|
Yes I have it on a Netbook which is around 10 years old.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
I know for a fact a scary number of embedded systems use XPe (Air traffic control monitors, Aircraft carriers, railway signals and on) , whch was part of the reason it was kept so long. 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not so sure that is scary. I have developed on WinCE for a very long time - because the hardware never changes, the systems are incredibly stable. Now, my code? 
I would much rather have CE or XPe than Windows NT... NT Leaves Navy ship Dead in the water.[^]
of course this is a long time ago. The biggest issue I've seen for us is that users (factory workers, engineers, scientists, etc) use these control systems as if they were simple PCs. I've gotten back storage that was completely corrupted by viruses. Iran lost a number of centrifuges due to Stuxnet - almost certainly introduced when some intelligent person plugged in an unknown USB drive to a control system computer.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
The fact you could use VB & C# on something embedded was a big shock to me. I come from an Electronics & Low level back ground. Mind you the Stuxnet thing meant now we don't leave USB ports physically accessable. Upgrading stuff on the shop floor has gone from emailing a file to having to go down physically remove the lid (many security things to make life difficult) find the header, plug a USB header in, boot the system and upgrade! 
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed. Many high security locations epoxy the USB ports.
Many years ago, I worked on an USAF Afb supporting and developing for Vaxes. The DOD ran a security sweep doing two things. First, they attempted to penetrate any system they saw on the network. At the time, they could not get past the VMS security, but they found numerous Unix machines wide open with unpatched issues.
So, they hacked in, modified the login screen or some other obvious place to say something like "You've been hacked, please call the base security office (insert phone # here) immediately!"
And then they waited. And no one called.  I think a key part of security is simply paying attention.
The also did another test. They created many thousands of infected USB drives and leave them in parking lots, bathrooms, etc. Even though security protocols dictated to turn in these devices to security, it was uncanny how many really smart people shoved them into their machines, cause, you know, I just got to know.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
Just thinking, I ought to pay attention to the log in screen...
|
|
|
|
|
I have an old service manual app for my old car (1999) that comes in a XP virtual machine.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, we still have some XP in a local LAN in the field... I suppose those will stop working first, when the hardware says: "until here and no more"
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Still have one laptop, used to launch super old industrial programs to give support to customers with old devices.
|
|
|
|
|
Flier has limited edition food (6)
"I didn't mention the bats - he'd see them soon enough" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nope - but I'm interested to know your thinking 
"I didn't mention the bats - he'd see them soon enough" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
food => beet
limited edition => LE
flier (def) => beetle (some of them, I think)
|
|
|
|
|
Good effort I'm tempted to let you have it
"I didn't mention the bats - he'd see them soon enough" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
If it's better than the actual solution...
|
|
|
|
|
I think it possibly is
"I didn't mention the bats - he'd see them soon enough" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
I was working with "LE" or "ED" for "limited edition" but got nowhere.
So what was it?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
beetle 
|
|
|
|
|
In the "old" days, you "clicked" (mouse); or perhaps double-clicked.
In UWP, we don't have (much of) a mouse; we have a "pointer"; and we "Tap" or double-tap; which generally can also be handled via Click. (The trolls get excited when you suggest tapping instead of clicking in certain instances)
Now the UWP double-tap, is actually a triple-tap: first the (single) Tap fires (if implemented); then the double-tap (if implemented). So, if you plan to handle both; you need to be aware of both.
My scenario was that if one Tapped a particular user control, it was "selected"; tap it again, and it became unselected.
I decided that a double-tap would select / deselect all of the same type. So, what happens now it, the first tap selects / deselects; then the Double-Tap sender is the original One-Tap sender which is now selected / deselected and enabling a cascade of the original intent.
(If you implement single-tap and not double-tap, all double taps become multiple single taps; but the double-tap does not override a single-tap. And implementing a drag, required implementing a "pointer pressed" versus a Tap)
Seems totally natural, somehow.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
I dunno man. For any fan of Spy Thrillers, double-tapping has a whole other meaning. I think you might have to be careful where you say something like "Just double-tap it!", just like when meeting your friend Jack at the airport it might not we wise to say "Hi, Jack".
Keep Calm and Carry On
|
|
|
|
|
I was going to mention that @JSOP might like the expression.
|
|
|
|
|
His signature clearly explains he is against that practice - it is also less defendable in court.
GCS d--(d-) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
You fire until the threat is stopped. It doesn't matter if it takes just one, or 30 rounds.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed: Double Tap[^]
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OK, Let me be sure I have this straight. If you implement both tap and double tap, and then you double tap the control, it raises the tap event and then the double tap event?
How is your code supposed to respond to the double tap appropriately if the single tap also happens, and happens first?
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
