I've used Active Presenter in the not too distant past. It has the tools to do application videos, has a free version (don't remember limitations, but did a decent walk-through using it) and seemed to me to be the best designed app for the purpose.

Archimedes24 wrote: but when the same word document is printed as a pdf, the edges are all jagged and the quality is quite rubbish. what are you using as the PDF output? are you using the save-as within word for pdf? or adobe pdf printer? or other free pdf printer? You may just need to change the default properties of your PDF output to increase the quality of the images. This is quite common to do when storing image graphs which do not convert to JPG low quality without significant loss of data. Archimedes24 wrote: when we tried resizing one of our images (3000X3000 pixels) to 75X75, it looks fine, and also comes out well when printed directly or as image in a word document that sounds like you managed a decent shrink if the image is viewable well without saving to a PDF. I would focus on the PDF settings if the image looks okay after shrinking and used within a print or display. I assume you are referring to using the shrunken image within these two (word and printing) and not the original image. If the problem is really the shrinking, you can choose a bicubic resize and drop in no more than 1/3rd or 1/2 resolution at a time. A good algorithm will take into account blending multiple pixels into one, but a bad algorithm may need to drop half resolution again and again until you reach your goal. Theoretically you will arrive at the same result, but depending on implementation you might not. http://www.imagemagick.org/script/convert.php[^] Adaptive resize is generally good, though from your description I think the problem is not the resize, but the PDF output. _________________________ John Andrew Holmes "It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifling exception, is composed of others." Shhhhh.... I am not really here. I am a figment of your imagination.... I am still in my cave so this must be an illusion....

RajeevBhatt wrote: Winforms Vs ASP.NET Winforms does not really qualify as thin client, and will require setup and deployment. This increases the cost of operations. RajeevBhatt wrote: Communication, It depends on your network architecture. If you have a homogenous corporate network, with well configured internal firewalls, go for the framework that gives you the most functionality, like WCF. If on the other hand, you will have to deal with different authentication mechanisms or domains, or with firewalls that only allow certain types of communication, you may have to kick down to a lower level of in-built functionality. RajeevBhatt wrote: Data persistence, Again, it depends: you may use a persistence framework like the entity framework, but if your data is not well suited to relational operations (and is large enough), you may have to deviate a lot from standard mappings, in order to optimise performance, to the point where a persistence framework becomes more a burden than an asset. RajeevBhatt wrote: Performance, Architecting for performance will again depend on the functionality of the app. Will you be able to scale on different servers, or are the operations single-threaded by nature? Will you be able partition your database, or will the queries by their nature prohibit partitioning. As you see there is no 'right' architecture. Architecture depends on what you want to do. It's the same with building architecture: If you want a lighthouse, you'll probably design a tower-like structure close by the sea. It will probably be unusable as a soccer stadium though :-)

Would "...yes..." be a good enough answer? My plan is to live forever ... so far so good

It is very, very rude to post the same question in more than one forum! For future reference, decide which forum most suits your question and post it there and only there. In this case either 'General Database' or 'Design and Architecture' would seem most appropriate. Henry Minute Do not read medical books! You could die of a misprint. - Mark Twain Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?" “I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”

Relax, mate....I don't think there is an need to get hyper about it. You have been most helpful in the past. My thinking is that posts that do not see much activity for more than a couple of days seldom get far, I thought it better to jog you into a response. I am sorry if you take offense at such things. RB

There is no need of reinstalling of window service there...... But Question regarding business components... depending upon the type of assembly... if it is deployed in GAC... there is not need to recompile the window service... else need to recompile the service....

You may have some other services or resources on the system that are not ready when the Windows service is started, for example SQL server usually will usually not be ready when your Windows service started. You should trap the exception to debug what is causing the failure, ie using AppDomain.CurrentDomain.UnhandledException or Application.ThreadException (can't remember which one for services, don't have the code with me now).

Um, Rajeev, that port may not be for what you think it is for. Most DSL modems, if they have a USB connection, provide it as an alternative for connecting up to a PC that may not have a network (RJ-45 connection). Assuming for one minute, however, that yours actually is for a print server, no, you cannot just connect an external hard drive to that port and expect it to be functional. Print server != file server. As far as you statement that commercially available external hard drives with RJ45 ports are not that dependable for serious network storage, they are infinitely more usable than any USB-connected solution. Low-end NAS is getting better every day, and there has been some consolidation that bodes well for the future of this technology. Check out companies like Buffalo Technology and NETGEAR for a representative look at what's out there. Some of these also feature USB ports, and those are for connecting additional external hard drives. As always, you get what you pay for.