What are Motherboard Monitor's two 'hoops' in system tray?

"Jan Yeero" wrote in message
...
When I run Motherboard Monitor I see two hoops on the right hand edge
of XP's system tray.

What piece of hardware is this related to? Why not try asking in a group
that is acutally related to your problem?

Better yet, did you read the help file that came with it?

"Jan Yeero" wrote in message
...
"Jan Yeero" wrote in message

When I run Motherboard Monitor I see two hoops on the right
hand edge of XP's system tray.



On 16 Oct 2004, Nooser wrote:

What piece of hardware is this related to?


This relates to a homebuilt PC which I want to overclock. The config
is quite power hungry and I want to avoid memory errors and the like
from poor voltage/temperature control of the motherboard and its
peripherals.

My bad... I'm sorry... really. For some reason I read "Network Monitor"...

My guess is that the two "o" symbols are degree symbols. Haven't been in the
settings for MBM for a while, but I'm guessing that you have the "Use a
windows font..." selected on the "Tray & OSD" section. I'm looking at
v5.3.5.0.

BTW, I appreciate the civil reply as well.

Hope this helps a bit.

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 01:03:07 +0100, Jan Yeero
wrote:

snip

You are in error.
It is software. This is not a software newsgroup.

The crossposting was excessive too and didn't specify a
followup group.

FURTHER, it is quite selfish to expect someone to do your
work for you, but to not let anyone else benefit from it in
the future with the "X-No-Archive: yes".

RTFM!

x-no-archive: yes


On 17 Oct 2004, kony wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 01:03:07 +0100, Jan Yeero
wrote:

snip

You are in error.
It is software. This is not a software newsgroup.



Kony, my posting relates to a software utility which is used only to
understand hardware behavior.

I reckon you wouldn't complain about a software memory usage monitor being
dicussed, you probably wouldn't complain about BIOS settings being
discussed. Nor about hardware reporting utilities like AIDA/Everest,
Sandra, FreshDiagnose, PC Wizard, etc. These are software too.

So why make an issue now out of MBM?

I guess maybe you got up on the wrong side of the bed that day you posted.
:-)


The crossposting was excessive too and didn't specify a
followup group.

I guess you are right about over-crossposting. I try to limit myself to 4
as advised by the standards. But I came across so many hardware groups it
was hard to do it this time. Apologies if it upset you. I will bear that
in mind.

Got to say that I hate FollowUp-To because if I am a regular visitor to only
one of the crossposted groups then I will miss the rest of the thread even
if I actually reply to it.

You seem to insist on FollowUp-To and just for you I will use it but I
believe it loses people who might have been interested in the outcome but
who don't want to subscribe to a new group.

At least RFC 1036 explicitly allows 'Followup-to' to name multiple groups so
I will choose a small subset of two.


FURTHER, it is quite selfish to expect someone to do your
work for you, but to not let anyone else benefit from it in
the future with the "X-No-Archive: yes".

Sorry about the X-No-Archive. However no later reader will miss much
because any replies (like yours) will quote the relevant parts of the text.

According to the RFC, X-No-Archive is only a request and databases are free
to ignore it. It was implemented only releavtively recently in an RFC
update so it can be assumed to be a viable option.


RTFM!


RTFM? But it's not in the manual.

If you can guess the answer then maybe you should be able to say some more.


Jan

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:11:16 +0100, "Jan Yeero"
wrote:

x-no-archive: yes


On 17 Oct 2004, kony wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 01:03:07 +0100, Jan Yeero
wrote:

snip

You are in error.
It is software. This is not a software newsgroup.



Kony, my posting relates to a software utility which is used only to
understand hardware behavior.

I reckon you wouldn't complain about a software memory usage monitor being
dicussed, you probably wouldn't complain about BIOS settings being
discussed. Nor about hardware reporting utilities like AIDA/Everest,
Sandra, FreshDiagnose, PC Wizard, etc. These are software too.

So why make an issue now out of MBM?

"I reckon" is somehow a fortune-telling event?
There is a reason why newsgroups are divided into different
categories. Use of software to troubleshoot or otherwise
deal with hardware issue (among other diagnostic measures)
is on-topic. Simply wanting discussion of software alone is
not.




I guess maybe you got up on the wrong side of the bed that day you posted.
:-)

Stop guessing and learn why usenet is divided into
categories.


The crossposting was excessive too and didn't specify a
followup group.

I guess you are right about over-crossposting. I try to limit myself to 4
as advised by the standards. But I came across so many hardware groups it
was hard to do it this time. Apologies if it upset you. I will bear that
in mind.

Not a manner of being "upset", it simply conflicts with
efficient flow of information to have everything duplicated
into as many conceivable newsgroups as possible, let alone
all off-topic groups. If this were practiced all the time
there would be thousands of posts in every group, inundation
to the point where none work as efficiently anymore.


Got to say that I hate FollowUp-To because if I am a regular visitor to only
one of the crossposted groups then I will miss the rest of the thread even
if I actually reply to it.

It's not that difficult to follow a thread either way.

You seem to insist on FollowUp-To and just for you I will use it but I
believe it loses people who might have been interested in the outcome but
who don't want to subscribe to a new group.

At least RFC 1036 explicitly allows 'Followup-to' to name multiple groups so
I will choose a small subset of two.


FURTHER, it is quite selfish to expect someone to do your
work for you, but to not let anyone else benefit from it in
the future with the "X-No-Archive: yes".

Sorry about the X-No-Archive. However no later reader will miss much
because any replies (like yours) will quote the relevant parts of the text.

.... but it is still fragmented and there is no assurance the
entirety of the opening post is copied, though some of it
may be relevant.


According to the RFC, X-No-Archive is only a request and databases are free
to ignore it. It was implemented only releavtively recently in an RFC
update so it can be assumed to be a viable option.

Yes they can ignore it, but what's the signficance of that?
It still limits many people's access to information unless
they are a select few who have forethought to access a
database that ignores it.




RTFM!


RTFM? But it's not in the manual.

If you can guess the answer then maybe you should be able to say some more.

I suspect the info is out there but you didn't look.

quit splittin hairs...........


"kony" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:11:16 +0100, "Jan Yeero"
wrote:

x-no-archive: yes


On 17 Oct 2004, kony wrote:

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 01:03:07 +0100, Jan Yeero
wrote:

snip

You are in error.
It is software. This is not a software newsgroup.



Kony, my posting relates to a software utility which is used only
to
understand hardware behavior.

I reckon you wouldn't complain about a software memory usage
monitor being
dicussed, you probably wouldn't complain about BIOS settings being
discussed. Nor about hardware reporting utilities like
AIDA/Everest,
Sandra, FreshDiagnose, PC Wizard, etc. These are software too.

So why make an issue now out of MBM?

"I reckon" is somehow a fortune-telling event?
There is a reason why newsgroups are divided into different
categories. Use of software to troubleshoot or otherwise
deal with hardware issue (among other diagnostic measures)
is on-topic. Simply wanting discussion of software alone is
not.




I guess maybe you got up on the wrong side of the bed that day you
posted.
:-)

Stop guessing and learn why usenet is divided into
categories.


The crossposting was excessive too and didn't specify a
followup group.

I guess you are right about over-crossposting. I try to limit
myself to 4
as advised by the standards. But I came across so many hardware
groups it
was hard to do it this time. Apologies if it upset you. I will
bear that
in mind.

Not a manner of being "upset", it simply conflicts with
efficient flow of information to have everything duplicated
into as many conceivable newsgroups as possible, let alone
all off-topic groups. If this were practiced all the time
there would be thousands of posts in every group, inundation
to the point where none work as efficiently anymore.


Got to say that I hate FollowUp-To because if I am a regular
visitor to only
one of the crossposted groups then I will miss the rest of the
thread even
if I actually reply to it.

It's not that difficult to follow a thread either way.

You seem to insist on FollowUp-To and just for you I will use it
but I
believe it loses people who might have been interested in the
outcome but
who don't want to subscribe to a new group.

At least RFC 1036 explicitly allows 'Followup-to' to name multiple
groups so
I will choose a small subset of two.


FURTHER, it is quite selfish to expect someone to do your
work for you, but to not let anyone else benefit from it in
the future with the "X-No-Archive: yes".

Sorry about the X-No-Archive. However no later reader will miss
much
because any replies (like yours) will quote the relevant parts of
the text.

... but it is still fragmented and there is no assurance the
entirety of the opening post is copied, though some of it
may be relevant.


According to the RFC, X-No-Archive is only a request and databases
are free
to ignore it. It was implemented only releavtively recently in an
RFC
update so it can be assumed to be a viable option.

Yes they can ignore it, but what's the signficance of that?
It still limits many people's access to information unless
they are a select few who have forethought to access a
database that ignores it.




RTFM!


RTFM? But it's not in the manual.

If you can guess the answer then maybe you should be able to say
some more.

I suspect the info is out there but you didn't look.