OT: Desktop icons vanishing. How to get rid of them?

Yes, by only using the CLI. I have a completely icon-free desktop; whenever I want to start a program I just pop open a console with a single keystroke and type in the command and argument (actually, just the first few letters of them and then TAB, which autocompletes the word.

robert

CLI = Command Line Interface? Ok, but I'd like to see on the desktop what's available. Hard to memorize umpteen programs and files on there. Why isn't there an option to just display the text under the piccies but no piccies?

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Right click on the desktop in an empty area (if you can find one on my desktop!) to bring up a menu, hit the refresh option. That happens once and a while to my machines, but that fixes it without restarting.

Win 2K in my opinion is the last OS hat M$ made that is reasonably any good. XP is just a glorified version with a bunch of extra features that make it less stable. Vista is XP with a new interface and DRM. Aero glass and themes will run under XP, and it runs much faster, on older hardware without hogging all the resources that vista needs to keep it's DRM things going.

Amen, brother.

Joerg wrote:

Here ya go:

*-*-bmp-*-that.consists.of.a.single.pixel+Hide.My.Computer

*-*-bmp-*-that.consists.of.a.single.pixel+Hide.My.Computer

Thanks but it doesn't seem to work for NT/2000 systems.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Thanks, it really did it. The question is, why does Windows suffer partial memory loss at random? Oh well, maybe that's just the "quality level" it comes with. What else does it occasionally forget?

No Vista here, absolutamente not. A wee problem will be that I'll soon need a cheap desktop to replace this one. And I don't want one with Vista. Might have to do the garage sale tour.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

On my old NT 4 pc, the "programs" folder on the start menu used to disappear regularly to be replaced by a single entry "eject pc".

It sounds like your machine is getting old and filled up - the only permanent solution is a re-install.

Yeah, maybe. But it costs so much time and lots of stuff doesn't work anymore after that.

The other problem I have is the incredible bloat Windows causes. The performance monitor in task manager says 137MB of RAM used when nothing (!) is running. Yet under processes it only shows 20MB worth of processes running. So one side of it lies to the other, what a "performance". Great. I guess that helper SW is not of a high quality either.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Personally, I find the icons useful most of the time.

But I must also say, the "real" fix is to just accept the fact that Windows Explorer has a lot of problems. Once you truly come to terms with that, the rest is easy.....!

-mpm

It sure does but it can't be the only problem. Most Windows such as 2000 hog gobs of RAM and that isn't reflected in the processes list of task manager. IMHO the last good OS from up there in Redmond was DOS.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Surf on "icon cache" for a variety of ways to bump up the cache size.

I've reduced my number of desktop icons down to 25, simply by collecting functions... for instance my "Engineering & Math Tools" icon has 22 "sub" icons, like Excel, KMAP and other logic reducers, various simulation auxiliary functions, etc...

...Jim Thompson

--
|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC\'s and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  E-mail Address at Website     Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |
             
         America: Land of the Free, Because of the Brave

Eventually I will do that. Right now I only have stuff on there that's very frequently used, the rest gets called via the start -> programs method.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Didn't you know? The reason they called it "Windows 2000" was you needed 2000 Megabytes of RAM to run it.

Joerg wrote in news:6GUHi.5923$ snipped-for-privacy@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net:

I use a button bar called NVBAR(shareware),and delete most of the desktop icons;W98 SE system.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

ROFL!

It's sad. Why does taskbar show the usage on the graphs but not on the process list? Another one of Bill's shrouding tactics?

Anyhow, I would never, ever, run anything mission critical on a Windows platform. The newer the versions the less I trust them.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Joerg wrote:

I like that one too.

I'm curious. When you save somthing in M$Works, in what format do you save it? Can you access those with any other program? Can you access them without Windoze?

Yes. Save it in "Works for Windows 2.0/Works for DOS" format. Or dBase if you want to. I can read it with DOS-Works 2.0. Don't know whether

1.05 would also work. That was the first copy I bought but haven't tried it yet because 2.0 is better and also DOS.

So, does anyone know why Win2k gulps >130MB all for itself?

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

My 1st question would be: "How much useless junk are you running?" http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:bh0NCeGYrioJ:

And they didn't even write that! They stole it from Digital Research. =:-O

Cheers! Rich