When the taskbar is at the bottom of the screen and the mouse cursor is
moved to the very bottom of the screen (so that the cursor only shows 1
pixel), if we click the mouse, the cursor will be pushed back several pixels
up away from the screen edge.

If the taskbar is at left, then it's when the cursor is at the left edge of
the screen, and it'll be pushed back several pixels to the right. Same thing
if the taskbar is at the top or the right.

This doesn't happen if the mouse cursor is at the other 3 screen edges where
the taskbar doesn't stick on. And this only applies in Windows 2000 up to
Windows XP.

The question is, why does it do that? Anyone know?

JJ <jj4public@gmail.com> wrote:

> When the taskbar is at the bottom of the screen and the mouse cursor
> is moved to the very bottom of the screen (so that the cursor only
> shows 1 pixel), if we click the mouse, the cursor will be pushed back
> several pixels up away from the screen edge.
>
> If the taskbar is at left, then it's when the cursor is at the left
> edge of the screen, and it'll be pushed back several pixels to the
> right. Same thing if the taskbar is at the top or the right.
>
> This doesn't happen if the mouse cursor is at the other 3 screen
> edges where the taskbar doesn't stick on. And this only applies in
> Windows 2000 up to Windows XP.
>
> The question is, why does it do that? Anyone know?

Under Mouse Properties for Pointers, are you using a Windows default
scheme for pointers? Or some 3rd party pointer scheme? Are you using
the mouse driver included in Windows, or did you install ancilliary
software that came with the mouse? Whose device driver is the mouse
using? Which brand and model of mouse are you using?

Is the Taskbar always shown, or did you configure it to auto-hide?

If using a Windows scheme, the pointer points up and to the left
(northwesterly pointer). In that case, you cannot move the tip of the
point beyond the screen at the left and top screen edges. The mouse
stops moving when its tip hits those screen edges. However, you can
make the mouse pointer disappear off the screen when you move it to the
bottom or right edges. The "handle" part of the mouse pointer goes
offscreen, and only a tiny edge of the left side of the pointer can be
seen when it is moved off the right edge, and you may not see the very
tip of the pointer when moved to the bottom edge.

If you drag the mouse pointer starting inside a window with text (so you
start by selecting text but drag the cursor outside that text window),
the default drag icon is an I-bar, and you can partially see it on edge
screen edge.

Are you using a screen resolution that matches the native resolution of
the monitor?

Have you tried uninstalling the video driver/software for your
unidentified video card, and revert to the standard/embedded driver in
Windows to test mouse pointer behavior?

Are you using a scaling feature in the video software that enlarges the
logical screen greater than the monitor's physical screen size? That
is, does the Windows screen slide around when the cursor hits a monitor
screen edge?

Since you are asking about really old OSes, are you using a CRT or LCD
monitor?

Are you using a 3rd party desktop manager instead of explorer.exe?

On Thu, 2 Dec 2021 06:01:13 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
> Under Mouse Properties for Pointers, are you using a Windows default
> scheme for pointers?

Yes. No fancy mouse cursor.

> Or some 3rd party pointer scheme?

Nope.

> Are you using the mouse driver included in Windows, or did you install
> ancilliary software that came with the mouse? Whose device driver is the
> mouse using?

Nope. All are Windows built ins. No OEMs driver. Just plain standard issue
Microsoft HID mouse driver.

> Which brand and model of mouse are you using?

Baseus GM01. It's a macro mouse, but I don't use any of its feature which
involve moving the mouse automatically. It doesn't come with any OEM driver,
and I don't run any of its included application in the background.

> Is the Taskbar always shown, or did you configure it to auto-hide?

Auto hide. But it also happens if not set to auto-hide.

> Are you using a screen resolution that matches the native resolution of
> the monitor?

Yes.

> Are you using a scaling feature in the video software that enlarges the
> logical screen greater than the monitor's physical screen size? That
> is, does the Windows screen slide around when the cursor hits a monitor
> screen edge?

No and no.

> Since you are asking about really old OSes, are you using a CRT or LCD
> monitor?

LCD.

> Are you using a 3rd party desktop manager instead of explorer.exe?

No.

I did mentioned that it only happens in Windows 2000 to Windows XP. Let me
add more information. I've tested all Windows versions from NT4 up to
Windows 10 in clean installations of VMs.

Keep in mind that, I'm asking why it does that. I'm not stating that it's a
problem that need to be solved.

"JJ" <jj4public@gmail.com> wrote

| I did mentioned that it only happens in Windows 2000 to Windows XP. Let me
| add more information. I've tested all Windows versions from NT4 up to
| Windows 10 in clean installations of VMs.

Mine does the same. My diagnosis would be that you
and Rudy both have too much time on your hands. :)

Mayayana,

> Mine does the same. My diagnosis would be that you
> and Rudy both have too much time on your hands. :)

Isn't having a hobby not already proof that of having to much time on ones
hands ? :-p

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On Fri, 3 Dec 2021 22:49:23 +0100, R.Wieser wrote:
> Mayayana,
>
>> Mine does the same. My diagnosis would be that you
>> and Rudy both have too much time on your hands. :)
>
> Isn't having a hobby not already proof that of having to much time on ones
> hands ? :-p
>
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser

I think there's a thin line between hobbyist and professional.

On Fri, 3 Dec 2021 09:12:41 -0500, Mayayana wrote:
>
> Mine does the same. My diagnosis would be that you
> and Rudy both have too much time on your hands. :)

And my diagnosis tells me that you're included. XD

JJ,

> I think there's a thin line between hobbyist and professional.

Indeed. I've never been able to consider myself a professional as I tend to
dive into the subject - spending way to much time on trying to "figure it
out".

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

"JJ" <jj4public@gmail.com> wrote

| > Mine does the same. My diagnosis would be that you
| > and Rudy both have too much time on your hands. :)
| | And my diagnosis tells me that you're included. XD

Touche. :) Though I wouldn't agree there's a thin line between
hobbyist and professional. A hobbyist can be an expert. But
a professional has to perform dependably in an affordable time
frame. A hobbyist might repair their own refrigerator. A pro
has to do it dependably and quickly. They can't really be pro
until they've fixed that exact problem numerous times. They're
not doing it for fun.

I don't think of myself as either with computers. Sitting
at my computer is not a hobby. Learning about computers
was at one time. As was programming. And to some extent
I've done both tech support and programming professionally.
But that mostly just grew out of a desire for competence.
I wanted the computer to act as expected and do what I
wanted. I'm a handyman by nature.

I now only research when I have to. I don't clean
Registries. I don't spend Saturdays exploring group policy
entries. I just read articles, send email, edit photos, write
and print business docs, etc. I've entered a phase of life
that I call, "I'm too old for that shit." I sometimes think I'd
like to get into writing a new program, but there's nothing
I need.

"Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> on Sat, 4 Dec 2021 08:32:18 -0500
typed in microsoft.public.windowsxp.general the following:
>"JJ" <jj4public@gmail.com> wrote
>
>| > Mine does the same. My diagnosis would be that you
>| > and Rudy both have too much time on your hands. :)
>|
>| And my diagnosis tells me that you're included. XD
>
> Touche. :) Though I wouldn't agree there's a thin line between
>hobbyist and professional. A hobbyist can be an expert. But
>a professional has to perform dependably in an affordable time
>frame. A hobbyist might repair their own refrigerator. A pro
>has to do it dependably and quickly. They can't really be pro
>until they've fixed that exact problem numerous times. They're
>not doing it for fun.

The Pro (some one doing "it" for income) has to do "it" in a
timely manner: paychecks don't come in until good product ships.
The "hobbyist" or amateur, does "it" from a love of the subject.
He can afford to be picky about parts, to take his time, to redo it if
he believes it is needed, because he is not dependent of getting
enough good product out the door this month to pay the bills.
>
> I don't think of myself as either with computers. Sitting
>at my computer is not a hobby. Learning about computers
>was at one time. As was programming. And to some extent
>I've done both tech support and programming professionally.
>But that mostly just grew out of a desire for competence.
>I wanted the computer to act as expected and do what I
>wanted. I'm a handyman by nature.
>
> I now only research when I have to. I don't clean
>Registries. I don't spend Saturdays exploring group policy
>entries. I just read articles, send email, edit photos, write
>and print business docs, etc. I've entered a phase of life
>that I call, "I'm too old for that shit." I sometimes think I'd
>like to get into writing a new program, but there's nothing
>I need.

"One of these days, when I have the time ..." what Rich said to my
dad about the disassembled Model A in his barn. Rich was 83 at the
time.
--
pyotr filipivich
This Week's Panel: Us & Them - Eliminating Them.
Next Month's Panel: Having eliminated the old Them(tm)
Selecting who insufficiently Woke(tm) as to serve as the new Them(tm)