Computing desk
< April 6	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 8 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

April 7

Photoshop Question

According to the Wikipedia article, Screenshot, it states:

Third party screenshot software There are many third-party programs available on different platforms to take screenshots with advanced functionality. Most computer graphics software (e.g., IrfanView, GIMP, and Photoshop) can acquire screenshots. Typically, these programs can be configured to include or exclude the mouse pointer, automatically crop out everything but the client area of the active window, take timed shots, areas of the screen not visible on the monitor (autoscroll), and so on.

But, I did not see any feature in Photoshop that says that it can acquire screenshots. Does anyone know how to capture screenshots within Photoshop?

Yes they can acquire images such as screenshots or just any other random image you have in your clipboard. But first you have to put it into clipboard by pressing printscreen if you want the whole screen screenshot or alt+printscreen if you want one window only. --antilived^{T | C | G} 00:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the GIMP can actually capture a screen shot directly into the program, as described here. The description on that page seems to imply that Photoshop can not perform this function. I certainly can't find anything like it within Photoshop Elements (although I am only running version 2). I don't have access to my copy of IrfanView right now, but some of the summaries I found by Googling seem to indicate that it too has this function. It is always possible that the information on any Wikipedia article is incorrect. I will go to the talk page for that article and see if anybody can confirm whether or not Photoshop has this capability. --LarryMac 01:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a follow-up, I got a response on the article talk page indicating that Photoshop does not have the screenshot capability, so the article has been edited. The respondent on the talk page mentioned that PSP also has the ability, so that is another option to the two that had been listed. --LarryMac 14:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Building a cheap linux box

Hi everyone. I'm planning to build my first computer, and make it a linux box. I have good experience with the software side of things, but not hardware. Could anybody refer to me a good (and cheap) motherboard and a compatible (and cheap) x68 processor? I'm not sure Intel integrated graphics comes to play in this, is it in the motherboard? Because I would really like to have Intel graphics (well supported in linux). Thanks everyone!--Ryan 00:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most Linux distros can run well on pretty much anything, and if you just want integrated graphics, you're best off just buying a crappy computer (P2/P3) for $50 bucks in the classifieds, wiping its hard drive, and installing Linux on it. EDIT: Read your query above: if I may ask, what do you plan to do with this computer? Are you putting it together for experience? -Wo o ty Woot? contribs 00:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could by a cheap P3 box, I've foumd I can run linux well on them (only problem is that the install is genraly quite slow) If your looking for somthing better than a P3, I'd go for a cheap AMD, however if you want intel and it must be better than the P3, i'd look around for a celeron the new versions go at 3gh. --Lwarf 01:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm building this for experience, so I don't want a used computer. I just want to build this for fun, experience, and to run an ssh server at home.--Ryan 03:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, if your building it then, this is what I recomend(This is assuming you are on a tight budget and want the most bang for buck) get an AMD CPU (They range for $50 - $500, I'd get an athlon the're the AMD version of Intel's P4), for a mother there are lots of cheap ones on the market, just make sure you get one with onbord sound and video(and SATA port if possable), now for RAM most brand are the same so this a price/memory issue, get 256MB min i'd recomend getting 512MB, now onto hard drives 20GB min, 40GB rec, 80GB if you can afford it when buying your hard drive try and get a SATA drive insated of PATA. On to the issue of optical drives, DVD-ROM is a min(just about all linux distros come on a DVD, you'll thank me later when you see that they come in packs of 6 CD's and 1/2 of them are broken and have to be sent back), if possable get a DVD-RW. Onto the topic of case one word formfactor amke sure the formfactor maches you motherbord's formfactor. Good Luck. For more nfo on building I think there is a wikibook on it if not take a llok round the net there's lots of great tips. --Lwarf 07:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Yea, this machine is just gonna get 256 ram. It's just going to be running an ssh server at my house. Do most motherboards come with built in networking? I just need 1 ethernet port. THanks again for all the help everyone.--Ryan 15:19, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perl or Python

What are differences between Perl and Python and which one is much easier to learn? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.241.232.192 (talk) 01:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Python is more formal than Perl, somewhat closer to a strongly-typed language like Java. For example, saying: "print '44' + 5" will print "49" in Perl, but will give a syntax error in Python. Perl will generally try to "do what you mean", which can be convenient, but can also undermine comprehensibility. They're probably equally easy to learn, if you're starting from scratch. They both have excellent standard libraries, documentation, and community support, which tend to be more important than intrinsics of the language. You should write a few programs in both and see which one you like better. --TotoBaggins 01:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that Python is somewhat easier to learn than Python. I would recommend that language 83.254.160.182 08:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd go with perl, I find it's great for writing up small tasks to do (I made one program that does my algebra for me). Beware becouse perl compiles at run time I've found you have to go to a lot of trouble to get it to run on windows (I've got around this problem by using Perl Edit but that cost money) so I'd recomend using linux. --Lwarf 10:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Windows versions of both Perl and Python can be had for free and with similarly easy installations from ActiveState. --TotoBaggins 13:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line: you are never going to get a complete, direct, unbiased, and useful (to you) answer to this kind of question. It's like asking whether Spanish is better than French. If you can learn a little of both then do so. If you have a specific project or some other constraint, ask specific questions in a forum like Perl Monks or Usenet. Better yet, if you have a friend who knows both, and is not a partisan of either, but simply uses them as tools to get a job done, learn as much as you can from him/her and ignore everyone else who tries to sell you on one or the other. dr.ef.tymac 15:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm of the opinion that if you can learn to program in one language, you will then be able to program in any language. I'm especially firm in this opinion if we're discussing languages that all have "familial resemblence", so any C-like language including C, C++, Perl, Python, Java, Javascript, PHP, etc. Among the C-like languages, I also don't think there's a clear "better first language". Learning to program in Java (or Python?) will probably teach you the best habits while Perl may lead you into sloppiness, but you'll probably be maximally productive fastest in Perl and that may give you a better sense of success in your early endeavors. I say this because Perl really is good at DWIM; this is good for a beginner but won't help you when you get to a pickier family member that is more strongly typed or has less intuitive I/O operations.

Atlant 00:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitor wont turn on

Wierd lines appeared on my monitor as if there was interference and my monitor went off and until now I still can't turn it on. I checked the cables the back, and when I unplug/plug back the power to the monitor, I hear a clicking sound in my monitor so I am guessing its receiving power. Anyone know a solution to this? I'd really appreaciate it. 65.95.21.81 01:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The clicking sound sounds like the relays trying to decide what video mode to put your monitor into. Could be a problem with the computer video card

I don't think so cause the light in front of the monitor is not turning green~(or responding at all), as it does usually when the monitor is on.65.95.21.81 01:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After detailed examinations, I found out that the cable that connects the monitor to the hardrive is missing one of the little needles, Is this the reason, or does someone knows otherwise? 65.95.21.81 03:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, unless the pin just broke off. It is common for some of the pins which aren't currently used (reserved for future use) to be omitted. I suspect your monitor is broken. I doubt if it can be fixed. I'd try it on another computer to verify that it's indeed broken, then get a new monitor. Unfortunately, monitors are one of the most expensive components of a computer these days. StuRat 05:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had a monitor which was making clicking sounds before; after sending it to maintenance some times, I decided I'd end up wasting more money fixing it every few months, and bought a new one. Your monitor is probably broken too. --cesarb 17:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah you need to determine if it's your monitor your computer (and the monitor cable would count as being 'the monitor'). Try a different monitor. One thing I can offer is that in my experience, if some monitors just get power, but no signal, their 'power light' will be 'on' but will not be 'green' to indicate that they are not receiving a signal (such as when your PC is off but the monitor is switched on, or such as when you unplug the monitor's cable). The unfortunate thing is you may not remember if your monitor did this. Another thing you should try do is verify that your PC is outputing a signal, usually you just make sure your computer is indeed booting up - when you power on your PC your keyboard lights should change at first, and you should hear your harddrives firing up - but ultimately try plugging in some headphones or speakers into your sound card, and wait a while and try log into windows - looking out for any sounds/noises generated by windows such as the 'log in' sound or an 'error' sound (if you type in the wrong password). If you're sure your PC is indeed booting up, then you can only point your finger at the monitor itself, or its cable, or the video card (which should be showing SOMETHING). At this point you'd check if your video card is seated properly - and if there's power to it. Good luck Rfwoolf 19:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monitor bonk

When I turn on (or wake up) my CRT monitor (a Hitachi SuperScan Elite 751), it sometimes makes a loud and reverberating (and somewhat disturbing) BONK noise. What causes that? Thanks! --TotoBaggins 02:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Degaussing? Our article would seem to imply that. Root⁴(one) 04:02, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. I like the noise :) It does that to ensure that the picture is as free as magnetic artefacts as possible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.163.129.56 (talk) 10:08, 7 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks, I guess that's it. It's just a lot louder than when I press the "degauss" button, but I guess that's due to it being off and accumulating bad juju. --TotoBaggins 23:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

limeware

is limeware is a kind of distributed system? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.136.68.194 (talk) 03:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Limewire is a P2P network, yes. Splintercellguy 03:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More specifically, it runs on Gnutella (pronounced like the hazelnut spreat, Nutella). The person who created WinAMP (I have no idea who) wrote it. (wait... Limeware?)-HuBmaN!!!! 15:38, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Audio and Video problems.

Hi I have been searching for a long time now how to fix my audio and video problems for my computer and have yet to find anything useful. When I play a music file on my computer it will randomly decide to mute itself,the volume icon says that its not muted. When playing a video,like something from Youtube or Media Player, the audio shuts off and the video pauses and then stops and then pauses again. This is extremely annoying because every time the audio or video stops I have to reboot my computer. I also don't think that this has anything to do with my speakers. So if you could please help me, or give the name of another site that could, I would be very grateful.

-Godz Hammer

You could try installing newer drivers for your audio card, or you could check to see that the Windows Audio service is not unexpectedly stopping. Splintercellguy 05:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strangely encoded MP4 WAV files

My MP4 player has a record function which can be used to record FM stations or from the built-in MIC itself. However, it uses some unusual format to encode the file which normal quality uses 32kbps, high quality 64kbps and recording from the radio: 256kbps. 64kbps on a fully empty 2GB MP4 (Exact value: 2,092,138,496 bytes) allows 70:56:08 hours of recording. I have to emphasise that the WAV file generated uses very strange encoding which it cannot be played by Windows Media Player/Audacity directly. Only by importing it with Audacity using the "Import RAW data" function at Signed 8 bit, mono, Sample Rate 8000 Hz, I managed to get the audible contents of the file, but it's so contaminated with noise that using the noise reduction is necessary. By then the quality is so poor that directly connecting the audio output of the MP4 to the computer is better. Is there any way to extract the WAV file without any noise? --Bruin_rrss23 (talk) 05:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I can upload the file if you want to have a look at it; it's a WAV file, which Wikipedia doesn't accept.

Try running file on it and posting the results here, or if it doesn't return useful results, do an hexadecimal dump of the first few bytes of the file; it's probably not a normal WAV file. --cesarb 17:10, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I used the online file service (Because I'm using Windows) to check the file and the results are:

RIFF (little-endian) data, WAVE audio, Microsoft ADPCM, mono 16000 Hz

Since I already have the necessary data, I made an attempt to import it into Audacity but the Import button becomes greyed out when I select Microsoft ADPCM. For the Hex Dump, I couldn't do so since I don't have a proper Hex Editor. I just used Notepad on the file and I got this on the first line:

(First 16 chars)RIFFÿÿÿÿWAVEfmt (At the end before the long blank space) INFORock fish

That's all results I got. Regarding the attempt to open the file using Audacity, I learnt about the "patent restriction" thing that prevents it from opening specific files when I tried to open a WMA file. That's the reason why I can't import the file. Are there any other options on how to open the file? --Bruin_rrss23 (talk) 07:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then it's ADPCM instead of PCM. Most programs can only understand the common PCM WAV files. You could try using something like sox to convert it to the standard WAV format (use 16-bit samples when doing that to avoid loss of quality). --cesarb 15:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Finally I managed to extract the file noise free (Although the warnings were "Premature EOF on .wav input file"). This proves that to listen to WAV files recorded using a Chinese MP4/MTV Player, the recorded file needs to be converted first to the proper WAV format before it can be listened to on the computer. Many thanks for helping me out! --Bruin_rrss23 (talk) 08:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

clearing up a pic

Hi After enlarging a pic from say 560x580 to 700x800 the pic becomes blurry or grainy depending on the original quality of the pic. Using Arcsoft photo studio 2000 does anyone know how to get rid of the blur or grain without losing the new size of the pic? Cheers —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.88.3.89 (talk) 06:14, 7 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

That's something implied when you redimension an image to a higher resolution, unless it's a vector image. To actually reduce and/or avoid the blurriness you could try a combination of Lanczos filter and sharpen tool, both avaliable on the free Irfan View. --Sn0wflake 12:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DVD Decrypter error or Videora iPod Converter error?

Hi today I ripped a DVD into my computer and tried converting it using Videora iPod Converter, the trouble with the output file is that the audio seems to be tuned down to a ultra-low pitch with an extra slow tempo, while the graphics remained applicable.

I used DVD decrypter, these are the EXACT steps I did in the software to rip the DVD 1) Insert DVD 2) Open DVD Decrypter 3) Go to mode and selected "IFO" mode 4) Go to tools and I selected settings, in settings I went to the IFO mode tab and in the File Splitting place I selected "By Chapter" 5) I confirmed the "By Chapter" setting and went back to the main screen of DVD Decrypter. I then clicked the icon "Decrypt" 6) Files are transferred to my computer.

I then converted it using Videora converter. Is there any way to fix the distorted sound? Thanks in advance! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.78.206.75 (talk) 09:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Image:School_ip.svg

Hi, I recently created this vector image using inkscape(i'm not that familar with inkscape, I created the image to get the hang of using inkscape) but I'm having trouble making the background transparent. Can any one help me? Thanks. --Lwarf 09:59, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've done it for you. I uploaded it as plain svg rather than inkscape svg which did the trick. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 10:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think Lwarf wanted to know how it was done. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 22:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to say this Theresa knott but your upload was reverted by someone (take a look here), something I've found though is that when I open up the image in my image viewer(gthumb) the image viewer says it had a trasparent background, also I thought in inkscape the white background is by default transparent. --Lwarf 00:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I think is going on ( and I'm no expert) is that as inkscape svg is not standard so browsers are not understanding it. Whereas plain svg is standard. As far as I know the difference between inkscape svg and plain svg is inkscape preserves things like canvas size, layers etc that are useful when you are in the process of drawing the object but aren't really needed afterwards. I always habitually upload images as plain svg (which you can set when you save the drawing) because I really don't think that we should stray from the standards when we are on the web.I've no idea why I was reverted.Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 07:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I wasn't reverted. He uploaded some other versions , decided against them, reverted back to me then deleted his versions. So it looked like he reverted me.Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 08:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point it could be browser problem, however it might be a bug in thw iki meta severs, worth looking into? By the way thanks for all the help. --Lwarf 11:38, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah could be, I never thought of that. I left a message on the village pump (technical) for a developer to come look here and see if it can be fixed. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 12:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Either one of the developers fixed it up or it's a browser problem, I just loaded up in firefox and it looks fine (try looking at it here, I'm going to see what it looks like IE 7 insted of IE 6. --Lwarf 01:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown virus

I am positive I have a virus on my computer, but my antivirus (which I update daily) can't seem to catch it. It keeps deleting the ntoskrnl.exe file from my system32 folder (for some reason, every 48 hours) and now it deleted my windows profile. Any advice on how I should deal with it? —LestatdeLioncour t 10:37, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a site (http://www.trendmicro.com/en/home/global/enterprise.htm) that lets you scan your computer online. I use it and it is generally very good at finding things. ny156uk 11:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm... foremost, "ntoskrnl.exe" is a vital system component, so you should use the Windows XP boot disk's "repair" function to install it again. Second, related viruses could possibly be: [1]. --Sn0wflake 12:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC) PS: Fix your freaking signature.[reply]

Yes, I know how important ntoskrnl.exe file is. Luckily I have a linux partition, and I keep a copy of the file there. So, every time the file is deleted I mount the windows filesystem and paste a new copy in the system32 folder. The related virus doesn't seem to be a match. I'm very intrigued by the selective nature of the "virus" and it's periodicity, which I never saw in a virus before. How can I report my problem to people who develop antivirus software? —LestatdeLioncour t 13:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want use Task Manager to monitor your processes when the virus is again due to delete that file. If you can get the name and location of the program that starts up at that time you will then be able to get more help. StuRat 01:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try Rootkit Revealer and xblock online scanner Glover 06:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Windows Vista Sleep

When you click start in windows vista and put the computer into sleep mode, the internet connection is automatically disconnected, is there any way to stop that from happening? I want to quickly resume working when I wake the computer up. Thanks in advance —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.79.61.119 (talk) 13:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

If you have a laptop, you can set your computer to do nothing when you close the display. If you do that, the only thing that will happen is that the monitor will turn off, saving some power. Your computer will stay connected. --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@(Lets go Yankees!) 14:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do you do that in Vista? Sorry but I'm relatively new in Vista!

If you have a laptop, go to start. Click "Control Panel". Then click "Mobile PC". Then, under the "Power Options" section, hit "Change what closing the lid does". Then select what you want. --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@(Lets go Yankees!) 14:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't really answer the question. The fact is putting the computer in any sort of "sleep" mode will cut network connections. Changing what the laptop does when you close the lid doesn't mean that putting the computer in "sleep" mode won't cut network connections -- it just means that the laptop isn't going to "sleep". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.163.129.56 (talk) 06:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Icon when image is loading in browser

You know that icon in your web browser that appears in the upper left corner of where an image is supposed to be before it has loaded? Usually, in both IE and Firefox, I remember it to be an assortment of shapes (triangle, square, etc.) of different colors. However, recently, in Firefox, it's been a red dot/diamond that appears in a white box. What is the name of this "placeholder" icon, and why has mine been a red dot recently? Thanks in advance. --JianLi 17:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In IE if you go to Tools - > Internet Options - > Advanced Tab, under the 'images' settings section, there is a setting for "Show Image Download Placeholders" - so I think to answer that part of your question, I believe they may be called "Image Download placeholders".
Unfortunately I don't know the answer to your second part of the question because I'm not familiar with Firefox - although I can confirm that in earlier versions of IE the image placeholder icon was indeed a small picture of a square, circle, and triangle featuring the colours red, green, and blue. One possibility for your case includes that your version of Firefox uses that different image as an image download placeholder. Rfwoolf 19:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure it's not a matter of which version of Firefox it is, since right now it's back to the "normal" assorted shapes placeholder that IE also has, while when I wrote this question just a few hours back it was the "red dot" placeholder that had been puzzling me. --JianLi 23:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox, Thunderbird trying to act as servers

Why does my firewall tell me Mozilla Firefox and Thunderbird are trying to act as servers? Why do I sometimes have trouble connecting when I block them from doing so? I connect to the Internet through a LAN, and I'm on Windows XP Home. I have no Thunderbird extensions, and my Firefox extensions are: ChatZilla, Clustybar, DOM Inspector, Showcase, Google Notebook, Google Toolbar, Google Web Accelerator, IE Tab, McAfee SiteAdvisor, Talkback and Web Developer Toolbar. Neon Merlin 17:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's trying to send more data that just the destination, which is picked up by the firewall as trying to be a server. I'm assuming ZoneAlarm is what you're using. At least, that's what I always assumed it does. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 17:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Wirbelwind, I'm not trying to pick on you here, but I'm trying to help you out. You might want to ask yourself what you think is "the destination" and how is the firewall supposed to know about it? When would the firewall know when the application is not sending data to "the destination"? There may be a viable definition of "the destination" for some applications, but I'm not seeing one that matches common sence reasoning about destinations. When Firefox requests some service, the destination could be anywhere. Now, I suppose we might consider "the destination" to be a port range instead of some IP address on the internet As in, if there's some request to port 63000 ~~on server xxx.evilbotnet.ru~~ from Firefox, which should only (hypothetically) use https, http, or ftp, we might want to note the problem and have the firewall do something as a reaction. In reality, though, that may be far to limiting for personal use. Root⁴(one) 00:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ChatZilla is possibly the problem. When your firewall says Firefox is acting like a server, it means the execution instance is actually listening for and accepting connections, not just asking for connections on other servers. Several messaging protocols appear to need "server" access (If I recall correctly Trillian won't work with ICQ if it doesn't act as a server.) IRC (servers) also often requires ~~usage of some sort of AUTH protocol.~~ usage of the IDENT protocol for some reason. Root⁴(one) 23:59, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both firefox and thunderbird use loopback connections to talk to themselves, so your firewall thinks that it's acting as a server even though the only connections it's taking are from 127.0.0.1.--Frenchman113 on wheels! 02:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quicktime, itunes in vista: lot'sa issues

Does anyone know of a way to get Itunes and Quicktime to work properly in windows Vista? Ive get the latest versions installed (i check for new ones about once a day)but they still don't work. Itunes wont play any sound (this makes lightening to music incredibly difficult). Quicktime also refuses to play any sound. I can get sound in all other applications and I know my sound card drivers are up to date. Ive tried running both app's in windows Xp service pack 2 compatibility mode but they still wont play sound. Apple and Microsoft downright refuse to be helpful (Microsoft tells me its Apples fault and to switch to there music player and Apple tells me its microsofts fault and tells me to switch to there operating system). Can anyone help me? IsaactheNPOVfanatic 17:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...I have no problems. --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@(Lets go Yankees!) 17:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok now ive tried a complete uninstall and reinstall of both programs. Please im gonna drive my slef mad if i dont get this fixed!!! *slams head into wall while curseing apple and microsoft*IsaactheNPOVfanatic 17:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you're gonna have to wait until enough people are complaining at apple about vista being mean to itunes that they release a newer version for vista. did you try to run the programs in compatibility mode? 68.162.29.63 18:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MACs and MP3s

I have a small problem. Everytime I delete data from my MP3 players using my MAC (by dragging to the bin), all the icons are gone and, of course, there is no music to play, as I expect. However, my 'available space' does not go up, and now I have an empty MP3 player with only 4kb available space, which is a bit of an embuggerance. I just borrowed a friend's MP3 to transfer some music from one PC to the MAC, and ended up with the same problem. What is happening, and how do I get all the memory back?

Cheers in advance.CCLemon-ここは寒いぜ！ 20:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried emptying the trash? Sounds like a dumb question, but USB drives wont show their full amount until the binned items are actually deleted. Sorry if thats not much help

Yes, I have tried emptying the bin both on the MAC and the Win PC I have. I still can't get my MP3 to be blank. (Signature changed ->)ScouseMouse - スカウサーUK! 00:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What type of mp3 player is it? What program are you using to delete the files? And are you sure you've emptied the trash on the Mac while the mp3 player is still connected? --24.147.86.187 01:00, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Rio MP3. I was using no program to delete the files, just dragging to the bin, but, now you come to think of it, I don't think it was still connected..... So, what do I do in that case? ScouseMouse - スカウサーUK! 01:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe mac stores the trash on the storage device from which you deleted the file? Sounds stupid, but nautilus does that. If so, just do a simple rm -r . --wj32 ^{talk | contribs} 09:20, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plug the mp3 player in and empty trash.--Ryan 15:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Macs store "trashed" items right on each volume, in a hidden directory/folder called .trashes (IIRC). So yes, to fully recover the free space you must first trash the files to be deleted and then empty the trash.

Atlant 00:30, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hard Drive (And More) Question

Hey. Some of you might remember me as the hapless fool who asked about fixing an internet problem. The "solution" has been to get a new (luckily free) computer. Unfortunately, I had a number of useful files on my old computer, and it stopped working after an acquaintance of mine fooled around with it. In the end I decided to try and move the hard drive to the new computer, which has been successful. My problem now is that the computer doesn't seem to be able to read Windows from my old hard drive, coming up with an error message. I have tried all three safe modes (Safe Mode, w/networking, and another) as well as restarting to the "last specifications" and trying to start Windows normally. Both computers (hard drives, rather) have Windows XP.

I should specify that the new computer is a Gateway, while the old computer was a Dell. The old hard drive was apparently an IBM, and I am not sure what the new one is. Everything is hooked up as it should be. I initially assumed it was a compatibility problem, but then thought it might

My questions on this problem:

1) Is it a compatibility problem? 2) Is the data just corrupt? 3) If the data is corrupt, can any of it be salvaged?

This isn't a life or death situation for me, but it certainly would be nice to get my data back. Thanks for your input. Robinson0120 21:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've no idea to the answer to any of your questions above but one possible solution worth a try is to get a live linux disk such as knoppix and boot it from the cd drive, if it can see the contents of your old hard drive you can copy them onto a memory stick. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 21:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need not boot the drive to access the files on it. It might seem inconvenient at first to find the files, but persevere. Start by looking in X:\Documents and Settings\user name\My Documents where X is the old drive, probably D or E, which you can find under My Computer.

Booting windows from a drive which was set up in another system usually doesn't work. In the old days (~1995) this was probably due to differences in the hardware installed and the way drivers were configured for them, but modern Windows might be detecting what it assumes is fraud.

If you want to recover data on the drive, resist the urge to change anything on it, including deleting stuff. Various forensic and data recovery programs are then in a better position to find and salvage the data. —EncMstr 21:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(After edit conflict...)

It's unlikely a compatability problem - and yes some of the data could be corrupt and certainly windows could be corrupted on that drive. If you can't get Windows to boot up you can look at doing a repair using the Windows repair consol - technically by inserting your XP disc and booting with it - and it's actually an advanced operation, takes a long time, and if your hard drive isn't working so nicely I would not consider this option til later.

The best thing to do with this Windows that you want to boot up is to reinstall Windows. Unfortunately, that means reformatting the drive. So let's look at recovering your data before we resort to that.

To recover your data, you'd need an operating system (much like Windows XP) and a place to put the data. This means two options: 1) You do the repair thingy on the corrupted hard drive (not recommended in this case) or 2) Connect the corrupted drive to the working PC but this time as a slave or secondary drive - so that your PC won't attempt to boot from the corrupted drive, but will instead boot from the working drive (which should be set to be a "Primary Master" (as opposed to a "Primary Slave" or "Secondary Master" or "Secondary Slave" -- as you can see there is a hierarchy of drives and the one that is set highest is the one that your PC will try to boot from first)). Righto, so, you boot from the working drive, but have your corrupted one connected as a drive lower in the hierarchy. So now you have your operating system (Windows on the working drive) and you have your place to store the data (your working drive). Once you're in Windows, you'd go into My Computer and you'd try to access the corrupted drive - and this time it will show you everything it sees - and you just copy over whatever is salvagable. Once you've done that, you can look at either throwing the corrupted hard drive out the window, or you can format it and try use it.

Some possible obsticles in this solution:

You will need to know how to set your drives up in their hierarchy to keep the working hardrive as a "Primary Master" and make the corrupted harddrive something less in the hierarchy - if the working harddrive is configuered properly and is using the correct ribbon cable you probably won't have to do anything
If your corrupted hard drive is using a FAT32 filing system, and the working hard drive is using an NFTS filing system, there's a chance your working hard drive won't be able to read anything off the corrupted one. When you install Windows XP it formats the drive and it will have asked you if you want to format it to the NFTS format system or the FAT32 format system.

Well, that should give you some idea of what's involved - it's actually not that difficult, hopefully it's as simple as connecting your corrupted hard drive to your new PC, booting windows, and copying the files across - but make sure you know how to 'undo' each thing you do - make notes if you have to. Good luck Rfwoolf 22:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I had tried to do was use the cables attached to the hard drive, using them instead on the new hard drive. You said something about using the "correct ribbon." Would this cause a problem? I do have the old ribbon still- should I try to use that instead?

The XP CD boot idea looks good to me (even though you said it is advanced) because I don't want to fool around with the hardware as much, but the XP on my old computer is different from the XP on my new one. Would this cause a problem, or would I still be able to use XP to simply boot it? Robinson0120 19:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The ribbon itself is only important in the following areas:

a) if it's damaged or not,
b) if it can plug into your hard drive on the one end and plug into your motherboard on the other end (some ribbons have more pins than others, and similarly some drives use more pins and some motherboards use more pins - but most of them are all the same),
c) the place the ribbon plugs into on the motherboard -- look at the motherboard you are using, it usually has 2x or more ribbon cable plugs right next to eachother, and usually each ribbon cable furthermore connects to 2 drives - this is your typical 4-drive setup (which can include CD roms as drives). These 2x ribbon cable plugs on your motherboard, look closely to see if they're labelled 1 or 2 (or 'P1' and 'P2' etc) - because one would be a Primary and one would be a Secondary - once again this is all used to set up a hierarchy of hard drives so that your PC will boot from the most senior one. Then going down a ribbon, if the ribbon has 2x drives attached to it, by default the PC will see harddrive that is nearest on the ribbon as being senior to the one that is further away on the ribbon. To top it all off, a lot of this can be overridden by things called jumper pins on the hard drives themselves - and that is a difficult thing to adjust), oh and

Based upon the above, I wouldn't stress too much, in fact for now ignore (c) altogether - just use a ribbon cable that is not damaged and has the right pin-holes to connect your hard drive to your PC

I'm not sure what you meant at the last part of your question there - but if you go and plug your bad hard drive into your new PC and boot up using your good hard drive, it doesn't matter that the two XP versions are different between the two drives - in fact the bad drive needn't have XP installed at all. What does matter is that they use the same file system like I mentioned earlier (both FAT32 or both NTSF) - if they don't use the same file system then the bad drive just won't appear to have anything on it.

With regard to repairing the Windows XP on your bad drive, aside from being slightly advanced and all that, if you're certain the hard drive is corrupt or experiencing hard drive failure, then more often than not it isn't a good idea to keep the drive. But on the other hand it could be an okay drive that somehow got Windows corrupted and maybe you want to try it all again. So you can try look at a guide on repairing Windows XP here or do a google for "Repairing Windows XP" - and you also have some further options if you still want to use the bad drive: Like I said if you install Windows XP it has to format the drive it's on, but what you can do is insert your Windows XP CD and go into setup, and try to create a drive partition on the bad drive, which will actually 'separate' it into two drives - one that is full of data - and one that is empty, and then it will try install on the empty one - this will technically keep your data where it is and maybe copy it over to your other partition. The downside is once again, if the bad drive is failing, or is prone to data errors, why keep it? Maybe you still have a warranty on it - go and swap it for one that won't mess up your data.

Good luck. Rfwoolf 20:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HDD Question

(Sorry, I usually make a point of not asking two questions at once, but...) Why is it that occasionally (about twice or three times a day) my WinXP PC's HD suddenly gets really busy (for a very long period of time), thus stopping me from working, as the PC just gets too slow and does nothing unless I go into the Task Manager and quit everything (and all applications say 'no answer'). I can understand this would happen when a scheduled application is meant to run, but it happens even when there is nothing. Can anyone help here? CCLemon-ここは寒いぜ！ 21:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check your swap settings. Start | Settings | Control Panel | System, select the Advanced tab, push the Performance button. Click on the Advanced tab. Press the Change button at the bottom in the Virtual memory section. The bottom of this dialog should show a recommended value and actual values. Your description suggests there is way too much paging memory configured. Or it could just be that the CD/DVD is having a hard time reading the disc which—on my computer—pretty well shuts down other operations until it is concluded. —EncMstr 22:02, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some anti-virus applications run periodic 'background' scans of all or selected files on a partition. The anti-virus program wouldn't likely show up in the application list, but should show in the process list of the task manager. Depending on the speed of the machine, the amount of fragmentation on the hard drive or the efficiency of the anti-virus program, these scans could slow your machine quite substantially. Defragmenting the partitions on the drive could also lessen the impact of the seemingly random activity. In relation to what EncMstr was saying, the task manager displays a graph showing your 'Page File Usage History' which would be worth checking after one of those periods of activity. See Commit Charge for more info on that. Johnnykimble 22:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, both of you. My PC is WinXP Prof, and doesn't have the 'Settings' in the Start Menu. I looked in Control Panel itself and found 'System', but there was no 'Advanced' tab. I was thinking that it might be something to do with the RAM and the Virtual Memory/Swap File, but could not really imagine why, as I am not using multiple applications at once (most of the time). I've defragged the PC twice in the last week or so (as I usually do), so I cannot think why it would be a problem with files being fragmented. The 'Page File Usage History' I will look into. Thanks again! ScouseMouse - スカウサーUK! 22:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Linux machines do this periodically, too -- the culprit is a cron job which is indexing the disk for use by the locate program. Since Windows machines (and Macs) have optimized, index-based file search programs, too, it wouldn't surprise me if they also fall prey to periodic slowness due to background indexing tasks.

Obviously a well-written and well-tuned operating system will not permit a less-important, batch-oriented or background task to usurp so many machine resources that foreground, interactive tasks are affected. Somehow, in my experience, Unix and Linux are absolutely stellar in this regard, Mac OS X somewhat less so, and Windows absolutely bletcherous. —Steve Summit (talk) 23:17, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I actually bought a MAC about 6 months ago and put OS X on it (after getting used to OS 9) and found that it was considerably slower, and, furthermore, started playing the same game as my Windows machine, only with a multi-coloured spinning top as a cursor. I started thinking I was just incompetent with PCs after a while. Having said that, getting a MAC was a good idea, even though, nevertheless I will also use my Windows PCs. By the way, Steve Summit (talk) , is there any way I can get Linux on my Windows PC, without getting a CD, without having to burn downloaded files onto a CD, and only by single-clicking (everything you need all at once rather than lots of files) on a button on a website? We are going way off topic here, but I also wanted to ask this anyway.ScouseMouse - スカウサーUK! 23:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to subsection below. —Steve Summit (talk) 00:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC) [P.S. The computer manufactured by apple is a "Mac". A "MAC" is a Media Access Control address, or a Message Authentication Code, among other things.][reply]

From the fragmentation point of view, typical linux file systems usually do a much better job at keeping things in shape compared to file systems often used with Windows. So, when a background task does run, it completes quicker because the system is less fragmented. Johnnykimble 00:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

one-click Linux download?

...is there any way I can get Linux on my Windows PC, without getting a CD, without having to burn downloaded files onto a CD, and only by single-clicking (everything you need all at once rather than lots of files) on a button on a website? ScouseMouse - スカウサーUK! 23:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of one, but I wouldn't be surprised if one exists. On the one hand, a CD seems to me to be the right way to do it, and a one-click web download sounds like a bad idea securitywise, but on the other hand, given how much else you can download and install from the net these days with a single click, why not? —Steve Summit (talk) 00:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, I'll keep looking. The reason I'm asking is because my CD drive is playing up too. Not having a good month with this PC, am I? ScouseMouse - スカウサーUK! 00:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there may be a solution. You could run Linux as a virtual machine under Windows XP using something like VMware. You might want to look under its "See also" section if VMware is too expensive for ya. That's probably not a "single click" solution, but it may be possible that you could download a CD or DVD .iso and whatever Virtualization software you choose might be able to read from it BTW, I've never used it, but I've certainly thought it might be fun for some experiments. Root⁴(one) 00:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is exactly something you want, but I forgot what it's called. There was this beta software that can install Ubuntu while running Windows, without using any new partitions (it uses a loop-back mount as a file on an existing partition). --antilived^{T | C | G} 01:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[Found IT] [2], called Wubi for some reason... --antilived^{T | C | G} 01:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

look at Instlux --Spoon! 01:16, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the ZipSlack distro. A 100mb version of Slackware Linux designed to fit on a ZipDisk (or USB pen). Haven't tried it myself, but just beware because I notice it only mentions FAT and FAT32 partitions in the installation section of the site, so if you are using NTFS for your Windows partitions it might not work. Johnnykimble 09:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you can isntall SUSE with somthing like this, not sure but it might be worth looking into. --Lwarf 07:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

blocking ip ranges

Do you need to install any programs on a website for administrators and syops to block whole ranges of ip addresses such as 213.5.0/0 or 4.xxx because on paleos.org and evo wiki it wont allow administrators to block whole ip ranges.--Fang 23 22:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you own the server and running linux on it (otherwise go run linux on it), this is very easy to do with iptables. --antilived^{T | C | G} 23:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or even .htaccess file can block IP addresses. These methods are not very graceful towards the blocked addresses though. --antilived^{T | C | G} 23:59, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could use Apache's rewrite engine [3] in your .htaccess, to redirect an IP range to a page that exlians the situation. risk 12:35, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]