Author Topic: too much download! (Read 15964 times)

ironclass · « **on:** February 17, 2015, 07:11:25 pm »

Hi there.... used to use this program years ago and have just got it set back up but I have a problem.... I have the latest version off the win mx connex site and it has installed ok but when I set it to search for a track it literally just shows anything and everything....ie if I ask for utah saints then it throws up thousands of tracks like sarah brightman and other tracks some of which arent even in english they are just random charachters....Is it something I am doing wrong?

Please help!

ironclass · « **Reply #1 on:** February 17, 2015, 07:34:28 pm »

Oh.... and now I have downloaded the new ourmx and this has loaded fine but just doesnt seem to actually find any music....am now pulling hair out....I just wanted to pirate some music FFS...lol

silicon_toad2000 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 17, 2015, 08:19:08 pm »

The network has been having some issues over the last few years with traffic being injected into the network to ruin the search results and make the network unstable.
We would suggest that you find a room with people of a similar interest to you. You can find a room list http://winmxunlimited.net/tools/chat-room-list/ here.

Ourmx is a preview release at this stage, when its finished it will help the community fix the network issues.

~~JOSE~~ · « **Reply #3 on:** February 17, 2015, 08:45:23 pm »

Take my advice and stick with winmx which even considering the attacks is still way better than the useless ourmx.

Ourmx is the never ending story that has promised a lot and delivered nothing.

I am willing to bet ourmx will still be ongoing this time next year.

GhostShip · « **Reply #4 on:** February 21, 2015, 10:51:33 am »

WinMxWorld also offer the same advice as Dai, we too would prefer folks to continue using the WinMx application until we have completed OurMx to our satisfaction, it makes a change to see Dai being so helpful

We also advise folks to use the OpenNap side of WinMX to avoid becoming frustrated with the WPN specific attacks, this will allow folks to share files normally and avoid any negative experiences and for those looking for chat you can use this room list

http://winmxunlimited.net/tools/chat-room-list/

and copy and paste the room name directly into Winmx thus defeating the attackers in every area

~~JOSE~~ · « **Reply #5 on:** February 21, 2015, 10:35:56 pm »

"until we have completed OurMx to our satisfaction"

Can you name which decade this is unlikely to happen

GhostShip · « **Reply #6 on:** February 21, 2015, 11:53:59 pm »

No I cannot, I dont do palm reading or read the future from old tea leaves either, what I do however do is my best Dai and thats the difference between us you continue to fail to appreciate.

Why do you use the name Dai these days when we both know thats not your real name but the name of a fairly recently deceased Mx user, its a tad disrespectful I feel.

~~JOSE~~ · « **Reply #7 on:** February 22, 2015, 10:22:56 am »

Sorry I had no idea about any recently deceased Mx user.

I would not do that under any circumstances.

Please accept my apology and how do I change the name?

GhostShip · « **Reply #8 on:** February 22, 2015, 11:21:01 am »

To change the Name on the forum simply go to the "profile" and select "account settings" from the list on the left.

If you didn't know it then it doesn't really matter, I just though it was simply a new angle you where using to cause annoyance, I don't know why you feel we are not doing our best here when all of us are pretty much under the gun already knowing the community relies on us, dealing with yourself simply wastes time and I know its because you have become frustrated with the delays I feel that pain myself but what else is there for us to do besides continue the battle to reach the end of the project and return the network to its full capabilities, this has never been a trivial task and with few able to help its been like dragging a heavy tree trunk a few inches a day, spare a thought for the rest of us please.

Bluey_412 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 22, 2015, 12:04:24 pm »

Even if it IS still going this time next year, at least it WILL be still going...

Do you have any USEFUL input to offer??

~~JOSE~~ · « **Reply #10 on:** February 22, 2015, 01:20:09 pm »

OK I have changed my user name.

The previous name was 100% coincidence and I would never use what you described
as another angle to attack as I would never stoop that low.

Anyway we move on and I stand by my criticism of ourmx which as a project has simply
gone on for too long and is in my opinion a lost cause.

GhostShip · « **Reply #11 on:** February 22, 2015, 03:15:34 pm »

I fully agree with most of what you have said bar the bit about being a lost cause, surely that's something that all of us who want this community to stay alive should be allowed to decide for ourselves, it is not hurting anyone and done as a labour of love, it wont be costing anyone anything and thus theres no real reason to be so negative towards the effort, common sense dictates that if we had something we feel is ready to replace WinMx you would be using it right now, if one man pulls a cart many miles alone it takes a damn long time, two men pulling the cart takes a lesser time and a group of folks pushing the cart makes for a fast and trivial job, we are at the few men stage, while that remains the case we all have to be patient and look to see what we as individuals can do to bring something to the community table, that after all is what sharing is all about.

Plum · « **Reply #12 on:** February 26, 2015, 07:56:47 am »

I am willing to help, but I don't currently code. (I used to, but only under real mode in QB and assembly.)

White Stripes · « **Reply #13 on:** February 26, 2015, 11:32:46 pm »

Quote from: Plum on February 26, 2015, 07:56:47 am

(I used to, but only under real mode in QB and assembly.)

Et Tu 8088?

GhostShip · « **Reply #14 on:** February 27, 2015, 12:03:49 am »

Reminds me of my old z80 days writing machine code

silicon_toad2000 · « **Reply #15 on:** February 27, 2015, 01:40:35 am »

Plum · « **Reply #16 on:** February 27, 2015, 09:30:17 pm »

Quote from: White Stripes on February 26, 2015, 11:32:46 pm

Quote from: Plum on February 26, 2015, 07:56:47 am
(I used to, but only under real mode in QB and assembly.)

Et Tu 8088?

Well, x86, but in real mode. Even for 16-bit programs, you can use 32-bit registers. That simplified the longer math operations, since it took several pages of assembly to work with long integers with 16-bit hardware. But if you had it on a 386, you could use the extended registers to natively do the work. I once had an 8088 machine, and soon put a V20 CPU in there. A V20 was NEC's clone of an 8088 and used the 186 instruction set. It used a smaller CMOS die and also included the entire 8080 instruction set. It was up to 30% faster than an 8088 at the same speed, depending on the software. It used a hardware multiplier, not microcode, so multiplying was done much faster. In the days of the 8088, the die space was at a premium, and a number of the instructions were done with microcode (emulated) and not real hardware. That was partly why the 286 was faster than the 808x. Like the NEC chips, its multiplier used actual hardware. But unlike any of the previous chips, the 286 separated the data and address lines rather than introduce latency by multiplexing them. And the 286 like the 8086 was faster than the 8088 because it used both a 16-bit internal and external bus.

White Stripes · « **Reply #17 on:** February 27, 2015, 09:58:43 pm »

32 registers in 16 bit programs? sounds like someone had some fun with 'unreal' mode

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreal_mode

...i wonder if the nec v20 (or v30) are still made... would be fun to put in my old tandy 1000SL...

White Stripes · « **Reply #18 on:** February 27, 2015, 10:43:39 pm »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWdG413nNkI

plum, and other geeks of days gone by... might find this interesting.... the color mode at the beginning is only possible with the little used but very flexible cga composite mode (something like how color worked on the apple 2 however the amount of colors with CGA composite was technically limitless)... so if you have a real cga pc/xt with a 30mb hdd and a sound blaster this will work... if not the black and white 'bad apple' part will still work on cga compatible cards...

and of course it runs in dosbox....

Plum · « **Reply #19 on:** March 01, 2015, 10:01:23 am »

Quote from: White Stripes on February 27, 2015, 09:58:43 pm

32 registers in 16 bit programs? sounds like someone had some fun with 'unreal' mode

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreal_mode

...i wonder if the nec v20 (or v30) are still made... would be fun to put in my old tandy 1000SL...

No, as long as the target hardware was a 386 or higher, you can use EAX, EBX, ECX, and EDX in operations, and not cause exceptions/hangs. That works in real mode just fine. I never messed with protected mode. All you have to do is use multiple code paths if you wanted to use older hardware. You had 32-bit instructions and registers available when in 386/486 real mode, but you still used the segmented memory model, 16-bit addressing, free use of the segment and stack registers, etc. I've done like multiplication and division using EAX, EDX, etc, in real mode. The only limit on using the extended general registers was the hardware, not the operating system mode. On a 808x, 286, you'd have to use thunker code to handle long integers in real mode, but you could directly do the operations on a 386+ machine in real mode.

Oh, and if you know what you are doing, you can even load 16-bit DLLs and drivers in real mode too. Of course, you have to manually do what Windows does in parsing the headers, copying to memory, etc. You can do a lot more in real mode than people think. In fact, 286's have undocumented opcodes that let you access all the memory, even in real mode. That is how Himem and related programs worked. But paging memory is not the same as a protected mode flat plane.

I ran a BBS and ran into an interesting problem. I ran doors (shell programs that keep the modem connection live) that used EMS memory, and at least one had a bad EMS leak. So I wrote a pair of companion programs to work around that. One measured and recorded the open handles, and the other read the file and made sure no more were open then in the file. So you would measure the handles and write them into a file (first program), run the door, then run the companion FixEMS program to close the leaked handles to what was recorded as being open. So the two programs would be added to the batch file that launched the door.

For the Tandy 1000 SL, you would need a V30, since that had a 8086 in it. I doubt they are still made, but I am sure plenty are around. I'd check Ebay. There are a couple of side-effects on the PC clones at least. If you have a crappy graphics adapter, you would get some snow, but there is a program work-around for that, a TSR to hook into the video routines to do sync to vblank. The other side side effect of note is that some programs using timing loops run too fast (they poll the CPU, and if the CPU is faster... I preferred to poll the vertical refresh signal, and thus I could time things within 18 ms increments reliably on nearly any clone of the time).