Unsubscribing from e-mail newsletters

I thought I'd try my hand at this today and just found:

• It slightly annoying when you are sent an e-mail confirming that you've unsubscribed (hello, I just told you I don't want your e-mails!)
• Even worse, you're asked to log into an account that you never created in the first place. My best guess here is that I registered to some other site owned by the same company. Though their 'password reminder' e-mail still hasn't come through.....
  

Why do people fail at handling WM_MOUSEWHEEL properly?

When handling this message, one of the values you receive is the value which expresses "the distanced the wheel is rotated" (or rather, was). I will call it delta1 to avoid confusion. Basically, this works on a scale where a delta1 of [fixed value called WHEEL_DELTA] is equal to [system wide setting] units (lines or whatever). With respect to that fixed value WHEEL_DELTA, it says on MSDN:

"The delta was set to 120 to allow Microsoft or other vendors to build finer-resolution wheels in the future, including perhaps a freely-rotating wheel with no notches. The expectation is that such a device would send more messages per rotation, but with a smaller value in each message. To support this possibility, you should either add the incoming delta values until WHEEL_DELTA is reached (so for a delta-rotation you get the same response), or scroll partial lines in response to the more frequent messages. You could also choose your scroll granularity and accumulate deltas until it is reached."

Unfortunately, many people seem to have glossed over that, and even the rest of the content on the page.

Some of the problems I have faced when using a smooth Microsoft mouse wheel:

• Applications scrolling in the same direction whichever way you turn the wheel (unless you turn it exceptionally fast). I would guess the bugged code in question would be something like:

  scroll_direction = delta1 >= WHEEL_DELTA ? UP : DOWN

  Microsoft's Performance Analyzer fits this category..
• Applications not scrolling at all unless you turn the wheel really fast. The problem in this case would be the application ignoring |delta1| values less than WHEEL_DELTA. The new PerfectDisk 10 fits this one.
  
• Applications scrolling erratically/"too much". The problem in this case is that they only check the sign of the delta1 value, and ignore the magnitude.
  
• Applications lacking common sense with mouse wheel scrolling. For example, on its rotating main menu Windows Media Center generally scrolls several entries at a time on when turning my mouse wheel.
• Not so much a bug but a nuisance nonetheless: applications accumulating delta1s until |delta1| >= WHEEL_DELTA is reached, when they could in fact have scrolled in smaller increments earlier. This affects many of the lists in the shell on Windows Vista, though I noticed many of those have been changed in Windows 7 beta.

(Click here if you don't know what my vertical bars mean)

Wow

How much misguided crap can a company spew?

Somone listened!

Probably not to me though.

The 'Internet Explorer' Windows Explorer warning I complained about some posts below now looks like this in Vista SP2:


Not only did they remove the Intenet Explorer references and make it make sense, they also changed the icon I complained about :P

I give up. (More flash/hard drive woes)

I ended up sending back the Samsung SSD, and bought an Mtron MOBI 3500 instead. (After a bit more research I found out that the Samsung was somewhat better, but never mind it was too late by then). Installed Windows Vista on it etc., it did what I wanted.

Today I installed the Windows Feature Pack for Storage 1.0 update and restarted my computer.

I was greeted by the lovely message:

DISK BOOT FAILURE, INSERT SYSTEM DISK AND PRESS ENTER.

WTF sprang to mind. I really wanted to blame the update I just installed, but this is at BIOS level so I will have to put it down to a coincidence.

I restarted, checked everything was set-up/recognised OK in CMOS setup and tried again. This time it booted like normal. Clearly I will have to keep an eye on this...

Buying things is difficult

After my problems with the 1.5TB Seagate 7200.11, I did some investigating and just kept finding other people with problems of increasing amounts of reallocated sectors. Seemed like enough reason to stay away from them permanently.

The WD 1TB black seemed like a good alternative, but in the end I somehow ended up deciding to buy a Samsung 32GB SLC SSD. It was the best price/performance compromise for an SSD, as the cheaper MLC ones seem to just suck. (Don't ask me how I decided that a 32GB drive would do instead of a 1.5TB one!)

The drive came, I installed it and booted up to my existing Windows Vista install and opened up disk management. From all the other hard drives I had had recently I was expecting it to prompt me to initialise the drive. It did not, strange I thought. It did not have any partitions but my suspicions were aroused. How it decides to prompt for this I am not sure - maybe it looks at the boot sector.

I used some S.M.A.R.T. software to check the power on hours and count of the drive and was surprised to see the drive had already had a few hours uptime and a bit over 10 power-ons. Could it be from the manufacturer? No, surely they would reset the data if they did even do any tests that would alter them.

So I proceeded to make an image of the drive and use some data recovery software. I discovered someone had installed Windows XP, some Custom PC benchmark program, Crysis and GIMP. Their Windows user name was SSDTESTS!

The dates on the files where long after the drive was made so clearly someone has decided to use the drive shortly to run some benchmarks. I suspect it may have been someone at the store I ordered from - it doesn't really seem like typical customer behaviour!

My problem is now that I have too much information. Does it really matter someone used it for a few hours? Do my principles outweigh the hassle of returning the drive and getting another one? Arrrgghhh!!!

It's usually quite interesting reading the Microsoft User Experience guidelines

...because they seem to like pointing out things that are actually wrong in Windows! Here is one I saw the other day:

Incorrect:


In this incorrect example, the use of glass is distracting. A plain window background would be a better choice.

(It made me laugh, anyway... :P)

This is what happens when you stick to hibernate instead of shut down...

...and keep Visual Studio and Firefox permanently open:

First entry is biggest WTF. It is a part of Visual Studio. What it is doing with 785MB committed memory (~45MB private working set (!) ) is a mystery (well, the problem is probably that it is doing nothing with it..). That is Visual Studio 2008 SP1 also. Maybe if Microsoft included this column by default in Task Manager some application developers may pay more attention to it.. (!)

I had a lot of tabs open in Firefox, but nevertheless it does seem to feed on GDI objects. System-wide there was about 8.7K GDI objects in use... which is the kind of point where I seem to face rendering glitches. Such as black screens in place of UAC prompts. It gets pretty annoying. (Not entirely sure if this is related to GDI resource usage actually.. possibly not.)

The other process using over 1K GDI resources in sidebar.exe. Must be a leak since it doesn't do anything particularly different after some weeks than shortly after boot-up (where it is using about 94). I will axe the only 3rd party gadget loaded and see if that makes any difference..

Yes, it will always be "explorer.exe".

One of the most annoying issues I have with applications when running under Vista 64-bit, is when applications (or rather their developers) decide that it will be a good idea to call explorer.exe directly for their implementation of "Open file location"/"Open containing folder". Apparently Shell APIs do not exist, or maybe they are scared of GetProcAddress et all if they actually care about Windows 2000 support.

Not only does calling explorer.exe directly work like ass, but generally when 32-bit applications decide to do it, it launches an instance of the 32-bit explorer.exe rather than the 64-bit version (I wasn't referring to this in the linked post though). For me I have this issue with Firefox and uTorrent. As a result, all of your 64-bit shell extensions will be unavailable. For me that includes 7-Zip and my anti-virus - the things I usually want to use on files downloaded with those two applications. Thankfully this was at least fixed in foobar2000. [Update: Seems to also be fixed in Firefox 3.1]

Accumulated installer issues
On a vaguely similar note, I seem to remember (some years ago) some retarded setup applications doing something like extracting a file called setup.exe into the temp folder, but then running an entirely different setup.exe from the (downloads) folder where the original executable was. Or something like that anyway.

The other similar installer issue is when (self-extracting) installers - such as most of nVidia's - decide the drive you wish to extract them to is the C: drive - even when it does not exist or is not the system drive. Who knows, maybe they fixed it by now.. I wouldn't bet on it though.

Installers launching the installed application with admin privileges when the installer is running under UAC elevation also seems to be something people have got wrong repeatedly in the past. Let's hope not so much in the future.

Another OS bug
It doesn't warrant a new post but I finally tracked down another issue I was having with Windows (Vista). I had downloaded an executable file, moved it into a sub-folder of Program Files, and created shortcuts everywhere for it. Now, whenever I ran those shortcuts, or even the executable directly it would always warn me about the file coming from another computer. Even when I unticked the box about always prompting for that file. Eventually it annoyed me enough to investigate. I opened the properties for the file, and tried clicking the 'Unblock' button. But it didn't stop the messages, and the button came back next time you opened that page! At this point I could work out what the problem was (two-fold):
1. Vista needed elevation to unblock the file (as it was in the Program Files folder) but failed to prompt for it.
2. It silently failed when it couldn't unblock the file (and temporarily acted like it succeeded).

There is probably a few ways to work around this - I don't remember which one I used, possibly moving the file out of Program Files, unblocking it, and moving it back. But there sure is a couple of sloppy things on Microsoft's side here.

Nokia N85 WiFi - "No gateway reply" with Thomson routers (also E71, N79, 5800, ...)

If you have one of the recent Nokia phones (N85, E71, N79, 5800, ...) and a recent Thomson / SpeedTouch / BT Home Hub router you may face the "No gateway reply" problem when using the WLAN. By trial and error, I found that this can be resolved by disabling WMM on the router via CLI. So it seems all of the phone's traffic is being QOSd away. Whose side the problem is on I don't know; they are both WiFi certified for WMM of course. An N95 (which doesn't have WMM support) is unaffected either way. Just thought I'd save someone who may come across this via Google the hours of pain I went through..

Update
Someone actually did find this apparently judging by the comments. To access the CLI you normally use Telnet. Open a command prompt and type "Telnet 192.168.1.254" (if you changed the default IP... you probably don't need these instructions.) (Note: On Windows Vista you have to install Telnet client first, under Programs and Features in Control Panel). Enter your username and password. (For unbranded routers the default username is Administrator, case sensitive, with a blank password. Things may be different if your router is ISP branded.) Finally run these commands:

:wireless qos config mode=disabled
:saveall

Verdict on replacement Seagate ST31500341AS

It will also be going back, for a refund this time. This one hasn't completely died like the other one, but it makes a click every time it powers up (the same type as the other one did repeatedly when it died), and the reallocated sector count is increasing slowly (on ten so far.. ten too many for a 2 week old drive). I didn't bother installing an OS on it this time.

I don't know if the packing/shipping of the retailer has anything it do with it. It came in a very tight air pack thing (the type where you would put the object inside it and inflate it) and that itself was loose in a large box.

I also found out there are two versions of this drive, ST31500341AS and ST31500343AS. More often than not it seems the former has SD1x firmware version whilst the latter has SD3x firmware. Not much info around on the latter model.

How many bugs do window scrollbars (APIs) have with visual themes enabled?

A never ending amount, evidently. Amusingly they go away if you disable visual themes for the application.

Retrieving data from the dead hard drive

The process I followed is relatively funny really:
1. Unplug hard drive SATA power lead & boot into Windows. Wait until it has finished loading.
2. Connect SATA power lead, copy as many files possible (using Robocopy) before hard drive starts persistently clicking loudly and stops responding (in practice was about 2.3GB worth of files).
3. Remove SATA power lead, wait a little bit until the drive spins down. Then go back to step 2.

That was fun, I can assure you. Handily Robocopy does not recopy files that is already copied sucessfully when you re-run it with the same command, so it was actually very useful.

I also tried formatting the larger partition after I had recovered the files, which of course forces all handles to the partition to be closed. It did about 70GB before it started clicking, which tells me the background things Vista was doing were not helping when I was copying files off the drive. BUT if you have a look around on the internet this drive appears to have issues when running under most other operating systems for some reason (the firmware issues, apparently). Booting a command prompt through the Vista DVD would probably normally be a good option - but I wouldn't have been able to address the >1.1TB part of the drive without loading the new SATA controller driver. It could most likely be done but I just wanted to get my data back ASAP, and I didn't think of this at the time. If my replacement drive goes the same fate I may be trying this method, however.

The most ridiculous thing about this was that I managed to check the S.M.A.R.T. values for the drive whilst I was copying my data from it. And NONE of the values were below their thresholds! It had been through so much clicking at the point, I was expecting something bad, but nope.

Computer woes continued

It seems my suspicions of the nVidia SATA controller driver being bugged were in fact correct. So if you are using the Seagate ST31500341AS or another affected drive (one with enough sectors) on an nVidia chipset, make sure you have the latest SATA controller driver. (It may have been designed like that rather than being a bug, but then it is poor design instead anyway).

As it turns out, it seems my hard drive has let me down afterall. Since today, shortly after logging in to Windows the drive stops responding (well, any app attempting to access the drive does) and emits a continous ticking sound. Nasty. The drive is only two weeks old :/ And, it passes the drive short self test in SeaTools (!) All seems very odd. There are a few similar reports in the reviews on NewEgg, and I've read a few reports that said Seagate themselves have said the SD17 firmware has issues. But the drive was working great up until now so I don't know, I've reluctantly gone for a replacement, so we will see what happens. Some more googling reveals there is in fact a new SD37 firmware. For now, I need to try and get my data off the thing :/

General computer woes

This is what happens when I decide to upgrade some parts of my computer:

1. Seagate 7200.11 1.5TB hard drive

It turns out the nForce 590 (AMD) SATA driver on Windows Update (version 5.10.2600.998; it was a new install of Windows Vista, the previous version included with Vista SP1 also didn't work) has some issues with this drive and/or 1.5TB drives in general. Windows Experience Index benchmarking fails ("Cannot complete assessment"); running the command-line WinSAT tool in verbose mode reveals some scary errors in the hard drive benchmark (when it reaches close to the end of the disk).

I was doubtful something was actually wrong with the drive, and things seemed OK with SeaTools etc. I ran a long drive test in SeaTools DOS overnight just in case. To my annoyance, when I returned in the morning SeaTools had decided to quit to the screen where it tells you how to read the log. Checking the log only showed a start time of the test, and nothing else, so no idea what happened there.

Moving on, the next thing I decided to try was booting the previous install of Vista and running the WinSAT tool against the 1.5TB drive. Strange, no errors. So I wondered what could be different and the only thing that sprung to mind was possibly the SATA controller driver. So I checked and indeed, the new install was running a fairly older 5.10.2600.998 version compared to the 10.3.0.42 version on the old install which I had got from the latest nForce driver pack.

So I proceeded to install the latest nForce pack on my new install.. and for some reason it didn't want to install the SATA drivers. So I did them manually through device manager. Finally, that cleared up the WEI/WinSAT problem. No idea if there was any other problems evident as Windows was installed to a 300GB partition.

2. Update motherboard BIOS (M2N32-SLI Deluxe) to prepare for new CPU.

My current BIOS didn't support the CPU I had ordered so I had to update the BIOS in preparation. Given the past woes experienced in updating the BIOS on this board, I had put this off until now.

Rightfully so, it seems. Updated BIOS to version 2101... no boot, just graphics card fan whirring at full speed (?). Reset CMOS and it boots again. A bit of investigation and hassle and it appears enabling SLI memory support causes this (which was fine in the previous version). It may be related to the 2.2V voltage set in the EPP profile of my RAM, but anyway it was working fine before. Several people have reported the same on the Asus forums. Anyway I manually set the timings at 2.0V and that was stable.

3. Actually install new CPU.

Well, physically installing the CPU was easy. But it was running hotter than I expected for a 65W CPU. A bit of investigation and it seemed that the CPU core voltage (as reported by the motherboard) was a bit high at 1.39V. The CPU was rated at 1.30/1.35V (side question: what is the slash meant to mean here? The CPU is AMD ADO5600DOBOX). So I tried manually setting it at 1.35V, but it was still reported at 1.39V. So I then tried seting it at 1.30V and it was now reported at 1.34V. It shaved about 5 degrees C off the reported temperature so a result it seems.

Conclusion: I knew it already, but this motherboard sucks.

Why does the Control Panel mock me?

I just opened up the Control Panel on my Vista x64 machine and just felt very annoyed. Why? Because it looked like this:
What's wrong here?

1. Half of the applets did not load correctly... I have complained about this before but it doesn't hurt to complain again. A refresh sorts this out. It may be some kind of time-out loading applets.
   
2. For some reason Vista has arbitrarily decided to change the current view to large icons. It likes arbitrarily changing the views of folders you see. This is incredibly annoying.
   

I saw this the other day. I didn't read all of it, but just by looking at some of the pictures it looks like much of the stuff I've noticed. Let's hope things are better if not in SP2, then Windows 7....

PS: Another annoyance is when you try to execute a large downloaded file (or something like that, there may be other factors involved). Nothing happens for several minutes whilst it verifies a digital signature or whatever. You'd think they'd know better and show some kind of progress dialog. Even worse, it can leave you wondering if the double click registered so you may double click again. Now try doing that over a network..

Unspecified brilliance

Windows Explorer surprised me today with a lovely new message whilst I was browsing a folder on my network:


:o

Strange messages in Windows: Part N

I do like making a note of strange dialogs for some reason. Here is one I got trying to copy a file in Windows Explorer:So what does Internet Explorer have to do with copying a file? The source and the destination were both on my local computer. Actually, the source file was inside a Zip archive I downloaded, not using Internet Explorer though.

Oh, and that icon looks a bit dated too.

Useless error messages

Don't you love them? :)

Visual C++ 2008 Incremental Link Bug

Finally, Microsoft released a hotfix for it. You can download it from the above link.