Right Steve,

Many programs that "are not responding" will continue (or terminate
correctly) if you just leave them be.

It would have been nice if Microsoft could have tried harder to develop an
applet that could tell the difference between "busy/working" and "not
responding".

--


Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
(For email, remove the obvious from my address)

Quote from George Ankner:
If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message
news:AF8B2A87-9CEB-48C1-B712-720257583468@microsoft.com...
> This "not responding" has always been a problem. Sure its not responding,
> its busy. That doesn't mean its not working.
>
> Its too bad they made it worse.
>
> You might try some multithreading if its an issue, but I'm not a big fan
> of such myself.
>
> steve
>
> "MueMeister" <mue@gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:uKGZWpcHHHA.5104@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I have an application which performs some tasks in a background
>> worker thread. If the app starts to export its data (which
>> takes up to 10 minutes) the GUI is getting pallid and the title
>> bar shows the ".. is not responding" state of my windows (which
>> is not true, since it is working correctly). In Windows XP
>> everything is fine.
>>
>> 1) Do I have to process certain messages in a new manner or maybe
>> I'm forced to process messages in Vista where in Windows XP has been
>> no need to do so?
>>
>> 2) I recognized that Vista performs this behavior really fast (lets say
>> after seconds). Is that a feature?
>>
>> TIA
>> MueMeister
>