• Chucara (unregistered)

    I love the error message I occasionally got on Xbox Media Center when connecting to a samba share. It got fixed quickly, but the 'error' popup was:

    In the headline field: Error
    And the error text?  - Success!

  • (cs) in reply to k4_pacific
    Anonymous:
    That's Exabytes, each of which is one thousand terabytes.

    An exabyte (EB) is actually 1018 bytes which is 1,000,000 terabytes (TB).
    A petabyte (PB) is 1015 bytes, which is 1,000 TB.

    For more fun:
    1 zettabyte = 1021 bytes
    1 yottabyte = 1024 bytes
  • (cs) in reply to Gene Wirchenko
    Gene Wirchenko:
    I have had the problem only once, when my memory stick failed.  I feel moorose that the large capacity was not real.

    Sincerely,

    Gene Wirchenko


    "moorose"?
    Is that how cows feel when they're depressed?

    Sincerely,

    Richard Nixon
  • (cs) in reply to Patrick Calahan
    Anonymous:
    Funny that none of these seem to be on OS X. :)
    None seem to be on Linux either. But that doesn't mean they don't exist.
  • anon (unregistered) in reply to SerajewelKS
  • anon (unregistered) in reply to anon

    And of course that didn't work. Go figure.

    Does this work?

    [img=http://tinypic.com/fw6cte.png]

  • anon (unregistered) in reply to anon

    No, of course not.

    But I hope you can figure out how to copy-and-paste that to get the dialog I'm talking about (from JFLAP).

  • Jonathan Thompson (unregistered) in reply to quamaretto

    I'd suggest you get Vault (can't think of the maker) which is what the company I'm working for now is using.  It's been very reliable, is easy to use, and is very happy adding as many files as you can select, from my observation :)

  • (cs) in reply to SerajewelKS
    SerajewelKS:
    Anonymous:
    Funny that none of these seem to be on OS X. :)
    None seem to be on Linux either. But that doesn't mean they don't exist.


    Well, you know, despite all the claims that GUIs like KDE and Gnome exist, it's actually all command-line on Linux, so there is no room for pop-up-dialog boxes. ;-)
  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to ammoQ

    Here's a stupid question...

    What does the alt in "Alt-printscreen" do?

    The printscreen button just copies a screen capture into your clipboard, there's no need to press "alt"... right?

  • (cs) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:

    Here's a stupid question...

    What does the alt in "Alt-printscreen" do?

    The printscreen button just copies a screen capture into your clipboard, there's no need to press "alt"... right?

    Adding alt only copies the active window.

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous

    The 'alt' makes it copy just the focused window.

  • (cs) in reply to JohnO
    JohnO:
    If England and Australia would adopt United States English (which is obviously superior), we wouldn't have WTFs like the first one.

    Which would still leave the rest of the UK and the world. Including the english-speaking populations of countries like India. Whoops.

  • anonymouse (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous

    Maybe you failed to notice how the printScr key doubles as Pause key?

    alt-printscr copies the current window to clipboard ... as opposed to shift-printscr whch copies the entire display to clipboard

  • (cs) in reply to quamaretto
    quamaretto:

    Here is a minor one that I really like. (The link is from a googling. I don't know the guy.)

    And after all of SourceSafe's other failings, my boss just doesn't see the case for switching to something else.

     

    I especially like it when you use the SourceSafe automation interface. There are no error codes returned from any of the functions (all voids). Exceptions are the error-reporting mechanism, and 99% of the time the error text is "Unknown Exception".

  • womble (unregistered) in reply to rhino-x

    As I understand, zip files are blocked because a 2GB file of 0's zips down to a few kb.

    Some virus scanners unzip files before scanning them.

    This can make mail servers asplode.

  • yadda (unregistered) in reply to anon
  • yadda (unregistered) in reply to womble
    Anonymous:
    As I understand, zip files are blocked because a 2GB file of 0's zips down to a few kb.

    Some virus scanners unzip files before scanning them.

    This can make mail servers asplode.


    Ah, a mail scanner that chokes on any ole compression bomb. These should be shot. It would be fun to link to a jpg bomb on this page and have people complain about their browser barfing. zork.
  • MOOOOO (unregistered) in reply to womble
    Anonymous:
    asplode.


    You're just making fun ASP and not your own telligence, am I correct? If not, am I correct to assume you're American? (Or United States of America-ian, for the America-is-not-USA-ers)
  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to MOOOOO
  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to Anon
  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to MOOOOO
     
    Yahoo Mail WTF??
  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Yahoo Mail
  • Lamah (unregistered) in reply to womble
    Anonymous:
    As I understand, zip files are blocked because a 2GB file of 0's zips down to a few kb.

    Some virus scanners unzip files before scanning them.

    This can make mail servers asplode.


    Disappointing! 1gig of zeros zipped down to about 1mb, but all my ISP did was add [WARNING: UNABLE TO VIRUS SCAN] to the subject line.
  • (cs) in reply to Lamah

    Sorry for the double post (No edit facility, WTF?). If I zip a file which is 2gig + 1 byte, will the email server wrap the size to 1 byte and attempt to scan it? :). I'm not sure I'm game enough to find out... (After all, they know where I live).

  • Toni Koivunen (unregistered) in reply to Lamah

    Too bad I don't have the screenshot anymore but my trusted old win98 once whined that it encountered an "Error while asking child to die." I was terminating some service or process when it happened...

  • (cs) in reply to Toni Koivunen

    I like this WTF from the official site: http://www.tgtsoft.com/prod_sxp_ss.php?lang=pl

  • (cs) in reply to NineSisters

    NOTE: none of the shown characters are valid polish characters. This is a result of encoding problems.

  • (cs) in reply to frosty
    frosty:
    AJR:

    Damn tpyos<font color="grey" size="1">[sic]</font>, why oh why won't this forum let me hide my mistake with the eidt button?


    The edit button is only for decoration.  In the code, there is a comment next to it reading:

    // TODO: Implement!


    Actually, it used to work and was disabled because it caused more messed-up postings.
  • (cs) in reply to Malhar
    Anonymous:
    The capacity issue is common when the file-system index of the storage device is currupt. I think only way to recover is to reformat the drive.


    Actually, running chkdsk/scandisk will nearly always fix such a problem.


  • javascript jan (unregistered) in reply to k4_pacific
    Anonymous:
    That's Exabytes, each of which is one thousand terabytes.  I right clicked on it and selected properties and the actual size it reported in bytes contained 16 digits and five commas.



    That's a WTF in itself. If the size in bytes had 16 digits it was in the region of a petabyte or two. An exabyte is bigger than you think. Perhaps the size reported was in kB?

  • (cs) in reply to RevMike
    RevMike:
    I usually like to tell English people that they have a lot of nerve naming their country for our language.  :)

    Do the more patriotic variety of Americans not call their bastardised English something else, then? Like "American"? :)

  • Sam (unregistered) in reply to stevekj
    stevekj:
    I had a bit of trouble figuring out the email filter message.  I couldn't understand which way the email was going - in or out.  I guess that the WTF is that the filter deleted a .zip file because it was unsafe, and suggested zipping it instead to make it safer?


    Correct (disclaimer: I submitted it). It was in a (solicited) inbound email, and was not (contrary to speculation) a large file (it was a C# source file about 50k in size). It was originally sent unzipped, but the mail filter rejected anything with the ".cs" file extension, with the message to zip it and resend, which was duly done. The mail filter then also rejected the zipped attachment with the same message...
  • (cs) in reply to Maurits
    Maurits:
    reinpost:
    I've actually been through that one - I mean, I got that message, realized my keyboard wasn't plugged in, plugged it in, and pressed any key to continue. So the message is both paradoxical and useful.


    I tried that but couldn't find the "any" key... :s


    (C) Matt Groening ....
  • (cs) in reply to rsynnott
    rsynnott:
    RevMike:
    I usually like to tell English people that they have a lot of nerve naming their country for our language.  :)

    Do the more patriotic variety of Americans not call their bastardised English something else, then? Like "American"? :)



    No, but once in a while I hear those from the UK referring to the US version as American.

    Those who study languages will note that for the most part (other than some reformed spelling and some Indian additions), the English spoken in the US is different from that spoken across the pond, where they changed the language while the US stuck to the old way.

    There are groups in the US (less and less all the time) who speak essentially the same language as Shakesphere.   Scholars love this because they can go to that area and it is almost as good as a time machine.

    I don't know what my point is, but the facts are interesting.

  • Mark (unregistered) in reply to ZeoS

    Some humourous Mac Programming Workship C error messages from ages ago:

    http://www.ralentz.com/old/mac/humor/mpw-c-errors.html

  • jim (unregistered) in reply to Mark

    I have no relevant comment to make, but I should just like to remark that while I was reading this thread, my computer decided that "Error Message" by Heist was an appropriate song to play to me. Media Player does exhibit a sense of humour sometimes.

  • Andrew Watts (unregistered) in reply to Grant

    OS X dialogs don't have a OK/Cancel buttons. (At least not HIG compliant ones.) They have actions. e.g. One button will say "Save" and the other will say "Don't Save", so you know what's going to happen when you click on it.

  • (cs) in reply to John Smallberries
    John Smallberries:
    Gene Wirchenko:
    I have had the problem only once, when my memory stick failed.  I feel moorose that the large capacity was not real.

    "moorose"?
    Is that how cows feel when they're depressed?


    It was a reference to Moore's Law.

    Sincerely,

    Gene Wirchenko

  • (cs) in reply to Joel
    Joel:
    Anonymous:

    I'm still trying to figure this one out... I thought XP was later than 95.

    [image]

    Microsoft thinks that XP is later than 2000 and NT, 95 or later would mean 98/Millenium...

    Yah, NT -> 2000 -> XP, 95 -> 98 ->Me -> blackhole.

    I love older installers that insist that they can't install on NT, and do I have 95 or 98?
    No wait, I hate older installers that check OS's... just give me my damn files biatch.
    I do love i6comp.exe... now if I could find something similar for Installshield 7 - 9...

  • Hanneth (unregistered)

    I remember back in my days of software testing we had this one Mac program that came up with an error box saying "There is not enough memory to close this application."

    This was back in '95.

  • (cs) in reply to Andrew Watts
    Anonymous:
    OS X dialogs don't have a OK/Cancel buttons. (At least not HIG compliant ones.) They have actions. e.g. One button will say "Save" and the other will say "Don't Save", so you know what's going to happen when you click on it.

    <font size="2">oh, c'mon...they don't like "abort, retry, cancel, fail"?</font>
  • (cs) in reply to Cyresse
    Cyresse:
    I love older installers that insist that they can't install on NT, and do I have 95 or 98? No wait, I hate older installers that check OS's... just give me my damn files biatch.


    I hate installers, period. Why the fuck does any 2 bit trivial tool think it needs to "install" itself? Give me an archive and let me choose where to decompress it, and that's just fine 95% of the time.
  • Cheeseman (unregistered) in reply to John Smallberries
    John Smallberries:
    A petabyte (PB) is 1015 bytes, which is 1,000 TB.

    1,024.

    So 1 PB = 1152921504606846976 B<font face="Arial" size="-1">.
    </font>
  • womble (unregistered) in reply to MOOOOO
    moo:
    You're just making fun ASP and not your own telligence, am I correct? If not, am I correct to assume you're American? (Or United States of America-ian, for the America-is-not-USA-ers)

    I'm not American; I was referencing paraphrasing Strong Bad.
  • womble (unregistered) in reply to womble

    Well, I butchered that.

  • (cs)

    <?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /><v:shapetype id=_x0000_t75 stroked="f" filled="f" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" o:preferrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600"> 

    <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p> </o:p>

    Will I be alive for 1,193,046 hrs a.k.a. 136 years, 70 days and 6 hours (appx) for Outlook 2003 to complete downloading my offline address book?

    <o:p> </o:p>

    It was only once that I had such a big number, other occasions it only showed to take a few ‘days’ to download offline address book [:P]

    <o:p> </o:p>

    <o:p> </o:p>

    <v:shapetype id=_x0000_t75 stroked="f" filled="f" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe" o:preferrelative="t" o:spt="75" coordsize="21600,21600"><v:stroke joinstyle="miter"></v:stroke><v:formulas><v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"></v:f></v:formulas><v:path o:connecttype="rect" gradientshapeok="t" o:extrusionok="f"></v:path><o:lock aspectratio="t" v:ext="edit"></o:lock></v:shapetype><v:shape id=_x0000_i1025 style="WIDTH: 368.25pt; HEIGHT: 240pt" type="#_x0000_t75"><v:imagedata o:title="outlook_funny display" src="file:///C:\DOCUME~1\gurur\LOCALS~1\Temp\msohtml1\02\clip_image001.jpg"></v:imagedata></v:shape>

     

    cheers

    >>Guru

    </v:shapetype>

  • (cs)

    The second one, refusing to run when there is more than enough memory available, has been around since the old days of DOS (we actually had "filler" programs that just decreased the free memory).

    The unusually large filesizes are definitely caused by corrupted filesystem... but isn't the maximum disk size for a PC 2TB? (512 bytes/sector * 4294967295 sectors)

  • (cs) in reply to llxx
    llxx:

    The second one, refusing to run when there is more than enough memory available, has been around since the old days of DOS (we actually had "filler" programs that just decreased the free memory).

    The unusually large filesizes are definitely caused by corrupted filesystem... but isn't the maximum disk size for a PC 2TB? (512 bytes/sector * 4294967295 sectors)



    Actually, the maximum disk size on a PC would be 512 bytes/sector * 4294967295 * 4294967295 sectors. A 64-bit entry is used to store the total number of sectors. (You could theoretically go even higher yet if you used a larger -- albeit extremely nonstandard -- sector size.)
  • (cs) in reply to CfP
    CfP:
    llxx:

    The second one, refusing to run when there is more than enough memory available, has been around since the old days of DOS (we actually had "filler" programs that just decreased the free memory).

    The unusually large filesizes are definitely caused by corrupted filesystem... but isn't the maximum disk size for a PC 2TB? (512 bytes/sector * 4294967295 sectors)



    Actually, the maximum disk size on a PC would be 512 bytes/sector * 4294967295 * 4294967295 sectors. A 64-bit entry is used to store the total number of sectors. (You could theoretically go even higher yet if you used a larger -- albeit extremely nonstandard -- sector size.)


    Oops: the limit would really be more like 512 bytes/sector * ( 4294967296 * 4294967296 - 1 ) sectors.

Leave a comment on “Pop-up Potpourri: Episode IV”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article