features you disabled in Windows 7 and why?


Recommended Posts

Did you know that Windows Media Player runs just fine with just the executable (and no other files present) in the dir? Although the visualizer is part of another dll file - mpvis.dll - you should keep that if you want the cruddy anims when playing music. I also wouldn't remove the wmplayer.exe.mui, mui files are important as long as the file they are referring to exists.

:)

Do you even have the slightest idea how many applications depend on Internet Explorer? Winamp, for example, uses it, as well as countless other applications. Internet Explorer isn't just an application, it's also framework. It might not be such a big deal in Windows 7, but disabling it before sometimes (more times than not) resulted in severe issues with programs that contacted the internet, as well as Windows Explorer.

When I had used XP, I tried to completely remove it. The thing is Source games like CS:S use it for rendering the server page. With a total removal of Internet Explorer, it will ask you what to do with htm/html files - as there is no IE Core to render them. It will annoy you to no extent, it is better to just kill the browser but not the engine. Also Windows Explorer should work fine without IE and as far as I can tell it has nothing to do with networking abilities - internet will work fine, but all applications that use the IE render will suffer.

Did you know that Windows Media Player runs just fine with just the executable (and no other files present) in the dir? Although the visualizer is part of another dll file - mpvis.dll - you should keep that if you want the cruddy anims when playing music. I also wouldn't remove the wmplayer.exe.mui, mui files are important as long as the file they are referring to exists.

:)

No, I don't buy the statement that WMP runs just fine with only the exe present. You may think it does, but something in the functionality will stop working when you get rid of it, you just haven't found it yet. I tried it in my vBox 7 that I use as a sandbox, and I've completely lost the ability to stream music, the language pack is totally effed up (all box characters), and some icons are missing. So no, I wouldn't say "it runs just fine". Thankfully, I restored the files and it now functions perfectly again.

It's quite retarded that you call that "tweaking". What exactly are you trying to tweak? You're removing functionality, and you do realize that the entire WMP12 Program Files folder (also checked the appdata folder) is roughly 6 and a half megabytes. Congrats. You shaved off 6 megabytes from your precious, oh, what's the standard HD sizes nowadays? 250 GB at least? Yeah, awesome.

No offense, but you really do sound like you know what you're doing, but you and the rest of your "tweaking" crowd seem to be suffering from a placebo affect. You can cry "it's my software, I'll do with it what I want", but at the end of the day, Windows 7 has worked on every single computer I've tried it on, both old and new, laptop and desktop, and I have yet to encounter any problem that required "tweaking". I think the issue is that the nostalgia from all the so called "tweaking" and "optimizing" from XP has driven you guys to assume that each Windows OS needs to be totally modified otherwise it will perform poorly.

I'm waiting for the day where people realize that Windows 7 has got to be the most hassle-free OS to use out of all the Windows OSes, and that it doesn't require much disabling except UAC and search indexing, if you don't use those.

No, I don't buy the statement that WMP runs just fine with only the exe present. You may think it does, but something in the functionality will stop working when you get rid of it, you just haven't found it yet. I tried it in my vBox 7 that I use as a sandbox, and I've completely lost the ability to stream music, the language pack is totally effed up (all box characters), and some icons are missing. So no, I wouldn't say "it runs just fine". Thankfully, I restored the files and it now functions perfectly again.

It's quite retarded that you call that "tweaking". What exactly are you trying to tweak? You're removing functionality, and you do realize that the entire WMP12 Program Files folder (also checked the appdata folder) is roughly 6 and a half megabytes. Congrats. You shaved off 6 megabytes from your precious, oh, what's the standard HD sizes nowadays? 250 GB at least? Yeah, awesome.

No offense, but you really do sound like you know what you're doing, but you and the rest of your "tweaking" crowd seem to be suffering from a placebo affect. You can cry "it's my software, I'll do with it what I want", but at the end of the day, Windows 7 has worked on every single computer I've tried it on, both old and new, laptop and desktop, and I have yet to encounter any problem that required "tweaking". I think the issue is that the nostalgia from all the so called "tweaking" and "optimizing" from XP has driven you guys to assume that each Windows OS needs to be totally modified otherwise it will perform poorly.

I'm waiting for the day where people realize that Windows 7 has got to be the most hassle-free OS to use out of all the Windows OSes, and that it doesn't require much disabling except UAC and search indexing, if you don't use those.

Does it still play MP3s? Yes.

Does it still play MP4s? Yes.

Therefore, to me there is no functionality that is lost.

This is not tweaking, this is pure removal of unnecessary functionality. :)

Actually it does work. A normal Windows XP install boots in about half a min on a 2004 my emachines, while a nlited install boots in about half that time. I haven't yet tried a lited 7, but the results should be the same. The results of tweaking can actually be seen at boot by just booting the 12 or so (12 if you remove some dependencies, more like 15) services needed for basic functionality and internet VS. booting at all 50 or so.

Does it still play MP3s? Yes.

Does it still play MP4s? Yes.

Therefore, to me there is no functionality that is lost.

This is not tweaking, this is pure removal of unnecessary functionality. :)

No, unneeded function as defined by you. The rest of us who use WMP to manage our libraries and stream them to our Xboxes, we call that needed functionality. And no, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference whether or not you delete them. I've timed the startup times after removing it and it does nothing for speed. You can gladly say "it's my OS, I'll do it the way I want" but the point is that it's not assisting your machine in any way, and any improvement you may think you see from deleting said files is purely placebo.

Actually it does work. A normal Windows XP install boots in about half a min on a 2004 my emachines, while a nlited install boots in about half that time. I haven't yet tried a lited 7, but the results should be the same.

No idea where XP's boot time has anything to do with deleting the majority of a 6 MB folder's contents.

No idea where XP's boot time has anything to do with deleting the majority of a 6 MB folder's contents.

No, that was a comparison between the normal 2GB install of XP and an lite XP that can be installed on a 512MB Partition. :)

No, that was a comparison between the normal 2GB install of XP and an lite XP that can be installed on a 512MB Partition. :)

And why pray tell would you want to install XP on a 512 MB partition? Don't you realize that programs, by default, install to the C:/ (or whatever the install drive is) drive?

If you're still living with ancient hardware, that's not called tweaking and "optimizing", that's called being too cheap to get decent hardware (which is no longer expensive, if all you're trying to run is XP).

And why pray tell would you want to install XP on a 512 MB partition? Don't you realize that programs, by default, install to the C:/ (or whatever the install drive is) drive?

If you're still living with ancient hardware, that's not called tweaking and "optimizing", that's called being too cheap to get decent hardware (which is no longer expensive, if all you're trying to run is XP).

You missed the point.

You missed the point.

If you say so. meanwhile, I'll still have a fully functioning operating system that does everything Microsoft intended it to, and when I have support issues, I won't have to keep a list saying "this is what I disabled, I wonder if this will cause an issue". Oh, and my Windows 7 runs plenty fast. Defragment regularly, don't install crapware, and you won't ever have to reinstall.

Have fun.

As I said earlier the only ones qualified to tweak/optimise windows is Microsoft, as they know what every part of their operating system does.

Microsoft have done a pretty good job of optimising Windows 7 to get it running on new and old hardware. So there is no need to tweak windows on any machine.

with hard drives being so cheap these days i don't really care about space....

You should. Fast Flash based, server grade and the Raptor harddrives from Western digital are expensive and relatively small. Bigger files also means longer time to load, and more fragmentation issues.

If you say so. meanwhile, I'll still have a fully functioning operating system that does everything Microsoft intended it to, and when I have support issues, I won't have to keep a list saying "this is what I disabled, I wonder if this will cause an issue". Oh, and my Windows 7 runs plenty fast. Defragment regularly, don't install crapware, and you won't ever have to reinstall.

I guess you are not very fast, on a general basis :p I find programs to launch much slower then on XP, and its strange that my Raptor WD1500 HD sounds much less busy in Vista and 7, than XP. Seems like Microsoft decided to insert a few millions NOOP instructions per HD I/O. NVIDIA Control panel takes several seconds to open vs. almost instantly on XP. Perfectdisk analyzing a HD is also much slower XP vs. vista and 7.

The user interface is also much more sluggish then XP. Each folder takes about half a second to open in Vista and 7, vs. instantly on XP.

Here is a video that shows how much CPU usage 7 uses vs. XP. GDI+ have several operations that can be hardware accelerated with proper graphics cards in XP, but it is not in Vista and 7. Latest WDDM 1.1 adds some, but still feels just as sluggish (could be my gtx 285 and WDDM 1.1 drivers). Vista and 7 the desktop composition is running in hardware, but they didn't migrate the GDI+ over.

Check out the link for more information on GDI+ and hardware acceleration.

Mac OSX they have migrated and now everything runs on the GPU, the CPU only have to issue relatively small drawing calls. On Vista and 7 however, we have GDI+, Windows DEsktop Compostition, WPF and now lately Direct2D.

If you look at the three Quartz implementation diagrams in sequence, you can see how the video card portion of the diagram has slowly expanded over the course of four years to encompass more and more of the display layer. The reason is clear when you look at the bandwidth numbers: 30GB/s between the GPU and VRAM, and that number is climbing rapidly—much more rapidly than the bandwidth between the CPU and RAM.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2005/...osx-10-4.ars/14

In programmer circles, Microsoft is the very model of modern bloated software. As a quick example, just check out your Windows Live Contacts database. Each contact gets a default 32MB database file.

I'm all for new features, but I think Windows Vista and 7 could run on much slower hardware if Microsoft wasn't such a bloat machine. It's not very environmentally friendly to produce computers (just check all the chemicals they use to make CPU's) and power efficiency is important in these days of possible human made climate change (the experts does't agree yet). You don't need a super CPU just for the web and there is no excuse not to hardware accelerate video playback.

As I said earlier the only ones qualified to tweak/optimise windows is Microsoft, as they know what every part of their operating system does.

Microsoft have done a pretty good job of optimising Windows 7 to get it running on new and old hardware. So there is no need to tweak windows on any machine.

Well, let's define "tweaking", shall we? If you mean disabling services or uninstalling system files / folders because you want to reduce the footprint of the OS, then I agree completely. But tweaking can also mean modifying the interface so it better suits your comfort level, enabling or disabling items in the startup menu (ie, run, search, recent docs, etc), removing icon arrow overlays, disabling some visual effects, moving the pagefile to where you want it, and so on. I see absolutely nothing wrong with doing any of these things.That's all part of "making the OS your own".

Here is a video that shows how much CPU usage 7 uses vs. XP. GDI+ have several operations that can be hardware accelerated with proper graphics cards in XP, but it is not in Vista and 7. Latest WDDM 1.1 adds some, but still feels just as sluggish (could be my gtx 285 and WDDM 1.1 drivers). Vista and 7 the desktop composition is running in hardware, but they didn't migrate the GDI+ over.

GDI+ is never hardware accelerated on any version of Windows. GDI+ is a software library with various utility functions and classes that make dealing with graphics easier. It does everything in software, and calls GDI when it's time to actually show something on screen (so that part can be accelerated, but nothing else.) Pedantry maybe, but worth knowing. The performance penalty for using GDI+ instead of GDI can be extreme, especially on slower systems.

Check out the link for more information on GDI+ and hardware acceleration.

Firstly I'm going to say that 7 does perform worse than XP. That isn't in dispute. However, the example you're using to "prove" this is extremely flawed. You cannot use Explorer to make some point about a graphics API, and you can't use it to compare different versions of Windows.

Explorer in XP and 7 is not the same program. It has changed massively, even on the graphics side. In XP it uses standard windowing and common controls, whereas in 7 it is based on Microsoft's internal windowless GUI framework. This might introduce additional overhead compared with XP, overhead that is entirely in the software framework itself and not with any Windows API.

In addition, scrolling up and down in Explorer is not necessarily just a benchmark of the graphics side. All the data that is being drawn has to come from somewhere. Changes might have been made in the way Explorer handles the extensions that create thumbnails of your files, for instance. Maybe they now run out-of-process for reliability reasons, something that adds more overhead. Maybe the code that creates the thumbnails has changed as well. Maybe it takes more processing power to read and draw icons and images that have higher quality. Maybe changes have been made to the artificial delays in various parts of the user interface (Windows has lots of these), and so on. The list goes on.

If you just want to make a point about graphics performance, then you have to run synthetic benchmarks that just do graphics, under controlled conditions. There wouldn't be much point though, because everyone recognizes that it is so. It is a necessary step towards the future. Maybe GDI is slightly slower, but at the same time the experience you get while running several Direct3D programs at the same time is much more pleasant than it was with XP and D3D <= 9.

What it feels like in real world use is more important than synthetic benchmarks, and Explorer honestly doesn't feel slow to me, and in some ways it even performs better. I have a folder with close to 7000 images, for instance, and 7 seems to handle this much better. Same with the image viewer.

Mac OSX they have migrated and now everything runs on the GPU, the CPU only have to issue relatively small drawing calls. On Vista and 7 however, we have GDI+, Windows DEsktop Compostition, WPF and now lately Direct2D.

Well, they had an easier job with OS X. Its APIs are fairly new, and they have little concern about breaking applications. Windows APIs like GDI and windowing (user), on the other hand, were designed in the 1980s and are very fragile, with thousands of applications relying on internal implementation details. The only real option I see is to create new frameworks that live side-by-side with the old. Microsoft has done that with Direct2D, but sadly there is no UI framework to go with it. The reason, in my opinion, is because Microsoft got so lost in their .NET vision.

there is no excuse not to hardware accelerate video playback.

What are you referring to here? Windows does have hardware acceleration of video. In fact, depending on the hardware you have, virtually the entire process can be handled by your graphics card's video decoder.

As I said earlier the only ones qualified to tweak/optimise windows is Microsoft, as they know what every part of their operating system does.

Microsoft have done a pretty good job of optimising Windows 7 to get it running on new and old hardware. So there is no need to tweak windows on any machine.

another person who is up microsoft's arse. Microsoft will set the defaults that are most suited to the mainstream user, typically someone who isnt particurly savvy. However it is never ever possible to have a configuration that is optimal for 100% of userbase.

I have enabled superfetch on my machine again now and will concede that superfetch is significantly better than it was under vista, it still runs when the machine isnt idle but not very frequently so is fine. However I would leave it off if I didnt have much ram. Windows search is still turned off tho.

The worst thing a software developer can do is not allow their software to be configurable, eg. microsoft have alienated some people by dumbing down windows 7 gui, its less configurable than previous versions of windows. A developer may have a vision of how a product such work but its a garuantuee not everyone will agree with him, and if he tries to force the issue by not allowing tweaks etc. then he will restrict takeup of software.

I like windows 7 but I feel sick when I read things such as "its perfect" "it does nothing wrong" "no need to change anything" "if it doesnt work then it must be a end user problem".

NVIDIA Control panel takes several seconds to open vs. almost instantly on XP.

I have the same problem, it is a mystery, here is what I have discovered.

1 - The 182.50 wddm 1.0 nvidia driver the panel loads signifcantly faster than newer driver versions, but still way slower than XP, in XP I was using a way older driver, so could be driver related.

2 - The nvidia panel opens alot faster on my amd box than on my intel, the weird thing about this is that on paper my amd spec is weaker.

3 - on XP I know the configuration of IE affected how fast the nvidia panel opened, eg. when I used spybot to fill up the restricted site zone with rogue sites it made nvidia panel open very slowly. So it is possible some part of IE has affected how fast the panel opens in windows 7.

I too don't like the way the GUI functions. What is the logic in not offloading scrolling to the GPU? (Windows Explorer)

For those who completely want to get rid of Internet Explorer in C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer ,

---> Do not remove ieproxy.dll

---> It is responsible for opening folders in the same window.

---> The rest doesn't seem used, so the rest can go

:)

I too don't like the way the GUI functions. What is the logic in not offloading scrolling to the GPU? (Windows Explorer)

For those who completely want to get rid of Internet Explorer in C:\Program Files\Internet Explorer ,

---> Do not remove ieproxy.dll

---> It is responsible for opening folders in the same window.

---> The rest doesn't seem used, so the rest can go

:)

WHY in the world would you even do something like this?

I guess you are not very fast, on a general basis :p I find programs to launch much slower then on XP, and its strange that my Raptor WD1500 HD sounds much less busy in Vista and 7, than XP. Seems like Microsoft decided to insert a few millions NOOP instructions per HD I/O. NVIDIA Control panel takes several seconds to open vs. almost instantly on XP. Perfectdisk analyzing a HD is also much slower XP vs. vista and 7.

The user interface is also much more sluggish then XP. Each folder takes about half a second to open in Vista and 7, vs. instantly on XP.

Here is a video that shows how much CPU usage 7 uses vs. XP. GDI+ have several operations that can be hardware accelerated with proper graphics cards in XP, but it is not in Vista and 7. Latest WDDM 1.1 adds some, but still feels just as sluggish (could be my gtx 285 and WDDM 1.1 drivers). Vista and 7 the desktop composition is running in hardware, but they didn't migrate the GDI+ over.

Check out the link for more information on GDI+ and hardware acceleration.

Mac OSX they have migrated and now everything runs on the GPU, the CPU only have to issue relatively small drawing calls. On Vista and 7 however, we have GDI+, Windows DEsktop Compostition, WPF and now lately Direct2D.

If you look at the three Quartz implementation diagrams in sequence, you can see how the video card portion of the diagram has slowly expanded over the course of four years to encompass more and more of the display layer. The reason is clear when you look at the bandwidth numbers: 30GB/s between the GPU and VRAM, and that number is climbing rapidly?much more rapidly than the bandwidth between the CPU and RAM.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2005/...osx-10-4.ars/14

In programmer circles, Microsoft is the very model of modern bloated software. As a quick example, just check out your Windows Live Contacts database. Each contact gets a default 32MB database file.

I'm all for new features, but I think Windows Vista and 7 could run on much slower hardware if Microsoft wasn't such a bloat machine. It's not very environmentally friendly to produce computers (just check all the chemicals they use to make CPU's) and power efficiency is important in these days of possible human made climate change (the experts does't agree yet). You don't need a super CPU just for the web and there is no excuse not to hardware accelerate video playback.

You really don't know the original meaning of software bloat, do you?

Well offloading as much as possible from the CPU seems logical. Especially when it comes to drawing 2D stuff.

It may seem logical, but it is extremely difficult to completely rewrite the implementation of an API designed in the 1980s (and designed around old hardware) to work on a completely different architecture. Even if you managed to do it and emulate the publicly defined API perfectly, you would most likely still end up with thousands of programs that would cease to function because they dependend on some internal implementation detail or quirk that you have now changed.

Chances are it is never going to be done, and that we will instead see a new UI framework that exists side-by-side with the legacy APIs (GDI/User) that new applications will be written to use.

It may seem logical, but it is extremely difficult to completely rewrite the implementation of an API designed in the 1980s (and designed around old hardware) to work on a completely different architecture. Even if you managed to do it and emulate the publicly defined API perfectly, you would most likely still end up with thousands of programs that would cease to function because they dependend on some internal implementation detail or quirk that you have now changed.

Chances are it is never going to be done, and that we will instead see a new UI framework that exists side-by-side with the legacy APIs (GDI/User) that new applications will be written to use.

:(

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Why you need to take back control of your synced passwords and how to go about doing that by Paul Hill Credit: Pixabay Last month, when Google decided to introduce daily and weekly caps for Gemini, it reignited an anxiety of mine, that you can’t really depend on service providers to maintain features forever, and it got me looking into free software (as in freedom) in other areas too. One app I quickly came across was KeePassXC on desktop and KeePassDX on Android as an alternative to password manager lock-in within the Chrome or Firefox ecosystems. I personally like to switch around with browsers, and using either password manager is inconvenient, so something like KeePassXC was interesting to me. The main issue with it now is syncing; I was not sure how to do that. After a bit of research, I came across Syncthing, a tool I was vaguely familiar with but had never used because it seemed complicated. However, I was completely wrong, and honestly, I think everyone should use it if they use multiple devices. It essentially lets you share folders peer to peer across all of your devices, no cloud services that you don’t control necessary! And it was fairly simple to set up, if not a bit clunky. Since setting it up, I’ve also started using Syncthing to back up other apps too, so don’t think it’s limited to just saving password databases. You can use it for pretty much anything you use Dropbox or Google Drive for. Before continuing to talk about those apps a bit more, let’s walk back a bit and talk about browser sync. Ever since the late 2000s and early 2010s, really, since we have been using smartphones, browser sync has been a necessity of life. I don’t know about you, but I have hundreds of passwords saved. For the most part, they’re all unique, so I don’t remember them and rely on software to manage them for me. Until recently, I’ve relied on password managers in Chrome and Firefox, but what I always found annoying was that it can be hard to transfer them between browsers. Sure, on Windows it is simple enough, but on Linux, exporting bookmarks has been temperamental. It works OK nowadays, but not too long ago, Chrome required you to enable exporting passwords in chrome://flags. The situation is even worse on mobile; there is no exporting or importing of passwords of any kind. You literally have to do it on a desktop, which is incredibly annoying in our mobile-first world. Sync also lets us take out bookmarks, history, tabs, and autofill data easily. To enable sync, it’s just a matter of signing into the browser once, and it handles the rest. It’s nice and easy. Obviously, all this has some issues, including those I’ve outlined above about it being hard to transfer data between browsers, but also things such as account suspension, lost account passwords, and other lock-in mechanisms, such as passkeys, being tied to a specific browser. On a sidenote, I have just removed all of my passkeys because they can make it harder to move browsers. I think the biggest threat to your synced passwords, especially if doing this with Google, is having your account suspended. I don’t ever expect mine to be suspended, but you do hear horror stories on Reddit where people lose access to their Google accounts. Imagine if you have hundreds of passwords, then suddenly lose access to them because Google froze your account, what would you do? So yes, it can be nice to use these syncing services for their convenience, but they also have risks. You may have seen me going on about free software quite a bit in my editorials. It’s essentially a concept championed by the Free Software Foundation. It’s software under particular licenses that grant you four freedoms: run the program for any purpose (0), study and change the source code (1), redistribute copies to others (2), and the freedom to distribute modified copies to others (3). For example, if there is an app I use and one day it gets abandoned by the developer, I can keep running it or even clone the software and continue developing it. Look at the myriad of cool services Google has run over the years before killing them. You can’t take the source code for those because they are proprietary, for the most part. Both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so I get the freedoms listed above. In my use case where I’m syncing a database full of my passwords, I also get proper ownership over my data, there is no losing access to the database due to a frozen account, I can access the code of the tools I’m using, and I can get support from real people online if I run into issues, rather than having to consult a vague help page from an opaque company. With the KeePassXC password manager, you create a .kdbx file, which is what will be synced between devices. KeePassXC has cross-platform apps and also has browser extensions so that the browser can fetch passwords from the database once it is unlocked. Meanwhile, Syncthing is a peer-to-peer file sync tool where you can select folders to sync between your devices. Just pop files in the folders you choose, and then they will be available across your other devices whenever they come online. Syncthing is resilient as it works over both LAN and the internet and only ever sends content between your devices, never to a third-party server somewhere else. By combining these two pieces of software, you can essentially replicate the browser sync functionality. I have had a weird, conflicting issue where a new file is appearing, but it doesn’t seem to be impacting my main password database, which is updating between devices just fine. If you want to get a setup similar to what I have, you will need to go here to download KeePassXC for your computer. Once you have that, you will need to download your passwords from your web browser to a CSV file. In Chrome, you can type chrome://password-manager/settings into the URL bar, and you should see an option to download your passwords under Export Passwords. This will give you the CSV file you need for importing into KeePassXC. If you use a different browser, just use a search engine and type “browser-name export passwords” and muddle along. In KeePassXC, you’ll want to press Import File from the home screen, select the CSV file, and create a new database from it. On one of the screens of the wizard, there will be a Title field with a drop-down selected to none. Change this to Title and continue. You’ll select a name for the database, the encryption level (the defaults are fine), and then you will pick a password. I would choose four unrelated words that are easy for you to remember, as you’ll be typing them fairly often to access your passwords. When you have all your passwords in your new database, you will want to set up the browser extension so that your browser can fetch passwords from KeePassXC. Rather than explain how to do that here, refer to KeePassXC’s guide on how to set it up properly. Once you’ve got that set up, you want to install KeePassDX on Android. You can grab it on the F-Droid store and the Google Play Store. For iPhone users, there are other .kdbx-supporting apps, but I haven’t tried any of them, so have a look around and use what suits you. Once you have that done, you will want to install Syncthing on your computer and find a third-party app for your mobile device. On Android, I use an app called BasicSync; there are also options for iOS, but again, I’ve not tried these. Once you’ve got SyncThing, you’ll want to set it up and connect all of your devices together and share a folder between your gadgets. PCWorld has a good tutorial on setting up a synchronized file between your devices using SyncThing. Once you’ve set it up, congrats, you’ll never have to touch that stuff again except for adding or removing devices. I’ll be honest, I didn’t particularly like setting up Syncthing. It didn’t take me a massive amount of time, but I think I had to check online because I found it a bit confusing. That said, I’ve had it running for several weeks now and never need to touch the Syncthing settings, so that’s very nice. I also mentioned a conflicting file. I’m not sure why this is appearing, but the main .kdbx file seems to be updating and syncing just fine. What’s nice is that both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so they won’t just vanish one day; you can take the code and fork the project or use a range of alternative implementations that others have made. It’s also nice that it works over LAN, so even if your ISP is having problems, your passwords will still sync. One area where you will want to be a bit more careful with this setup is if you only have one device. I am OK because I have a computer and two phones, all synced up. If you just have one device, you will probably want to store a backup of your .kdbx file somewhere else. Obviously, you’ll also want to remember your password really well, too. If you get locked out, it's game over. Overall, if you want to take back control of your computing from big tech, taking control of your passwords is an important part of this. You don’t need to immediately clear out your browser’s password manager; try running KeePassXC and the password manager concurrently for a while to see if you run into any problems. If you do try this out, let us know some other creative ways to use Syncthing. I haven’t really come up with a solution about what to do with my bookmarks, for example.
    • If the price was a dollar, someone would complain "Why isn't it free?" If it was free, someone would complain they weren't being paid to play it.
    • That lens of history will burn if you hold it at the right angle... Warn users too late: Shame, Microsoft! That extremely minor update to an obscure Control Panel widget required 2 years of warning. Warn users too early: Shame, Microsoft! We've got better things to do. Pipeline and process be damned, we'll just always be disappointed, eh?
    • Microsoft Paint used to be my favorite Windows app as a kid, and it's still pretty good by Usama Jawad I have been using Windows since the early 2000s, when I was around 10 years old or so. I vaguely remember playing around with Windows 98 and Windows 2000, but that may have been on school PCs which had old operating systems installed. My main OS on the home PC, and the one I recall spending most time with, was Windows XP. At that time, I used the home PC to create Word and PowerPoint documents for school, but a lot of the time, I simply used it to play games. My dad would bring game discs which we would try and install on the PC, sometimes unsuccessfully, and sometimes, we would rely on flash games in the browser, like Bubble Trouble on Miniclip. However, the problem with the latter approach was the internet speed. On a good day, our dial-up internet would offer us speeds of 56 kbps, but on most days, it was closer to 33 kbps. This did not facilitate online gaming as I would often have to wait minutes for a game to load or "draw" on the screen, and trying to download pirated games wasn't simple either. I remember getting tired of waiting for online games to load and just downloading simulator games from the Big Fish Games website instead, only to be disappointed after finding out that I was just being given access to trial versions of the title, and I needed to fork out money to pay for the full version. All of this is to say that it wasn't very easy to find entertainment options on the home PC when I was a kid, due to a number of reasons, mostly outside of my control. This situation pushed me towards a rather unconventional ally: Microsoft Paint. Whenever the internet wasn't working as good as I expected, I would simply spin up Paint and draw complete rubbish on the canvas. Of course, that wasn't always the intention, but it usually happened when I messed up drawing a straight line or something, and then I would give up on that particular piece and simply draw a random collection of objects. Microsoft Paint was extremely accessible and easy to use. Even if you weren't an artist, you could quickly understand the tools at your disposal and how to leverage them on a canvas. The absolute breadth on offer ensured that each painting was truly unique, as you could utilize various combinations of tools like the pencil, paint, spray paint, and more to truly personalize your creation. Since I wasn't particularly good at drawing both on digital screen or a physical screen, I remember that my main style of art would be to insert a bunch of randomly intersecting lines and then fill them with random colors through the paint can. I have trying to replicate that art style in the latest version of Paint below, and as you can see, it's truly Pablo Picasso-esque. The human imagination truly knows no bounds Microsoft Paint kept me occupied for hours and was my best friend when video games on the home PC were inaccessible for one reason or the other. There was no academic or professional reason for which I would need to use Paint, but I still loved using it in my personal time, even if what I created wasn't worth being shown to anyone. It was simply fun. Fast-forward to today, and the situation is mostly the same. Now that I am almost 29 years old, and I still have no reason to use Microsoft Paint in a professional capacity. In fact, I don't even use it in a personal capacity, except to dabble with it from time to time, just to see if core functionalities are still intact. And I'm happy to say that I think Microsoft Paint still offers the same accessibility and inviting experience that it did to me a couple of decades ago, even though its UX has been refreshed and it's been integrated with Copilot features. Interestingly, things could have been a lot different, had Microsoft had its way. Microsoft Paint was marked for deprecation with the Windows 10 Fall Creators Update in 2017, and even began displaying a product retirement alert, urging customers to shift to Paint 3D instead. Fortunately, after consumer backlash, Microsoft reversed course on this decision, and Paint continues to be a native app inside Windows installations that can also be updated quite frequently through the Microsoft Store. Instead, Paint 3D ended up on the chopping block, which is for the better, I think. I have intermittently played around with Microsoft's refreshed Paint experience in the past few years, and I do think it has received worthwhile upgrades. the UI and the UX has been modernized while retaining core functionality, and the app is still fairly easy to use. It doesn't meet any of my use-cases, but I've never really had any use-cases ever, as described previously. Of course, the elephant in the room is the Copilot integration. Personally, I believe that this is one place where Copilot does make sense, environmental concerns aside. I know that a lot of creatives use AI to generate images, and while some may be using professional alternatives, Paint still offers a decent casual experience, with the power of Copilot. Of course, you do need to have a valid Microsoft 365 Copilot license and available credits to use it, but even if you don't, you still get the big Copilot button in the toolbar, unfortunately. All in all, I am glad that Microsoft Paint continues to be a native feature in Windows 11, and a piece of software that has evolved to meet modern needs without cutting off its own roots. It's just an iconic piece of Windows history that was an essential part of my childhood, and while I don't use it anymore, I'm just glad it is still there.
    • 2TB WD_Black SN7100 PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD drops to its lowest price in over three months by Fiza Ali Amazon is currently offering the 2TB WD_Black SN7100 internal solid-state drive at its lowest price in over three months, so you may want to check it out, if you have been considering a storage upgrade, before the deal dries up (purchase link is toward the end of the article). Featuring a PCIe Gen 4.0 interface and M.2 2280 form factor, the SN7100 promises to deliver sequential read speeds of up to 7,250MB/s and sequential write speeds reaching 6,900MB/s, offering as much as a 35% improvement in performance compared with the previous generation. It also achieves random read speeds of 1,000,000 IOPS and random write speeds of 1,400,000 IOPS. The drive uses Western Digital’s TLC 3D NAND technology for reliable performance and is further supported by a five-year limited warranty. It also offers strong endurance, rated at up to 1,200TBW, making it suitable for demanding workloads such as gaming, content creation, and high-speed recording. Moreover, its DRAM-less architecture claims to improve power efficiency (the SSD relies on system memory for caching via HMB), while the WD_Black Dashboard software enables users to monitor drive health, install firmware updates, and activate Game Mode for potentially better performance. Finally, it operates within an operating temperature range of 0°C to 85°C, and can withstand storage temperatures from -40°C to 85°C. 2TB WD_Black SN7100 PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD: $242.96 (Amazon US) Check this deal out if you want a 4TB option. Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      hhgygy earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      514
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      87
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!