Qbasicnews.com

I turn my monito off too but I usualy have SETI@home in the background.

Quote:

barok Wrote: Eyecandy is always cool. That's why my current screensaver is electricsheep.

I love that as well, until I realised how it would affect my drive's MTBF.. that thing nibbles at the drive every second that the computer is idle. If you leave your computer on 24/7, that results in a heck of a lot of drive wear, so I finally decided to switch to a less demanding screensaver. (black screen xD)

Yeah, sad but true. As well, the thing apparently takes up a good 500 megs of hd space. 500 megs that could be better spent. I was contemplating on whether to get rid of it or not, and I think I will. I was always uneasy, watching the hd light flicker while the screensaver was running.

Quote:

DrV Wrote:

Agamemnus Wrote:I still don't have a clue how to make it start (by default) from C:\ instead of "My Documents".

Code:

explorer /e,/root,C:

where the hell do you learn how to do thingas like that :o

Just googled for "explorer command line". I guess you've got to know that such options exist in the first place to go looking for them, though...

Hmm, thanks for the help btw.

Windows explorer is one of the little things Microsoft has done right since the beginning. It was already good on Windows 3.1, and it just gets better and better with every new release. I've seen the new features in Vista and hell, I like them.

The good thing about this is that you always can turn the eye candy off. You can make Windows XP to look like and work as fast as Windows 2000, but I prefer to use skins and nice effects (I might have everything turned on at the moment). This computer I'm typing at is a 2,800 Mhz computer. Windows 2000 without the eyecandy ran at light speed in my 500 Mhz computer, so I have lots of spare processor time to add as many bells and rings as I want Plus they don't take that much processor time. Most is done in the video card, a piece of hardware that usually has acceleration and which is not very used when you are not playing.

The most important issues, I think, with using 3D graphics effects for the OS GUI is how much RAM it uses and whether it will be eating processing time when I am in full screen in a game or not (secondarily to what extent if I am windowed in a game). Usually I play games in full screen because most of them drastically slow down/look horrible in a window.

You also have to ask yourself, what will be the usefullness of
3d windows? Is it going to be the front and back of a window?
Or a cube you can rotate to see the sub-folders of the main folder your looking at? :-?

The new Windows takes advantage of the video hardware to its fullest when displaying windows. It's a concept they stole from Macintosh (and why not, it's a killer concept!).

Quote:You also have to ask yourself, what will be the usefullness of
3d windows? Is it going to be the front and back of a window?
Or a cube you can rotate to see the sub-folders of the main folder your looking at? :-?

I've seen a desktop with 3D windows for linux. It was so nice.

Imagine you are at firefox, browsing. And you see something you want to remember - well, you flip the window around, and stick a post-it to it. That's cool :lol: