|
Hi Eddy,
its basically not to secure the system, but i just want the user to access the desktop only after entering some information (basically its an employee utilization tracker, so when the user has locked his system for a while, he/she needs to provide justification before accessing his/her usual applications).
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you replace the logon-logic, you'll find people bypassing the form. As for the justification, I'd go for "I work here, how about you?" every single time 
I are Troll 
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy,
i hope the user of my application doesnt read ur justification....
if i can create a transparent form, maximize it to the height and width of the screen and then show a modal dialog, will it serve my purpose....?
|
|
|
|
|
Nope. People can just get around it quite easily.
|
|
|
|
|
Dave,
Please suggest me a better way to track the user productivity.....
|
|
|
|
|
You'd need something that's called a "manager". I'm not talking about the kind of boss that thinks that he's running a jail.
I'm talking about a person who divides the work into pieces, assigns those pieces, who checks the progress regularly and who makes adjustments if needed be.
Alternatively, if the client does run a jail, you might want to point out that each computer logs the time and date that it's started. You can install a program that also counts the number of keys pressed (and do make sure that it's actual work, not just an application that sends keystrokes to simulate a user!), you can measure the lines of code that people produce (I love to be paid, just to type in comments) and the amount of bugs solved.
Those statistics might look as they give you a clue about what's going on in your company, but those stats are subject to interpretation. Someone can solve 30 bugs in a minute, or take 4 days for a single bug. In which case was he/she more productive?
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
By being a good manager??
There is no software-based way of tracking a users productivity on a computer. They can be sitting there mashing the keys and throwing the mouse around all day, but what have they really accomplished??
There is simply no way to tell if the user has been productive unless you go and check their work, get progress reports, make sure your actually getting the proper deliverables from each employee, ...
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, I'd press Ctrl-Alt-Del to open the taskmanager, kill the application and get on with my work. Worse, I'd be pissed too, because I'd get the feeling that someone is trying to micromanage me.
If you're trying to monitor productivity, then there's better ways to do so.
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
Please suggest me what do i do now....
|
|
|
|
|
Tell your client that there is no fool-proof way to do this. Find out why this
functionality is desired, and see if you can come up with an alternative.
There's an event-log, there's screensavers - lots of ways to measure the activity on a workstation. Then again, activity doesn't equal productivity.
The latter one is hard to measure. Again, the course of action depends on what it is that you're trying to achieve.
I are Troll
|
|
|
|
|
Hey,
I'm working on a .Net library for segmented downloads. I have a Download class and a Segment class. The download class creates a thread for each download, from which threads for each segment are spawned.
I've done this walk through[^], but am having troubles implementing the same pattern for my library.
I don't know how to work with the userStateToLifetime HybridDictionary with async operations in my case, since in contradiction to the example, there are two 'levels' of tasks in my case (Downloads and Segments).
Important to note is that the Download class is set up for ONE download, not multiple.
So what should I do, create one HybridDictionary that holds async operations for the segments, create one that holds both the segments and the download, or two; one holding the segments and one holding the download?
This is my first real implementation of this pattern, so if you think I'm missing some important understanding of it, please refer me to the relevant documentation
Cheers
Jeroen De Dauw
---
Forums ; Blog ; Wiki
---
70 72 6F 67 72 61 6D 6D 69 6E 67 20 34 20 6C 69 66 65!
|
|
|
|
|
I have a property that return bool value.
And the corresponding data type of field in table of this property is bit type.
When I want to save this bool type property it gives the error due to the data which i am going to save in database that's data type is bit type.
My question is how to convert the property into bit from bool?
with regards
tarak
|
|
|
|
|
You can use the system convert functions. I would assume 0 <-> false and 1 <-> true
|
|
|
|
|
While passing values to a bit parameter of an SQL Stored Procedure, use 0 for false and 1 for True.
|
|
|
|
|
If you have correctly defined your parameter objects they will translate bool to bit and bit to bool automaticaly.
What is the .net code you have used to make the database call?
|
|
|
|
|
I want to execute some code on a regular 25kHz interval. It needs to be fairly accurate to within 5%. Does anyone know how to do this. I don't care what language.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am trying to make a stepper controller. Several Windows CNC controllers, logic analyzers and oscilloscope type program allow you to choose an update rate. They are in the 25kHz - 100kHz rate. I was wondering how they do this?
There is this article Stopwatch - a High-Resolution code timer class[^] but I don't know how you could use this to control the rate.
|
|
|
|
|
You can't do that [ADDED] in a meaningful way [/ADDED] with a [ADDED] Windows [/ADDED] PC. At best it will work some of the time; and when the net result is a physical motion it will be really dangerous for people or animals in the vicinity.
The proper way to do that is to have external logic that generates the required steps, and takes higher-level commands from the PC, at a much lower frequency. So the PC could say move to X,Y using a ramp up, a maximum speed and a ramp down, and the external logic would do all that autonomously in a couple of seconds. The safety precautions (micro-switches aborting a motion when a safety limit gets crossed] should also work inside the external logic, without any PC intervention at all.
modified on Sunday, November 29, 2009 2:42 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: You can't do that with a PC
And why not? AFAIK only Windows is at fault here, in DOS you could just steal the whole machine for yourself (disable interrupts etc)
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, my statement could use some refinement; if you're willing to use all of a PC's hardware then you can do it; I could even do it with Windows, except the users won't be happy with it any more; just install a highest priority driver and let everything else come to a standstill.
However it does not make sense, you need external hardware anyway (a H-bridge, a power supply, ...), so why not do it the proper way and include a little micro-controller?
|
|
|
|
|
True, true, I was just being a pedantic bitch
|
|
|
|
|
Nope. You were right, my statement wasn't correct, I've fixed it. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
harold aptroot wrote: AFAIK only Windows is at fault here
Windows is a shared system, not only between users, but between apps as well. Shutting off interrupts just isn't possible. You simply cannot execute code on a fixed schedule at that rate and accuracy.
harold aptroot wrote: in DOS you could just steal the whole machine for yourself (disable interrupts etc)
DOS DOES steal the entire machine for itself, and (on the surface) only does one thing at a time.
|
|
|
|
|
Why does it sound like you're arguing when you're agreeing with me?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Java | [Coffee]](https://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/Images/coffee.gif)
