XP question

Page 2 of 3  
| here's my config for Fvwm/xmms2: | | DestroyFunc Xmms2 | AddToFunc Xmms2 | + I Exec exec xmms2-launcher | + I Exec exec xmms2 playlist shuffle | + I Exec exec xmms2 playlist play | + I Silent Key KP_Right A S Exec xmms2 server volume +2 | + I Silent Key KP_Left A S Exec xmms2 server volume -2 | + I Silent Mouse 4 A S Exec xmms2 server volume +2 | + I Silent Mouse 5 A S Exec xmms2 server volume -2 | + I Silent Key Pause A C Exec xmms2 toggle |
It never ceases to amaze me that Linux people will think it's impressive to say things like: "Hey, I can do that with 27 lines in a console window. You poor Windoze people have to click a button or something." Since 1995, few people will be impressed that you can control a music player without using a UI of any kind. They'll be even less impressed that they can write excessively bloated and abstruse config entries for custom commands. You may find it hard to believe, but that just isn't a compelling salespitch.
(Not to mention the only-geeks-could-love-it naming traditions. Anything named Fvwm/xmms2 has no right to exist. :)
| It's just as simple to tell the WM to select a window | and generate synthetic keystrokes if the player doesn't | already have a command interface. | Of course selecting a window with the WM will make the | window active, you'll have to first capture the active | window and switch back. |
Yes. The whole point was to send messages to windows that are not active, without changing the active window. He doesn't have any problems with sending his commands, as I read it. He just wants to send them to a non-active window. I don't know of any way to do that, and if you could it would require both a specific OS functionality and a target process that's designed to listen somehow. The system sends input to the active window. So it seems the target process would need to be hooking into all input, like a sort of super keylogger, since its window is not receiving the input. The target software would have to be designed for that purpose in the first place and would have to provide config options for it. Once that's solved, you'd need to figure out how *not* to send the specific input to the active window. That would mean having something like a Control Panel applet that lets you configure details of which processes can receive input from which devices. (Or on Linux, of course, it would require that someone online has posted 53 lines of interminable gobbledygook that you can enter into a console window to accomplish the same thing.)
Maybe all of that exists and is possible on your Linux Miracle, but I don't see how. ...But at least you don't have to use a chisel and a stone tablet, so I guess Linux may not be far, now, from being ready for prime time. :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 9:03:21 AM UTC-4, Mayayana wrote:

Yes, his reply covers the issue of it being "trivial" to do in Linux. I mean, if they want to bash Windows, at least be honest. In the context of the thread here, "trivial" to me would mean that the typical home computer user could easily do it. It might be "trivial" to someone experienced in customizing Linux, but what he posted sure isn't going to be trivial to the vast majority of home PC users. I'm sure you can do all kinds of cool things in Linux, but that doesn't make those things trivial to the typical home PC user. When you post stuff like that, it just reduces your credibility.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 8:29:52 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
4, nothing like pointlessly enter the conversation of people who know what they're talking about and rehashing what's been said for your greater glory! Maybe some of their smarts will rub-off...you can only hope!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 3:52:21 PM UTC-4, Bob_Villa wrote:

People who know what they're talking about would obviously exclude you, dirt bag. Is that you're new purpose in life? To follow me around and make snide remarks. The fact that you had nothing relevant to say about the discussion speaks for itself.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 4:54:05 PM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote: The fact that you

Exactly right moron...I could not add to the conversation but you did only trying to stick you nose in it to get noticed...because you are a loser.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 8:21:17 PM UTC-4, Bob_Villa wrote:

Good that you accept that you have nothing to add to the newsgroup. I and I'm sure many other's have noticed it for some time now. Now you can just work on the anger management and jealousy for those that do.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, May 19, 2014 10:12:34 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:

At least I can recognize I have nothing to add to this conversation...where as, you go over your head to show your ignorance...and try to gain some credibility. What angers me...blowhard assholes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, May 19, 2014 11:23:33 AM UTC-4, Bob_Villa wrote:

Since you admit you don't know anything about the topic then obviously you're in no position to comment on what I can add. I simply supported Mayayana's position that to attack Windows and claim that the solution is trivial in Linux, is BS. I said the same thing M did, that what was posted might be trivial to someone who customizes Linux, a system administrator, a developer, etc, but it's not trivial to a typical home PC user. M said the same thing, yet you choose to just attack me. You really do need some anger management help.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 2:52:10 PM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:

d,

et

elp.
You're fair game because you have no credentials in what is being discussed and only think you might look good by rubbing elbows with someone that doe s know something about the subject. How can you agree with something withou t the research to back it up? And besides...you're a dick! (or is that a co mpliment?)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 7:43:40 PM UTC-4, Bob_Villa wrote:

did,

yet

help.

ed
You obviously have no way of knowing what my credentials are.
and only think you might look good by rubbing elbows with someone that does know something about the subject. How can you agree with something without the research to back it up? And besides...you're a dick! (or is that a com pliment?)
OK, you want to talk about my credentials? You want to talk about referenc es? You want to talk about making comments in threads where you don't know anyt hing? Let's take a trip down memory lane, where all your hostility apparen tly started.
There was a thread about installing a whole house surge protector. The adults had it under control, whereupon you posted this gem:
"Whole house surge protection is pointless and costly...protect the individ ual items that need it at each point of use. .02 "
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en #!searchin/alt.home.repair/surge$2 0protector|sort:date/alt.home.repair/1VhechFrbdw/9QOFTP7GiigJ
Since you want references, the above link is provided to document what you said.
Oren asked what that comment was based on, and you replied:
"Since runs of different surge loads possibly share the same conduit or are run side by side...surge will be induced after the protection. Leaving the expensive device impotent."
I politely explained to you how that is wrong, to which you replied:
"This sounds like a sales pitch...there is virtually nothing that will prev ent damage from a nearby lightning strike. Mainly because it will "jump" ov er, or burn-out any device. Again, this is my .02"
After that, Bud and I took you apart, limb by limb. I'm an electrical engi neer. Bud is too. We gave you references to surge protection guides written by committees of experts at NIST and the IEEE:
http://www.nemasurge.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/surgesfnl.pdf
http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lhm/IEEE_Guide.pdf
They say you're wrong. And instead of learning, this was your reply:
"Okay, okay...this will be my last two-cents on this...you can show me all kinds of specs and recommendations, and say how "in theory" these work (and they will work in a very specific and narrow window of lightning surge). B ut the "real world" data is not there...it is anecdotal at best because eve ry situation is different. "
So, the situation here is clear. It's *you* who enters threads where you know nothing, even freely admitting it with the "just my two cents". Then when Bud and I point out the sound science based on physics and backed up by 75+ years of real world deployment, instead of reading and learning, you just dismiss it and call it anecdotal. Are you so stupid that you don't realize that surges and how to protect from them has been of vital importan ce for most of the last century? Phone companies, power companies, cable companies, communications facilities, factories, etc have been involved with surge protection, studying the best methods etc. That is reflected in the NIST and IEEE guides we cited for you. But, heh, let's just chuck all that out and go with your 2 cents.
And even worse, you've developed a need to follow me around and make snide comments. So, it's my duty to expose your true ignorance and how it's *you* who enters threads that even you freely admit you know nothing about and start spouting BS. Even worse, it's clearly demonstrated that you refuse to read and learn.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Uh huh.
When faced with answers to all your snipping it's time to resort to gobbledgook and ridicule.
I suspected I should not have wasted my time. I could delve deeper but there's no point.
--
Dan Espen

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| Uh huh. | | When faced with answers to all your snipping it's time to | resort to gobbledgook and ridicule. |
All my snipping? You started this, remember? You were the one who said Linux is better than Windows and that what the OP wants to do is "trivial". No one was attacking you. You were criticizing Windows. All I asked was for a simple explanation of how Linux could do what's requested. I don't think it's possible to do. You seem to be claiming otherwise. Isn't it a fair question to ask exactly how you can solve the OP's dilemma?
| I suspected I should not have wasted my time. | I could delve deeper but there's no point. |
No need to delve deeper. It was a simple question. The OP wanted to send secondary keyboard messages to a non-active process without them going to the active process. Did you understand that? Either you know how to do that or you don't. You're posting links about changing the default language and talking about the flexibility of your command line music player. Those have nothing to do with the question.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 10:26:34 AM UTC-4, Mayayana wrote:

+1, especially about the "trivial" part in the context of the thread here. What he posted isn't trivial to the vast majority of home PC users and as you say, it doesn't solve the problem asked, even for Linux.

I think his question is better summarized as he wants the ability to tie a keyboard to a given app. Whether the app is active/inactive wouldn't seem to matter.
Did you understand that? Either you

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| > | DestroyFunc Xmms2 | > | AddToFunc Xmms2 | > | + I Exec exec xmms2-launcher | > | + I Exec exec xmms2 playlist shuffle | > | + I Exec exec xmms2 playlist play | > | + I Silent Key KP_Right A S Exec xmms2 server volume +2 | > | + I Silent Key KP_Left A S Exec xmms2 server volume -2 | > | + I Silent Mouse 4 A S Exec xmms2 server volume +2 | > | + I Silent Mouse 5 A S Exec xmms2 server volume -2 | > | + I Silent Key Pause A C Exec xmms2 toggle | > |
I can't resist rubbing it in just a little bit, don'tcha know..... You really should try using Windows. We have Space Age music players that can be controlled with nothing more than the mouse. No config files. No console window. No muss. No fuss. No kidding. Even the volume can be changed without a config file. It's the very definition of "trivial". Windows is so modern that I've been on all morning and haven't needed to use the keyboard for anything but typing characters. I feel like I'm living in the 21st century. :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/15/2014 3:06 PM, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Look into "hotkeys", a way to control programs on your Windows computer. There are numerous methods and applications to create hotkeys. There are also "macrow" shortcuts and software for controlling your Win computer. ^_^
http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-hotkey-macro-recorder-utility.htm
http://preview.tinyurl.com/kq2hj59
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| > The OP wanted to send secondary keyboard messages | > to a non-active process without them going to the | > active process. | | I think his question is better summarized as he wants the ability | to tie a keyboard to a given app. Whether the app is active/inactive | wouldn't seem to matter. |
The basic design is that the OS gets the hardware input and sends it to the active window. It all happens via system messages. There's no option to tie input to a specific program or process, as far as I know. Software alone doesn't know what's happening at hardware level. So if the target program is not active that does matter. It can't receive the input. The target program would have to be listening to all input (a systemwide "hook", like a keystroke logger uses, that arranges to have the OS pass each message through the target program) and it would have to somehow recognize which input is the relevant input. Then it would also have to somehow "eat" that input, so that the active window doesn't get the keystrokes. I'm not aware of any such functionality. It would be very complicated and intrusive functionality to add to any program, which would rarely if ever be useful. (I still don't understand why the OP needs it.)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, May 18, 2014 11:51:36 AM UTC-4, Mayayana wrote:

For the keyboard, I agree that's true. Actually, I think we need to back up a bit. I said keyboard, gfre said numeric keypad. I was thinking numeric keypad on the keyboard, which I morphed into keyboard. Actually you can get separate numeric keypads. IDK how Windows handles a totally separate keypad at all. But certainly some apps that run under Windows can get hardware input while not the active window. gfre can clarify if it is a separate keypad?
It all happens via system

But it still simplifies down to tying the keypad to a certain app or apps, while the mouse and (i think keyboard) is still tied to other apps. When it comes down to doing the tying, what he wants is the keyboard associated with the MP3 player.

IDK what target program you're referring to. This appears to me to be an issue between the device driver for the keypad and the rest of the OS and/or the app. I don't see any need for monitoring all input. The OS only needs to know that the keypad input goes to the MP3 player.
that arranges

IDK what you mean. He pushes "3" on the keypad. That triggers an interupt, the device driver receives the "3". Somewhere at a higher layer in the OS, the OS knows that the keypad is associated with the MP3 player. It gets the "3" from the device driver and it passes the "3" to that app. That's how it works now, no? Except that the OS passes it to the active window.
Then it would also have to somehow "eat" that

If it's a separate keypad, then I think it may be easier, but I tend to doubt it's doable without some effort with someone with the right knowledge, if it's doable at all.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 05/18/2014 11:51 AM, Mayayana wrote:

I authored (in C#) a Windows software that controls a piece of $800,000 lab equipment through a USB port.
This program sends instructions to the machine, the machine performs the task and then returns the result.
Based on the returned result, the app sends additional processing instructions or terminates the process.
All of this executes flawlessly in the background while I play Freecell. ;-)
FWIW, I put a lot of effort into this program. My boss just yawned. Fuck 'em!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 18 May 2014 09:03:21 -0400, "Mayayana"

I have not tried it yet but one of the guys over on the XP group suggested a hot key program that might let me do a lot of the things I want to do without actually taking the focus off of the music player window.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 18 May 2014 11:51:36 -0400, "Mayayana"

OK the simplest way to put this.
I am running an MP3 player with the playlist screen on monitor 1 (operated by several separate input devices) and I have weather RADAR running on monitor 2. If I want to move the center of the RADAR display, I take the focus away from the player. If I do not remember to put it back, the input devices, scattered around the pool deck, stop working. You might not even notice it until you are in the pool and hit the floating "next" button to skip something you might not want to hear right then.
I used to have 2 PCs running and this was not an issue. When I consolidated it to one, this became an issue.
The "next" button is actually a keyboard function on the PS/2 KBD port that also integrates the 3W1 wallbox and a separate wired numeric pad
If I could just lock the PS/2 port to a window, 90% of my problem is solved. I was hoping it was simply a poorly documented set up option but that does not seem to be true.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.