IrfanView: sometimes very slow loading

On 2015-09-13 22:25:04 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 11:41:40 +0100, David Taylor
wrote:

Le Snip

You can most certainly move a file from one device to another in Win-10!
Select the files, and use the right mouse button. When you release
the mouse button, it allows either move or copy in addition to Create
shortcut.

Once again I was talking about W7. This time when copying files into
Dropbox. Suddenly, when selecting a file with left-click, dragging
didn't just copy a file into Dropbox: it moved it, leaving nothing in
the directory from which it had come.

From a Mac users perspective, that is the way Dropbox works. With OSX,
and I suspect various versions of Windows, there are several ways to
load a file into Dropbox.

1: With the Dropbox folder you can drag the file from its primary
location and it is moved to the desktop DB folder from its original
location, and copied to the DB server. The file will only exist in the
Dropbox desktop folder or sub-folder.

2: Right click on the file icon and select "Move to Dropbox" from the
pop-up menu. The file is moved from its original location to the
desktop Dropbox folder. It is not copied.

3: Using the Dropbox web interface, left click and drag the file to the
location on the DB web page and drop. The file is copied to the DB
server and the original remains unmolested in its original position. It
will also place a copy into the Dropbox desktop folder, or sub-folder.

4: Using the Lightroom export dialog, I have several export presets
for converting to JPEG and exporting to a Dropbox, of Adobe CC
location. That is how I generate my shared JPEGs and the only exist in
either the Dropbox or Adobe CC desktop folders and servers, not in
Lightroom.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2015-09-13 22:39:13 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 14:38:10 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
On 2015-09-13 20:21:21 +0000, Tony Cooper said:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 15:58:49 -0400, nospam
wrote:
In article , Bill W
wrote:

And finally regarding upgrading from XP, I use lots of software -
mostly music and photo, and almost none of it will run on XP. And I
think I'm a typical user.

as i said in another post, software developers aren't supporting xp
anymore.

Is that more of a case of XP not supporting software developers now
that there are few XP units extant? No point in expending time and
energy for the small demand.

The reason many software developers are not supporting XP is much the
same reason developers no longer support OSX 10.6.8 "Snow Leopard"(SL),
the capability of new versions and revisions of their software would
have to be crippled if they were to maintain backward compatibility.
The newer OSs, for both Win and OSX provide opportunity for developing
new software features and performance improvements over the versions
written for the now unsupported OSs.

Why should any developer ignore new and advanced OSs to support an OS
put out to pasture by its parent company, when they need to move on?

Isn't that exactly what I said?

Not exactly.
When I spoke of support by the developers it was in terms of software
development and evolution. Sticking with, and supporting defunct OSs
does nothing for development and evolution of their products.

There is no significant income -
support - for developing apps for something that has declined in use -
and is continuing to decline - when the financial support is in the
development of apps for what is newer and in growing use.

Maybe my use of "support" in the financial sense slipped by.

To be fair, you didn't exactly use the word "financial" until this response.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

You can most certainly move a file from one device to another in Win-10!
Select the files, and use the right mouse button. When you release
the mouse button, it allows either move or copy in addition to Create
shortcut.

Once again I was talking about W7. This time when copying files into
Dropbox. Suddenly, when selecting a file with left-click, dragging
didn't just copy a file into Dropbox: it moved it, leaving nothing in
the directory from which it had come.

dragging a file on the same drive has always been a move. it would be
very stupid for that to be a copy.

when dragging to a *different* drive, it's a copy.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

| The reason many software developers are not supporting XP is much the
| same reason developers no longer support OSX 10.6.8 "Snow Leopard"(SL),
| the capability of new versions and revisions of their software would
| have to be crippled if they were to maintain backward compatibility.

In most cases that's not true.

it's *always* true.

Apple generally supports
2 versions back. Their customers are willing to shell out
for new hardware.

more ignorant bull****.

el capitan/10.11, which comes out in a couple of weeks, works on macs
back to 2007 or so, some of which originally shipped with tiger/10.4.

that's *eight* years of hardware and *eight* versions of the operating
system.

Windows has a tradition of backward
compatibility because Microsoft's main customer is business.
Business people won't update to a newer system if it
breaks the software they need.

nobody does. however, not a whole lot breaks.

however, backward compatibility comes at a cost, which is lack of
progress.

As a result, much of what
runs on Win10 will run on Win98.

nonsense.

for instance, photoshop elements (which is $50ish street price)
requires win7 or later.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Their financial support comes from developing
products for the larger market.

the main reason is that creating compelling apps on xp is no longer
possible.

Evidently, you are not aware that "support" is a term used to mean
one's source of income as well as a term that means to supply
assistance. I tried to make it clear for you, but to no avail.

If you are an app developer, your support comes from the proceeds of
app development. If you are smart, you will expend your time and
effort in developing apps that work on a present and growing market
and not one in decline. The market for XP apps is in sharp decline.

that's a different definition of support than what the software
industry uses and i'm not surprised you get it wrong.

developers support operating systems and/or products. if they don't
write apps, the product fails. that's how it is.

palm webos was a decent product but very few developers supported it so
it failed.

microsoft windows phone is a nice alternative to ios/android but
developers are not supporting it. there are very few apps compared to
ios/android. microsoft has pretty much given up on it.

xp is old and developers no longer support it. nor does microsoft.

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Is that more of a case of XP not supporting software developers now
that there are few XP units extant? No point in expending time and
energy for the small demand.

The reason many software developers are not supporting XP is much the
same reason developers no longer support OSX 10.6.8 "Snow Leopard"(SL),
the capability of new versions and revisions of their software would
have to be crippled if they were to maintain backward compatibility.
The newer OSs, for both Win and OSX provide opportunity for developing
new software features and performance improvements over the versions
written for the now unsupported OSs.

Why should any developer ignore new and advanced OSs to support an OS
put out to pasture by its parent company, when they need to move on?

Isn't that exactly what I said?

no.

you said the system stopped supporting the developers. it's the other
way around. developers support operating systems and/or products.
without that support, it fails.

There is no significant income -
support - for developing apps for something that has declined in use -
and is continuing to decline - when the financial support is in the
development of apps for what is newer and in growing use.

Maybe my use of "support" in the financial sense slipped by.

the financial side is part of it.

the main reason is that compelling apps are simply not possible on
older systems so developers stop supporting old versions.

On 2015-09-13 22:33:49 +0000, "Mayayana" said:


| The reason many software developers are not supporting XP is much the
| same reason developers no longer support OSX 10.6.8 "Snow Leopard"(SL),
| the capability of new versions and revisions of their software would
| have to be crippled if they were to maintain backward compatibility.

In most cases that's not true.

Actually it is true.

Apple generally supports 2 versions back.

Wrong.

Their customers are willing to shell out
for new hardware.

Never willing I can assure you. I am running OSX 10.10 Yosemite on a
Mid 2010 21.5" iMac with a 3,6 GHz Core i5, and 16 GB 1333 MHz DDR3. It
works just fine and I will up date to OSX 11 when it is released.
However I have other things to buy before I buy fresh hardware.

Windows has a tradition of backward
compatibility because Microsoft's main customer is business.
Business people won't update to a newer system if it
breaks the software they need. As a result, much of what
runs on Win10 will run on Win98. The general API has been
maintained with great consistency for the sake of business
customers. In many cases new software would need some
updated system files to run on older Windows versions, but
Microsoft is good about that, too. (Not because they're
more considerate than Apple. Simply because Apple targets
the consumer entertainment market and MS targets the
business market.)

That is your take on things, not what is actually happening in the real world.

Things like games usually take advantage of the very
latest developments, like the latest DirectX. Aside from
that, it's usually not a big deal to support any system
that's already been supported. For instance, program
XYZ supports XP. Vista comes out. The developers adapt
XYZ to support Vista. Likewise with Win7. It usually
doesn't take much. So most of the companies will continue
supporting the Windows versions they already targetted.

With new software it might be different. It depends on
what it is, how deeply into the system it needs to go, and
whether the developers think it's worthwhile to support
minority systems. The one notable difference with XP now
is that they have an excuse if they don't want to support
it. When MS drops support that provides an excuse for
others to drop support.

With all this talk of dropped support I still haven't seen
any list of popular software that won't run on XP. All I'm
aware of is newer versions of Pale Moon and Adobe's
cloud scam, as I said earlier. Those are not a problem for
me. Of course I can't get IE 11, but I wouldn't allow it if
I could. And I can't install the latest
version of MS Office. That, likewise, I wouldn't take for
free. Microsoft has maintained their Office monopoly for
years by breaking compatibility so that people have to
constantly update. Fortunately Libre Office solves that
problem for many people.

If you took the trouble to look you might understand that Adobe
Creative Cloud is far from a scam. Photoshop and Lightroom CC are a
much better deal than being trapped on the upgrade treadmill.

XP is being phased out more, so I expect more support
will be dropped in the next 1-3 years. But I'm not worried
for the foreseeable future. I'm still running Visual Studio 6
on XP, writing software that runs on anything from Win98
to Win10. That can't be said of newer programming tools.
.Net has limited support and is already being scaled back.
Metro apps are basically phone/tablet apps that can only
run on Win8/10 at best.

XP isn't being phased out, it is dead, defunct, kaput, except for those
who continue to use unsupported XP.
....and those folks are probably very happy.

BTW: Why don't you use a decent Usenet client that will show atributes
properly?
....or do you deliberately trim atributes.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 17:56:43 +0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:

"p-0''0-h the cat (UK) - The voice of the Sheeple"

Sun, 13 Sep 2015
07:37:34 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 00:02:36 +0000 (UTC), Diesel wrote:

yes it did. xp is insecure and anyone still running it is at
risk.

Okay. Please, specify the way(s) in which it's insecure.

Well, where do I start...

Excellent.

Most people logon to XP using an adminstrative account and they

That's not a smart thing to be doing for the typical computer user.
How is that the fault of XP though? Is XP forcing you to login as
admin? Mine doesn't. Although, I confess, I typically do use an Admin
account myself. The restricted account annoys me. I don't require
it's hand holding 'security' measures. Many of which you listed
below.

What *you* require or not is immaterial. Jeese Dusty, it's not about *you*

Under Vista + even if you logon with an account which has administrative
priviledges any applications you launch still run in the context of a user
unless you elevate. If you cannot see the improvement then words fail me.


launch applications under that context whereas later versions of
Windows at least have UAC which only elevates applications to run
in the context of an adminstrative account if they require it,
then there's the out of date security subsystem, lack of mandatory
integrity control, user interface privilege isolation, windows

All of those features you brag about have already been defeated,
though.

Well thanks for citing proof. It's an idiotic argument of course because
the bar was raised and remains raised and will now be even higher providing
the alledged vunerability has been patched.

it's missing a load of encryption additions and improvements in
later versions of windies, the firewall is dated, and so on and so
on.

What's forcing me to use the built in firewall?

Nothing, why do you ask? Did the fact that we are discussing the XP OS
escape you?

Even so, it still
does the basic stuff a firewall is known for doing, doesn't it?

It does *SOME* of the basic stuff. Woopee!! Basic stuff for a personal
firewall nowadays includes filtering outgoing by application. Does it do
that? No. Does it filter outgoing at all? I can't remember. I don't think
so.

So..
other than losing out on very custom rule sets and more advanced
filtering options, what does it really matter in this case?

Well Dusty it matters but don't you worry your pretty little head about it
none. You just keep telling yerself yer brilliant.

You wouldn't just rely on the OS firewall would you?

Sure, I do that every time I connect to hotel WiFi. Do you take your router
with you?

Surely you're
incoming connection is behind a firewall of it's own. Yes?

It's behind three actually but packet filters are pretty limited and
setting up an application level proxy just pour moi isn't a top priority
and the best costs dear, as in a lot, I'm not calling you dear.

Those encryption additions have worked out great for ransomware, I'm
glad you brought it up. Money maker, right there. Several PoCs have
already made it wild abusing them, too.

It's pointless asking you for proof of that of course. I've asked before
and you never back it up with hard evidence.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.

--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, ******* hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll,
troll infâme, the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers]
lowlife troll, shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple,
sociopath, kook, smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile,
snittish scumbag, liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur,
scouringerer, the most complete ignoid, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

On 2015-09-13 23:41:24 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 15:45:46 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2015-09-13 22:25:04 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 11:41:40 +0100, David Taylor
wrote:

Le Snip

You can most certainly move a file from one device to another in Win-10!
Select the files, and use the right mouse button. When you release
the mouse button, it allows either move or copy in addition to Create
shortcut.

Once again I was talking about W7. This time when copying files into
Dropbox. Suddenly, when selecting a file with left-click, dragging
didn't just copy a file into Dropbox: it moved it, leaving nothing in
the directory from which it had come.

From a Mac users perspective, that is the way Dropbox works. With OSX,
and I suspect various versions of Windows, there are several ways to
load a file into Dropbox.

1: With the Dropbox folder you can drag the file from its primary
location and it is moved to the desktop DB folder from its original
location, and copied to the DB server. The file will only exist in the
Dropbox desktop folder or sub-folder.

2: Right click on the file icon and select "Move to Dropbox" from the
pop-up menu. The file is moved from its original location to the
desktop Dropbox folder. It is not copied.

On my Windows computer it's "Send to" and then choosing Dropbox. The
file is copied to Dropbox but remains the folder from where it was
sent. Just tried it. I did this by going to StartComputer(file
folder)

When I right-click on a file this is the menu I get with "Move to
Dropbox", and it moves it to the DB desktop folder. It does not copy it.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_294.jpg


3: Using the Dropbox web interface, left click and drag the file to the
location on the DB web page and drop. The file is copied to the DB
server and the original remains unmolested in its original position. It
will also place a copy into the Dropbox desktop folder, or sub-folder.

I'm not sure what you mean by the Dropbox web interface. When I open
Dropbox on the web, I don't have access to a folder to drag from.

Why not?
All I do is open a folder with the image files and pull that on top of
the open Dropbox web site location on my web browser. I select the
image I want in DB, I left-click on it, hold and drag to the browser
window and drop. That is all that is needed.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/FileChute/screenshot_293.jpg

I use the import icon to add a file to Dropbox, and this imports a copy.
I could open a separate window and try to drag, but this seems much
more complicated than simply importing.

What could be simpler that drag & drop?


BTW...did you ever check to see if your Dropbox items are viewable on
your iPad when offline?

I just turned off WiFi on my iPad so it is offline, and opened Dropbox.
I got the following DB message, "Unable to Load Recent Files". In
actuallity is is unabe to load any files.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Is that more of a case of XP not supporting software developers now
that there are few XP units extant? No point in expending time and
energy for the small demand.

The reason many software developers are not supporting XP is much the
same reason developers no longer support OSX 10.6.8 "Snow Leopard"(SL),
the capability of new versions and revisions of their software would
have to be crippled if they were to maintain backward compatibility.
The newer OSs, for both Win and OSX provide opportunity for developing
new software features and performance improvements over the versions
written for the now unsupported OSs.

Why should any developer ignore new and advanced OSs to support an OS
put out to pasture by its parent company, when they need to move on?

Isn't that exactly what I said?

no.

you said the system stopped supporting the developers. it's the other
way around. developers support operating systems and/or products.
without that support, it fails.

You really are thick. Even when it's explained you don't get it.

What is your primary source of support?

you're the one who is thick.

once again, developers decide if they want to support something or not.

if enough of them do, the product will likely succeed. if not, it won't.

history has shown this time and time again.

developers are no longer supporting windows xp. even microsoft is not
supporting windows xp.

not enough developers supported palm webos, so it failed.

not enough developers are supporting microsoft windows phone. the
hardware is decent, as is the operating system, but without the apps,
there's no compelling reason to get it over ios or android.