Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 

Tommy

Super Moderator
  • Content count

    1,072
  • Donations

    $140.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Tommy last won the day on September 19

Tommy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

110 Excellent

1 Follower

About Tommy

  • Rank
    Brooke's Tommy Honey <3 / MSFN Enforcer
  • Birthday 02/26/1989

Profile Information

  • OS
    98SE
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

4,470 profile views
  1. Adobe to Pull Plug on Flash

    And you're absolutely right on that. It's actually kind of like Windows XP, it won't stop working but using it in modern settings, it's likely to start becoming unusable. The most common setting is for people to use their devices on the internet so even though local things will still work just fine with flash, as you said, using it on big websites that follow trends will mainly make it useless to have. I suppose something like YouTube you could always download the videos using one of those online capture services. Not sure exactly how safe, legal, or morally right it is, but it is an option nonetheless. @jumper I completely missed the replies above. But as I posted in the thread, I do have this working. The only issue I'm facing though is that right now sometimes YouTube videos start flickering or go black all together but I think it might be due to my PC because it didn't do this until I backed up my profile, built a new machine with a few new pieces of hardware, and reinstalled Windows and my Firefox profile. I have read of other people saying this happens to them on modern OSes as well. But that's a little out of scope of this thread so we can discuss it more in the link I posted if you wish.
  2. Adobe to Pull Plug on Flash

    Oh, you mean because it used to be owned by Macromedia and then Adobe basically bought them out and took it over? That would make sense but what I was driving at when I said planned obsolescence is that many older devices basically depended on Flash to give them the capability to watch or interact with multimedia, especially and particularly on the web. Like YouTube basically axing Flash. Since I'm no expert when it comes to this field...is this one of the main reasons that YouTube applications spanning from many older devices like earlier iPod touches and even more recently, the Nintendo Wii, no longer work, because they continue to change their technology that delivers their content? Did these applications use Flash to deliver videos to you on these devices? And those are honest questions because I really don't know and am assuming. But if that is the case, either you have to plunk down more money on new devices in order to continue watching something that worked perfectly fine in the past or you're just up a creek in a boat with a hole.
  3. Adobe to Pull Plug on Flash

    Just more planned obsolescence. At least it's not happening like right this second but you'll still need to make sure you have a powerful enough computer to handle all the new standards. Probably by 2020 most computers in use will have plenty of power but people like me just has another nail in the coffin. Although since we've got YouTube working properly with HTML5 and H.264 on Windows 2000, we should be good for a little while. Not to make this a discussion about Windows 10 and how I won't use it, but since Microsoft had said it was the last Windows operating system they will make, it makes me wonder how they'll actually keep up with so many new standards. Or maybe Microsoft is going to ditch Windows all together in the future and create a new operating system. But if it's the former, why didn't they just leave stuff alone like Windows XP or Windows 7, operating systems most people want to use, and just follow a similar business model. I don't know if Windows 10 will have free updates or eventually charge people to update to a better core every so often, but if it's the latter, then to me they should just keep all of their customers happy and support several different platforms. It's certainly better than chasing them away to other companies. But that's my two cents.
  4. One thing I could never understand: Why do some websites INSIST on letting you know someone posted with a mobile device? They don't make a special note letting people know you posted via PC, so why is mobile so special? Facebook used to be really bad with this but as the years went on, they dropped it. But to be honest, I couldn't care less that you posted something with your precious phone. To me, all I see in "Posted via mobile" means, "Look at me, I'm cool! I have a phone! :w00t:"

    1. mixit

      mixit

      I completely agree that these days such notes are pretty pointless, but I always thought that they were initially put there to provide an excuse to mobile posters. As mobile posts would tend to have more spelling errors, lack proper caps, etc. due to people typing on a tiny keypad - and often feel markedly more off-the-cuff than those written from behind a PC - my thinking was that these notes were there to head off flames from the audience. But it's quite possible that I've been overthinking this and it has always been mainly about the gee-whiz factor as you say.

    2. Tommy

      Tommy

      That's actually some interesting insight you've posted there. Since most mobile users don't really bother to use proper grammar or spelling, it could be there to basically say "I'm lazy" as well. :lol:

      But in all actuality, I even see such "signatures" on forums that let you know, "Hey, I posted this from my phone!" I usually only see those as spam messages because it adds nothing to the conversation.

      But you're right, those keyboards are very small. The only mobile thing I've ever owned was a second generation iPod Touch which is quite useless anymore even updated with Whited00r. But I've always hated the thing because it never does what I want it to, either it's taking you to things you never really touched but because your finger just happened to land on it while scrolling, you have to hurry up and hit stop your browser otherwise it screws you up and takes you someplace else. And I'm a proficient typist on a PC. I can go upwards of 150 WPM but those things, they drive me crazy. Human fingers were never meant to try typing on a thing so small so that's the one thing I one finger at and it takes me forever to get out a simple email message so I don't use it often at all. But get me on a regular keyboard and I go like wildfire! I've even had people at my work be like, "What the hell man??" since I'm just in my little cubical clacking away like nobody's business. XD

      A little story before I wrap this up. I was at a friend's house long ago, back when stuff like AIM was still popular and used often. She wanted me to try it out and type to her friend and so I did. However, I used correct grammar and she's like, "What are you doing?" Apparently I was suppose to not use capitals or periods. I told her I wasn't illiterate and that using the correct style of writing was what I did. I'm certainly not perfect, but I can't see turning my brain off either just for the sake of being fast. :whistle:

  5. KernelEx for Win2000

    I haven't tried other versions. Right now I'm just using whatever was put into tomasz86's unofficial rollup from 2013. I can probably test a few of the other ones but after translating his site, it looks as though he made a few changes to a few video files in version 16a, the one I was using. I just don't really understand exactly what the changes meant so maybe he can provide us some insight.
  6. It's generally faster as well if you post your name change request here because then any admin can change it. xper doesn't always get on a lot so you might be waiting a while if you only message him about it. And since Trip and Den are on here regularly, it'll most likely get done quite quickly if just requested here.
  7. KernelEx for Win2000

    BUG FOUND! *Extended core Windows2000-KB979683-v16a-x86-ENU is flawed* After thorough investigation into why my dualview was not working, I did a clean install on a test hard drive and everything was working fine, until I installed this core update package. As soon as I did and rebooted, dualview stopped working and only my primary monitor would work despite Windows knowing there were (multiple monitors). So I hooked up my original configuration of drives to get back to my regular install of Windows, removed extended core which I had installed on this installation, went to install duelview again from the nvidia control panel, rebooted, and sure enough it works like a charm. Both monitors work as an extended desktop just like they should. @blackwingcat Basically, using this extended core package means nvidia dualview compatibility is broken and will not work.
  8. KernelEx for Win2000

    Still not having much success. I've even tried that particular package listed in the link and it's still not letting me enable dualview. What's crazy is right now I'm running Ubuntu in a live cd environment on said computer...and guess what? Both monitors work JUST FINE and are independent from each other. So either something is very messed up in the Windows 2000 install or there's other issues going on that prevent it from actually happening. But now we know for sure that my card indeed supports dualview.
  9. KernelEx for Win2000

    My duelview thread merged into this one It is not working! This isn't even something I'm new at because I've been using dual monitors since the turn of the decade. However, with my new machine, no matter how much I play around with it, I cannot get dualview working. So, my old card was a NVidia GeForce 8600GT dual DVI output, my new card is a NVidia GeForce 9800GT with dual DVI output as well. Whether it makes a difference or not, it's the energy efficient version so it doesn't require extra power to run. Now here's where things get very interesting. I can clone my desktop so both monitors show the same thing, I can also do horizontal/vertical view which doubles the resolution. But I cannot get dualview to have two independent monitors working. The video card recognizes two monitors are there, it knows that for a fact. But when I go to the display properties, even though it says multiple monitors, it only shows the one and extend my desktop is grayed out. The things I've tried were basically changing driver versions which I've used both Tomasz86's 270.61 driver, no luck. I've tried a few of Blackwingcat's drivers, no luck either. I've even tried removing all the drivers via safe mode and removing the device all together and even running my registry cleaner to remove old entries, makes no difference. The only thing I can think of that might be fouled is the NVidia GeForce 8400GS that I originally had in there, it had DVI/VGA and HDMI, and apparently you cannot dualview a digital and analog connection, it's either one or the other. The other resources I looked for online on this issue is about as helpful as going out in the rain and covering your head with a spaghetti strainer. No real insight is offered. But with Dual DVI, I'm sure dualview should work. Am I to the point I might just have to reinstall Windows or what? I'm pulling my hair out because I've never had this much trouble getting it going before. Usually all I'd have to do is go through the control panel, enable dualview, restart at the prompt, and when Windows returned it would install the Dualview driver (which this doesn't), restart again, and then I could extend my desktop. So why this isn't happen with this, I have no clue. Now I'm turning to the ones who know even more than I do.
  10. Quality of OSes

    I was the one that closed the thread and nobody contacted me about it, my inbox is open to those who have any concerns. Hence why I have a super moderator badge on my profile. I have no issues with discussing quality of OSes, not one bit. In fact I'm one that questions the quality that goes into Microsoft products these days myself. However, it was a pointless thread and it wasn't going anywhere, it made no sense. I will let this one stay open as long as meaningful discussion takes place in it. I wasn't even aware this thread was created until just now. I don't close threads without reason. If you want to have a meaningful discussion about how you feel the quality of Windows has declined, have at it! But let's just keep it that way, okay? And please try not to double post so much unless a large amount of time has elapsed otherwise it just continues bumping the thread and pushing other ones off the radar. If you can do those two things, that would be much appreciated. And we are not affiliated with Microsoft, not at all. So we are not biased based on their products but instead of our own opinions.
  11. Actually, before this month rotated over, we were at $400, so actually we did make the goal, twice over.
  12. Not DOS section on main Forum site

    There's no need for this thread to be open any longer, it's been long answered. If you want to talk about DOS in general, feel free to make a thread in the appropriate forum and continue discussion. This is no longer a site issue. Topic LOCKED
  13. Salutations my friends

    Welcome to the community, and thank you VERY much for donating to the forum as well! We appreciate it very much! I hope you enjoy your stay with us.
  14. Forum upgrade to v4.2!

    I do too, but as I said, if you just reduce your zoom to something like 90% for MSFN in your browser, it should work out just fine. @xper might be able to figure out something else but that's what I've been doing for quite a while now.
  15. Forum upgrade to v4.2!

    What is your screen resolution? I use 1024x768 and found I need to reduce the zoom just a bit in order for it to fit correctly. But I've noticed this as well.
×