|
The taskbar (the bar that normally lies along the bottom of the opening screen) has moved up the left hand side of the screen, how do I get it back down to the bottom? I have tried clicking and dragging, but it doesn't work. I can drag it to the right, making it much wider than normal, but I can't drag it down to the bottom. Help please.
|
Click and hold in the middle. Drag your pointer to the bottom of the screen, it will appear that the task bar is not moving.
When you get the pointer to the bottom of the screen it will suddenly flick down.
Then release.
|
|
|
You have to keep trying to drag it - it will go back, trust me!
When it's there, right click on a blank area, click Properties / Advanced, scroll down to Taskbar and untick 'Enable moving and resizing'. This will keep it locked in place in future.
|
|
|
I'm on my 8th day with Windows XP and not a Blue Screen of Death (yet). Perhaps Gatesy has other fun-filled surprises in store -- already the MS update site has had me download 10 MB of updates before the thing's barely out of the shop! Why can't they develop the thing properly before they release it to market? And what a warmed over thing to make so much fuss about. The menu system is more confusing than ever. Nothing special at all. Bring back Dos 3.3.
Sorry, wrong forum.
|
|
|
|
Contact the www.net4nowt.com discussion group to vent your feelings to computer enthusiasts. I still happily use my Amstrad 8256 from 1985 for financial records! No one forces you to buy the latest operating system. Now you have done watch how much old software refuses to work with it
|
If you mean an PCW8256 then I still have a 3" disk (not 3.5") with all my GCSE work on it. Locoscript was one of the better word processors available at the time. Of course I was lucky enough to change my 8256 for an 8512 with a second disk drive and a whole 512k of ram (k not meg). Hard drive? Whats that?
I memory serves then these machines ran on CP/M not DOS and used the same processor that you would find ina sinclair spectrum.
|
|
|
|
Yep :-) good choice of OS, IMHO
Been very stable with no BSOD, yet!
There have been many updates since launch; yours might have been quite an old version, which then required the major updates
Some people don't like XP; I do, so thats that!
|
|
|
Thanks for that, it worked. I was doing the right thing, just not being firm enough............... now where have I heard that before?
Don/DBE
|
|
|
I just bought a new laptop which is how I came to get XP. Of course no one forces one to buy any OS (unless it's a MAC), but one does have a right to expect something new and special from such a hyped product.
I recall my own Amstrad with fondness. Came with MS-Dos 3.2 and DOS-PLus I think plus that GEM programme with icons -- that must have been before Apple "invented" them.
I can hear the agricultural clunk of the 32MB HDD now......
|
We use Win98 at home and 2000 Pro (otherwise known as NT5) on my portable. 2000 Pro would be my choice - very stable and all the nice 'multimedia' features, however, not all the drivers for some peripherals are available even now... I have heard muchthe same about XP plus some damning reports about XP used in a home environment.
I think I'll stay with 98 for now...
Martin.
|
|
|
|
|
It was the 512 ran on DOS, with a terrible monitor resolution (lack of). It was originally an A and B drive, then I forked out for a Seagate HD. I can only describe the feeling as similar to that when I cast out my old black and white TV and got a color one 35 years ago! But a totally unburstable machine, unlike today's finicky things. It survived everything we did to it, including a 4 year old daughter all over it.
|
|
|
