|
Yeah, they will. Same if you use different hardware profiles, though it MIGHT be possible to trick it that way. I have never gotten it to work though.
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
Won't work, users share network settings. 
They share Resolution settings as well. I was really hoping that they would fix that. 
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, my roommate and I regularly face toward Redmond and shake our fists in frustration over the screen resolution issue. What part of "Everyone has different eyes" don't they understand?
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
I was afraid you were going to say they were set up like that.
The only choice in a situation like that is probably to go with a third party program like netswitcher[^].
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
I was wondering if anyone else has had this and if they managed to fix it.
Two of us recently upgraded to 2 processors in Win2K and did the various steps to make the Win2K us the Multiprocessor HAL (ACPI Multiprocessor to be exact). That works fine and Task Manager etc. recognises the two processors.
However....
Now IE doesn't show web pages until you move the window or click on one of the menus. The same problem exists in Windows Explorer - i.e. the right pane doesn't show until you move the window or select a menu. On top of that Mozilla and Firebird both fail to load (Mozilla gets as far as the splash screen). Everything else seems to work fine.
I've no idea what it is, and I can't find anything on the web that helps. I did find a google groups discussion that described the same thing but didn't have a fix. So if anyone knows what I can do to fix it I would be delighted 
Win2k, SP3 (SP3 re-installed since upgrade)
Dual P3 733
2GB Ram
|
|
|
|
|
If you upgraded from 1 CPU to 2 CPUs your most likely gonna have to reinstall windows. Replacing a mobo or CPU configuration may seem to work at first, but will eventually crash and burn.
Matt Newman
Sonork: 100:11179
"Whoa, that ruled! What function key do I gotta press to get that to happen again?" - Strong Bad
|
|
|
|
|
After some more searching I came across the answer.
According to Microsoft Knowledge Base Article - 322913 it seems that WM_TIMER messages somehow stop being sent to programs. I presume that IE etc. uses the WM_TIMER to trigger drawing of the page, and without them only causing forced re-draws (i.e. invalidating the window in some way) was getting the content to display.
However, merely applying the hotfix did not work as some of my core dlls were newer than the ones in the hotfix and thus didn't get updated. So I then tried SP4 which is the first service pack which includes the fix. Once SP4 was installed the problem went away
So if it happens to you then I would try the hotfix first, and if that doesn't work try SP4 (and don't forget the Blaster patch after that).
Thanks for your help,
R
|
|
|
|
|
i want to control file (not fold)opertions such as delete move or copy with some specifical extension ,in shell ,copyhook can just contol fold opertions,can any one help me!
|
|
|
|
|
Hi!
I wonder if someone know how to get all the active shares using C++/C# or even VB? The thing I like to know is the same as if you right click "My Computer" and choose Manage. Then go down to "Shares" which is located "Computer Management (Local)->System Tools->Shared Folders-Shares".
Is this possible to do from a program?
Sudden
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 questions down please
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
btw, its not usually a good idea to repost a question unless it has dissapeared off the page.
Ista wrote:
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work.
lol, thats great
Matt Newman
Sonork: 100:11179
"Whoa, that ruled! What function key do I gotta press to get that to happen again?" - Strong Bad
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Newman wrote:
btw, its not usually a good idea to repost a question unless it has dissapeared off the page.
Well if no one answers it for 4 or 5 days I dont see what it hurts.
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
No problem, take a look below. 
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
Why is it that the Windows Task Manager seems to always show "Total Memory Usage" as the sum of all the running process's "Peak Memory Usage"?
This doesnt make sense, since the "Peak Memory Usage" of a process may represent memory that has already been freed (i.e. test.exe's "Peak Memory Usage" is 10MB but currently it is only using 1MB - if this were the only application currently running, Task Manager would show "Total Memory Usage" as 10MB - it should be 1MB, since 9MB has been freed)
Am I missing something?
60% of statistics are made up on the spot
|
|
|
|
|
dont forget when windows shuffles the process even though it shows 1MB its still using 10MB. And therefore even though 1MB is being used 10 should still be calculated because when the process becomes active again ( designated by the current OS ) it will be 10MB or how much is needed to continue processing the current process.
Find some articles on how windows manages the processes life cycle.
Plus, Peak Memory Usage means a peak. Not exact at that moment just over an interval chosen. Or so you would think. For more info on that See Spock on Star Trek encyclopedia.
This is from a devlopers point of view, I'm sure an admin would have more to say.
nick
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
Not really sure, perhaps because many programs expand to take up more memory and fail to let go of it again later? (*cough* MSWord *cough*)
Seriously though, it doesn't seemto be that way on my machine, the "Mem Usage" which shows the total amount currently in use is going up and down as my machine runs. Not just when I open or close programs either, when I close one of three web pages I have open it goes down even though the browser does not actually unload.
What OS are you using? (Win2k here)
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
Okay so the contract admin gave me terminal server install on my client so I can administrate the new .net server. And its called Remote Desktop Connection. So is this the new name.
nick
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
Remote Desktop is adminstration only, its limited to like 2 (not sure) connections. 2003 Server System has terminal services, but it requires licensing per user or per device etc. Remote Desktop is limited to 1 connection on XP Pro.
Remote Desktop is base on Terminal Services, but it has restrictions on how many simultaneous connections etc and is intended for adminstration.
Matt Newman
Sonork: 100:11179
"Whoa, that ruled! What function key do I gotta press to get that to happen again?" - Strong Bad
|
|
|
|
|
Close, but there is more to it than that. See my post below.
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
Remote Desktop Connection is the name of the newer Terminal Services Client.
The protocol used by Terminal Services is called RDP, (Remote Desktop Protocol), and always has been. The server is called Terminal Services in Win2K. I haven't looked at it on Win2k3 yet, they may have changed the name there. Many of us refer to the newer client as the "XP Terminal Services Client" because it made its first appearance with WinXP, but that is not really its proper name.
Specifically the new client is the RDP5 client, supporting version 5 of the protocol. This client is compatible with nearly all versions of Windows and can be used to access all versions of Terminal Services.
The Terminal Services server software included with Win2k can be installed in two different modes, "Remote Administration" mode allows only 2 connections and only members of the administrators group can log on, "Application" mode allows as many connections as the hardware will handle and regular users can log on though they do still have to have permission to the server in question.
WinXP allows one user to "take over" the desktop remotely using the RDP5 client. When this is happening, the screen on the client workstation locks itself and if you break the lock by logging in the remote session will be disconnected. There is only one "desktop" during this, not several independent desktop sessions like you get with full Terminal Services.
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
?
If I have services running through com+ and someone logs in will it log them off and corrupt my services?
Also, what if Someone is at the pc using it when I log on to the pc. Will thier session be logged or can someone physically use it while I do with Remot desktop?
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
|
Ista wrote:
If I have services running through com+ and someone logs in will it log them off and corrupt my services?
No, taking over the desktop will not end any programs/services/thingees. At least it hasn't happened to me yet. It basically just takes over the computer and instead of sending the desktop images to the screen on the machine it sends them to the controlling RDP client. When this is happening it shows a "This workstation has been locked" message on the controlled desktop.
Ista wrote:
Also, what if Someone is at the pc using it when I log on to the pc. Will thier session be logged or can someone physically use it while I do with Remot desktop?
Their session will not be logged off, you would just take it over. Also, they have to agree to let you take it over, you just can't jerk it away from them.
No they can not work at their desktop while you are controlling their XP machine. You will be the only one seeing their desktop while you have remote control.
All of this confusing crap about one login only applies to using Remote Desktop to work with an XP machine remotely. Not working from an XP machine, (or other compatible windows machine), to a windows server. When you are working with a windows server remotely, then someone could be working on the console, someone else could be working via the remote client, and you could be working via the remote client. All of this could be happening at the same time and your various sessions would not interact at all. Well, aside from stealing processor ticks and memory from each other.
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
"Real programmers can write assembly code in any language."
--Larry Wall
|
|
|
|
|
My setup is windows 2000 professional and I'm tagging a .net server 2003
I'm not an expert yet, but I play one at work. Yeah and here too.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
