Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Computing/2006 August 31

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< August 30 Computing desk archive September 1 >
Humanities Science Mathematics Computing/IT Language Miscellaneous 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 at one of the pages linked to above.

Contents

[edit] Apps wont open, CPU running very slowly, other things

Today out of nowhere, things started falling apart. Firefox or AIM don't open (they just display the hourglass mouse for a few seconds, which then goes away and no windows open). AdAware stops responding after a certain amount of time, Spybot Search & Destroy scans extremely slowly. Also, my task manager has no menu bar at the top or tabs to go to the Performance, Processes, etc. Disk Cleanup just sits at "Scanning: compress old files" forever.

My harddrives were just wiped 2 weeks ago and I really don't have a lot on the computer. I'm using XP with SP2 and the firewall up. I use SoulSeek occasionally but I don't have it up when I'm not downloading something. I just got DSL last night. Seems like my CPU usage is way up. Can I run AdAware or Spybot Search & Destroy in safe mode?

Any recommendations or suggestions or anything would be much appreciated. Thanks for your time. NIRVANA2764 01:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

It sounds like the DSL you just got last night is the problem. I suggest you do the following:
1) Reboot the computer.
2) Use the Task Manager (CONTROL-ALT-DELETE) to kill all processes other than Explorer (that's Windows). (Under Windows 98, that's all you need to run Windows, but on another O/S you may need other processes running.)
3) If your computer will not respond, uninstall DSL, and see if that doesn't solve the problem.
4) If your computer still won't respond, try "Safe Mode", then repeat from step 2.
StuRat 01:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Everything ran fine for a few hours this morning though. I'll give that a shot. NIRVANA2764 01:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • You could try running windows in safe mode when you boot up. By the way, wiping your hard drive should be a last resort. Have you tried defragmenting your harddrives? - Mgm|(talk) 11:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I've identified the problem (sort of). Whenever I try to open an application such as AOL Instant Messenger or Firefox, my CPU usage instantly hits 100% and stays there until I shut down. I'm defragging right now. I press F8 to try to get into safe mode but instead I get a boot menu so I'm not completely sure how to get into safe mode at this point. NIRVANA2764 13:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC) Just defragged. By the way, Spybot S&D keeps saying it's blocking downloads of "/MediaPlex" and "/Advertising" which are both known threats. This leads me to believe I have some sort of spyware/malware/trojan/virus, etc. NIRVANA2764 13:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Doesn't the boot menu have a "boot in safe mode" option ? I'm skeptical that a defrag will complete with the computer in that state. StuRat 13:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Okay. Found something. Went to Start > Run > "msconfig". Clicked the Startup tab. Tell me if any of these look suspicious:

Image:Nirvana2764startupwindow.JPG

NIRVANA2764 14:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd untick wormexe, rtlfindval and utsgmon. A google search makes it seem like thwey definitely are trojan, and the name of wormexe is enough to disable it anyway?
Well, it was getting pretty out of hand so I downloaded every anti-spyware/anti-virus program I could possibly find, ran everything in safe mode, to no avail. Finally I just had my friend (who is leet) come over and we wiped my drives. She's workin' fine now! I appreciate the help, everyone! NIRVANA2764 19:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Which Graphic Card????

Hi, I need some suggestions for choosing my graphic card, my motherboard is an AMD GA-K8VM800M. My second question is should I choose AGP NVIDIA chipst or AGP ATI RADEON chipset, are these two any differnt? THANKS Jon.

It really depends on what you plan to do with your computer. If you don't want to play games or do video editing, etc., then many motherboards, including your current one already have a graphics card built-in which should be fine for word processing, web-surfing, etc. However, it's next to useless for playing 3D games.
There's not a lot of difference between ATI cards and NVIDIA cards, it's really just a brand and these days it doesn't matter much which one you go for. However, there's a lot of difference between the cheapest cards and the most expensive ones. If you play a lot of games, but you aren't too serious about having the absolute best graphics, then the NVIDIA Geforce 6600 GT is great value for money. Make sure you get the AGP version rather than the PCI-Express version. Sum0 12:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to assume you want a graphics card to play games with (if you don't, see Som0's answer above). Som0 is also right, there is no intrinsic difference between nVidia and ATI, they both make a wide range of graphics cards with different capabilities and prices (a bit like Intel and AMD for CPUs).
Ask yourself the following questions: how much money do you want to spend? Graphics cards go anywhere from $50 to $500 or more. If you want a graphics card to play games, look at some of the requirements of your favourite games, how much graphics memory do they need? Don't forget to plan ahead a little, are there any games coming out in the near future that you want to be able to play? If so, take that into account.
Browse around the internet and in stores in your area to get an idea of what kind of cards are available in your budget range. Take the time to familiarise yourself with the terminology used - graphics cards are complex beasts, and you want to have at least a basic grasp of what factors are important in a card (it's not just the amount of memory!). Then go online and read up on reviews of your favourite cards - I can recommend Tom's Hardware Guide for a good first stop, after that, start googling a bit. You're trying to find a graphics card that meets your needs and that you can afford. Good hunting! — QuantumEleven 12:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] slow printing from Acrobat reader

when i print any document from MS-world or any other software it is good to print .But it is not printing from Acrobat reader why it so.It takes a long time to print from Acrobat while my PC and printer(HP 1320n) are new and working fine.

Check the files sizes. Sometimes pdf files are enormous! Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 12:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Simply put, the printer has a computer on it. It needs to process the data in the PDF file and print it. Sometimes simple PDFs can be processed quickly, otherwise they may take longer if the PDF is more complex. Dysprosia 12:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
On Apple computers it takes almost forever, if at all, to print a document from Adobe reader. You need to open in in Preview, and print it from there. If you don't know how to do that just go to Applications, open preview, File>Open, find the document and click open.Template:Susbt:User:Mac Davis/Sig
Most versions of Acrobat Reader have an option to render the entire printed page as an image. This can be used to correct font problems in some document/printer combinations, but it results in an enormous print job that may print very slowly. If you are using Acrobat Reader 7.0, try choosing File>Print>Advanced to see whether "Print as Image" is selected. dpotter 19:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I frequently try to print .pdf files from state of California sites, and they all invariably come out as unreadable masses of nonsense characters. I keep adobe reader current, and have no problems with any other sites (except for one or two), but this is consistant with the California government sites. Presumably if this were a problem with everybody, the state would fix it, but it seems to be only me. Any ideas? User:Zoe|(talk) 02:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

This has happened to me as well, ALL documents i tried, all of which would print OK from other's PCs, would take ungodly amounts of time for mine. It wasnt due to the printer at all, since the job never left my PC (to go to the network printer) until adobe was finished doing whatever it does. After a while i just got an alternate pdf reader (ghostview) and the same docs printed fine. I recently switched back to adobe reader with the newest version and printing is normal. Short answer, try the latest version. Long answer, adobe reader is a bloated piece of crap, why not use a Free tool that does a better job. --Jmeden2000 18:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can not connect to some SSL sites

Hi,

My friend has recently installed ADSL at their house (we are in Australia by the way). Before then, she had dialup. She has also set-up a network, with a router, modem and several computers. The problem is, although she can go on sites like Google, when she tries logging in on sites like Hotmail or Ebay, it fails, with a "page cannot be displayed message in Internet Explorer", this happens will nearly all secure sites. It is interesting to note however, that she can access our school's Outlook Web Access service which is SSL. I am very good with computers and networks, and have tried many things, with no avail, such as clearing the HOSTS file, and DNS, clearing SSL State, temporary internet files and cookies, etc. I have not had the chance to go out to her house and have a look at it, which will make it much more easier, as I have only given her instructions over the phone which has been very difficult! Her router is a D-Link 624 and modem is from Open-networks, and ISP is iPrimus. I was just wondering if anyone had any suggestions or ideas to how to resolve this problem. I think it may have to do with something in the modem or router regarding ports (443 in particular).

Thanks, Ronald Ronaldh 12:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

She could try disabling her firewall (either a software firewall or one on the router). Also, check the router's port forwarding - it should be forwarding port 443 (which it really ought to do by default, that's lousy setup by either the ISP or your friend). You can often access the router interface through a web browser, check the instructions that came with it. — QuantumEleven 16:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merging colours and detail

Suppose we have two images of the same subject — one of high resolution and one with good colours. What would be a good way to merge the information of the two into a single image with the best of two worlds? —Bromskloss 14:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

You could digitally alter the colour in Photoshop or a similar program. By the looks of it that's what happened with the picture already. Harryboyles 14:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
OK, but is there a well defined algorithm to do this – to essentially take the detail from one and the colour from the other? —Bromskloss 08:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Sure. Convert to HSV, then take value from the detailed image and saturation+value from the colour image. EdC 13:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Identifying ISP while traveling

When traveling, it is often possible to receive email, but not possible to send email without knowing the ISP mail server at that location. Is there a way to identify an ISP mail server through the internet connection?

Ed Leventhal

You have to contact the ISP. There is no standard. For a while, mail.someisp.com, smtp.someisp.com, and pop3.someisp.com were all being used. But, spammers use that knowledge to look for open mail servers. So, they are usually given weird names now. --Kainaw (talk) 15:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Also, note that some ISP have SMTP (mail sending) servers that require you to log in (to fight spam). You won't be able to use those. You could always use a webmail account to send e-mail while travelling (using, if necessary, a Reply-To header so that replies go back to the address you want them to). — QuantumEleven 16:04, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
If your home ISP makes you log in to their SMTP server, you might be able to use that one even when away from home. That works fine for me. —Bromskloss 11:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] iTunes

So I have about 10 gigs of songs stored on my computer, but every so often enormous chunks of data disappear from my library. For example: I used to have 100 Beatles songs, but in the blink of an eye it went down to 40, and I haven't the slightest idea why. This has happened twice to me, and I'm not sure if it occured randomly or when I transferred all of the files onto an external hard drive. On the first occasion, I was able to relocate the songs using the search feature, but now I am having no luck. Anyone know what is going on? AdamBiswanger1 15:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

A virus or worm? Are you sure you haven't deleted the songs? The default for iTunes on Windows is to not copy the song to the iTunes library, just index the location of the file. If that is the case, that you deleted the original copy of the song go into Preferencess (options I think on Windows) and check the copy songs to library one. — [Mac Davis] (talk) (Desk|Help me improve)

As User_talk:Mac_Davis mentioned, the song titles in iTunes are only a shortcut to the address location of the file on your computer, if you move or rename your music, or the folder that its in, when you click to play the song in iTunes it will look for the song in location it was when you first played it. If you move your songs you have to clear them from iTunes and then reopen them from their new name or location.

[edit] Downloading Wikipedia

I'm having some trouble trying to download the wikipedia database. I'm trying to download the text version of the latest articles. I don't know what program i need in order to download the material, or what program i need to setup a usable version of wikipedia offline after i get the material downloaded. I tried to download the text version of the articles at this link: [1] but it only downloaded a 2kb file which my computer didn't recognize and wasn't able to look up. Is this the right file for text only?, and if so, how do i download it.

[2]

Can anyone expand on how to download Wikipedia here: [3]

-thanks

It's considerably more complicated than that. The file you downloaded was an XML file (compressed with the bzip2 algorithm) which is a list of all the current pages. The files for download at http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/latest/ are the MetaWiki dumps, they are only readable if you install the MediaWiki software on your computer. This is not easy or trivial - you are essentially setting up your own webserver to run a Wiki on. None of this is really a good way to 'read Wikipedia offline' (which I presume is what you're trying to do). Unfortunately, there is currently no good way of doing this - your best bet right now is the Wikipedia CD selection. — QuantumEleven 07:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I had read a Make DIY magazine article from august 2005 that gave step-by-step instructions on how to make a portable encyclopedia using wikipedia and something like a palm pilot. The article is in depth on how to modify the electronic device,(how to add more memory, what software you need to tranfer files from your computer, etc), but it just glosses over how to download wikipedia, basically saying "then i downloaded wikipedia". The article had mentioned MySQL, and Apache but didn't give any details about them. From the wikipedia database download page it mentioned that SQL would no longer be supported, I went to Apache where they have tons of programs and code available to download but i have no idea what any of it does, or what specific program i need. Would MediaWiki work for something like that?


Hi, you might like to try downloading Webaroo (www.webaroo.com)...its currently in beta at the moment, but I use it and it works great. It enables you to download your own chosen websites, as well as their "web packs" to your computer for offline viewing. They have a Wikipedia webpack, which contains all of Wikipedia's articles, which is about 4.5GB. Also, they update the webpacks every so often, so newer articles will be added if you run a cntent update from Webaroo. You can browse the downloaded webpages using Internet Explorer. Ronaldh 09:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tracking Internet activity on OSX 10.4.7

I want to track Internet traffic on my computer. I'm running mac OSX 10.4.7, typically running Firefox 1.5.06. I am using Live HTTP Headers to help monitor header traffic from my browser, but I'm especially interested in seeing the network traffic that tools like Google Toolbar send/receive when I browse. For example, when I surf to a site, and Google Toolbar displays the estimated PageRank. How can I see the messages sent/received to Google in order to deliver that data? Thanks Not a dog 20:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Wireshark. EdC 13:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RAM

I was thinking of updating my ram, but i got a few questions first, first on windows Xp is there anyway to see whethere i've got 2 ram chips installed or one i can check what the total is (but without opening my computer up) also as i cant seem to find what my clock rate for ram is does it matter if i have 2 chips with different clcok rates? and my computer was built by a friend so i have no documentation and he's moved to austraila--Colsmeghead 20:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, you have to open up the cover to be sure how many memory boards you have. There are likely one or two memory boards, each with it's memory being a power of 2 Mb, however, so if your total isn't a power of two, you likely have two memory boards, according to this chart:
  24Mb =   16Mb +   8Mb
  40Mb =   32Mb +   8Mb
  48Mb =   32Mb +  16Mb
  72Mb =   64Mb +   8Mb
  80Mb =   64Mb +  16Mb
  96Mb =   64Mb +  32Mb
 136Mb =  128Mb +   8Mb
 144Mb =  128Mb +  16Mb
 160Mb =  128Mb +  32Mb
 192Mb =  128Mb +  64Mb
 264Mb =  256Mb +   8Mb
 272Mb =  256Mb +  16Mb
 288Mb =  256Mb +  32Mb
 320Mb =  256Mb +  64Mb
 384Mb =  256Mb + 128Mb
 520Mb =  512Mb +   8Mb
 528Mb =  512Mb +  16Mb
 544Mb =  512Mb +  32Mb
 576Mb =  512Mb +  64Mb
 640Mb =  512Mb + 128Mb
 768Mb =  512Mb + 256Mb
1032Mb = 1024Mb +   8Mb
1040Mb = 1024Mb +  16Mb
1056Mb = 1024Mb +  32Mb
1088Mb = 1024Mb +  64Mb
1152Mb = 1024Mb + 128Mb
1280Mb = 1024Mb + 256Mb
1536Mb = 1024Mb + 512Mb
However, if your total memory is a power of 2Mb, that could mean one or two boards:
  32Mb =   16Mb +   16Mb
  64Mb =   32Mb +   32Mb
 128Mb =   64Mb +   64Mb
 256Mb =  128Mb +  128Mb
 512Mb =  256Mb +  256Mb
1024Mb =  512Mb +  512Mb
2048Mb = 1024Mb + 1024Mb
StuRat 23:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
It gets more complicated than that. If you've got a cheap graphics card, it's sharing the computer's main memory, and the memory won't be reported by Windows (so, for example, if the card is borrowing 16MB and you've got 512, Windows will report your computer as having 496MB). As for speeds, as long as the new memory is of the same type as the old memory (SDRAM, RDRAM, DDR SDRAM, DDR2 SDRAM, etc.) and is at least as fast as the old memory, you'll be fine. --Carnildo 05:53, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
But it's a waste to buy memory faster than your old memory - your RAM will still run at the speed of the slower memory. Unless you plan to replace your old memory in the near future. For certainty, I always suggest you open the computer up, so you know for sure how much memory you have and what kind it is. — QuantumEleven 07:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Only if you can find the slower memory for less than the faster stuff. I agree that if your computer takes PC2100, it's a waste to spend extra for PC4800. But PC2700 is more common than PC2100, so you're likely to find it cheaper. Similarly, if your computer takes SDRAM, you're going to wind up buying PC133, because they simply don't make PC100 any more. --Carnildo 20:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] *NIX for older Mac?

I've got a beige G3 minitower. It's currently running MacOS 9, and I want to install a free *nix operating system to turn it into a fileserver. What would be the easiest OS to install on it, using either BootX or the firmware to boot from? I've tried Gentoo Linux (booted, but couldn't find the hard drives), NetBSD (wouldn't boot), and Ubuntu (wouldn't boot) without success. --Serie 22:19, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Mac OS X is based on Unix under the hood, and early versions run on beige G3 Macs. FreeBSD has close ties to OS X, but only supports USB, not ADB. I'm not surprised NetBSD won't boot easily, but as documented here it should boot. --KSmrqT 02:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Have you tried Yellow Dog Linux? Seems a specialised ppc distro might be what you want. EdC 13:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] {{CURRENTDATE}}

Is there anyway to use mediawiki variables to do something like {{CURRENTDATE}}+1 or -1, to generate the date before or after a given date?--71.247.243.173 23:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Today is 15 June 2008, and tomorrow is 16 June 2008. Yesterday was 14 June 2008. See m:ParserFunctions.-gadfium 01:06, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, you have literally helped reduce Template:Reference desk navigation from, this:
{{subst:Reference desk navigation
|previous = Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Science/2006_October_1
|date1 = October_1
|next = Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Science/2006_October_3
|date2 = October_3
|type = Science
}}

to this:

{{subst:Reference desk navigation|2|October|Science}}

--VectorPotential71.247.243.173 02:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)