scryoko

I'm a woman here and though the other woman would probably kill me for this... ;; Perhaps, it's just me and I don't usually get offended easily... but I thought those were the funniest things I have ever read. lol. I find it even more funny since it's actually true... lol. Though there are exceptions to some people (like for instance, how I simply abhore make-up and shopping, nor am I too fond about jewerly... hm... maybe my opinion shouldn't count since I'm not your typical woman who squeals about the thought of going on a shopping spree... ;, I find a lot of the things true regarding many women. Like how we explode without warning at absolutely nothing sometimes -- guilty as charged. Oh... I thought the "Hazards" of some of "woman" properties was hilarious. LOL, talk about "Hell hath no fury a woman scorned" eh? That one just cracks me up. And, oh! The Shopping Mission is hilarious too. Did anyone notice how the tracks of the female one never did get to Gap? Lol. Priceless. ^__^ Wai! Thanks for sharing!! Regards, -- scryoko

Hi, Wow, I went through some of tutorials and I think these are one of the best tutorials I have seen, simply because it is so much easier (and not to mention, helpful) when you have a step by step tutorial that you can visually see with your eyes. I think how you made it into animation form is the best part of it! But... I do have one suggestion. Since it is a tutorial and well, you know, tutorials are for people who may be completely new to photoshop (or who just plain suck at using it -- *cough* like me *cough*)... I think it may be a bit more helpful if the step by step animation were a bit slower... That way we can see what is going on more clearly than trying to figure out at some points what was being clicked on. Or, another suggestion could be if you can make the whole picture of the photshop program (and therefore the image being created itself as well) bigger. Then again... making that bigger would mean that it will take longer to load and though that's a downside to it... I think it will be worth the wait since your tutorial will be much better. Of course, this is just a suggestion and the end result is entirely up to you. ^__^ Well... I'm not sure if making the animation slower will affect the loading process or not but if it doesn't, maybe what you can do is have the animation slow down some and just keep the image size of the tutorial at that size because I think that the animation may prove to be a more... important problem than the image size. Because I think it would be a bit annoying if a person would have to keep on replaying something over and over just to see if they understand one particular step correctly. Or, oh! Maybe you can create a "Pause" and "Play" button instead so (duh ^_~), the visitor can pause or play the animation any time he or she wishes. That way, you do not have to slow down the animation and just keep it at the pace that it is right now. ^__^ Though, uh... I'm not good at these things (apparently... hell, unfortunately) but maybe creating those buttons may be a hard thing to do, perhaps more so on trying to get them to work properly. ;; Bah... again, entirely up to you. Hm... this reminds of a time when my professor gave me tips of teaching someone something. He said that if you give lessons on a subject, never assume that the learner knows anything because if you start to assume things, and teach in that sense, then you may be going to fast and the learner may have lost you at the very beginning. I say this because, well, from my experience, this is pretty damn true and the only way I know if the learner already knows the stuff is if I ask them. If they do, then I move on at a fairly quicker pace -- depending on where that particular person or group is at. If not, I keep the pace slow and I try to explain everything that I am talking about. Now I just want to let you know this (if you haven't already) because some people like me, I'm pretty sure, find it hard to understand what some of the functions of tools are in photoshop. For instance, sometimes, when I click on (and I'm just saying this off the top of my head right now) Filter > Artistic > Plastic Wrap... it seems as if nothing had happened to the picture! (I really hate it when that happens... >_<; This is especially bad if you're playing around with photoshop and you want to know what this tool does when you click on it, what that element functions as, etc. I have tried reading some photoshop books and I swear... some of it are just hard to understand. Bah, point being, if you want your tutorials to be just mind blowing and awesome (not that they aren't already ^__^ so I'd say to make them even more so) and you know, perfect for "Photoshop for Complete Dummies" ^_~, perhaps you can make little, um... notes on the side during the animation to further explain what each step you are doing when you click on this or when you do that to create so and so effect on the image. But that would require more work... >_<;;; I'm really sorry for suggesting all these stuff that requires so much work. Um... gah! Although it seems as if I made more suggestions than I did praising your tutorials... I really, really apologize for that. This is the very first tutorial I've ever seen that is even remotely close to be this... awesome, EASY, and just plain cool ^__^ so really... I am in compelte awe. I applaud you for your awesome work and actually taking the time to create photoshop tutorials for us in the first place! I've been looking for these -- especially ones that I can quite know what to do to create so and so effect. Although some I have found before are very useful and easy as well, others I have found to a bit confusing at times especially if most of it is in text and the some pictures that they provide aren't very helpful. (So you can imagine how simply happy I am to find tutorials all in animation. Whee!! *ahem*) Anyhow, once a-damn-gain, lovely, lovely tutorials. And though your site is a design site, thank you so much for sharing anyways. Regards, -- scryoko p.s. Bah! I'm so sorry I rambled on and on! I do have a bad tendency to do that... ;; p.s.#2 I really, really love the layout of your site! The colors are simply beautiful (okay, so I just love blue... ^_~) and the 3D look of the very top menu is really nice!! And your final-design banner is awesome too. Can I ask what font did you use for the text, "FINAL-DESIGN.NET"? that you used in your banner? Really... very, very lovely. Other things I love that look so simple and yet it just plain fits are the title headings, for instance. That nice tint of blue for the background color and the bolded title of the updates fit perfectly with one another. Browsing through the links, I noticed the rollover link color is red and though this color certainly stands out, I think that perhaps it throws off the flow of the site a bit. I think that maybe if it were white, for example, it may look more appealing. I say white because I think it fits with the other white colored background that is already on the page and plus, with the blue shade in the mouseover background color, white colored text links would still be readable. Other than that though, very kick *bottom* site. /grin/

I know of another simple way to make a window pop-up so you can suggest to your visitors to make your site their homepage. function popUp() { alert("Please make my site your homepage!");} You just put the code above together with your other script code in the <script> tag -- that is within the <head> tag. How it works is that the "alert" function will pop up as an alert box and whatever message you want your site visitors to see first when they get to your site will be displayed in small pop-up window (AKA the alert box). In between the quotations within the parenthesis is what will appear in the alert box. I just put "Please make my site your homepage!" as an example but you can change that part of the message to whatever you want it to be. And now, in the body tag, have the following: <body onload="popUp()"> This code is as oveture explains. It will call the function called (well, in this case) "popUp()" and "onload" (which means that when your webpage loads), the function being called will be executed. So... if you don't have the "onload" function in the <body> tag, the script from how to pop-up a window will not work. Okay, I hope that helps you out. A really simply code and I believe it fits what you are asking for. ^__^ Regards, -- scryoko

Hey, Thanks for providing pop-up blocker programs but I do have a question... With these programs, since they block pop-ups, does that mean that, let's say for instance, I want to download something off of the internet and in order to do that, a pop-up window must open and pop-up so that I can choose the destination of where I want to save that download. Will any of these programs provided block those kind of pop-ups too? And what about other pop-ups that inform us that we are entering a secure site or that we are leaving a secure site and etc. Will these be blocked as well? And though not really that significant, what about those pop-ups on people's websites that just pop-up to say, "Thank you for visiting my site!" or something along those lines. Same question, will these be blocked too? Or are the ONLY pop-ups these programs will block are those annoying ads and banners? I'm sorry for bugging you guys with these questions (maybe I was becoming annoying by asking them... ;; ) but I kinda want to make sure that the pop-ups that aren't ads and banners will still pop-up even after I download any of the programs provided. Thank you very much in advance for any help provided. Regards, -- scryoko

Haha, probably not considering that we humans would all probably be collapsing left and right on the spot. Not that I can necessarily blame them, per se... it's revenge and all from their side of the story. Man, now this has totally made me root for the turkey (no offense to anyone...) for apparent reasons. But I think I'm trailing off topic... >_<;; Anyway, I really love the sig with the way you did the background in contrast to the turkey to make it stand out. Especially though, I love turkey's attitude. It has the whole... "Gun fully loaded here, human, so don't even think about messing with this turkey" attitude. /grin/ Not to mention, I think it fits even more with the "Open For Business 24/7" text right next to it. lol. Simply priceless. ^__^ -- scryoko

Oh man, that's priceless! I am laughing so much that there's tears in my eyes. And it's even more funny with the "what if" situation that you gave with the image too. Ahahahahaha. Whoo... I don't think that I'll ever be able to look at a "Parents" magazine anymore without crackig up. /grin/ Haha, now that's a question to ponder upon. /grin/ But, I think, really, that it was probably unintentional -- or maybe it secretly really was intentional but the person creating the front page pretended not to notice... /snicker/ If this was the case, man, I'd give the person props... haha. Hmm... now I wonder if the company of this magazine has already seen this *ahem* mistake. Oh wait... darn, it's the April 2005 issue. They're bound to have seen this error /snicker/ already. If not... (man, are they totally clueless!) shall we inform them of this..? Ahahahaha. Ahh... thank you for sharing this! You've totally made my day. ^__^ /grinning like an idiot/ -- scryoko

I am sorry that my post seemed as if I was just tossing out nonsense (I suppose it *would* seem that way coming from the point of view of someone who knows what they're doing with computer graphics -- someone who isn't me). And yes, it really would make more sense if I had the knowledge (of computer graphics) to support my opinions on a subject. I guess I just tend to write what it is that I feel about the subject, gut feeling and all, I guess you can say, (be it an image, story, whatever) even though sometimes I cannot express it right or that it might not make sense half the time. -- scryoko

You know... I *did* read your first post and I *was* well aware that you said that "Terregen" generated the scenery for you. However, I know very little about graphic programs and even *less* about the program, "Terregen" (I had not even *heard* of it prior to this thread). So, though yes, like you said, "Terregen" created those sceneries for you, I had thought that the sceneries created were very simple and that the person using the program (in this case, you) would have to play around with it, adding more details, making the image look better, etc. I'm sorry that I let you believe otherwise -- that I was merely sprouting lies and trying to get more credit for a longer post -- instead of "replying honestly." I believe that if a person gives feedback to another, no matter what it's about, he/she should explain what they liked or disliked about it, rather than merely exclaiming, "Cool! I really liked this a lot!!!!" or "This sux!!!" I've seen too many of these and to me, frankly, they don't really say anything about the material. What do or don't you like about it? Why? If not, what suggestions do you have to improve it? I do this with all the feedback I give. Yes, I was perfectly aware of what I was typing -- the rainbow, pollution, impure water and everything. As a matter of fact, I still think the images look that way. I can do nothing to make you believe otherwise but what I wrote in the previous post still holds true (regardless of this particular matter). That is, the sceneries still do look polluted yet captivating in an odd manner. -- scryoko P.S. Oh, and as for "not knowing how to bold and italicize my name" in the last post... excuse for my *typo* on that. The bold and italicize buttons, for some reason, had not worked so I typed the HTML code in there myself. Excuse me for forgetting to put the " / " before the "b" and the "i". I was in a rush as I was finishing my post so I had not previewed the post to check for mistakes before posting it up.

I think both images are pretty good. One seems to blend into the background, almost making the atmosphere appear calm... yet dreary at the same time. However, I think the way you added the intricate details in the mountains make it look absolutely realistic (just *wow* -- I really can't do that, haha.). I also like the added touch of the rainbow above it. As for the second one, I think it just really captures your attention. At first, I admit, the first thing I noticed was that whoa, it's pretty bright -- enough to hurt the eye a bit. But then when I took a glance at it a second time, I couldn't help but notice that the sun's reflection onto the water is... captivating. I can't really explain it but when I continued to stare at it, it drew me in even more and somehow, I can see the water moving... That part, I liked how you were able to get me to see that. I also couldn't help but notice though that (unless this was intentional ^_~) the water doesn't seem pure to me (well, then again, water -- in lakes, oceans, etc. -- usually *isn't*.. really) but it seemed... what's the word... tainted -- *contaminated*. As a matter of fact, now that I think about it and look over the images once more, both sceneries seem to be polluted to me, be it the air or the waters. To me, I think that's an interesting concept to try to make -- ironic even. The landscapes itself are beautiful and yet it is clouded and degraded by the pollution that surrounds it. 'Only goes to show how industrialized countries can screw us over, huh? Well, perhaps this concept wasn't your original intention at all (perhaps it was -- and if that was the case... whoo, I applaud you ), but y'know, I really like these two images. ^__^ -- scryoko

First of all, I'm glad that this post exists. It is *very* helpful and useful information that point out things that people may or may not notice. I, myself, found the advice useful and plan to use them myself -- if I haven't already. This is a really good advice -- as the website designer would *want* their site to look the same on all browsers; however... it's not entirely possible. Each browser company (Internet Explorer, Firefox, Netscape, etc.) render their browsers differently -- for many reasons, one being competition. Each of the companies want people to use *their* browser so they try to make theirs different (however little) from other browsers, so that they have the edge, so that they can have the upper hand over another browser company. Because of this, a webpage will look different on every browser -- even if it's only a little bit of change here or there. I am not, however, trying to discourage you from taking this advice (though it sounds like it, I know. -.-;. I just want you guys to know this fact so that you might not get frustrated when the webpage opened in IE isn't the same as when it is opened in Firefox. Haha... been there, done that, and I was annoyed as hell. But, even as I know that now, I still try my best to make the webpage appear as how I want it to in different browsers. Hm... if you actually want, and I think this is a better way as well... what you can do is still try to make your site look similar on different browsers, but should also label a "Website best viewed with [insert browser name here]" message on the homepage (or the initial, "Enter" page) of your site. This way, the user can either choose to continue viewing the site in the browser they are still currently using or, if they aren't already using it, change to the browser of the recommended one. Another tip I have that in improving your website is to not have a horizontal scrolling bar -- especially when you don't have a vertical one. I would say the majority of sites (and whoo! that's a *lot* of sites) use vertical scroll bars and many, many people are accustomed to those. If you would like to use a horizontal scroll bar, this is okay (but not entirely recommended) as long as the user does not have to scroll much using that scroll bar. And even then, it rather throws the flow of your site out the window, because even if the site has both a vertical and horizontal scroll bar, no matter which scroll bar is the main one (the one you'd use to scroll the most in order to view the detailed contents on the site), it can be annoying to have to work with both scrolls in order to be able to view everything (or even just one thing) on a site. Another reason is not to use a horizontal scroll bar is readability. Once again, people are more accustomed to reading/browsing through a side that operations up and down in order to view contents, as opposed to left and right. Hope this helps! -- scryoko

Hi, I'm sorry but I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. Are you saying that it is already in our computer systems and all we have to do to use it is by activating it? Or do you mean that we have to download it somewhere and after doing so, it is still "sleeping" and we have to activate it then? Also... if it is not already in our computer systems, is Internet Download Manager a freeware that we can download from somewhere or do we have to purchase it? If we can download it for free, can you provide a site for me so I can download it? I heard that when we download things off the internet, IDM will make it so that our downloads will be faster. If this is true, then I do not quite understand how an internet browser will play a role in making our downloads speed up. I thought that whether how long it takes for a download to finish will depend on our internet connection speed and our computers themselves. What does an internet browser have to do with this? I'm really sorry for all these questions but IDM interests me and I would like to learn more about it. Oh... one more question. Are there any other features to IDM as well? Thank you so much for your time and patience. Other than these (I'm pretty sure these are annoying to you.. >.<; questions, I think your tutorial is very simple and understandable. And for that, I'm glad. I can't stand reading something, whether it's an official manual/tutorial/instructions booklet/or whatever and not being to understand a word it says, tellng me what to do. Thanks for posting this up. ^__^ Regards, -- scryoko

Hi! I followed and tried that steps that you have provided and it is exactly as you have said -- this, in essence, I think, is a very good tutorial. ^__^ But, um, I do have one question... exactly what is the "Windows Version on the Desktop"? Maybe it's just my stupidity kicking in or something but I do not quite understand that. Can y ou explain it to me? Or maybe... show a picture of what the outcome would look like if you "hide the version of the desktop" as opposed to "display[ing] the version on the desktop"? Also... what exactly is a "DWORD"? What does it stand for? I'm not sure about that one too. Thank you so much. I'm sorry for asking you all these questions. >.<;; Thanks, -- scryoko

Hey! Thanks for explaining what freeware was. I kind of had an idea of what it was (free software), but I had no clue that freeware also meant software that was free of I'm glad to (now) know about that bit. Also, thanks for giving us tips and sites instead of just explaining what freeware is and leaving it at that. They were very helpful. Now I shall go bookmark those sites... ^__^ Thanks again, -- scryoko P.S. I think "Freeware for Dummies" fits, really. But like you said, some people might get offended... (and of course the copyright matter.) But I'm not offended, but it really applies... well, to me anyway. lol. ;;

I think it depends actually. I have to admit, I do know quite a number of kids who know how to use the computer, but then, I also do know about the same number of people who only know the very, very basics of computer -- if at all. So for me and those I know, it's a balance. But I suppose it may be different in my neighborhood seeing as the kids do go outside and play -- nearly every single day. My concern would be that I think they do not know enough about computers; the ones that I do know that use the computers only use them for playing games, chatting, or using blogs. This, while I believe helps them in the sense that their typing skills will improve, however, they do not know how to do other things... Things that will be vital in their future, especially considering the fact that we can damn well almost do anything now that there's technology. But I guess this may only be my own opinion. Though, yes, I must agree, a balance between playing outside with friends and using the computer should be the best way to go. -- scryoko

pomjim: Thank you very much for helping me clear that up. Now I actually get the whole thing. ;; WeaponX: I am so very glad you supplied us with this wonderful tip. I think that if had used "Restoration" without knowing anything -- that you have to immediately restore a file -- I really would without a doubt have made that mistake. Thank you so much. ^__^ -- scryoko

I, perhaps like most people, really did not know that when you "delete" something, they do not actually get deleted. But hm... now I'm a little confused... from what you quoted, justin138, GN says that, does this mean that when you simply send the file to the Recycle bin, the file does not get deleted or is it referring to instead that when you empty all of the files from the Recycle bin, the files do not really get "deleted"? Now as for the "Eraser" program, this would completely delete/erase the file and you would not be able to ever see it again, correct? If this is the case, would the mean that there would be more space on our hard drive then, and in essence, our computer performance (run faster and whatnot) will be better? If this is not the case, does that mean that we can still use "Restoration" to restore the "completely deleted" file (as in, just in case we make a mistake and, using the "Eraser" program, "completely deleted" a file by accident. Yeah, very... stupid is the only word that I think really fits... but I can't say that I'm the brightest bulb when it comes to certain things... >.<;;? Much appreciation to anyone in advance for helping me clear these questions up. -- scryoko

My history class also talked about this when I was taking it two quarters before, and I learned that because of Microsoft's monopoly, the Clinton administration (I think) had sued Microsoft because of that and well, in the end, Microsoft of course lost. However, the law suit didn't end until Bush Jr. became president (or perhaps it did end before that) anyway, Bush Jr. hadn't really cared all that much about this law suit and gave Microsoft some slack. However much amount Microsoft had to originally pay for trying to monopolize the computer technology industry was cut in half (or maybe more or less than that, I don't completely remember it all). So all Microsoft had to do now was simply pay the amount that was left that the Bush Jr. administration said to pay. Which really sucks when you think about it. Tch... if you have money and power... you can do/get out of anything. Just look at the 2000 Presidential Election in Florida and you'll see what I mean. /snort/ Okay... enough of that, and onto helping you with the survey. 1. I actually have a total of three computers in my house -- one is mine, one my sister's and another, someone gave to us. I mainly use my Hewlett Packard one but I also do use my sister's (same brand) and the third one, Sony. 2. All are Windows XP Professional 3. Mozilla Firefox all the way. ^__^ 4. Yahoo Mail, because I personally think it's more easy to navigate (as opposed to Hotmail -- it took me a long while to figure out that "New Message" is where you click on if you want to compose an email and send it to someone... but of course, this could just be my own idiocyncracy or stupidity.... >_<;;. 5. I use Windows Media Player, however, I have also used WinAmp, MusicMatch Jukebox, Real Player, and NeroMediaPlayer. 6. Microsoft Word/Office XP; I have used WordPerfect before though when I did at the time, it got on my nerves because I would save the file and when I tried to open it on another computer, it wouldn't open... 7. Avast! -- which I think is much better than Norton Anti-Virus... which I had used before. 8. Hm... as for anti-spyware, I use Spy-bot Search and Destroy as well as Ad-aware... but then Ad-awre only detects adware, right? Or does it detect spyware as well?? I have not a clue. -.-;;; Hope that helps! And good luck in history. ^__^ -- scryoko

Oh, wow! Thank you so much, garen_taym! I just finished downloading the programs and now I can use GIMP. I tried it out and /squeals in delight/ I simply LOVE it!! Well, I'm not all that good at using Photoshop -- I'm still learnign how to use all of the controls/commands -- but I have to say, I am loving GIMP. Wee..!! Thanks once again for providing me with the links! I really appreciate it a lot. Now... I shall go mess around with the program. -- scryoko

Hey! I'm sorry, but I was wondering if you guys can help me with something. I haven't used GIMP and since you guys said it was just as good as Photoshop, I tried to download it at download.com but afterwards, my computer could not recognize the file. I have never heard of a .tar file before (this is what GIMP is) so now I'm not sure what to do to be able to open the program. Can anybody help me? Do I have to download another program in order to be able to use GIMP then? If not, then what did you guys do to get GIMP? Where did you download it from, since you say it is free? Thank you so much for helping me with this! ^__^ Regards, -- scryoko

Oh, wow! That was so cool! I've never seen something like this before (man, have I been missing out or what, huh??)! So... so... cute. I never expected them to fight each other, and that's what threw me off -- in a good way, mind you ^_~ -- so that's what got me interested. ^-^ Hm.. about "Icon's Story." First off, I liked the fact that the icons weren't as big -- that's what made them all the more cuter. ^_~ Second, I loved each of the icon's weapons -- well, those that we were able to see their weapons used anyway. The MSN that used its head... hehe, nice. I would've never thought of that. Not to mention, I loved the sound it made too. Oh, and the ICQ that used its petals as projectiles -- which reloaded itself right after! And, oh!! The cup of paint brushes. I loved how, at first, it was so... expressive, showing its obvious fear at being in the middle of a crossfire. But then, wow! Maybe I was just slow to catch on that they were gonna be missiles... but I thought it was better when the first missile/paint brush was launched. And man... it killed the other two with just the second and third shot! /grin/ And ohh.. of course the IE icon. Hehe, y'know, it's, um, move, to slice the other icons up... it sounds a lot like Star Wars and their laser swords (gah, I don't know the right term for it >.<;. But I also thought that was cool, and how the e-mail icon and the IE icon dueled it out. Very cool. And ooh! I thought the computer icon kicked *bottom*. A laser beam! Damn, it took out IE quickly -- very kick butt!! And then there was also Norton with the lightning powers. I wouldn't have thought of that -- I probably would have thought of... maybe a net -- like Spiderman or something -- because of the fact that it scans and catches viruses?? Oh well, I still thought it was cool. But most unexpectedly was the fact that the Diablo II icon ate the rest of them all at the very end. And... was it just me or did Diable II look like a red dragon? I'm not sure what "Diablo II" is but the icon looks like a devilish insect. So I was surprised when its, uh, close-up version was a dragon. Reminded me of those dragons I see when Chinese New Year comes around. /grin/ Not to mention, I loved how it burped in the end. Cute. I loved this short movie a lot but I thought there was one part that kind of threw things off, seeing as it was out of... pattern, perhaps? See, I noticed that all of the icons (save for MSN, the first one) had gotten involved with the crossfire(s) somewhat unwillingly -- they were either provoked, attacked, or almost had been (AKA, something that pissed them off to give payback) -- while one icon had not: Norton. After Computer completely blew IE away /grin/ Norton joins the fight and attacks Computer -- as well as the rest of the other icons. Hm... Norton, here, could be trying to avenge IE, perhaps, but even so, when I first saw it, it threw me off a bit as the pattern (of getting involved in the crossfire only when provoked) was disrupted. But I continued watching the movie anyways and loved it very much - talk about a twist in the ending, huh? Great job, marcin! Again, I loved it. ^__^ -- scryoko "Not very fresh," huh? Man, I need to catch up with things faster. /grin/

Oh wow! To be honest... I didn't even know you can change the text size of Firefox... by keyboard. -.-;; I'm so slow... lol. But, hey! Now, as you've mentioned, I can just use CTRL+mouse scroll. ^__^ Thanks for the tip! Hm.. you know, I was hoping that this um... technique? could possibly work with IE so I just tried it right now but it doesn't work at all -- not even the keyboard (CTRL + or CTRL - ) works. Man, IE pretty sucks... but I think it sucks even more that javascript and CCS only works in an IE browser... I think it would be better if it could work in Firefox as well. Does anyone know if this is somehow possible? Thanks, -- scryoko

Yeah, I know. I was tweaking with the font sizes/styles and all -- I even went back to those single elements in the advanced tab to try and change it back somehow. But what I find odd is that I can't find a sub(-sub)-tab taht indicates font size or window text. I think that's what puzzles me the most -- the fact that I can't seem to figure out exactly what it was that I pushed/clicked on/whatever that made things the way it is now (i.e. large® fonts). So, sadly, and annoyingly, enough... I have absolutely no clue as to how to change the settings back to the original state. Hm... I don't have Windows 98 -- I have Windows XP. Already, I had tried to change the theme of the settings (like from the Windows Classic appearance to the Windows XP one) and even then, it doesn't seem to help fix the large-fonts-size-in-IE-windows problem. Now, I still have no clue as to what to do, damn. Still, thank you so much for your help. Got any more ideas? ^_~ hehe. j/k...ish. >_<;; -- scryoko

Hi, everyone. Unfortunately, I don't have very good computer skills and so I need help. Okay, I'm not really sure what I clicked on or changed but the font size on my Internext Explorer browser is much too large -- to the point where some of the words would overlap would one another. But the weird thing is, even when I tried to change the font size to the smalest one there is (I did this by going to the 'View' menu on IE, then highlighting 'Text Size' and then clicking on 'Smallest'), the size of the text on the web pages are still too big ('Large' and 'Largest' are even worse). Since this did not work, I then tried going to the 'Tools' menu on IE, clicked on 'Internet Options' and under the 'General' tabs, I clicked on 'Fonts' and tried to change the font style -- but for some reason, no matter what font I clicked on, nothing happened. I think that somehow I must have changed the font size/style when I was trying to change the appearance of my comp (I did this by right clicking the desktop, then clicking on 'Properties', and then clicked on the 'Appearance' tab, and then clicked on the 'Advanced' button, and proceeded to change the appearance of the comp). But now, I really don't know how to change everything back to how it originally was (with IE and all). I know that people say that IE isn't that good of a browser, compared to Firefox (I do have and use Firefox by the way), but the fact that the "smallest" font size on IE is still too large where the words overlap, I can't stand that. Plus, since I do use IE for previewing my webpages that I create with MS FrontPage, I want to be able preview the webpages exactly how it should be -- instead of large fonts and all. Yes, one might say that I could use Firefox, but then the CCS styles that I use are not displayed -- I can only see them on IE. And once again, I want to be able to preview the webpages as how it should be. So if someone, anyone can help with this problem... I would completely grateful. Now, I shall go kick myself in the behind for even messing with the appearance settings in the first place. /sighs.../ Thanks, -- scryoko p.s. Oh yes, I forgot to add one thing that I thought was really weird. For some reason, when I changed the appearance settings somehow, it only affected IE. When I use Firefox, nothing of the font size or style had changed so... I wonder why is that?

Yes, I have to agree with DerekBaldersonator. After just recently updating to Firefix 1.0.5, I haven't been experiencing any problems with this version, so I, as well, am curious as to what types of problems that you guys are having trouble with. Hm... but then this brings up another question. Why would it be, then, that for people using the same Firefox version, some would experience problems while others wouldn't? Would it have anything to do with this computer having certain viruses and that computer not? I'm not a computer expert... so this is rather puzzling to me. ;; -- scryoko

You know what? I went searching for Avast this morning and I was able to find it at download.com. But the best thing of all, which I had hoped for, is that avast at download.com is completely free -- not any of the "free trial"/"demo"/"free to try" thing which only lasts for a certain amount of days. The version I found there is called the Avast Home Edition 4.6, which, for a direct link, is here: Avast Home Edition 4.6 But there are also other, um... tools? programs? that is Avast related, so if anyone is interested in those as well, here is the general link I got when I clicked the search button for "avast": Avast search results Hmm... now about the program... after using it to scan my computer this morning, I have to say that the plus part of Avast is that it lets you decide what type of search you want (i.e. Quick, Standard, or Thorough), with Standard being the regular type of scan that a security program does. And it also lets you decide on what you want to scan (i.e. local disks, removable media, and/or folders), with the added benefit that you can decide to scan all the archived folders that a security program would not normally scan, if I'm correct. Though, of course, a thorough scan takes the longest of them all, it goes through all of your files, if you choose to scan your computer as such. But I have to admit, that the downside with Avast is that when it's performing the scan, you can't really just leave the computer to go do something else and come back half an hour (or more) later hoping that the scan is already complete and that results of what is detected (or not) is shown on your screen. You kind of have to be sitting in front of the computer (or at least be nearby and pay attention every so often) for the windows that pops up to inform you that a virus has been detected. Unlike Norton that repairs/deletes/quarantines all of the viruses at the end of the scan, Avast repairs/deletes/quarantines the viruses as it is still scanning. The downside of this? Well, once a window pops up to tell you that a virus has been found and what would you like to do with it (be it to delete, quarantine, etc. with it), you have to deal with the virus on the spot or else... the scan will not continue -- as in, it will pause, so to speak. I had not known this and so what could have been avoided with those hours of scanning my computer... well, I think you get the drift. Really? I didn't notice... Well, I guess it might be because I didn't turn the volume on at all, but then, with this Avast Home Edition 4.6, the mesage window doesn't flash though, but, again, I'm still not sure if the siren sounds. lol. But hm... you know, yeah, I have to admit, there is always a up and downside to everything -- and this program is no different. But I think that when it comes to the fact that your computer's security is at stake, with all your files and whatnot, I think that sitting in front of your computer while it scans for viruses is a small price to pay, right? And as for the siren sounding... I'm not sure if this version does that. I can simply say that turning the volume off would do the trick but then, people might also want to listen to music at the same time or somehing, so it may clash... But really, I think that Avast is a good security program since it can detect the viruses and is actually able to do something about them. But of course, this is still only my opinion. What are yours? Hm... Mcafee: a bit better than Avast with lesser memory usage, huh? You know... I think I will check this one out too. Thanks for sharing! -- scryoko