shassouneh

Cool. I'm still looking into ways to "emulate" IE under Linux if at all possible. I'm getting sick of Netscape and its clan (e.g mozilla) and Konquerer is OK but not as good as IE!

Thanx for the reply. Yes indeed both MS and AOL have great potential if they would collaborate. Imagine AOL and MS merging together, wouldn't THAT be a disaster, LOL. Btw, Yes IE is a much better browser than Netscape for sure. Stability, solid-performance, ease of use, and staying away from pushy ads deifnately adds icing on the cake! I personally hate how AOL uses Netscape to push more ads at you (the new Netscape 6 is kinda like that). However, as much as I love IE, it has failed horribly in one important respect: Multiple-platform. There's probably nothing better than IE on Windows and Mac, but IE is non-existent on Liinux! It is a pity that arguably the most powerful browser out there is not available on Linux, BUT that is understanndable. It would jeopardize the success of IE as a program on any platform is it is available in Linux, and here's why: In order to make IE available for Linux, the GNU dictates that it should be OPEN SOURCE, a concept Microsoft is uneasy with, understandably of coarse. Imagine IE being open source. Who would stop netscape from stealing IE code and going on top of IE with a cheap trick? It would be perfectly legal is the source code was open to anyone! I don't think the GNU allows for ANY form of non-open source programs n Linux (I could be mistaken). IE on Linux would be a good idea IF AND ONLY IF Microsoft is allowed to keep it (or even ANY Microsoft product) CLOSED-source. So in terms of being fair to Microsoft, CLOSED source is a MUST BE for IE products to be ported on other platforms. MacOS 9, for example was NOT Linux-based, and hence Microsoft gladly made a Mac version of IE. To be homest, I have NO IDEA if IE is available on MacOS X. Again, PLEEEASE correct me if I'm wroing in anything. I'm only human, and I DO make mistakes like other people! What do you guys think? Oh btw, If trillian was made open-source, MS will have a harder time swallowing the idea of approaching it, LOL

Hmmm, I think that MS and AOL are on "good terms" with each other. I would doubt that AOL or MS would use a supertool like Trillian to try to eliminate the other from the market. After all, AOL licenses Internet Explorer from Microsoft to be ditributed with its AOL software. Also, AOL software runs on Microsoft Windows meaning it would benefit BOTH companies to stay as quote-unquote "business freinds". Yes MSN messenger / Windows Messenger poses some competition with respect to AOL nistant messenger, but it seems the MAIN focus of AOL is their full-blown AOL software. Even thier AOL Instant messenger seems sometimes like nothing but a "freindly" ad to their services and software. If you've ever installed AOL Instant messenger, you realize how many "free 700" or "free 1000" hours offers from AOL there are in that little banner! And what does AOL IM run on? Windows, Unix, Mac, etc... (but windows is DEFINATELY included). SO it seems that a lawsuit between AOL and Microsoft seems ONLY possible IF AND ONLY IF Microsoft licenses trillian to be able to eliminate AOL instant messenger! Also, due to the great work and effort Microsoft put into its excelent web browser, Internet Explorer, AOL finds some competition in supporting Netscape and competing with Internet Explorer. On the Other hand, Microsoft competes with AOL in terms of Internet Explorer vs Netscape competition, LOL (more on that below) I personally think that IF Microsoft is going to approach the trillian concept, I think it'll choose to buy it out for some main reasons: 1.) No more legal issues to worry about in terms of "controlling" companies. The ONLY legal issue that may arise is Microsoft CASUING companies to sell out, an argument Netscape (now owned by AOL) attempted to make a while ago 2.) If MS owns trillian, they can certainly look at the source code and "mess" with it and edit it, like they did when they bought Hotmail! 3.) Microsoft would not have to worry about trillian's "stake" if it buys out trillian! 4.) Microsoft can innovate new things with its knowledge of the code (read point 2 above). It can, for instance, integrate some of the code with MSN/Windows messenger, or even do like it did to match Netscape's competition by adding more features to MSN messenger as part of Internet Explorer (in version 6 of Netscape, AOL included a dumbed-down version of AOL instant messenger. When Internet Explorer 6 came out, Microsoft included a version of MSN messenger with its web browser, and further strengthened MSN messenger by hard-soldering it into Windows XP). 5.) Windows/MSN messenger is still an evolving product. Microsoft may use trillians mutliple-chat-network technology to delve into stuff like file transfers between MSN messener and AOL instant messenger! ;-) Of coarse such a step would require a big "OK" from AOL as well as a satisfied "eye" from the USDOJ 6.) Also (like point 5 above) Microsoft can implement such things as video/telephony in Windows messenger OVER MULTIPLE CHAT NETWORKS So arguing from all of the 5 points above, i think in fact Microsoft would benefit probably MORE than AOL would by buying out trillian, if not licensing its technologies. YES it would be nice to be able to connect to all those chat netwroks natively from windows, BUT due to the legal nature of the problem, it may not be entireyl possible. ALSO remmember that there is a HUGE possibility that AOL (and its subsidries like ICQ) will not be satisfied with this, and will probably re-configure its servers to block Windows messenger (or MSN messenger) from access to them! It CAN be done you know LOL tell me what you guys think of what i just said.I hope its not just phoney bologne! PS -> I prefer Microsoft Internet Explorer over Netscape ANY TIME! I REFUSE to install Netscape on my machine, LOL.

oops, sorry guys, It took me a while to write that post up. It looks like i was typing it as you guys where changing the subject. Sorry!

What you said AlecStaar is bery true indeed, but judging from AOL's HUGE network of users, like you said they want the money, bottom line. Let us assume MS licenses out trillian and it can connect to all AOL networks (i think trillian does that now anyways), less users will have the INCENTIVE to at least download AOL instant messenger (which is LOADED with AOL ads and banners, etc...). THAT alone will take out a considerable "chunk" of their quote-unquote "business". Consider this, have you ever thought of why Windows media player STILL can't open all .MOV files, or any .RA, .RM or event .QT files? simple: too much of a legal hassle, allow me to explain below: A.) .RM and .RA are sort of "owned" by RealNetworks. Its kind of their "territory". If Windows Media Player WAS to include native support for such files two things would SURELY happen: i.)RealNetwork's stake would SERIOUSLY be affected, since there would be NO real need for their software. Thier software is FULL of ads, and banners and is VERY pushy in presenting "offers" to the user! If Windows Media PLayer (WMP) was to support the files, why would any of us ever have to use RealPlayer? ESPECIALLY if windows media player stays as it is by minimizing ads/banners in it ii.)Microsoft would be involved in SERIOUS legal trouble. Not only will Real spare all they can to beat Microsoft in court, but other lawsuits against Microsoft will use this to try to demonstrate that Microsoft indeed is a "monopoly" that demands and executes "forced control" of markets, get what I mean? This would also support any future rulings to break up Microsoft. B.) IF Windows would have native support for MOV or quicktime files, again, why would ANY of us have to dowload Apple QuickTime? Again, this would shove Apple's stakes down by people not HAVING to download thier quote-unquote "free" player. Their free player makes money by popping up the "do you wish to upgrade" dialogue box frequently. OF coarse, this may seem fine, but it IS irritating AND all they really want is to pipe you their web site where they would have more ads, and where they would lure you into "Apple" products. If .MOV or .QT support was included natively within windows media player, we would probably have no more of the "do you wish to upgrade" BS that Apple QuickTime keeps BOMBARDING us with. I guess what I'm trying to say is this: Microsoft is a great company. It should know by now though that native support for everything is simply not gonna work for them! Its "muddy waters" for them. Take for example Executive Softwares defragging software which it licensed from them. YES it may not be as advanced or powerful as the full-blown Executive Software product (e.g Diskeeper Lite), but how many of us out there feel the NEED to either download or purchase dfragging software? now with Windows XP, since it can burn data files on CDs natively, again we probably feel LESS of a need to download other software or buy it. right?? Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Microsoft to death, and I woudl WISH someday to work for them, but their marketting and "dominance" strategies right now will not work!

Hi All, this pertains to Windows 2000 and XP (IE 5.0 or later). [XP uses IE 6.0] How can we change the time out settings for IE? For instance, since I'm on a crappy network, IE returns a "page not found / cannot find server" page whenever I try to upload some file becaus ethe upload time times out! I KNOW the server is there and running, so I just need to edit IE's timout settings. Any hints anyone? Agin, this pertians to Win2k/XP.

Cool. Thanx for your comments. Its definately a confidence boost. btw, I'm a Junior and my major IS Computer Science. It may as well be called semi-computer engineering since we do soooooooo much math, physics and other stuff too! I'll be minoring in math and physics by the time i get done (if ever), LOL. I need to figure out this networking business. I aso need to figure out Linux. Yes, I absolutely hate linux and think its a retard OS (right now at least), but I know I'm "expected" to know all about it when i apply for a job! I am considering starting off building a domain or a small Windows 2000 server. Of coarse, this means having to learn the innner workings of Active Directory and what its all about, eww. I tried messing with that earlier to little or no avail. Btw, I really do appreciate yo answering to my posts. You, clutch and the gang make this place a GREAT hangout for WIndows NT fans and lovers alike! Keep it up guys. Maybe someday I'll move up the hierarchy level and start helping people too, once I pick up a little more experience. I know a lot about win9x/Me but not NT/Linux at least not YET). Anyways, I'll let you guys know of my progress on the server. I'm looking forward to this upcoming xmas break, it'll be a great time to do some serious reading!!!

Cool. I actually LIKE the fact that enter=send! I can't stand having to go ctrl-Enter r even clicking "send" myself. LOL. I think Trillian ROX as it is, only they reeeeeally need to implement file-transfer stuff!

That may be indeed true, and very nice, BUT (there;s aklways a BUT LOL), the fact of the matter is that AOL and/or ICQ will probably not be too happy about it, because it may drive people away from having to download and install thier software. The chances are AOL (and maybe ICQ) will AT LEAST re-configure their servers, if not even sue Microsoft. If Microsoft was to approach trillian it should do so veeery carefully. Also, I would absolutely hate it if they simply buy over trillian to strengthen their MSN messeneger / Windows messenger software. Just an opinion, lol

Hmm, that's going a little too fast for me. I think i better wait till they improve the internet a bit here. It only recently (oday) started to time out on me while uploading.. Oh well. Life beihnd a college network. Like a virtual prison. a 28.8 modem conection is more honorable! ;-)

thanx ALecStaar. I think i also posted a link under the "other" section as told to do so by clutch. MS interested in trillian? that's both good and bad news. Here's why A.) MS could be interested in trillian only to backbone its MSN messenger better, which is already too pushy and hot-soldered into WindowsXP (refer to my post about un-installing Windows messenger under Windows XP). We don't need another MSN messenger here! Its eveil enough, LOL. I would really hate it if MS bought over trillian to do just that. Or, if they are gonna do it, better make MSN/Windows messenger a heck of a whole lot less pushy. I also hate that it already forces itself open whenever Outlook Express launches, eww! B.) It would be good IF they LICENSE it since windows (or MSN messenger) will have built-in support for multiple chat platforms. I doubt MS will do that though. If they do, they may face aggresive law suits by AOL and maybe ICQ since its not in their "best interest" so to speak for "Windows messenger" to connect natively to their networks! If so, people won't download AOL or ICQ any more! ;-) Also in that case, ICQ AND AOL will both re-configure their servers to block MSN/windows messenger.... It seems HIGLY UNLIKELY MS will license trillian (as in option due to it being "too much trouble" Also, MS is already struggling with law suits, and if MS is any smart they'd stay away from "muddy waters" at least for now. What i think MS might in fact do is buy over trillian ONLY to strengthen their MSN messenger/Windows messenger backbone, and force it messenger to be yet even MORE competitive and aggresive on the chat "market" so to speak. Trillian has a great start. It would be a disaster to one-program chat clients for it to be bought over I think. Just my opinion though

Hi, can anyone help me make up my mind on what to do with my old CPU unit? Its in good shape, and I would like to see it put to work (it has served me very well). Its a Dual-pentium pro 200 MHZ machine with 512KB of cache (per processor) and 256MB EDO DIMM RAM. It also has a built-in sound card (Vibra Pnp16 [sb16 compatible]). RIght now I'm considering the following options, but I am open to any and all suggestions: a.) Get a 2 GB hard drive and set up a Linux server on it (i have NO IDEA how to do this) b.) Set up a Windows 2000 domain on it (I have NO IDEA how to do this either) c.) Set it up as a simple windows 2000 file server (no idea how to do this YET). d.) E-Bay it! [dpn't like this optioon too much] e.) give it away to someone f.) trash it [i hate this option] Any help people? I mean come on, its a dual processor machine, I hate for it to be just sitting there or wasted [by trashing it]! Oh I almost forgot, the Motherboard is a Micronics w6-Li (lightning) dual pentium pro motherboard. I beleive it has UltraDMA/33 support. Tried it and it works with Windows 95/98/Me/2000/XP and Linux Mandrake 7.1/8.0. For more info on this board, check out this link: http://www.diamondmm.com/default.asp?men...ntium_Pro_W6_Li

Thanx AlecStaar. I have written down your email and I'll get back to you ASAP as soon as funds are more available. I think SCSI is good for servers. Although 5.2 GB seems a bit small for a total size, I can always tap on more hard drives like you said. thanx.

Kindly follow this thread please -> http://www.ntcompatible.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18877

Quote: How's sound + cost of shipping to you (probably a total of tops for it all)? Sounds great? for a total of 5 gigs SCSI?? Please let me know. Also, PMme your email address so I can email you as soon as funds become a little more relaxed. That way It'll help wuite a bit. thanx PS: exactly home many drives are they? cpacity / drive? I just need to know to see if i have enough space to put linux and windows on the same machine. LOL

Thanx clutch. I have just posted a link to this thread in the "other" section. I hope people will like my siggestion above.

Please follow this thread here --> http://www.ntcompatible.com/vb/showthread.php?threadid=18867&goto=newpost

clutch - > a typo. I fixed it in the post above Feilix - > yeeouch dude! That sux. I guess i gotta be super careful. I plan to buy a a small size hard drive (say a 8 gig or 9) to be able to set up the server on (any hints where i can get one dirt cheap?). yeah our ISP don't seem to care too much about gtting the internet to work, but they care ALOT if we have access to mp3s or file-sharing (yeah, right. full of it!).

Hi, Awesome! I'm glad I converted to NTFS. ALl my partitions are larger than 5 GB. In fact, my main Mp3 partition (12.1GB) is NTFS. I would probably kepp FAT32 as a partition siply for easier read/write access from within Linux. Other than than, linux can use read-only features to access NTFS partitions! That is one huge advancement in linux (i think). Anyways, Even though Fat32 seems to have less space constrictions and less items "attached" to the file system, I still think NTFS is a better choice simply because I never see any corrupted files or directories when using it. It also seems a little bit faster when defragging, LOL Thanx for your help AlecStaar. That gives me a few hints to research into. Oh and btw, Quote: Plus, it uses something called a B-Tree algorithm for searches of data & it works! That is something coders learn about in datastructures classes... I am gonna take Data Structrues I next quarter (in C++). Its the last time my University offers it in C++ so I HAVE to jump in on the bandwagon and take it, providing I get a 2.7 or better out of OOP (which I'm taking now). Data Structures II is language-inspecific so I'm not worried about that just yet. So I can't wait till I'm done with them so I can actually get down and dirty at file-system level!

Thanx again. I'll let you guys know as soon as I buy one. Right now I'm wating for that distant-looking paycheck, LOL.

Cool. Thanx guys. Confidence boost. I'm thinking of setting it up as a file server using WIndows 2000, or even better as a full-blown web server using windows 2000. The only problem right now is our ISP has locked all pors but 80 and 21 to "conserve" bandwidth since they claim software like Kazaa, Morpheus, etc.. is eating up all their bandwidth. Even WITH the block, the speed is slower than 56K (a 28.8 modem can be faster!) The LAN seems to be working pretty OK. Its a ten based T1 LAN so file/print server is not too far away of an idea. I also need to figure out how to re-compile the linux succesfully. I have done it like 9 times (no joke) and it never worked! Anyways, I am still open to suggestions and advice. keep em coming folks. Thanx for all yoyr help guys! THIS POST HAS BEEN EDITED FOR TYPOS. thanx clutch

Hmm. All these idea are very interesting indeed. Only one problem exists, the HOW. As you guys probably noticed I am not exactly a hardware or netwrok guru or genius. In I'm your typical windows dummy, just barely know how to set up IE to work on a LAN, LOL. I would love to set up a server of some sort on that machine. I am confident it can handle it. I am currently struggling with linux myself, so I don't think a Linux server would be my best or first choice. It looks like either a game or file server running some version of Windows 2000 (Windows 2000 server or Windows 2000 Advanced server). I need to learn how to do this stuff to begin with, PS -> what's good forum (like this one ) for linux? I am having problems with my sound card and network card in Linux and I know it wouldn't be appropriate to post this here since its a Windows NT forum, LOL.

Hi All, Exactly what's the deal with page files and awap files in Windows NT (nt/24/xp) ??? [note: I shall be referring to Windows NT4/2000/XP hereon as Windows NT] I know that in win9x/me (eww) a swap fie is essentially what windows uses to throw around program data that temporarily doesn't fit in system RAM, effectively trading hard drive space as a slow alternative to RAM. Here's my main question: What is a pagefile? Also, how related is it to a swapfile? does windows NT use swap files or page files or both? if so, how? So to put these questions into breif form, here we go: -what's a pagefile? -does Windows NT use swap files? page files? or both? how? Thanx. Note: I said "A dummy's guide" for a reason, so please use simple plain english whenever possible. Thanx

Thanx AlecStaar. I'll read up on it

Thanx AlecStaar. I think that helps me out a little.