in folder windows, but it
can't be used on 64-bit because shell extensions run
in the Explorer process.
On the other hand, I'm not sure how much there is
to miss at this point. Many of the things I've written --
mime filters, BHO, browser extensions, property pages,
explorer bars -- are being phased out as MS locks
down the system.


  #67  
Old January 6th 19, 05:03 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
No_Name
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 155
Default 10 Sucks !

Are you still around ?!

Same obnoxious SOB, I see.
  #68  
Old January 6th 19, 05:05 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Stephen Wolstenholme[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 229
Default 10 Sucks ! VB6

On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 09:09:28 -0500, "Mayayana"
wrote:

You could try running Procmon to see what it's trying to
access. I haven't yet tried running VS6 even on Win7.
As I understand it, one has to create a dummy msjava.dll,
but that's all I know.


For any performance problem I use Windows Resource Manager. Is Procmon
the same thing?

Steve
--
http://www.npsnn.com

  #69  
Old January 6th 19, 06:13 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,733
Default 10 Sucks ! VB6

Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 09:09:28 -0500, "Mayayana"
wrote:

You could try running Procmon to see what it's trying to
access. I haven't yet tried running VS6 even on Win7.
As I understand it, one has to create a dummy msjava.dll,
but that's all I know.


For any performance problem I use Windows Resource Manager. Is Procmon
the same thing?

Steve


Process Monitor logs ETW events, including the I/O that all programs
are doing, as well as registry read/write. You can use it for debugging
the suspicious activities of various programs.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sys...nloads/procmon

It starts capturing as soon as you start it. Removing the
tick box in the File menu, stops capture. Using the Edit:Clear
clears the display, so you are ready to do another capture.

ProcMon also allows boot logging. You can have ProcMon running
just before shutdown time. Do a shutdown (ProcMon closes and
saves the current capture). When the machine reboots, a hidden
DLL like procmon23.dll captures startup ETW events, allowing
analysis. When you next start Procmon, it'll ask if you
want to "save boot trace?" or similar. When you say yes, you'll
have a 500MB file with interesting stuff to go through.

Most of the time, it's like searching for a needle in a haystack
in there, but occasionally you find something interesting.
The most baffling part, is all of the junk activity that
goes on in your OS that you don't know about. A lot of the
"noise" in there comes from that. Some OSes can be doing
1000-10000 registry accesses per second... when nothing
is going on. Some of that noise can be Windows Update
scans.

Paul
  #70  
Old January 6th 19, 07:05 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,327
Default 10 Sucks ! VB6


"Stephen Wolstenholme" wrote

| For any performance problem I use Windows Resource Manager. Is Procmon
| the same thing?
|

Yeah, what Paul said.
sysinternals is a lot of small utilities written by
Mark Russinovich, who's a top Windows programmer,
got hired by MS, and gave the sysinternals tools
to MS.

I prefer Regmon and Filemon. They're more specific.
And Procmon is ridiculously sluggish. When you stop
the logging it announces that it's beginning to stop
the logging and takes a long time. Filemon and
Regmon are instant. They also specialize, in file access
logging an Registry access logging respectively. But
I don't think those are any longer available. So it's
Procmon.

The idea I had was that while he was running the
PDW he could run that to see what files the PDW
EXE was accessing, in case there might be something
like a corrupted package type list file.


  #71  
Old January 6th 19, 08:44 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Mark Lloyd[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,416
Default 10 Sucks !

On 1/5/19 2:14 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

Yes, Chrome is very popular. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that
it's from Google is irrelevant; I just don't like it at all. To me the
three worst browsers, in descending order, are

Chrome
IE
Edge


Opera probably should be on that list too, since it's so much like Chrome.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"I acted alone on God's orders." [Yigal Amir, assassin of Yitzak Rabin,
Israeli PM]
  #72  
Old January 6th 19, 11:29 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Commander Kinsey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 195
Default 10 Sucks !

On Sat, 05 Jan 2019 20:00:20 -0000, Mark Lloyd wrote:

On 1/4/19 5:45 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:

[snip]

Just because it's now called Edge doesn't mean it's gone. Edge is still
here and it still sux.


Yes. While there is no major browser without problems, Firefox seems to
have the fewest. Some people like Chrome, but that is from Google.

Currently it tells me I have no internet
connection, yet every other browser works. WTF? And as per usual with
modern fluffy programs that act like a ****ing Apple Mac, all I get is a
silly cartoon with a confused looking alien saying no internet. What
about some ****ing technical information so I can fix the problem?!?


I've noticed that about uninformative error messages.

BTW, The first thing I thought when looking at the desktop in the Windos
8 preview was "I really don't want a iPhone".


Yip, what were they thinking making an apple (bad choice of fruit in my analogy) look like an orange? This is a computer, that is a phone, they're not meant to look the same. I don't get in my car and want it to look like my shower.
  #73  
Old January 6th 19, 11:30 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Commander Kinsey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 195
Default 10 Sucks !

On Sat, 05 Jan 2019 20:14:45 -0000, Ken Blake wrote:

On Sat, 5 Jan 2019 14:00:20 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 1/4/19 5:45 PM, Commander Kinsey wrote:

[snip]

Just because it's now called Edge doesn't mean it's gone. Edge is still
here and it still sux.


Yes. While there is no major browser without problems, Firefox seems to
have the fewest.



I'm very happy with FireFox, and never run into any problems with it.


Some people like Chrome, but that is from Google.




Yes, Chrome is very popular. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that
it's from Google is irrelevant; I just don't like it at all. To me the
three worst browsers, in descending order, are

Chrome
IE
Edge


I'm only on Opera because I'm used to it. I started out the internet on Netscape in 1995, then when that became ****, a colleague recommended Opera, which was vastly superior. It hasn't annoyed me enough to change yet.
  #74  
Old January 7th 19, 04:14 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Ken Blake[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,122
Default 10 Sucks !

On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 13:44:53 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 1/5/19 2:14 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

Yes, Chrome is very popular. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that
it's from Google is irrelevant; I just don't like it at all. To me the
three worst browsers, in descending order, are

Chrome
IE
Edge


Opera probably should be on that list too, since it's so much like Chrome.



If you say so, I'll believe you, but I tried Opera only once for just
a very few minutes, and have no memory of it.

There are probably also others that I've never tried that should be on
the list.
  #75  
Old January 7th 19, 07:42 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,733
Default 10 Sucks !

Ken Blake wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jan 2019 13:44:53 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 1/5/19 2:14 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

Yes, Chrome is very popular. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that
it's from Google is irrelevant; I just don't like it at all. To me the
three worst browsers, in descending order, are

Chrome
IE
Edge

Opera probably should be on that list too, since it's so much like Chrome.



If you say so, I'll believe you, but I tried Opera only once for just
a very few minutes, and have no memory of it.

There are probably also others that I've never tried that should be on
the list.


There are two versions.

The original version... was original.
It had its own shortcomings on rendering.

The later version was a Chromium-clone.

"On 12 February 2013, Opera Software announced that it would drop its
own Presto layout engine in favour of WebKit as implemented by Google's
Chrome browser, using code from the Chromium project."

Your experience of those would likely be quite different.

Paul
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.