 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Windows XP / Customization / February 2007Is there no one out there?
I hoped to receive an answer to my query of 20/11/05, copied below, by now > Mac System X desktop folders and files can be set to as they can within XP > folders - List¹ - taking up much less space and which I find easier to > arrange and keep track of > > Can XP DESKTOP folders and files be similarly arranged with small icons and > the text to the right? If so how please Francis Hookham Not that I know of. The desktop settings are stored in the registry under this key: "HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Shell\Bags\1\Desktop" The "mode" value stores the icon style, but it you try set it to anything other than 1 (list is 3), explorer just changes it back :) Keith > I hoped to receive an answer to my query of 20/11/05, copied below, by now > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Francis Hookham Try storing your documents in My Documents folder instead of on the Desktop. Then you can have different Views. List view displays the contents of a folder as a list of file or folder names preceded by small icons. This view is useful if your folder contains many files and you want to scan the list for a file name. You can sort your files and folders in this view; however, you cannot display your files in groups. How To Arrange Files Using Folder Views in Windows XP http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;306554  SignatureHope this helps. Let us know. Wes MS-MVP Windows Shell/User > I hoped to receive an answer to my query of 20/11/05, copied below, by now > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Francis Hookham Thanks Wes – yes, I use different Views for different needs (an I am amazed to find friends just not having ventured far enough to find that simple facility) It is just a pity Windows does not have that List facility in the Desktop which is what Apple has done (Well, I’ll put that on my wish list and Bill might catch up one day – or should I not say such a thing here!) (I’ll switch to the Mac for the next job – oh! no, I am already using it write this email on!) Francis > Try storing your documents in My Documents folder instead of on the Desktop. > Then you can have different Views. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >> > >> > Francis Hookham Must be why your message is in HTML. SignatureHope this helps. Let us know. Wes MS-MVP Windows Shell/User > Thanks Wes – yes, I use different Views for different needs (an I am > amazed to find friends just not having ventured far enough to find that [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] >>>> >>>> Francis Hookham Recte: Yours is a very honest, straightforward answer -- the first one I've received.... After all the pompous bafflegab. Thank you kindly. Comments below. DSH > On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 15:46:20 -0000, "D. Spencer Hines" > <poguemidden@hotmail.com> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > fairly active in creating web content and since I also author a lot of > DVD content I NEED to see how each new OS performs. As simple as that. Fair Enough. > While Vista is being touted as a new "major" release, I don't see it > that way. To me and to many, it is mostly a face lift and a needed > one. Windows in XP was getting tired looking and a bit behind the > times. Vista, especially if your system can support Aero is slicker, > visually. I guess that's a benefit, but hardly one that justifies the > cost of upgrading. Bingo! I use the Windows Classical look. I don't want my computer to look like a jukebox. "Slicker" is not something I cherish -- either in friends, women, politicians or operating systems. > Several little things have been fixed. About time! One thing I do like > is now with Windows Explorer when you drag and drop files you get a [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the file in the folder above or below your intented target. Now that's > less likely. That's Nice -- An enhancement. > Vista's help system is much improved over XP. So it now details about > where your files are for example when clicking on Start than All > Programs. No more annoying ever expanding to the right list that takes > over your monitor. Now each category opens in the same window and > scrolls in place. Takes a little getting used to, but better once you > get use to the change. I prefer manuals -- which have been deep-sixed -- unless we pay extra. > Believe it or not (except for UAC) Vista is less of a nag and actually > tries to be more helpful. Little windows pop up and give more specific > information like when installing new hardware, information in Event > logs is better, Control Panel has undergone a major face lift. I installed IE7 TWICE and pulled it OFF twice. HORRIBLE Nag -- worse than three mothers-in-law at dinner. <g> Now, Windows Update tells me I have HIDDEN a Critical Update and will surely Go To Hell with viruses and Trojans besieging me. I don't need that. I am the master of my OWN computer. > I'm sure there are many improvements under the hood I haven't had time > to explore yet. These and any one of many little things may be enough > for somebody to consider upgrading a good idea. Asking to make a list > is simply too difficult not knowing everybody's likes or dislikes in > XP and saying if or not they've been fixed, or made worse. If they are TRUE improvements they will be obvious. Take Microsoft Windows TrueType Fonts, for example --- THEY were an item worthy of listing on the TEN bullet list at the time -- and finished Bitstream Fonts for most of us. > One thing that does seem to be a glaring mistake was forcing UAC on > users without asking if they wanted it forcing you to discover how to > turn UAC off as opposed to learning on to turn it on if you want it. PRECISELY! That was similar to the Chinese Communists taking over Hong Kong. VERY POOR MARKETING and STRATEGY by Microsoft -- HEADS SHOULD ROLL. You simply don't treat Americans like that -- or anyone else for that matter. I ran into it on IE7 and trashed it. Bill Gates' departure from the hands-on led to these disasters? > I bet that will get changed. Quick. Its pissing off a lot of users. Too slow for me. That's why I'll be waiting for SP2 -- AND the software manufactures to catch up, change their drivers, work out bugs and so forth. You were RIGHT -- you didn't even come up with FIVE Good Reasons. <g> But Thanks Anyway. Cheers, DSH Others have speculated this "non-guaranteed" SP3 for XP will simply be a ROLLUP ---- incorporating previously released updates and security fixes and will cleanup some of the material left on many XP computers by previous updates and security fixes. DSH --------------------------------------------- > There are no guarantees of course, but Microsoft *is* planning a Windows > XP SP3. It's currently planned for for [sic] the first half of next year. > See > http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycle/servicepacks.mspx |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.