HI
I activated the "open standard lister on desktop doubleklick" function...
works so far....but when i double klick anything on the desktop, dopus opens the standard lister instead of opening the file/folder....what can i do about this?
im using vista x64
I don't think there is any workaround for this at the moment.
Full 64-bit support, ironing out the problems like this one, is coming but I don't think there has been an announcement on exactly when it will be done.
Hi,
try a search in the forum with the keywords "opus x64". Unfortunately You will find no solution but rather the advice that x64 is currently not fully suported.
I have the same problem with WinXP64Pro. My "solution" is to click once on the shortcut and then hit ENTER 
hmm....i hope theres a fix for this soon....
[quote="xbprm"]Hi,
try a search in the forum with the keywords "opus x64". Unfortunately You will find no solution but rather the advice that x64 is currently not fully suported.
I have the same problem with WinXP64Pro. My "solution" is to click once on the shortcut and then hit ENTER [/quote]
Wouldn't a better "solution" be to disable opening a lister by double-clicking the desktop? Aren't there enough other ways to open listers?
when i disable this function and then klick the file, nothing happens....it just gets marked...
[quote="rcoleman1943"][quote="xbprm"]Hi,
try a search in the forum with the keywords "opus x64". Unfortunately You will find no solution but rather the advice that x64 is currently not fully suported.
I have the same problem with WinXP64Pro. My "solution" is to click once on the shortcut and then hit ENTER [/quote]
Wouldn't a better "solution" be to disable opening a lister by double-clicking the desktop? Aren't there enough other ways to open listers?[/quote]
Of course, there are many ways to open a lister but I find the double-click option the most convenient may. And I do not have many shortcuts on my desktop (about 5 only). I hate this messy desktops with hundreds of icons on it. So I do not use the desktop very often.
[quote="ch40s"]
when i disable this function and then klick the file, nothing happens....it just gets marked...[/quote]
Did you hit ENTER after you clicked on a shortcut? Explanation: The first click on the shortcuts will selected or mark it. If you then hit ENTER the shortcut will/should be executed. Basically this is the same as a double-click but will avoid the detection of a double-click by Opus.
Also: When disabling the option you can double-click shortcuts etc. again.
Yeah, during my brief foray with Vista64, I became acutely aware how dependent I had grown on the convenience of just double-clicking the desktop to bring up a new lister. 
My suggestion is to disable the feature and just double-click the icon down in the system tray (next the time/date). Don't forget to instruct Windows to "Always Show" it. After about a day or two, it became just as second nature to me as double-clicking the desktop.
@xbprm
of course i know that it would work with selecting the shortcut and then pressing enter....i feel ashamed that you think im such a newb..^^
i also hate messy desktops...i have about 6 txt files i check/change a lot..so thats why i need the double-klicking(for me hitting enter is no option)...and i used to love this feature of dopus...
i now have deinstalled opus and will wait for a proper x64 version....because i dont like it when my system is not running flawlessly
(i know....using windows maybe is a step in the wrong direction then 
)
Do you really need to run the 64 bit Vista? Unless you have a very specific need there's little to be gained and you'd be better off going to the 32 bit version to get full Opus functionality (until a 64 bit version is released of course).
[quote="ch40s"]@xbprm
of course i know that it would work with selecting the shortcut and then pressing enter....i feel ashamed that you think im such a newb..^^
[/quote]
Oops, sorry. I didn't mean to embarrass you. Your comment "it is only marked" puzzled me so that I decided to explain more clear what I meant in my first posting. Of course, you cannot be such a newbie as you are using Opus 
[quote="ch40s"]i also hate messy desktops...i have about 6 txt files i check/change a lot..so thats why i need the double-klicking(for me hitting enter is no option)...and i used to love this feature of dopus...
i now have deinstalled opus and will wait for a proper x64 version....because i dont like it when my system is not running flawlessly
(i know....using windows maybe is a step in the wrong direction then )[/quote]
I also do not like it if something is working at it is intended and I have to remember things which are not working. But think about tanis comments. I also think x64-Versions are not that useful yet.
i need the x64 version because i have 4 gigs of ram....and as you all know a 32 bit system cannot address that much memory....
Again I ask, do you really NEED x64...
Are you doing anything with 4gig of ram which you cannot do with Windows only seeing 3 of it?
i do a lot of audio/video editing so 4 gigs are making the work smoother.....of course i could "just" use 3 gigs....but 1st the price for ram is so low....and 2nd i have no problems with vistax64 except for the dopus one...so why not using vistax64?
In my case, the price of Opus not working properly would be reason enough to temporarily lose 1 gig of ram. 
It's nearly a year since the (business) release of Vista and I'm still dumbfounded by the lack of support for Vista 64-Bit. When I say support, I mean "things actually working". I have problems on an everyday sort of level with drivers failing, to programs simply not functioning as intended.
To be honest, the reason for this probably falls into two categories: [1] The percentage of people actually using (and needing) Vista 64-Bit is still low, and [2] 64-Bit driver+software compatibility can be a real pain and most companies are not putting the effort into it because of the low user base.
I'd have to agree with tanis in the sense that a computer (ie software) not functioning as it should, is a very good reason to temporarily lose 1GB of RAM. I'm currently weighing up this option as I'm so tired of the 64-Bit woes - just for that extra GB of RAM (that was very expensive when I purchased it).
The only real solution for people who actually need the 4GB of RAM is a dual boot. I have a dual installation of Vista 64-Bit and WinXP 32-Bit, so I get the best of both worlds. Though, I only use DOpus on my Vista boot- mainly due to the fact I haven't checked out whether the license is valid for two installs on the same machine, and I do the majority of my work on Vista.
This is all a pretty standard backlash against compatibility problems with a 'new' technology platform. But in the case of x64 Vista, you're dealing with the double-trouble move to both a new OS and architecture. Remember that for a while, lots of companies were slow on the uptake for DRIVERS for even regular 32bit Vista eh???
Anyhow, this whole sort of debate amuses me endlessly... the FACT is that there is indeed lackluster support for x64 Vista, but you give forum members, mods, and admins waaaaay too much credit by suggesting that people of their ilk are significant contributing factors to the decisions by software and hardware vendors that are keeping things this way.
~do you really NEED this NOW~...
Is a perfectly legit question, and IF the answer is no (which it often is)... then the choice of continuing to basically BETA test a platform that has so far rec'd poor support from the community or going back to a known working platform seems a no-brainer. Nobody OWES new technology anything... should the average Joe user suffer through compatibility problems & loss of productivity just to help force companies into devoting resources to making things work better on a new platform?
For the ppl who have a real NEED (or maybe sometimes not even a true NEED so much as just a strong PASSION) for a new platform... this certainly sucks, but it will come in time. And until it does, I personally won't run the new stuff and will get by with less frustration than many .
That said... the whole thing is a shame. I personally think the arrival of 64 bit computing in the Windows world should have been used as an opportunity to completely abandon the whole notion of compatability. I just don't think you can make REAL groundbreaking... revolutionary improvements and still maintain significant backward compatability. If it had been up to me, there would have been no incremental 'middle' ground of 64bit extensions to the x86 platform, and along with supporting a pure 64bit architecture like Itanium I would have liked to have seen Microsoft make DRASTIC changes to truly revolutionize their platform. What better time to make such a major move at the software level than when there is an equally major shift in hardware architecture?
This topic really isn't progressing anywhere, so I'll just say one last thing to leave my piece.
The Microsoft OS and 64-Bit is not new. It's only "new" in the minds of people because most people don't use it and dependable software support is still in the infant stages.