Re: ping

--001636e0a8bdaa409004865d4301
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

autohotkey can over ride it with a script and do all kinds of crazy things
while you're at it.

Let me know if that sounds cool or not.  I can help you out after finals.

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Michael Sallaway <
michael-litestep-8jsF3aZKAbVWk0Htik3J/[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Yeah, Win 7 is a bit nicer -- although there's one thing I *hate* about i=
t,
> and figured I'd ask you guys, since someone might know?
>
> How on earth can I disable the WIN key and up/down/left/right shortcuts? =
My
> problem is thus: I want to use VirtuaWin shortcuts -- WIN+left to move a =
VWM
> left, etc. However, they're the shortcuts used by Aero windowing stuff in
> Win7 -- win+left will resize the window to take up the left half, win+up
> maximizes, etc. "No worries", I thought -- disable the Aero themes. Howev=
er,
> when I try to register the hotkeys with VirtuaWin, it still says "hotkey =
in
> use" or something to that effect (even though they don't do anything
> anymore). I've then tried using any different shell (since I thought it
> might be the explorer shell that's registering it) -- nope, no luck, even
> though the key combo doesn't do anything, virtuawin reports a problem try=
ing
> to register it.
>
> I've also tried the "Disable WIN+<key> shortcuts" registry hack that's
> floating around (to disable things like WIN+E, WIN+R), doesn't affect it,
> and also tried the "remapping" programs to remap or disable the key -- wh=
ich
> disables the key completely, so no luck there. :-)
>
> It's Win7 only, as I was using the exact same setup in WinXP fine.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> Cheers,
> Michael
>
>
>
>
> On 12/05/2010 1:10 PM, Elliot Nesterman wrote:
>
>> It is sad. It's such a good interface. The lack of a stable 64 bit versi=
on
>> is why I'm not using it anymore. I use bb4win on my x64 machines. Works =
a
>> charm, skinnable, also designed after NextStep.
>> I'm not any kind of coder, but if I were updating LS to 64 bits would be=
 a
>> fun project.
>> I suspect when I eventually move to Win7 I'll forgo an alternative shell
>> all together. I hear generally good things about the interface.
>>
>> Kevin Brew wrote:
>>
>>> Wow, that's pretty sad. I hadn't even realized I was still subscribed t=
o
>>> the lsml from this address.
>>>
>>> I have to say that most of the reasons I began to use LS don't exist
>>> anymore, but it still has quite a bit of utility. I still have xp on on=
e of
>>> my computers, and six months ago I got seriously sick of explorer, and =
just
>>> happened to trip over the folder containing all of the loose-screws stu=
ff.
>>> Now I have an entire interface built into a 20x200px space again. Wheth=
er
>>> it's being actively worked on or not, it's stable, it works, and it doe=
s
>>> what it's supposed to.
>>>
>>> But, it's definitely sad to see how small the community has gotten. Tha=
t
>>> was always the best part of it, arguments and all. Not many things will=
 get
>>> me to do data entry for days and days, but apparently, this bunch was
>>> enough.
>>>
>>>     --Kevin Brew (cypress)
>>>
>>> On May 11, 2010, at 19:54, "Mike Edward Moras (e-sushi=99)" <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Oh well, back in the days the "state of the step" was showing first
>>>> signs of death... but I didn't expect everything to fade away.
>>>>
>>>> Makes me wonder where all those skinners and themers have gone.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand you're right: MS is so much more stable than back in
>>>> the original Win98 era. It's just... I miss my skins. ;)
>>>>
>>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>   Can't Unsubscribe? Check http://desktopian.org/listunsub.html
>       LS List Homepage: http://wuzzle.org/list/litestep.php
>           Get the LS FAQ: http://lsfaq.shellfront.org
>
>

--001636e0a8bdaa409004865d4301--