|
May be you are right about the developers you are talking about. May be you are smarter and more talented and experienced then your fellow Indian colleagues or may be you are exceptionally talented.
But, If you are saying/thinking that you have not found smarter people then you or if you are saying/thinking that you have never been proved dumb in your career by someone more experienced/talented/smart, then I know that you are lying big time. Nobody in this world is absolute smartest/most talented/ever intelligent. I am pretty much sure that there are dumb people in every society including Russia. If that was not the case, they would not keep the word "dumb" in many languages in many countries. So please do not categorize people based on nationalities. Moreover, There is no person in this world which hadn't have his moments of dumbness.
Now to tell you the facts that there is highest percentage of Indian developers in organizations (e.g. NASA/Microsoft)that boast of having the smartest/talented people in the world.
No every country has shown there share of dumbness/follies in their history including Russia/former Soviet Union, so dont blame India alone for dumbness detected in this world.
As far as I am concerned, i do not have any problem if you think i am dumb. One should have the ability to ask the dumbest of questions if one needs to gain some knowledge.
Gajendra
|
|
|
|
|
David,
Thanks for your answer and quick and valuable help.
I am not asking about loopback adapter that is optionally installed and does not come with Windows. The Microsoft Loopback Adapter is an optional interface you
can install, not a standard part of the OS, and, even *without* that
adapter installed, you can send IP packets from the machine to its own
IP address, or to 127.0.0.1 (the loopback address), and have them be
received by the machine.I assume that the purpose of the Microsoft
Loopback Adapter is to deal with cases where you *do* want a network
adapter for testing purposes (so that what I presume is internal
looping-back by the networking stack isn't sufficient), or where you
need a network address other than one that belongs to a real network
adapter and other than the 127.0.0.1 (or other loopback network)
address.
Thus the loopback address i am talking about is different then the loopback adapter that you seem to be talking about which can have any address other then "127.*" net.
I was looking for a programming solution on all WIndows platforms e.g. XP/2000, 2003, 2008/Vista. Now i have found the solution, which is to enumerate the local interfaces using WSAIoctl() and checking for loopback net with flag IFF_LOOPBACK for the loopback interface.
Thanks again for your help.
Best Regards.
Gajendra Sharma
Gajendra
|
|
|
|
|
|
hello David,
Thanks for your constructive suggestions. I will see how i can use the information provided.
Thanks and Best regards.
Gajendra Sharma
Gajendra
|
|
|
|
|
Good Morning All
i have a Sourcesage Database created by me and my Boss has access to the Files in his Computer, now there is a Class Project that claims it has been checkout by him and when he checks in is Computer it says i have the file checkedout by me. Now another thing when he tries to checkitout from VS it says
"The File has been exclusively checkout by the same user in a different location"
We have delete any occurance of that file we have only in his machine. How can we overwrite this Error
Thanks
Vuyiswa Maseko,
Few companies that installed computers to reduce the employment of clerks have realized their expectations.... They now need more and more expensive clerks even though they call them "Developers" or "Programmers."
C#/VB.NET/ASP.NET/SQL7/2000/2005/2008
http://www.vuyiswamaseko.somee.com
http://www.vuyiswamaseko.tiyaneProperties.co.za
vuyiswa@its.co.za
http://www.itsabacus.co.za/itsabacus/
|
|
|
|
|
|
I found a Solution to this. This is because my Boss had a project previouly and made a backup and delete the old one and create a new one in a different location. Now Sourcesafe was pointing to the deleted directory. To resolve this i change the directory to the new location of the file and check it in from his side and get the latest and and check it out from my site.
Thanks
Vuyiswa Maseko,
Few companies that installed computers to reduce the employment of clerks have realized their expectations.... They now need more and more expensive clerks even though they call them "Developers" or "Programmers."
C#/VB.NET/ASP.NET/SQL7/2000/2005/2008
http://www.vuyiswamaseko.somee.com
http://www.vuyiswamaseko.tiyaneProperties.co.za
vuyiswa@its.co.za
http://www.itsabacus.co.za/itsabacus/
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
i know that name of the parent of exe files in windows, is explorer.exe.
explorer.exe there is in list of windows running processes in Windows task manager.
can it is this exe (explorer) there is whit other name in Windows task manager list?
Zo.Naderi-Iran
|
|
|
|
|
I'll take Incoherency for $500, Alex.
On a more serious note, I realize English is not your native language but what you've written here is just plain hard to understand. Try to rephrase it, our run your native language through a to-English translator and see if that helps.
"Old age is like a bank account. You withdraw later in life what you have deposited along the way." - Unknown
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
|
|
|
|
|
Believe me, in some languages where sentence constructions are absolutely different from languages like English - it is quite hard to build sentence correctly (this sentence as an example as my native language is Russian).
However - your point is stated perfectly! (will write it down for friends who work with Indian and Pakistani guys)
------------------------------------------------------------
Want to be happy - do what you like!
|
|
|
|
|
While Linux and Unix have a process tree as a result of the fork() system call, Windows does not. Every process is equal, apart from some kernel processes which can't be killed in Task Manager. Windows on the other hand (not the operating system, the GUI construct), have parents; most are children of the Desktop (hWnd:= 0, process:=explorer.exe). Considering your question, this seems more likely.
However, that's just the second line. Could you elaborate on what you mean in the last line of your question please?
Between the idea
And the reality
Between the motion
And the act
Falls the Shadow
|
|
|
|
|
Windows (the OS) does keep track of which process spawned which other process(es).
There are parent and child processes.
|
|
|
|
|
That's odd. Thanks for the correction; my answer clearly no longer applies. I'll have to do more research into that
Between the idea
And the reality
Between the motion
And the act
Falls the Shadow
|
|
|
|
|
Since I just posted a comment a few minutes ago about disc cleaning ,I thought that I might as well add another posting concerning the polling cd drive speed tweak that I had posted some months ago ,in order to try and clarify why the "1 millisecond" default setting that comes with the xp operating system has such an unnecessary and major loading effect on the overall computing processing speed of the xp operating system.
For example - the overall "system bus speed" of my Dell computer is 400 MB per second as I had stated in the original posting.
So , I think that the 400 MB per second speed should be divided by a factor of 1000 which would then produce a net "system bus speed" of .4 MB per second or in other words the real "system bus speed" is 400 KB per second unless the computer engineers should happen to say that the 400 MB per second " system bus speed" already includes the 1 millisecond default polling speed of the xp operating system and if that is the case , then:
if you increased that 1 millisecond default setting to, for example 1 second , then , I would think that you could then multiply the 400 MB "system bus speed" by a factor of 1000 that would then increase the net "system bus speed" to 400,000 MB per second or in other words 400 GB per second , at least , theorectically.
In actual operating conditions , I guess, that
the solid state componets [ram memory] upper operating speed limits would probably be somewhere between the 400 MB per second and 400 GB per second.
winch1020
|
|
|
|
|
I am going to do some more speculating on the 1 millisecond default polling value of the USB drive [ not the cd drive which I accidently wrote in my previous posting ] and its effect on the xp operating system processing speed.
Dividing the "system bus speed" by a factor of a 1000 would only apply for a worst case scenario: that is , if the computer engineers were to deliberately design the 1 millisecond polling output to Shut DOWN the complete "system bus " every millisecond when the polling circuit is turned on by the microprocessor [assuming that the polling circuit is not a separate free running oscillator running at a 1000 cycles per second - astable as opposed to monostable - a lack of synchronizing would no doubt cause to many problems , so the polling is no doubt tripped off by the microprocessor].
Even if "the total shut down "design is not opted for by the computer engineers - they could still opt to have the 1 millisecond polling increments shut down SOME of the "system bus" that is, some of the 32 bit address or 64 bit address space.
If the computer designers chose not to shut down any EXTRA parts of the system bus every millisecond and just let the 1 millisecond polling increments utilize the required amount of system bus address space it required in order to poll the USB drive --- I wonder how many BYTES per second or BYTES per millisecond of computer band width would be taken by the polling ciruit?How much system address space has to be set aside every second to process the 1 millisecond polling increments ?
I suppose that the polling ciruit has its own coded file.How large is it? Would it be a couple of thousand bytes in size or would a file the size of a couple of hundred bytes be enough to get the USB polled?
I assume that you could Multiply the Size of the Polling File by a Factor of 1000 in order to find out how many Bytes per second that the computer has to continually process.
modified on Friday, July 10, 2009 9:02 AM
|
|
|
|
|
For the past couple of months I have been using the ccleaner utility tool each time I turn on my computer to surf the internet etc , which means that the ccleaner utility is run at least once every time that I power up the computer.
I think that it is a smarter policy to run any utility tool when you first turn the computer on instead of running the tool at the end of a computer session and just before turning the computer off for the simple reason that if the computer user has happened to have been on the internet - any viruses or spyware etc that might happen to have got into the ram memory would automatically then be deleted.
I used to only use the ccleaner and the xp disc cleaner about once a week or every 2 weeks or so but I have noticed that the hard drive now goes about 10 to 20 times longer before requirng a defragging because I frequently monitor [every couple of days] the fragmented condition of the hardrive using the windows "analysis" option that is a part of the xp defragging tool. The percentage of total fragments and fragmented files is now always well below the 5% and 10% level for much longer periods of time.
winch1020
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, does anyone know which is is free to generate from ISA log file? Thank in advance!!!
|
|
|
|
|
how to get bios date from windows xp
|
|
|
|
|
CPU-Z can find it for you.
//Johannes
|
|
|
|
|
The system time reflects the BIOS data/time. If you set the time in Windows, the BIOS date/time also gets set. The opposite is also true.
|
|
|
|
|
Application log file got > 2.5 GB on production sever. so I want to switch the log file, with out
stoppping the application. I tried to rename a old one and create a new with same name, but there was sharing voliation.
Please advice
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, currently my network contain domain cotroller running windows 2003 and one e-mail server plus 30 client computer. Now I want to setup a firewall running ISA 2004 Standard Edition.
I have successfully install ISA 2004 on a new server running windows 2003. Then I try to create the rule that make ISA and my internet network could be able to communicate with each. The following rule is created:
1. Rule name: ISA to LAN
2. Action: Allow
3. Protocol: All outbound protocol
4. Source: Local Host
5. Destination: Internal (internal network card)
Then I apply the rule but when I try to ping from my ISA computer the any client in my internal network, the ping is request time out.
Does any one know how to configure its access for the above purpose?
Thank in advance!!!
|
|
|
|
|
How can v retrieve computers connected through LAN in vb.net 2003?
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
