Windows TF 7 takes over an hour to install updates
-
Sorry @Matt Westwood but I would have to call you an incompetent n00b as well, either that or you're just looking for some attention because your life is so boring & mundane you need it. When SP1 for Windows 7 was released (as an MSDN subscriber, Microsoft Beta Tester and a Member of the Microsoft Partner Network I get notified pronto when something comes available, like I was running Windows 7 Ultimate (RTM) before it was even available to the public) I applied the SP to my desktop, my laptop, my wife's desktop and her laptop as well, none of those systems took more than 15 minutes to complete the configuration of SP1.
As for your claim that i takes 5 minutes to start the only thing(s) to cause this is 1) Something running in the background (i.e; virus, malware, bloatware) 2) The system is running a boot scan, thus causing it to run a virus scan everything it boots.
Every computer in my house runs Windows 7 Ultimate and have yet to have any serious issues (and you're wrong the UI is perfectly usable, probably the best they're released ever). So why not tell us the specs of this phantom computer that has taken so long to apply SP1, I would be interested to know.
-
not a single case of broken CPU
I've seen broken GPUs, HDDs and a single motherboard but never a CPU. I guess you could say, what's on-die, doesn't die. YEAHHHHHH
-
@Someone You Know said:
The Real WTF is that Team Fortress 2 is at least the third game in the Team Fortress series.
For the last time, it's their game, they can call it whatever the fuck they want. When you spend 9 years and millions of dollars to develop a game, you can call it whatever the hell you want.I'm sick of people bitching about game sequel numbers.
"Oh, it's really COD 6." "No it's not, you moron, it's fucking MW2 because that's what they called it."
-
@PsychoCoder said:
Sorry @Matt Westwood but I would have to call you an incompetent n00b as well, either that or you're just looking for some attention because your life is so boring & mundane you need it. When SP1 for Windows 7 was released (as an MSDN subscriber, Microsoft Beta Tester and a Member of the Microsoft Partner Network I get notified pronto when something comes available, like I was running Windows 7 Ultimate (RTM) before it was even available to the public) I applied the SP to my desktop, my laptop, my wife's desktop and her laptop as well, none of those systems took more than 15 minutes to complete the configuration of SP1. As for your claim that i takes 5 minutes to start the only thing(s) to cause this is 1) Something running in the background (i.e; virus, malware, bloatware) 2) The system is running a boot scan, thus causing it to run a virus scan everything it boots. Every computer in my house runs Windows 7 Ultimate and have yet to have any serious issues (and you're wrong the UI is perfectly usable, probably the best they're released ever). So why not tell us the specs of this phantom computer that has taken so long to apply SP1, I would be interested to know.
You seem well connected. Can you tell me the name and address of the dickhead who decided to remove the "up one folder" button (which is NOT always the same as "back", goddamit) so I can mail him some anthrax? Or call in an air strike.. something...
-
I just installed SP1 just now. I went outside for a smoke break after I hit the Install button, and when I came back, it was booting into Windows. Figure about 5 minutes.
-
@PsychoCoder said:
either that or you're just looking for some attention because your life is so boring & mundane you need it
From some of the things Matt has said, I get the impression that a boring and mundane life would be a welcome relief to him. I think I picked up on his subtle hints since I've been there too.He's definitely lived on the wilder side.
-
@SQLDave said:
You seem well connected. Can you tell me the name and address of the dickhead who decided to remove the "up one folder" button (which is NOT always the same as "back", goddamit) so I can mail him some anthrax? Or call in an air strike.. something...
Move your mouse to the URL bar. Click the folder name second from the right. Congratulations, you've gone "up one folder". In a single click. With a larger active region than the UI widget. Without the need for a UI widget.
-
No shit, Sherlock. Did it pretty well, too, given how many fish struck at the unbaited hook.
-
@SQLDave said:
alt+up@PsychoCoder said:
Sorry @Matt Westwood but I would have to call you an incompetent n00b as well, either that or you're just looking for some attention because your life is so boring & mundane you need it. When SP1 for Windows 7 was released (as an MSDN subscriber, Microsoft Beta Tester and a Member of the Microsoft Partner Network I get notified pronto when something comes available, like I was running Windows 7 Ultimate (RTM) before it was even available to the public) I applied the SP to my desktop, my laptop, my wife's desktop and her laptop as well, none of those systems took more than 15 minutes to complete the configuration of SP1. As for your claim that i takes 5 minutes to start the only thing(s) to cause this is 1) Something running in the background (i.e; virus, malware, bloatware) 2) The system is running a boot scan, thus causing it to run a virus scan everything it boots. Every computer in my house runs Windows 7 Ultimate and have yet to have any serious issues (and you're wrong the UI is perfectly usable, probably the best they're released ever). So why not tell us the specs of this phantom computer that has taken so long to apply SP1, I would be interested to know.
You seem well connected. Can you tell me the name and address of the dickhead who decided to remove the "up one folder" button (which is NOT always the same as "back", goddamit) so I can mail him some anthrax? Or call in an air strike.. something...
Settle down.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@SQLDave said:
You seem well connected. Can you tell me the name and address of the dickhead who decided to remove the "up one folder" button (which is NOT always the same as "back", goddamit) so I can mail him some anthrax? Or call in an air strike.. something...
Move your mouse to the URL bar. Click the folder name second from the right. Congratulations, you've gone "up one folder". In a single click. With a larger active region than the UI widget. Without the need for a UI widget.I do that, but "under protest".
Maybe I'm the only person in North America for whom this applies, but... When working on a computer, I rely heavily on what I guess could be called "muscle memory" (combined with hand-eye coordination). For example, to click on the "File" menu option of 99% of all windows, my hand+eyes know how to move the mouse depending on where the cursor is. In other words, I could put my hand on the mouse and observe where the cursor is and then close my eyes and STILL hit the "File" menu option. That's because that menu option is always fixed relative to the boundaries of the window. The same USED to be true with "Up one folder". Under the new "improved" method, the coordinates where I have to position the mouse change with each folder. Also, I frequently and in folder /A/B/C/D/D1/D2/D3 and want to navigate to /A/B/C/X/X1/X2/X3. With the up button, I can get to it and click it 4 times (landing me at /A/B/C) with lightning speed, then quickly go to X1/X2/X3.
(It would be as if a version of Windows decided that if it detected a scroll-wheel-enabled mouse, it would make scroll bars disappear. "After all, the scroll wheel is SO much better, so they won't miss scroll bars", is what I can hear them saying in the imaginary design meeting taking place in my mind).
Is that a big deal in the scheme of things? Not really. But it FEELS like it slows me down because I've got 237 years of Windows "habit" built up that I now have to break, and FOR NO GOOD REASON (IMO). I mean, at least make it a friggin' registry setting so can have it if I want it. MS (and others) seem all to willing -- eager? -- to change interfaces (Office Ribbon, anyone?).
-
@tOmcOlins said:
@SQLDave said:
alt+up@PsychoCoder said:
Sorry @Matt Westwood but I would have to call you an incompetent n00b as well, either that or you're just looking for some attention because your life is so boring & mundane you need it. When SP1 for Windows 7 was released (as an MSDN subscriber, Microsoft Beta Tester and a Member of the Microsoft Partner Network I get notified pronto when something comes available, like I was running Windows 7 Ultimate (RTM) before it was even available to the public) I applied the SP to my desktop, my laptop, my wife's desktop and her laptop as well, none of those systems took more than 15 minutes to complete the configuration of SP1. As for your claim that i takes 5 minutes to start the only thing(s) to cause this is 1) Something running in the background (i.e; virus, malware, bloatware) 2) The system is running a boot scan, thus causing it to run a virus scan everything it boots. Every computer in my house runs Windows 7 Ultimate and have yet to have any serious issues (and you're wrong the UI is perfectly usable, probably the best they're released ever). So why not tell us the specs of this phantom computer that has taken so long to apply SP1, I would be interested to know.
You seem well connected. Can you tell me the name and address of the dickhead who decided to remove the "up one folder" button (which is NOT always the same as "back", goddamit) so I can mail him some anthrax? Or call in an air strike.. something...
Settle down.
Continuing this tempest in a teapot of a topic....
So.. I have to take my hand off the mouse just to go up a level?
I swear I must be the fastest typist and mouse mover around. I seem to be the only one who chafes at interface inefficiencies.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@Master Chief said:
Actually EA recently has stepped up pretty well. They look golden next to Bethesda. And either way, the games are still fun.Still though, I do like HP laptops, even if it takes an afternoon to remove all the shit and get Windows up to date and un-fuckified.
My last one, a G61, wasn't too bad though, only took a couple hours to get all the proprietary bs removed and rip an image of the drive with clonezilla.
Damnit. Stop giving HP money for that. What's wrong with you people?
If you stop PAYING them, they'll stop shipping shit-- or they'll go out of business. Either way, we're all better off. You're like those gamers who buy every EA game, then gripe about the quality of EA games.
-
@SQLDave said:
Up in the directory "bar" you can just click the folder to the left of the current, or any folder for that matter to go "up" in the directory structure.Continuing this tempest in a teapot of a topic....
So.. I have to take my hand off the mouse just to go up a level?
I swear I must be the fastest typist and mouse mover around. I seem to be the only one who chafes at interface inefficiencies.
-
@SQLDave said:
Also, I frequently and in folder /A/B/C/D/D1/D2/D3 and want to navigate to /A/B/C/X/X1/X2/X3. With the up button, I can get to it and click it 4 times (landing me at /A/B/C) with lightning speed, then quickly go to X1/X2/X3.
You can just click "C" in the URL bar.
@SQLDave said:
(It would be as if a version of Windows decided that if it detected a scroll-wheel-enabled mouse, it would make scroll bars disappear. "After all, the scroll wheel is SO much better, so they won't miss scroll bars", is what I can hear them saying in the imaginary design meeting taking place in my mind).
Except in this case, the replacement is superior to the original in every way. Except your force of habit. Which is out of Microsoft's control.
@SQLDave said:
But it FEELS like it slows me down because I've got 237 years of Windows "habit" built up that I now have to break, and FOR NO GOOD REASON (IMO).
The new interface is measurably better at navigating up folder levels. Your opinion doesn't factor into it... Microsoft does scientific studies before changing the UI, they don't go by "opinion." (And good on them!)
@SQLDave said:
I mean, at least make it a friggin' registry setting so can have it if I want it.
Then they'd have to QA it.
@SQLDave said:
MS (and others) seem all to willing -- eager? -- to change interfaces (Office Ribbon, anyone?).
Change is good. Embrace change. Don't be a dinosaur.
-
I'd bet money the OP has an HP/Compaq. HP does make a nice laptop, but the software ruins it.
The last laptop I bought was a Dell Latitude, which came with no extra software to clog it up, not counting Vista. The very first thing I did was set it up to dual-boot Ubuntu, which runs great. I haven't used the Vista install very much, but it seems to run alright. I did run Vista SP1 on my last gaming rig, and it worked fine after I tweaked a bunch of settings to help the performance.
My current Win7 Pro rig is a screamer, and it doesn't seem to slow down with age like all my XP boxes did.
@SQLDave said:
+1You seem well connected. Can you tell me the name and address of the dickhead who decided to remove the "up one folder" button (which is NOT always the same as "back", goddamit) so I can mail him some anthrax? Or call in an air strike.. something...
I know it's a redundant feature now that the Explorer path in the address bar is made up of links, but I used that button a lot, dammit. It took me a long time to get used to it not being there.
-
@blakeyrat said:
Damnit. Stop giving HP money for that. What's wrong with you people?
Show me some other company manufacturing laptops with a Wacom tablet screen AND a CPU and GPU set good enough for most games.
All other tablet-laptops I saw (the turn-screen type I mean, not the single keyboardless slab type) are always low-powered, and always with Intel or other such basic GPU.
Not to mention that a large number of the models (including Dell ones) don't have a Wacom but some alternative digitizer, and a ton of "everything is a Wacom"-assuming software falls back to the simple 1-bit mode with no pressure detection.
-
@bannedfromcoding said:
@blakeyrat said:
Damnit. Stop giving HP money for that. What's wrong with you people?
Show me some other company manufacturing laptops with a Wacom tablet screen AND a CPU and GPU set good enough for most games.
Hm. Ok, I guess you got me there... Toshiba used to make them, but it appears they no longer do.
That doesn't change the fact that HP sucks shit and deserves to go backrupt, though.
-
@blakeyrat said:
@SQLDave said:
Yes, that works quite nice -- <font face="courier new,courier">once you know about it.</font> But that's the problem. It's not obvious. To the average person, the icon for "go up one level" is gone and there is nothing in its place.You seem well connected. Can you tell me the name and address of the dickhead who decided to remove the "up one folder" button (which is NOT always the same as "back", goddamit) so I can mail him some anthrax? Or call in an air strike.. something...
Move your mouse to the URL bar. Click the folder name second from the right. Congratulations, you've gone "up one folder". In a single click. With a larger active region than the UI widget. Without the need for a UI widget.
Someone in this forum once said -- and I'm pretty sure it was you -- something along the lines of "if a user doesn't know a feature exists, then it doesn't exist". While it's true that the "new" way allows you to go up as many levels as you want with a single click, I'm betting that most people typically just want to go up one level, which makes the "new" way marginally (at best) better than the old way and results in a lot of confusion and people (myself included) wanting to strangle a Microsoft developer for removing an obviously useful feature.
Windows 7 has many improvements over previous versions, however, despite all the alleged "scientific studies" some of the changes smell an awful lot like "we have to make this really different because ..... well because it's a new version and a new version needs to be different".
-
@El_Heffe said:
Yes, that works quite nice -- <font face="courier new,courier">once you know about it.</font> But that's the problem. It's not obvious. To the average person, the icon for "go up one level" is gone and there is nothing in its place.
I argue:
1) Clicking the folder name is no less obvious than clicking the button with the folder and curly arrow
2) The "average person" never used that widget in the first place@El_Heffe said:
Someone in this forum once said -- and I'm pretty sure it was you -- something along the lines of "if a user doesn't know a feature exists, then it doesn't exist".
Ziiing.
But it's pretty damned discoverable, as far as things go. You never moved your mouse over the URL bar of an Explorer window and noticed that all the folder names turned into buttons? What else do you think Microsoft should have done to increase discoverability?
@El_Heffe said:
While it's true that the "new" way allows you to go up as many levels as you want with a single click, I'm betting that most people typically just want to go up one level,
Nothing's stopping the people who want to go up one level from going up one level. As I mentioned before, it's actually easier to go up one level than before, since the active area is larger. Additionally, you know where "up one level is" because the button for it is labeled with the name of the folder you're going to. The new interface is seriously superior to the old in every way.
@El_Heffe said:
which makes the "new" way marginally (at best) better than the old way
Even if it was only 0.000001% better, the point is that it's better. Change is good. Without change there's no improvement.
@El_Heffe said:
and results in a lot of confusion and people (myself included) wanting to strangle a Microsoft developer for removing an obviously useful feature.
They didn't remove the fucking feature! WTF.
How can you spend 3 sentences talking about how the feature works in Windows 7, then suddenly declare that the feature you were just talking about doesn't exist in Windows 7? WTF^2.
@El_Heffe said:
however, despite all the alleged "scientific studies" some of the changes smell an awful lot like "we have to make this really different because ..... well because it's a new version and a new version needs to be different".
What changes, specifically?
-
@El_Heffe said:
Yes, that works quite nice -- <font face="courier new,courier">once you know about it.</font> But that's the problem. It's not obvious.
Took me about 3 seconds to notice it and a week or so to get used to it.Dunno what your problem is. Could it be that you're a dog with a toupé?
-
http://classicshell.sourceforge.net/
Adds (among other things) an up button to Explorer. It's probably the only reason I've not bothered to go back to XP.
-
@Lorne Kates said:
Wait, you got it on floppies? I had to feed 7,594 miles of punched paper tape through the reader.@blakeyrat said:
??? Windows 7 ships on DVD, not CD
Wait, you got it on a CD? I had to switch between 3,263 floppies.
-
@DaveK said:
@Lorne Kates said:
Wait, you got it on floppies? I had to feed 7,594 miles of punched paper tape through the reader.@blakeyrat said:
??? Windows 7 ships on DVD, not CD
Wait, you got it on a CD? I had to switch between 3,263 floppies.
I'm still typing mine in from "OS Monthly Magazine". Hope there are no typos in the 1.8 million lines of code.
-
I've got a screwdriver sitting on the CPU clock hanging it and I'm manually flashing the RAM to contain the installer with a UV light source, an AAA battery and two paper clips.
-
I've released the butterflies and am waiting for them to cause a tsunami in China that will change the magnetic attraction of the sunlight to manipulate the individual bits of my harddrive.
-
Rehashing XKCD comics line by line is somehow even LESS funny than just posting the comic.
-
@hoodaticus said:
@Medezark said:
Personally, I try not to use the OEM restore option. But then again I have access to other resources.
Isn't it great being an IT manager with a volume license agreement?
USED to be an IT manager until the stress nearly killed me (came home after a really tough out of town assignment with my blood sugar so high my wife's meter thought she was testing raw honey).
Had a technet subscription I was paying for out of my own pocket. The sales reps keep calling me to re-up, even though technically I don't think there's much way for me to actually use it for it's intended purpose and stick to the licensing agreement. However it does allow me to download ISO's of full, clean installation media.
(I have talked several people into buying MS software after showing them what it can do, so I guess it evens out).
-
@blakeyrat said:
@SQLDave said:
To be fair, if your folder name is long enough to take up the entire available text space, the next level down will not be shown to click on.You seem well connected. Can you tell me the name and address of the dickhead who decided to remove the "up one folder" button (which is NOT always the same as "back", goddamit) so I can mail him some anthrax? Or call in an air strike.. something...
Move your mouse to the URL bar. Click the folder name second from the right. Congratulations, you've gone "up one folder". In a single click. With a larger active region than the UI widget. Without the need for a UI widget.
Edit: Upon testing, this is no longer true. I SWEAR it used to be, though. Vista? Pre-SP1? Some stealthy hotfix?
-
In my quick testing on vista SP1 if a folder name is sufficiently long it will take up the entire bar.
-
Any time I get a new computer from a vendor, especially one with lots of crapware, I format the disk drive and reinstall the OS from the DVD (or CD). You have to get all of the drivers, but Windows 7 is very good about this.
My Windows 7 computers that have an SSD boot in 8 seconds. SSDs are still kind of expensive (but they are now under $200 for an Intel 80 GB X-25M). Well worth the investment.
My Windows 7 computers that don't have an SSD boot in 35 to 45 seconds. If a PC with W7 takes 5 minutes to start up, then it's seriously screwed up. Blame the added software, or the roaming profiles, not the OS itself.
-
@blakeyrat said:
I argue:
1) Clicking the folder name is no less obvious than clicking the button with the folder and curly arrowI agree.
2) The "average person" never used that widget in the first place
I believe you're very wrong there.
Nothing's stopping the people who want to go up one level from going up one level. As I mentioned before, it's actually easier to go up one level than before, since the active area is larger.
Not entirely correct, I think. One advantage of the old up button was that it had a fixed place, you didn't need to look for it whether you were three levels down in the hierarchy or twelve.
Additionally, you know where "up one level is" because the button for it is labeled with the name of the folder you're going to. The new interface is seriously superior to the old in every way.
Not in every way.
Even if it was only 0.000001% better, the point is that it's better.
Hyperbole, or are you really that bad with numbers?
Change is good.
No. Change can be good or bad or neutral. Most of the time, a change doesn't improve things (unless it was a change made to address a specific deficiency, such changes have a reasonable chance of improving things).
Without change there's no improvement.
True (well, a tautology, but I agree with the implied sentiment).
-
@delta534 said:
In my quick testing on vista SP1 if a folder name is sufficiently long it will take up the entire bar.
If your folder name is erroneously long, or your explorer window is very small, yes. How many of those do you encounter on a daily basis? And I mean normal usage, not making a directory called "hahaimgoingtogetyoumicrosoftlookatthisitbrokeyourstupidwindowslololololol".
-
@Ilya Ehrenburg said:
@blakeyrat said:
Even if it was only 0.000001% better, the point is that it's better.Hyperbole, or are you really that bad with numbers?
Yes, he totally suck at math, but he has been very honest about it
-
@Master Chief said:
How many of those do you encounter on a daily basis? And I mean normal usage, not making a directory called "hahaimgoingtogetyoumicrosoftlookatthisitbrokeyourstupidwindowslololololol".
I have thousands of them. They're timestamped decompressions of archives that often have quite long names to begin with in the format <timestamp> - <originalarchivename>
-
@Master Chief said:
@delta534 said:
In my quick testing on vista SP1 if a folder name is sufficiently long it will take up the entire bar.
If your folder name is erroneously long, or your explorer window is very small, yes. How many of those do you encounter on a daily basis? And I mean normal usage, not making a directory called "hahaimgoingtogetyoumicrosoftlookatthisitbrokeyourstupidwindowslololololol".
Remember the current audience
-
It was a folder I don't normally go into and was generated as part of saving a webpage to view when I don't have access to the internet.
-
@Weng said:
@Master Chief said:
How many of those do you encounter on a daily basis? And I mean normal usage, not making a directory called "hahaimgoingtogetyoumicrosoftlookatthisitbrokeyourstupidwindowslololololol".
I have thousands of them. They're timestamped decompressions of archives that often have quite long names to begin with in the format <timestamp> - <originalarchivename>I said normal usage.
-
@Master Chief said:
@Weng said:
@Master Chief said:
How many of those do you encounter on a daily basis? And I mean normal usage, not making a directory called "hahaimgoingtogetyoumicrosoftlookatthisitbrokeyourstupidwindowslololololol".
I have thousands of them. They're timestamped decompressions of archives that often have quite long names to begin with in the format <timestamp> - <originalarchivename>I said normal usage.
Most users here are devs, or at least have job duties tangentially related to development, I'd say what Weng is describing is normal usage for us.
-
@locallunatic said:
Most users here are devs, or at least have job duties tangentially related to development, I'd say what Weng is describing is normal usage for us.
Long folder names being neccessary for development sounds like something a manager would say.
-
@locallunatic said:
@Master Chief said:
@Weng said:
@Master Chief said:
How many of those do you encounter on a daily basis? And I mean normal usage, not making a directory called "hahaimgoingtogetyoumicrosoftlookatthisitbrokeyourstupidwindowslololololol".
I have thousands of them. They're timestamped decompressions of archives that often have quite long names to begin with in the format <timestamp> - <originalarchivename>I said normal usage.
Most users here are devs, or at least have job duties tangentially related to development, I'd say what Weng is describing is normal usage for us.
I'm pretty sure that the discussion about this feature did not include this line of dialog
--Hey, what about them tech people, won't they complain about this using very large directories names?
--Fuck them, they are a very small part of the demographic and are probably using linux anyways so it is not an issue.
-
@serguey123 said:
@locallunatic said:
Most users here are devs, or at least have job duties tangentially related to development, I'd say what Weng is describing is normal usage for us.
I'm pretty sure that the discussion about this feature did not include this line of dialog
--Hey, what about them tech people, won't they complain about this using very large directories names?
--Fuck them, they are a very small part of the demographic and are probably using linux anyways so it is not an issue.
Point was that Master Chief was asking how many one of us saw on a daily basis, not general case users. I was more just being picky about the wording than anything.
-
@locallunatic said:
Most users here are devs, or at least have job duties tangentially related to development, I'd say what Weng is describing is normal usage for us.
Oddly enough, that particular use case has NOTHING to do with development.
-
Counterpoint: How many devs use Explorer to browse their files (development related files that is.) Even I use the VB file explorer.
-
@Master Chief said:
If your folder name is erroneously long, or your explorer window is very small, yes. How many of those do you encounter on a daily basis?
The Save dialog is very small and encountered on a daily basis. It's small to the point where high-up folders drop off and only the current one, its parent, and its grandparent are shown.
-
@Master Chief said:
Even I use the VB file explorer.
The visual basic ifle explorer...?
@Master Chief said:
How many devs use Explorer to browse their files
I use Total Commander because it's the more powerful file manager.
Windows Explorer is more easily accessible for ad-hoc browsing to a quick file, though, because Winkey+E is a snap, and people who don't use the folder tree are idiots.
Cue discussion of the default settings of Explorer. ;)
-
@Master Chief said:
Counterpoint: How many devs use Explorer to browse their files (development related files that is.) Even I use the VB file explorer.
I will open up two explorer windows, one to my source code and one to our dev server, and copy files marked ! from source to dev.
-
@Medezark said:
explorer
@Medezark said:files marked !
Marking files with a "!" in explorer? Hu?
Also, if you habitually open two explorer windows that you will undoubtedly scale and resize, I'm going to recommend Total Commander to you. :) It contains a built-in dir comparer, file comparer and dir syncer.
-
@dhromed said:
@Medezark said:
explorer
@Medezark said:files marked !
Marking files with a "!" in explorer? Hu?
Also, if you habitually open two explorer windows that you will undoubtedly scale and resize, I'm going to recommend Total Commander to you. :) It contains a built-in dir comparer, file comparer and dir syncer.
This is, IIRC, how the various Tortoise SCM shell extensions mark changed files or something.
-
@boomzilla said:
This is, IIRC, how the various Tortoise SCM shell extensions mark changed files or something.
This explanation is adequate for now; thank you kindly.
-
@dhromed said:
The Save dialog is very small and encountered on a daily basis.
Double-click the title bar.
