Computing desk
< January 2	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 4 >

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.

January 3

MySpace IM

anybody know how to set up Gaim, or some other multi-protocol IM client to function with MySpace IM?

thanks Omnipotence407 02:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the protocol is currently supported by Gaim:

It is compatible with AIM and ICQ (Oscar protocol), MSN Messenger, Yahoo!, IRC, Jabber, Gadu-Gadu, SILC, Novell GroupWise Messenger, Lotus Sametime, and Zephyr networks.[1]

— Kieff 03:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Running Linux on A Blackberry Handheld

Are their any open source projects for running linux (any distro) on a blackberry? Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.181.165.150 (talk) 03:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The only Linux distro I know that's made for portable devices is Familiar Linux. I'm not sure whether it supports Blackberries or not. Try having on their website. --saxsux 07:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Free Ipod Converter (RM)

Hi is there a free converter that can convert real media format files to mp4 ipod format? Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.102.23.93 (talk) 06:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

#How can I put RM stream videos into my iPod? --h2g2bob 00:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pacific county

What are the major cities of Pacific County? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.35.124.41 (talk) 06:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

How is this a Computer question ? See Pacific_County#Census-recognized_communities (do a lot of hippies live in Tokeland ?). StuRat 19:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assignment Help Request

Hi All,

Can you please help me out finding answers for,

1) Why a positive correlation might exist between Round Trip Time(RTT) and Packet size with reference to the different components that contribute to RTT (propagation, transmission and queuing delays).

2) Explain why a positive correlation might exist between RTT and distance with reference to the different components that contribute to RTT (propagation, transmission and queuing delays)

Any guidance site information will also do the needed. I couldn't find the exact and appropriate answers. So was asking for your help.

Hope you will help me in this regard. Thank you.

Anticipating a positive reply from you.

Thanks and Regards, Prabhu.

ShallV Prabhu 07:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the answer to 2 obvious? Longer distance = signal takes longer to travel = larger RTT? WP 10:36, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, bigger packets do take longer to transmit on any network link for obvious reasons, but there may be more subtle things going on: 1) Queueing algorithms may give priority to small packets, as they are typically ACKs for other packets, and this helps things flow more smoothly, 2) Large packets may simply be discarded to ease congestion on a particular link, and retransmitting them takes extra time, 3) similarly, large packets are more likely to suffer from errors on a poor-quality link, 4) Large packets may be fragmented, and there's an overhead associated with collecting and reassembling them. --IanHarvey 14:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Printing hidden pages in Excel

Hi. I'm using Excel 2003 and would like to make Excel print a page that is otherwise hidden (ie the user doesn't see the page unless they print the worksheet). Is this possible? --Dweller 09:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you can do it with a macro, but theres no built in functionality from what i can see.--PiTHON 07:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for an old Half-Life mod

Hi everyone. Some years ago I used to play a Half-Life modification named "argh", "arg", "arrg" or something like this. It was a pirate mod, a pretty funny one. Search engines didn't come up with anything useful so I was hoping that someone here remembers the mod and could give a an adress to download it or at least the exact name. Thanks! 82.83.89.26 09:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but List of Half-Life mods may have something that jogs your memory. --Seejyb 21:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can I put RM stream videos into my iPod?

Hi I tried to put this .rm video into my ipod but no converters work! Is it because of this streaming thing or something? Pplease direct me into the right way..thanks!

If vlc will play it, you will be able to use the Transcode wizard (file->wizard, transcode) to change it's format to something that an iPod can handle (offhand I think it's h.263, but check that). However, it's very likely it will fail, as many .rm files use codecs which are not widely supported. More at videolan wiki. --h2g2bob 00:45, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oops

what are the 56 types of oops concepts? "what are 56 types of oops concepts?"Swarupa 12:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC) "what are oops concepts?"Swarupa 12:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you are looking for object oriented programming system (I edited your posts to make them a little neater, by the way). NoClutter 16:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wii #3

How much does the console cost by it self?

How much does Wii sports cost?

How much does the Tv cable cost?

How much does the power cord cost?

Nunchuck=$20

Wii remote=$40

Is there is any thing I missed?

______________

$250

+ tax

______________

$270

Sorry if you feel interrogated, but please, these Qs have been bugging my since the thing came out.

Østerbrogade 20:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean the cost of production? Wii sports would cost nintendo probably less than a cent to press. The cords are very cheap as well. The console and the wii remote would be the most expensive parts. I doubt the nunchuk costs nintendo $20 to make. --⁪froth^{T C} 21:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I need is the price of everything. I really want to know what the package prices are seprately to equal $250

So like I said the mote would be $40. what would every thing else be?

It's impossible to say, seeing as how the console is only sold with the accessories inside. You could try to start with the $250 and work your way backwards by subtracting (what I think you're doing here), but the fact is that when Nintendo sells accessories separately, they have to mark up the price due to the fact it's not being sold with a console and therefore is in less demand. In addition, Wii sports is afaik not being sold separately. I'd be willing to bet the power cord and tv cables are about $10 a piece, so that's $20. The Wiimote is $40, and it comes with two of them, right? As well as two nunchucks? That's $80 + $40= $120 for the controllers. Wii games are about $50, so assuming NT wouldn't mark down Wii sports for being such a simplistic title, that's $50 for the game, $120 for the controllers, and $20 for the cables. That adds up to an alarming $190, so the console is about $60 by itself. I'd be skeptical of that figure, but it's what I got. --W o o ty Woot? contribs 01:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

only one wiimote and nunchuck, bringing the total for the system to $120, which is entirely possible. The tech isn't very expensive. I imagine at first they are taking a hit just like sony, so it probably actually costs them like $150 to make that, while it takes them <$100 to make a GC. Pretty reasonable since the system (w/o the wiimote) is basically 2x a gamecube (coming from a Wii owner). 66.159.174.217 03:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a fundamentally flawed question. Games cost less than a penny to press in the factory, the $50 is paying for licensing to Nintendo and paying for advertising and game development. The controllers are probably marked up significantly as well to bring Nintendo some profit so you can't rely on market prices of the controllers. And since you can't buy the console by itself, you have absolutely nothing to work off of --⁪froth^{T C} 04:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the United States so far behind in cellphones?

The USA invented the cell phone, so why is it that it lags so far behind in cell phone technology? It seems the models for sale are at least two generations behind what Europe and Japan offer. --24.249.108.133 17:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a combination of infrastructure requirements, market forces, and (I expect) government regulations. For example, the US is around 30 times the size of Japan but less than triple the population. That means a lot more infrastructure has to be replaced or upgraded to support new features, and that infrastructure must be funded on a much lower per-capita basis. Consequently, the mobile phone suppliers must pass along significantly higher costs to consumers if they're going to roll out upgrades at the same pace. There are, I expect, many other contributing factors. — Lomn 19:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a common phenomenon where the leader in a new technology lags behind the rest in a few years. One reason is that the originators still have functioning old models, and people accustomed to that level of technology, so are reluctant to throw them all out and get new phones using new technology. I have to admit, I'm in that category. I don't need games on my phone, have no desire to download ringtones, don't need a camera in my phone (as I've got a real digital camera), and have no desire the sends IMs over the phone, I get enough carpal tunnel syndrome from my computer already. For some strange reason, I seem to think phones are to be used to talk with people. StuRat 19:23, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might change your mind when the cellphone becomes a computer, phone and watch all in one, the size of a typical wristwatch. Imagine carrying your PC around on your wrist; or heaven forbid, a little Star Trek device on your chest - remember the communicator Kirk used to tap to speak to Scotty? The tech already exists to project a laser keyboard, and the tech is fast emerging to project a holographic monitor (who needs LCD?), and nanotechnology is the next frontier. I think even technophobes might find that when tech is this useful, it cannot be passed up. Sandman30s 10:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that some day the technology might be ready (I personally would prefer voice recognition that really works rather than a projected keyboard, though). However, the technology doesn't appear to be here yet. I find trying to poke microscopic buttons while squinting over a tiny screen with a crappy low res pic to be a waste of time. I will wait to upgrade until they can do far better than that. StuRat 01:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the US does not have a single cell phone technology. There are competing cell phone companies all trying to get ahead of each other. If you go to someplace where there is basically one cell phone company, there is no need to ensure compatability with other carriers. For example, what if McDonalds wanted to put a phone number on every cash register. You go there, make your order, call the phone number on the register, and your order shows up on your phone bill. Can they do it in the US? Not really. They could do it with one or two phone companies, but it is not cost-effective to try it with all of them. But, if you hop over to a country that only has Nokia service, McDonalds can hook up with Nokia and even have a McDonalds button on every cell phone. --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL, just what we need, a McDonald's button on our cell phones. How about a "super size that" button, to boot ? Just in case the burden of carrying a few bucks is preventing somebody from getting their fill of greasy food. StuRat 21:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You think the US is bad? Come to Australia, where we are 25 times as large as Japan and only have a SIXTH of the population! :) Our internet and mobile technology is rubbish even compared to the States. Vespine 21:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a somewhat different POV on this. I think the US is behind because of unintended consequences of a marketing strategy: the coupling of the physical cellphones with the service. They were pretty much giving away the units so as to contract the customer for a long service agreement. As a result, Americans developed the expectation that a device that would cost $300 retail should be theirs for free, making the American market unwilling to absorb the cost of better technologies. Pisses me off; I really want my Samsung SPH-i550, but it's just not going to happen because Sprint doesn't want to. If I were in Mexico I could get one. Harumph. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 21:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My POV is that phones should call people. I have a laptop for email and and a camera for pictures, and "smart phones" aren't at all cost effective --⁪froth^{T C} 04:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My POV is that tiny little web browsers should have phones. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 07:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Europe, people often ask "why are we so far behind Japan ?" ;-) Jean-no 09:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh! It's because they wake up six hours before us! 213.161.190.228 10:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well that seems to explain everything. Jean-no 15:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that nothing made in Europe works in Japan, or vice versa. At least with the US we have some level of compatibility. JIP | Talk 19:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there no company in America offering free upgrades? I know from personal experience that in the UK you can sign a 12 or 18 month contract and at the end receive a new phone for free if you sign another contract. Then when that contract ends you get another free one etc. The result is I've not had to pay for my last 4 phones and they've all been pretty new models. --Kiltman67 17:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let me point out that the US is ahead of the rest of the world in one respect here, avoiding clogging landfills with old cellphones. By continuing to use the old ones, we prevent lots of toxic substances from ending up in the ground. StuRat 01:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, most people aren't motivated by conservation... Superm401 - Talk 05:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, either, but the result is good for the environment, nonetheless. StuRat 04:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

which do you think you would prefer for reading?

I am doing a survey and for that matter want to know your opinion. 1) Imagine that you use the PC only for reading news and ebooks. For that purpose, would you prefer a laptop or a tablet pc if you had given a choice between the two? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.92.126.210 (talk) 17:11, 3 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Just for reading, the tablet, but the laptop is a better general purpose tool, overall. StuRat 19:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A PDA with a frontlit monochrome screen. Too bad they don't make them anymore. --Carnildo 00:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tablet if it was a dedicated reading machine and not just Microsoft Reader running over Windows or something. --⁪froth^{T C} 01:24, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TV as Monitor

This may not be the right reference desk to ask it on but it seems most suitable.

I've just bought a 23" widescreen LCD TV screen and if I wanted to connect a computer to it by DVI it will only support a resolution of 1024x768. Now compare this to my 19" LCD monitor which supports a resolution of 1280x1024. Why does what is a larger screen not have as high, if not higher, a resolution? --Kiltman67 17:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All displays don't have equally big pixels. See for example display resolution TERdON 18:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We had a very similar question a few posts ago: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Computing#Web_Surfing_on_a_non_plasma.2Flcd_TV. Basically, it takes fewer pixels to see the things typically shown on TV than it does to be able to read lines of text, so TVs have a small number of large pixels, while computer monitors have a large number of small pixels. StuRat 18:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't use tv as computer monitor cause ive found out that its extremly unclear and fuzzy.--Taida 22:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are also issues with frame rates, especially as relates to interlacing --⁪froth^{T C} 04:08, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir

dear sir, i`m trying to find out information about my grandfather who served in the royal horse artillery during the second world war (ww2)his information is has follows.

mr james edward murphy 53,tudor street or road cardiff. his date of birth is 21/06/1909 if anyone knows anything or got information about him please let me know. thank you—Preceding unsigned comment added by Bart09 (talk • contribs)

What does this have to do with computing? Was he a "computer" during WWII when the term referred to people instead of machines? --Kainaw ^(talk) 20:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure this user has simply posted in the wrong place. Bart09, I'd suggest you posting your question on the Humanities or Miscellaneous desk instead. Good luck! Anchoress 21:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Logic, CMOS, and the like

Take a look at Image:Static CMOS Inverter.png. What does the circle in front of the top transistor signify? It can't be an inverter, like I thought, since the diagram is of one(you can't have an inverter in a diagram of an inverter, can you), and I can't think of anything else that would make sense? ST47Talk 21:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you found my circuit diagram! :) The circle means it's a P-channel MOSFET, as opposed to a N-channel MOSFET, like the bottom one. This is only one of several different variants of this circuit symbol - four different ones are shown at MOSFET#Circuit_symbols and I've seen at least one variation not shown there. If you want to learn more about MOSFET transistors, the rest of the MOSFET article is really good to read as well. TERdON 21:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

posted by mistake

i am sorry for posting in the wrong place you must understand i`m new on this site i have now posted the question in it`s proper place thank you