<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Some stuff &#187; Windows</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.yhuang.org/?feed=rss2&#038;tag=windows" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://blog.yhuang.org</link>
	<description>here.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2025 08:50:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Disable Apple Mail attachment defaulting to inline</title>
		<link>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=1642</link>
		<comments>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=1642#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2015 01:19:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Address Book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[command line]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Graphical user interface]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IPhone OS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mac os x]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Macintosh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MobileMe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Operating system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[os x]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plain text]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scripts.mit.edu/~zong/wpress/?p=1642</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Did you know that Apple Mail does the presumptuous thing of sending all images (and maybe other attachment types) as inline attachments, no matter what options you choose in the program, like attaching at the end of message, like making it &#8220;Windows-friendly&#8221; (as if it&#8217;s a Windows problem),&#8230;. Nor does any of the very typically [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Did you know that Apple Mail does the presumptuous thing of sending all images (and maybe other attachment types) as inline attachments, no matter what options you choose in the program, like attaching at the end of message, like making it &#8220;Windows-friendly&#8221; (as if it&#8217;s a Windows problem),&#8230;. Nor does any of the very typically low-quality &#8220;solutions&#8221; you&#8217;ll find by misunderstanding Apple users online help, like changing message type to plain text or running that one silly line on the command line</p>
<blockquote><p>defaults write com.apple.mail DisableInlineAttachmentViewing -bool yes</p></blockquote>
<p>Just look at that and think about what it does! None of those do anything at all.<br />
<span id="more-1642"></span><br />
But I found this today after much searching: <a href="http://clivegaleni.com/posts/os-x-mail-disable-inline-attachments/">OS X Mail &#8211; disable inline attachments</a>, and it is indeed the only solution that works.</p>
<p><em>Edit:</em> However, I can no longer recommend this Mail plug-in. Not only does it nag-screen for payment an hour or so after first using it, there is not even a way to uninstall it without manually going through the system. Given how difficult it is to cleanly remove .pkg installations on OS X, I consider this thing to be in terrible taste. Use at your own risk.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://blog.yhuang.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=1642</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>on transparency, dynamic wallpaper, 3d desktops</title>
		<link>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=209</link>
		<comments>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=209#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 08:02:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[desktop]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[screen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[space]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[transparency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scripts.mit.edu/~zong/wpress/?p=209</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[With Windows 7 about to arrive, I&#8217;ve been thinking about supposedly &#8220;cool&#8221; UI trends of recent years that actually annoy me greatly. Beginning a few years back, when graphics cards in computers not used for games became powerful enough to do something interesting, out came features that tried to take advantage of this power. I&#8217;m [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With Windows 7 about to arrive, I&#8217;ve been thinking about supposedly &#8220;cool&#8221; UI trends of recent years that actually annoy me greatly.</p>
<p>Beginning a few years back, when graphics cards in computers not used for games became powerful enough to do something interesting, out came features that tried to take advantage of this power. I&#8217;m talking about things like circular windows, transparency, video wallpapers, flipping window previews, 3d desktops, like a cube or whatever&#8230;</p>
<p>Now trust me. Since I don&#8217;t play games, I&#8217;ve thought about using the idle GPU for other purposes, too. So I tried the above features. And they all suck. Greatly. (I also tried GPGPU but that&#8217;s a rant for another day.)<br />
<span id="more-209"></span><br />
Along the way, I&#8217;ve become convinced that trying too hard to &#8220;use&#8221; GPU power is the wrong way to go. Alas, it&#8217;s probably better to stick to the basics and think of things that are actually useful. But first, why are the aforementioned graphics features so repugnant that users (at least I) turn them off after a few tries? Because they are unnatural, that&#8217;s why!</p>
<p>For example, the shape of windows. Look, rectangles are nice, for a good reason. They tesselate well. Hexagons may even work. Circles do not work. Odd shaped windows are the bane of my existence. How about the use of transparency? It never works! You don&#8217;t actually want to see what&#8217;s underneath, because if you do, it&#8217;s distracting. So transparency blurs what&#8217;s behind to the degree that you can&#8217;t tell what&#8217;s behind. This is paradoxical and completely useless. Video wallpapers. Bad idea. The desktop should not be distracting with movements. The eye is extremely capable of detecting scene change, especially change due to movement. You do not want the background to move at all! Flipping windows as in Vista&#8230; no. It&#8217;s harder to see what&#8217;s in the window due to the 3d angle and harder to see which one is at the forefront because of a stack of very different looking windows all competing for attention. Cube or spherical surfaces for desktops a la Compiz: fail. Nothing on our current desktop naturally wraps around a cube or sphere. You&#8217;re introducing extra distortion to generate the unnecessary projection to 2D. This is stupid.</p>
<p>However, I can think of two useful graphics features that are modifications of the failures described here:</p>
<p><strong>1. Getting things out of your way</strong><br />
Do you see all these people with multiple monitors? Why? Because people want space. They want multiple windows showing at the same time. They want a big desktop. Now desktop resolutions even on a single monitor these days are by no means small. I argue that it is the extremely inefficient use of a single monitor that drives people to multiple monitors. This is quite ridiculous, actually. Why do I say this? Because I&#8217;ve seen a good MDI (multiple document interface) in, say, source code editors and development environments that can easily put all the documents you want (usually just two) on screen at the same time. So there is no reason to give up on the same level of efficiency between multiple applications.</p>
<p>Okay, so what am I talking about. I think most space problems can be solved if there is a way to get things out of your way. For example, if I want to tesselate a screen with rectangles I may end up leaving unused space due to some windows being certain sizes. Wouldn&#8217;t it be nice for windows to be unions of rectangles and their contents flow within them naturally so that the entire screen looked like a newspaper page layout? This requires window content to be amenable to reflow, but whatever. It can be done. Barring that, it&#8217;d be nice if you can throw windows out of your way to a automatically determined reasonable location, either temporarily or permanently. Windows 7 sort of does that (but only to pre-defined locations and sizes like half a screen) and Mac OS X sort ot does the &#8230; opposite &#8230; of that by bringing all windows into view&#8230;</p>
<p><strong>2. Changing backgrounds</strong><br />
While video backgrounds are extremely distracting, a changing background itself isn&#8217;t a bad idea at all. The background can be equally used to get attention, as a conduit for conveying information &#8212; provided that is the goal. After all, it is already used to convey some information, with desktop icons, etc., although this happens only when the background is actually the foreground &#8212; when all other windows are out of the way. So can the background convey information while still being the background, and how?</p>
<p>Yes, it can. First thing to realize is the background can&#8217;t really convey a huge amount of information, since during normal operation, either (a) a small portion of it is revealed at a time &#8212; e.g. the gap between windows; and (2) a large portion is revealed only briefly &#8212; e.g. when switching windows. But a small amount of information can still be conveyed through this. One of the best uses for the background is to convey quasistatic or low frequency data. For instance, you&#8217;ve seen little weather and time indicators&#8230; why not let the background show the time and weather display by actually displaying a scene of that? It can be either current conditions or forecast, so long as the user knows what it is. So, if you want to know if it will rain 6 hours from now in Capetown, and have set the display to show that, the desktop can simply display a scene of that &#8212; and this doesn&#8217;t really change except when the weather changes, which is precisely when you want to be distracted with this new information, and in a non-intrusive way (you&#8217;ll just notice something new between switching windows). At other times you don&#8217;t even notice.<br />
<br/></p>
<p>I&#8217;m sure there are other applications like these. There is no excuse to pretend that piss poor UI design is acceptable if it just seems &#8220;cool&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://blog.yhuang.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=209</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>biometric authentication</title>
		<link>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=139</link>
		<comments>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=139#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:18:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[authentication protocol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fingerprint reader]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[paper templates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[problem]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[random strings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tablet mode]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scripts.mit.edu/~zong/wpress/?p=139</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Now that I have gotten seriously addicted to Tablet PC (the faux paper templates in Windows Journal alone were enough to get me hooked), I&#8217;ve been pondering about some limitations of the platform. One is authentication. One of things you are not happy to do with a mouse &#8212; which the pen is, sort of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now that I have gotten seriously addicted to Tablet PC (the faux paper templates in Windows Journal alone were enough to get me hooked), I&#8217;ve been pondering about some limitations of the platform. One is authentication. One of things you are not happy to do with a mouse &#8212; which the pen is, sort of &#8212; is inputting random strings that have become of modern-day passwords.</p>
<p>So I understood the point of the fingerprint reader option on this build. Swipe and you can bypass having to type passwords in tablet mode when the keyboard is hidden. But I didn&#8217;t get the option, and I believe there are other alternatives.</p>
<p>There are many modes of biometric authentication, fingerprint, face recognition, handwriting, voice, etc., and getting nearly perfect reliability in each case is a difficult problem when used alone. State of the art is just not good enough. But combined into a multifactored authentication protocol, it may just work. Here is something that should work <em>today</em> with existing hardware:</p>
<table border="1" cellpadding="10" style="margin: 2 2 2 2; border-collapse: collapse; border-style: solid; border-color: #365873;">
<tr>
<td><strong>Look into the webcam, solve a quick reflexive cognition problem, and provide a handwriting sample.</strong></td>
</tr>
</table>
<p>That should do the trick for a quick keyboard-less authentication. Why hasn&#8217;t anybody written software to do this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://blog.yhuang.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=139</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>how to get NVTV tuner to work with MCE</title>
		<link>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=83</link>
		<comments>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=83#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:14:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hibernation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kind]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mce 2005]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[media center edition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NVTV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tuner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[windows media center]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[windows media center edition]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scripts.mit.edu/~zong/wpress/?p=83</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This tuner card kind of sucks, but it is supposed to work with Windows Media Center Edition 2005. It doesn&#8217;t work out of the box, though. The way to get it to work is to install the following: The driver, version 1.20.45, from nVidia Forceware Multimedia 3.62 from XFX (with these two, the card will [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.xfxforce.com/web/product/listConfigurationDetails.jspa?productConfigurationId=1026">This tuner card</a> kind of sucks, but it is supposed to work with Windows Media Center Edition 2005.</p>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t work out of the box, though. The way to get it to work is to install the following:</p>
<ol>
<li>The <a href="http://www.nvidia.com/object/nvtv_winxp_mc_1.20.45.html">driver</a>, version 1.20.45, from nVidia</li>
<li><a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/9y37i0gd1l44xpr/forceware_362.iso" title="originally at ftp://xfxsupport.com/public/utility/Forceware_Media_3.62.zip">Forceware Multimedia 3.62</a> from XFX (with these two, the card will work with nVidia provided applications)</li>
<li>April 2006 <a href="http://support.microsoft.com/kb/914548">update</a> for MCE 2005 Rollup 2 (that makes the card work under MCE)</li>
</ol>
<p>It still craps out occasionally, but it works. Image quality is pretty good.</p>
<p><i>Edit:</i> Wow, a couple of days playing with MCE made me realize that PC&#8217;s these days can be woken from <b>hibernation</b> on schedule <b>programmatically</b> &#8212; that&#8217;s right, hibernation, not standby, and that&#8217;s right, by software, not via wake-on-hardware. I wonder how that happens&#8230; I gotta try this on an older PC now to see if it works there, too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://blog.yhuang.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=83</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Vista blah</title>
		<link>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=29</link>
		<comments>https://blog.yhuang.org/?p=29#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2006 02:04:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bitlocker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[east asian languages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[game manager]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[language bar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manager]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[minority languages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privilege]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scripts.mit.edu/~zong/wpress/?p=29</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Memory management: Despite running on 256MB (actually 274MB is what it&#8217;s set to, to be precise), memory management in Vista seems to be working well. The paging policy is persistently keeping physical RAM usage at around 200MB, +/- 20MB. This isn&#8217;t too different from XP. Disk management: There appears to be some rudimentary non-destructive repartitioning [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Memory management: Despite running on 256MB (actually 274MB is what it&#8217;s set to, to be precise), memory management in Vista seems to be working well. The paging policy is persistently keeping physical RAM usage at around 200MB, +/- 20MB. This isn&#8217;t too different from XP.</p>
<p>Disk management: There appears to be some rudimentary non-destructive repartitioning functions like &#8220;extend&#8221; and &#8220;shrink,&#8221; much like gpart. The disk is also versioned. Creating and destroying symbolic links, however, is still not exposed in the shell.</p>
<p>Network management: A crapload of changes in network management &#8212; too much to figure out what&#8217;s going on there right now. Most notable is probably exposing IPv6 support.</p>
<p>Privilege escalation: Windows itself now makes the request for administrative privilege if it is needed, instead of saying the current user privileges are insufficient. So far this is saving a lot of time.</p>
<p>Foreign languages: Display of East Asian languages are enabled by the default installation (I guess that just means the fonts and codepages are installed by default). The input methods I use are still the same, although there are a lot more input methods now, including a half dozen minority languages of China. That&#8217;s amazing. But, I can&#8217;t believe that the language bar is <i>still</i> having issues, not knowing whether to hide itself on the taskbar or how it&#8217;s supposed to be aligned.</p>
<p>Other stuff: There is this &#8220;Windows Cardspace&#8221; thing which seems to be a online accounts manager. There is also a &#8220;People Near Me&#8221; function that uses the Messenger social network. Some lame games and a &#8220;game manager.&#8221; BitLocker and ReadyBoost are nice, but kind of over-engineered. I doubt these will be used extensively.</p>
<p>In general, I think there are many good and needed changes here, but very little that I find compelling. From 2000 to XP, remote desktop, multiple user logon, system restore, and wireless support were compelling. From XP to Vista, the only thing I see is Media Center. But that isn&#8217;t in most versions of Vista. Add packet writing of optical discs, also, that might come in handy. Some of the other changes might have been compelling years ago (like Sidebars), but at this point are too little too late. If new applications turn up either from Microsoft or others to make a compelling case for the new graphics subsystem or anything else that has been included (pen input? speech recognition? text-to-speech? imaging/color codecs?), things may be different.</p>
<p>In other trials:</p>
<ul>
<li>RDP 6 works fine. Sound quality seems better. Not much else exciting going on here. I thought there might be application publishing support, but that requires the server OS.</li>
<li>Office 12 is fine. XML file format and some UI changes. The thing seems to be the same to me. Outlook doesn&#8217;t use the new UI but has improved IMAP support including remote sent-mail folder and auto-purge support, but I had those working with scripts anyway.</li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://blog.yhuang.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=29</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
