Posted by Zepachu on November 16, 2000 at 16:19:22:
In Reply to: I'm using 98, it's still a pile of dung. (n/t) posted by Arch-Angel on November 16, 2000 at 15:39:06:
Not to advertise (and this will be my last post in this thread because it's completely off the topic of CF), but... Head on over to www.litestep.net and get LiteStep. LiteStep is an Explorer replacement. Explorer is the guts of the GUI (graphical user interface) for Windows. It's your taskbar, desktop, etc.. Litestep is much more efficient than explorer, rarely crashes and loads up quicker (i.e. faster boot time) AND loads your programs quicker. I've been running litestep for three or so years now and it's extremely easy to switch between the two, although litestep is much more customizeable, so I usually am in there. In three years I can count on one hand the amount of times Litestep has crashed, and although I've used Explorer 1/5 of the time that I've used Litestep I've crashed A LOT more times. It's just better. Definitely something to look into if you're a "Windows hater" and you're somewhat of an advanced user. It's not extremely user friendly. It takes 5-10 minutes to setup, but 3-4 hours for you to learn how to customize your own stuff. It's worth it. Also. If, after you install it, you don't want it anymore just open c:\windows\system.ini in notepad. Look for the line shell= and just make it... c:\windows\Explorer.exe or c:\litestep\Litestep.exe, depending. I type too much, e-mail me if you try it out and have problems.. it prevents me from hating windows. -Zepachu. > > You may be right, and sure we will never know, but I was merely pointing out the difference between Windows (as Arch-Angel brought up) and this forum. This forum IS much more simply. > > Of course you can safely say that Dioxide has many nifty little things running behind the scenes that i don't know about, I haven't seen the code. I can only make an educated guess. I was not insinuating that the code was "Hello World"-esque, I was talking from experience. I've written a forum and it *is* tricky, true, but I seem to think if there was a bug that the misplaced posts would be more rampant. > > Only Dioxide knows. > > -Zepachu. > > > The reply threading bug has crept up before. I'm not sure what causes it, but I know it has been fixed at least twice. Dio's been making changes to the site recently (not ones that are very visible to the public, but still), and it is entirely possible that the bug is back. I've seen a several posts in the past few days that look misthreaded, so either there are several boneheads at work, or there's a bug about. > > > Thread continuity can also get messed up by post deletion within the thread, but I don't think that is the case here. > > > I think I can also safely say that you might be unaware of how many nifty little things Dioxide has running behind the scenes. It helps keep everything running, but the code required isn't exactly "Hello World"-esque. > > > > I understand about Windows, but hell that was released back in '95 with thousands of KNOWN bugs, let alone unknown ones. > > > > This forum is basically a script. It has only a few functions. Post, read, list threads... only about a dozen or so different functions. > > > > Windows has tens of thousands. The potential for messing up is far greater, especially since that same potential will become much greater if a few functions are used in conjunction with each other. > > > > This forum is proven to work. It was human error. No, Graham error. > > > > -Zepachu. > > > > > > ...but this tops it. The forum is a computer program and it just doesn't "mess up". You replied to the wrong post, it didn't attach it to the wrong thread. > > > > > > You made a mistake. Grow up Mr. Cracker. > > > > > > -Zepachu. > > > > > > > .