XP question

[trader_4]

Or any specific window at all. From what I see, it just allows you to use one keyboard or another as the keyboard for the whole system, which is very different from the question asked.

[trader_4]

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.

[Dan.Espen]

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.

[Mayayana]

| 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.

[Mayayana]

| > | 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. :)

[trader_4]

+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

[The Daring Dufas]

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. ^_^

TDD

[Mayayana]

| > 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.)

[gfretwell]

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.

[gfretwell]

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.

[trader_4]

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.

[Jack]

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!

[trader_4]

I'm not sure that what you're asking for fixes your problem. You say you want to keep the keypad associated with the MP3 player. But then you have this active/inactive point that M brought up. I could see the keypad being "associated" with the MP3 app and you still having the same problem, ie that if you leave the computer without the MP3 being the active window, it won't get the input from the keypad, even though the keypad is associated with it. In other words, I think what you really want is for the MP3 player window to be the window that becomes the active window if there is no keyboard, mouse etc activity for X mins. IDK any way to do that either, but I think it may be what you really need to do. It's like you need some kind of app/macro to give the MP3 player a "kick" to make it the active window. If that happened it would solve the problem, no?

[rbowman]

That's why people doing any serious administration with Windows use PowerShell. It only took M$ 10 years to come up with that, with a detour through Windows Scripting Host. The lusers do love their buttons.

[Bob_Villa]

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!

[Dan.Espen]

Sorry, sniping.

I had no idea you were MSFT's public relations person. I seem to have upset you.

Bear in mind, the solution I gave accomplished everything the user wanted to do.

Since you're taking this as a personal insult on your favorite OS, I'm not going to take the time to look up how to solve the problem EXACTLY the way you'd like.

Ah, the flesh is weak. I can't avoid a challenge. The answer is "xdotool". Take a look at this discussion:

I just installed it, followed the steps to get the window ID and type a character in a window that is minimized. The window did not take focus when I typed the character and did not become active or visible.

I trust you will now admit that Linux easily does what Windows can't. I only spent a minute or so looking up how to do it.

BTW, as far as arcane commands, I use Fvwm. That is not a mainstream window manager, and having pointy clikcy GUIs is not a plus for me. There are projects that layer a GUI on top of Fvwm configuration. I'm just not interested so I don't use them.

There are dozens of other desktop environments for Linux that at least match windows for the pointers and clickers. I'm old fashioned.

As far as making fun of the names of certain tools, like Fvwm and XMMS, you seem to have ignored the other music players I mentioned Audacity and RhythmBox. I'm very sorry some projects pick names that upset you. I bet that never happens on Windows.

[Dan.Espen]

That's just plain ridiculous. I use XMMS2 and I like it. Guess what, it has no window at all. You only communicate with it thru commands. I see no reason why a music player should show me anything as it plays, but that's just me.

If I wanted something with no config file, and no typed in configuration I'd use something else like Rhythmbox. It has all that space age stuff you seem to like.

You really don't know what you are talking about.

[trader_4]

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.

[Mayayana]

| Since you're taking this as a personal insult on your | favorite OS...

Not at all. I'm not easily insulted, and I'd be happy to criticize Windows and Microsoft, given half a chance. Unlike Linux devotees, I see my computer as a tool, not an afilliation. But you're posting in a non-technical group and saying that Linux is much better than Windows. Claims like that could mislead people.

| The answer is "xdotool". Take a look at this discussion: | |

| | I just installed it, followed the steps to get the window ID | and type a character in a window that is minimized. The window | did not take focus when I typed the character and did not | become active or visible.

That sounds like it will work, except that the OP wants to associate an input device to a window. If he's going to switch to another program to do the job then I'm guessing he might as well just switch focus to his music player.

On the other hand, after reading gfretwell's recent post about lounging in his pool while he watches the weather radar and adjusts his jukebox, I'm thinking that the advanced technology needed to maintain his apparently sybaritic lifestyle is beyond my expertise. I just have a mouse, keyboard and screen, with no pool between them. :)

[Mayayana]

| 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.

I don't know of any option. It would have to be in the Control Panel options or be a function of the music player. I could be wrong, but I think it's very unlikely that you'll be able to do what you want. When you think about it, such a function wouldn't make much sense in most usage. Anyone who wants to target another window can easily just switch to that window. You're scenario seems to be very unusual and complex. This is not really a solution, but if it were me I think I'd just skip the weather radar, listen to the music, and if you see lightning get out of the pool. :)