|
For the past couple of weeks, I've noticed that some of my remote desktop windows behave as though the Always on Top flag is set. Not sure whether the fact that I'm running multiple monitors is a factor or not, but it's been getting progressively worse. Initially it only seemed to happen when I was remoting into one particular machine (very rarely), then another one started exhibiting the same behavior...in both cases, it's not consistent, but I'm definitely seeing the problem more and more often.
The solution, in every case, is to close/reopen the RDP session, but this is getting annoying.
Has anyone else encountered this problem?
[edit]
Just tried something (as I was writing this the thought occurred to me)...if I un-maximize the window that's stuck in the Always on Top state, then re-maximize it, the problem goes away. Definitely more bearable than closing/restarting the session, but still, it's something that I never had to deal with, and I've been using RDP for years. FWIW, I've never seen it happen with anything but the RDP window.
|
|
|
|
|
I vaguely recall there being a checkbox somewhere that's supposed to control always on top behavior. Unfortunately I've no idea where; my vague recollection is of swearing about it and a coworker giving me a fix that's been migrated from one OS image to the next over the last several years.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Neely wrote: I vaguely recall there being a checkbox somewhere that's supposed to control
always on top behavior.
I'm always launching my RDP sessions from the same shortcuts, so I see no reason the checkbox would come up in one state vs another from session to the other. I just went over all the options--I see no such checkbox.
As for the other answers I got--while appreciated, I wasn't looking for alternate RDP clients...
|
|
|
|
|
Have you tried Terminals[^]?
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's going to be titled RIMing: From Crackberry to Dingleberry.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
|
They've got very good circa 2005 vintage smartphones. Their problem is falling asleep while Apple rewrote the book about what a good smartphone should do; a few years later leading to their sadly out of date hardware flushing the brands reputation down the toilet. By the time they woke up and got BB10 out the door, no one cared any longer even though their new touchscreen only phone is competitive with the competition from a technical standpoint.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collin Jasnoch wrote: Lets back up here. We are talking about "Smart" "Phones".
The first word as it is buzzy has no real definition. As a consumer I would argue it being smart means it should be extensible and have easy integration with other systems. While those points were argued they never really came to fruition.
The original definition was phone + PDA. The latter included some level of being able to run 3rd party apps. MS and Palm both came into the early smartphone market through that route by bolting phone functions into their existing WinCE/PalmOS based PDAs. RIM created a device with both at the same time, with their special sauce ibeing that they also had the best back office stack to make corporate IT PHBs feel like they were keeping everything safe. I believe Symbian was created by bolting more PDA type features onto an existing phone platform but I don't know much about its history.
Post iPhone: a capacitive touchscreen instead of a resistive one + stylus, etc became a required feature as did lots of mass market and consumer apps instead of 3rd party apps mostly being limited to internally written LoB cruft.
Noone at the time ever said that palm, rim, etc were suddenly no longer smartphones just because Apple massively one-upped them. Trying to change the definition now to do is as much revisionism as insisting the Apple 2, Amiga, and Commodore 64 aren't real computers because they didn't come with mice or touchpads as standard means of control.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Collin Jasnoch wrote: Dan Neely wrote: They've got very good circa 2005 vintage smartphones
That is debatable. While they did get awesome sales during that time their product was by no means "very good".
The fact that their users called them Crackberries speaks to their quality relative to what else is out there. IF they sucked the suits who initially fell in love would've been ranting about how painful their thumb powered email addiction was to use. Beyond that my comment about revisionism from my other reply still stands.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is Candia anywhere near Canadia?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Just picked this[^] one up and, knowing there's one or two axe men here, I thought I'd share.
Pretty good cross over between the different solos me thinks, but then I can only play the fool.
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
At first, I was going to be annoyed because those opening items were riffs, not solos, but they rescued that one thankfully. However, the guitarist was using a fast vibrato, and in Black Magic Woman, the vibrato is slow and wide (Santana really milks this to get the level of sustain he does). And, showing Randy Rhoads with Crazy Train to introduce tapping? Surely you'd go with Eddie and Eruption as that's the one that made the technique popular.
But yes. Learn to play an instrument. It is fun.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: Surely you'd go with Eddie and Eruption as that's the one that made the
technique popular.
Yeah. What Pete said! 
|
|
|
|
|
Used to work with a bassist who would play EVH solos on his bass. If he wasn't such a nice guy it would have been really annoying.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow.  Given how wide some of Eddie's stretches are, they must have been even more insane on a bass. Of course, Billy Sheehan and Stu Hamm were geniuses at this as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, this guy was amazing. And it was back in the 70s, when bass players still just played bass rather than being accomplished soloists in their own right.
All this talent, and he was the most humble, down to earth guy I ever met.
|
|
|
|
|
I remember it all in a blurry kind of way. Nice link!
aside: The was another link on there of an amazing guitarist Estas Tonne[^]
|
|
|
|
|
If you can remember it, you weren't really there. 
|
|
|
|
|
I occasionally woke from my drug induced stupor to request what month and year it was?
|
|
|
|
|
Ah. One of the responsible ones.
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher Duncan wrote: Ah. One of the responsible ones.
Someone had to flip the LP over, we took turns.
What a deadhead says when the drugs wear off, god this music sucks!
|
|
|
|
|
Cool video, I recall playing a number of those tunes over the years.
I do find it interesting how different players will play the licks differently and get essentially the same sound.
That got me to thinking how I would have absolutely loved having the tools available to young guitarists today for learning songs. The internet with instant access to tabs and YouTube. Not to mention the recording capabilities one has with the PC these days. I remember renting a "portable" 85 pound Tascam 388 8 track recorder for $350 for 2 days (I believe they retailed for around $3000 back then).
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
