Oh, I have a hard time getting used to 'new' programs, too

One of my favorite things about mozilla is being able to open links in new tabs in the background with a single click of my mousewheel (works the same with the middle button of a 3 button mouse).

Yes, the middle click browsing is very handy indeed but I haven't found out how to make a page auto-refresh every minute or so like Opera does (which is very handy on the spam club )... And I also can't find a 'Search In Page' anywhere...

But I admit Mozilla has its own advantages of course

ctrl+f works in mozilla the same as in any prog, and you can install a searchbar plugin (I think it's called easysearch) from the http://mozdev.org website that lets you search a number of engines from the toolbar and lets you search in page from the toolbar. One of the best things about mozilla is all the addons and plugins that you can get, thereby customizing to your needs. Now if they would just get a fully functional version of the google toolbar...

Edited by Cypherswipe at 12:58 on September, 11th 2002

Are we talking about the same Mozilla? The one I'm using has a 'searchbar' built in! Why would you need a plugin or other helper program for this?

It has a built-in search bar, but it doesn't search in page (at least not that I can find). The addon searchbar has an 'in page' button. See attached screencap.

"The image cannot be displayed because it contains errors"

Anyway, it is still useless because all you have to do is click Edit - Find In This Page or press CTRL-F. As I see it, this 'searchbar' is just a hoax for Microsoft users to feel familiar - because they think they need thousands of patches, upgrades and fixes

Try this again...


(Here's a feature request, the abaility to re-upload attatchements while editing a post, in case the file doesn't upload properly the first time (like in this case).)

Yes, as I said - it's useless.

Yes, well in fact it is pretty useless, but I just wanted one because Opera has it

One more question though... If I change my default browser in XP, will this be a system-wide change or just a per-user setting? All other users of my pc have password protection (so do I) so I have no way of finding this out... and I wouldn't want to upset any one of them

Well, I have xp, but I'm the only user so I don't know about that one.

I don't use """""""""""""""""""""""""""""XP""""""""""""""""""""""""""""", but using normal logic: wouldn't it kind of defeat the whole purpose of a multi-user system if one could change settings for all?

Some settings can be changed for each user, but some are universal settings and affect every user.

Hey Mole, what's your access level on your comp? If you're not an admin, then you won't be able to change any of the global settings. IOW If you're not an admin, but can change a setting, then that setting affects only you and no one else.

Well, I'm an admin... Otherwise I couldn't even install/uninstall anything (eg. Mozilla)...



Normal logic doesn't seem to apply to Microsoft's operating systems...

I've never seen any logic in the way XP makes file name associations, for example I have my profile set to open .nfo files with Notepad, whereas on other users' profiles a .nfo is treated as "system information"... That works fine, but on the other hand I cannot configure my profile to open MP3s with Winamp on my desktop and Media Player on everyone else's... I think it's more a game of chance really so I might as well go ahead, change the setting and see what happens

While trying to solve a browser issue I'm having, I noticed a page that indicated that you can't have seperate browser associations for each user.

Wasn't """""""""""""""""""""""""""""XP""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" meant to be some kind of networking OS?

Yes, meant...

I don't need advanced networking features, I don't even know if XP has them, and to me Windows XP is really just 'fancy flashy' windows... and I've already had a truckload of ridiculous problems with it...

For instance, in Windows 98SE desktop resolution was a per-user setting while XP just has one resolution setting for all users... I find it really strange that Microsoft kind of downgraded certain features, I can't see why/how they would do this for financial gain... Makes one wonder what their real intentions are...

[Edit: Spelling]

Edited by The Mole at 13:32 on September, 14th 2002

The real intentions: financial gain.

Reasons: this way, they can publish a new version with the cool new feature 'different screen resolutions for different users' soon

I hardly think that just that feature would grant a new release of Windows which is why I don't see how they could ever make any real money with such tactics

Only difference between Windows 95 and Windows 98: 'integration' of Internet Explorer.

Only difference between Windows 98 SE and Windows ME: disabled DOS mode.

It worked. Why do you think it won't work again?

Edited by Mr Creosote at 13:14 on September, 14th 2002