Zlobomir

A couple of times, maybe both when exiting Far Cry, Apex remained in systray w/o any reaction, impossible even to bring it up with starting and selecting "No" on the question for another instances. I noticed that in these cases Apex used only a bit over 20MB of RAM and no CPU, acc. to Taskman.

Well, at least MS makes a progress... 2000 had 4 SPs, before can be called an OS , XP had 2, 2003 had 1, Vista might manage with one too. ;)

@Staff: Consider moving to Support pls.

Hey, are you on UPnP connection setting? If so, try with "Firewall manual port forwarding" and see. Do not forget to open the same port nos. in your firewall, or even better, allow ApexDC++.exe through the firewall. HTH

Discussed already, at least for Favorites.xml Yes, but it will require some converter. Not so easy task, let's wait for the dev's opinion.

Please accept my sincere condolences, I think ifmn will present his condolences too.

I wonder whether Crise remembers my claim to speed up this awkwardness in closing network connections... It was really long ago. I am too lazy to search for the link at 04:30 AM. Sh*, 2:30 hrs to "wake-up". :)

But we do have "Ignore user". Afaik it is the same.

Hm, maybe these ports are reserved for use, if each connection requires a socket, could make sense. Can't it be made to dinamically open needed sockets rather than reserving them, if not so already?

Isn't that cute? Ah, sweet childhood, I remember, mine was spent more in games outside due to PC absence. It is definitely true that Apex is not a pure OP client, even this is out of the question. OP clients are not faking, so I do not see any reason to ban them. It is like a hardware dealer refusing to sell me the latest VGA card, just because I do not use GFX, or even because I use GFX a bit (like OP-ing in 1-2 hubs). Sorry Toast, imho you are not right (not just because this is our forum ). We really did not predicted the consequences of 3.0 AML concept, but we are all people, sh* happens. We, at least I guarantee for me, respect you and your work, so please let's respect each others at least in the public areas. I am sure none of us will, but smo will be surely pissed off enuf to edit your AMLs, then we all will have a real problem, when an error is made, it will spread like a faked client. I am sorry if I have abused or hurt you, but Satan will not have the monopole in opinions.

And also, for more distracted users, this will raise shares in hubs, if one does not mind whether Apex is running in background.

Привет, Файл листы не считается в общий брой заетих слотов, т. е. качание файл листь не влияет на брой свободных слотов.

I thought it is the intended behaviour. You click if you need the client, so it logically pops-up. @Lее - I know it is for an official version, but considering my a little old H/W and strange circumstances, did not wanted to start a witch-hunt.

I am 90%+ sure that the new Apex DC++ 1.0.0B4 does not have it. Please try to reproduce with it.

Coder, isn't it a feature? (forgive me, couldn't stand) :stuart:

And esp. looking at the Guides section, since setting Passive mode w/o reason restricts you and others.

Third!

But still there is Created, Modified, Accessed? We are interested in Modified date, I think... And I doubt 99% of users will play with timestamps.

Bad Toast (as we concluded in a PM with him on another topic)! :blushing: Anyway, what about having customized AMLs per hub? If useful (will be for me), please consider moving to Feature Requests. Do not know the best way to achieve, maybe separate AML button in each Fav Hub's properties and edit capability there.

Please ask SMT for support of this mod. You are not using the original Apex client! @Staff - Pls move to Support>Bug Reports

I don't see any relation between both, it can be hacked client born in Israel. Since it obviously has smth useful, why not learn from hacked client?

There should be a centralized server for this, right?

I think Search Spy shows strings, but not exact filenames. But it is not easy to have smth better, as smtms even the user starting the search does not know what is searching for. :)

In my opinion not, it influences in both cases the user lacking the resource. But anywayz, I just have some feeling that the feature will not be implemented.

The thing is, Apex DC++ is not LAN-dedicated client, so 80k/10000 files is quite a lot. BUT, on the other hand, imHo, pros here are far more than the cons. It is hard for me to believe that 80kB (the average size of a text document) can be a problem, unless user is on dial-up. If we think like that, TTH support is bad for users, because some are still using PI 133MHz w/o MMX and they hash too long. It will be perfect if OPs could choose whether to take FL stamp or not, but I guess it can't be separated from the FL itself.