Opening Start Menu

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

Previously, when I went into my start menu (bottom left corner), when I
hovered over a folder it would expand to let me see what's inside.
Suddenly, now every-time I have to press the folder in the menu to get it to
expand to show me the contents inside. How do I get it to a state where
hovering automatically expands the folder?

Thanks.
7 answers Last reply
More about opening start menu
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Hi,

    Right click on the start button and select properties. Click on customize
    and flip to the advanced tab and check 'Open submenus when i pause on
    them...'.

    --

    Anando
    Microsoft MVP- Windows Shell/User
    http://www.microsoft.com/mvp
    http://www.mvps.org

    Folder customizations
    http://newdelhi.sancharnet.in/minku

    Protect your PC!
    http://www.microsoft.com/protect


    "Newsgroup" <hrk_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:ulTJTr2vEHA.1204@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
    > Previously, when I went into my start menu (bottom left corner), when I
    > hovered over a folder it would expand to let me see what's inside.
    > Suddenly, now every-time I have to press the folder in the menu to get it
    > to
    > expand to show me the contents inside. How do I get it to a state where
    > hovering automatically expands the folder?
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    >
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Newsgroup wrote:
    > Previously, when I went into my start menu (bottom left corner), when
    > I hovered over a folder it would expand to let me see what's inside.
    > Suddenly, now every-time I have to press the folder in the menu to
    > get it to expand to show me the contents inside. How do I get it to
    > a state where hovering automatically expands the folder?
    >
    > Thanks.

    Would you mind fixing your clock you are posting from the future. According
    to your headers, you're in Lahore, and your time zone is correct, but the
    stamp is sixteen hours ahead of what it should be.

    Post dating is considered the Usenet equivalent of queue-jumping, and
    therefore extremely rude. You wouldn't like it if someone cut to the front
    of the queue in the supermarket or bank, so why should Usenet be any
    different?

    This is in your own best interests as many people (myself included) will not
    respond to post-dated messages (except to inform the poster that they need
    to adjust their settings). Also, many servers will strip post dated messages
    as it's a tactic used by spammers to ensure their messages receive top
    billing (as it were).

    Once you have made the necessary adjustments, I'm sure someone will be more
    than willing to assist you.
    --
    My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
    lose his marbles?
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Hello Miss P.
    The whole thing about timing maintained by client sounds very stupid!
    I think that this task should be done by the server.
    Perhaps designers had a reason to make it depend on the client?

    George
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Yeah, there is no guarantee of delivery time. Image if you see the last, second, fourth, third, first in a thread - as you may have with server side times.
    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.uscricket.com
    "George Valkov" <null@somewhere.com> wrote in message news:%23IL1%2399vEHA.3976@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
    > Hello Miss P.
    > The whole thing about timing maintained by client sounds very stupid!
    > I think that this task should be done by the server.
    > Perhaps designers had a reason to make it depend on the client?
    >
    > George
    >
    >
    >
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    George Valkov wrote:
    > Hello Miss P.
    > The whole thing about timing maintained by client sounds very stupid!
    > I think that this task should be done by the server.
    > Perhaps designers had a reason to make it depend on the client?
    >
    > George


    Huh?! The time is localised for the viewer's zone but, if the poster's clock
    is off, the viewer's server cannot correct the discrepancy. Thus the time is
    dependent on the posters clock being correct. If the poster's clock isn't
    correct, the time won't be correct.

    Is that easy enough for you to understand?

    --
    My great-grandfather was born and raised in Elgin - did he eventually
    lose his marbles?
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    "Miss Perspicacia Tick" <misstick@lancre.dw> wrote in message
    news:CAwhd.47$DE2.37@fe48.usenetserver.com...
    > George Valkov wrote:
    >> Hello Miss P.
    >> The whole thing about timing maintained by client sounds very stupid!
    >> I think that this task should be done by the server.
    >> Perhaps designers had a reason to make it depend on the client?
    >
    > Huh?! The time is localised for the viewer's zone but, if the poster's
    > clock is off, the viewer's server cannot correct the discrepancy. Thus the
    > time is dependent on the posters clock being correct. If the poster's
    > clock isn't correct, the time won't be correct.
    >
    > Is that easy enough for you to understand?

    Actually, George was suggesting that when a NNTP client submits a message to
    the server, it should be the server that sets the Date: NNTP header
    overriding what the client may have put for the Date: header, which is
    something that is allowed for by the RFCs. What isn't allowed for by the
    RFCs is for the server to change the Date: header on a message handed to it
    by another server.

    It isn't the first time I've heard the request, nor will it be the last. I
    am not sure if it will be implemented. Not all servers on USENET behave the
    same way with regards to the Date: field. Some will over-write it, some
    won't.

    John Eddy
    Microsoft Newsgroups Administrator
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    "Miss Perspicacia Tick" <misstick@lancre.dw> wrote in message
    news:CAwhd.47$DE2.37@fe48.usenetserver.com...
    > George Valkov wrote:
    > > Hello Miss P.
    > > The whole thing about timing maintained by client sounds very stupid!
    > > I think that this task should be done by the server.
    > > Perhaps designers had a reason to make it depend on the client?
    > >
    > > George
    >
    >
    > Huh?! The time is localised for the viewer's zone but, if the poster's
    clock
    > is off, the viewer's server cannot correct the discrepancy. Thus the time
    is
    > dependent on the posters clock being correct. If the poster's clock isn't
    > correct, the time won't be correct.
    >
    > Is that easy enough for you to understand?
    >

    Yes it is... In case that we have multiple servers all-over the world,
    synchronization may cause delays. In our situation, the clients adds a
    timestamp + time-zone to the message.

    My original idea was that the server can use a time stamp from the moment
    when it started receiving data from the client. This should be equal to the
    client's time, unless the client's clock is wrong (time-zone is corrected
    automatically). In this scenario the time should be correct even if there
    are network problems.

    Thank You for the information!
Ask a new question

Read More

Configuration Start Menu Expand Customization Windows XP