Computing desk
< October 25	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 27 >

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.

October 26[edit]

Word[edit]

In Word, how can I keep a straight edge on the right side without justifing it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.142.163.229 (talk) .

That's the definition of justify, so it's not possible --⁪froth^{T C} 01:32, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you maybe mean not right justified? If so, then choose justified, and it'll left and right justify and fit both ends. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 01:48, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You generly have 4 options for aligning text:

Left Align

This text is left-aligned so you get a streight line on the left side.

CENTER

This text is centered so all the text appears in the center.

Right Align

This text is right-aligned so you get a streight line on the right side.

Justify

This text is justified so you get a streight line on the both sides. This is done by changing the spacing between the letters / words on each line to make them line up on bothe sides.

86.41.151.218 02:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What Froth said above is not accurate; you can use a right-aligned tab stop without changing the alignment/justification. Anchoress 09:10, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you're still "aligning" it, and thus "justifying" it, so while we're speaking English here I don't really see the difference. You're just using a secondary method to do the same thing. freshofftheufo ΓΛĿЌ 09:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While we're speaking English here, we're not here to argue semantics, we're here to answer questions and help people. Froth's answer gave the impression that what the OP wanted wasn't possible. While it may have been technically correct (as I say, it's semantics), it was unhelpful. Anchoress 09:39, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not essential for the question, but note anyway, as 86.41.151.218 pointed out, that justification means that both left and right side of a block of text align with their respective margins. —Bromskloss 10:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The difference here is between 'justify' and 'msWord justify'. So, although incomplete, Froth's remark was justifiable. DirkvdM 10:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL Dirk, do you have to ponder these puns, or do they just come naturally? Hyenaste ^(tell) 18:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They come naturally because I constantly ponder on them. :) My mind just works that way - it constantly plays with words. I couldn't stop it if I wanted to. And I've tried because it can be irritating at times not to be able to concentrate on the serious meaning of words. For example, at the top of the page, 'humanities' to me reads as 'human titties'. Which is mildly funny at first, but becomes a bit of a drag after a while. And 'John F Kennedy' to me becomes 'John Fuckin' Eddy'. :) DirkvdM 09:06, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry people, it was more of a quip than a serious answer :/ --⁪froth^{T C} 17:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3D[edit]

We know that 3d graphics accelerators generate 3d graphics but display only 2d field of vision.Any idea what tweak can be applied (something like the stereo command in python)to many of the opel and other games so that they produce stereo view continously which can be used for 3d viewing???

NVIDIA has a 3D Stereo driver for their video cards. If you don't have one of their cards, and the game doesn't support it on its own, there's little else you can do. There are some alternatives, but they suck. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 16:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can mask the colour writes so that you just draw red, and then render the left-eye view, then switch to blue-green and render the right-eye view, and use a suitably coloured pair of 3D glasses to view it. (In OpenGL you would use glColorMask) You'd have to code it right into the game though. - Rainwarrior 17:26, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

java j2sdk1.4.0 question[edit]

hi,friends.myself jack.I have installed java j2sdk1.4.0 in the c drive and set classpath using environment variables.after creating a simple application helloworldand using javac it is compiled ,but during runtime it shows "Exception in thread main 'Noclassdeffounderror':helloworld.Why is this happening and how should I solve it.please help.

~~:The name of the class and the name of the file are not named the same. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 16:28, 26 October 2006 (UTC)~~ See the Java Forum. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 16:30, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft Word[edit]

Sometimes on Microsoft Word, if I write something before text I've already written, it strangely deltes and replaces that text. What causes it? --212.219.230.119 11:18, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a command called 'OVERTYPE', which can be accidentally turned on with a keystroke or a mouse click, which replaces existing text letter by letter when new text is typed in front of it. I don't recall the keystroke offhand to turn it off or on, but when you are looking at your MSWord screen, the 'status bar' (the grey band at the bottom of the screen right above the Windows Taskbar), where you see information like what page you are on, will have several little 'windows' with grey text. When you are in 'overtype' mode, the 'OVR' text will be black, and double-clicking on it will turn the feature off. Anchoress 11:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. (deleted) --212.219.230.119 11:27, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I get it, you're a troll. Well maybe your answer will be useful to someone, even if you asked it as a joke. Anchoress 11:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was being serious, I needed to know how to stop the overtyping. (deleted). --212.219.230.119 11:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a soap box. Anchoress 11:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(deleted} ;) --Wooty Woot? | contribs 15:53, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The INSERT key in the 6-pack above the arrow keys typically toggles between insert and overstrike modes. StuRat 15:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DNS mystery[edit]

2 machines on the same hub, running the same OS (Win2K pro), one resolving domain names fine, the other not. Can traceroute to the DNServer from both machines. nslookup results in

 *** Can't find server name for address 195.188.53.113: No response from server
 *** Can't find server name for address 193.38.113.3: No response from server
 *** Default servers are not available

(on the "bad" machine, natch). Any ideas? Rich Farmbrough, 17:51 26 October 2006 (GMT).

In nslookup set debug, type in some domains, and see what's different between the output of the same command on the two machines. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

debug output

 > set debug
 > www.cisco.com
 Server:  UnKnown
 Address:  193.38.113.3

 socket (dg) failed: No error
 *** UnKnown can't find www.cisco.com: No response from server
 >
 
 -----------------

 > set debug
 > www.cisco.com
 Server:  ns.cableinet.net
 Address:  193.38.113.3

 ------------
 Got answer:
    HEADER:
        opcode = QUERY, id = 4, rcode = NOERROR
        header flags:  response, want recursion, recursion avail.
        questions = 1,  answers = 1,  authority records = 2,  additional = 2

    QUESTIONS:
        www.cisco.com, type = A, class = IN
    ANSWERS:
    ->  www.cisco.com
        internet address = 198.133.219.25
        ttl = 49480 (13 hours 44 mins 40 secs)
    AUTHORITY RECORDS:
    ->  cisco.com
        nameserver = ns2.cisco.com
        ttl = 49480 (13 hours 44 mins 40 secs)
    ->  cisco.com
        nameserver = ns1.cisco.com
        ttl = 49480 (13 hours 44 mins 40 secs)
    ADDITIONAL RECORDS:
    ->  ns1.cisco.com
        internet address = 128.107.241.185
        ttl = 71035 (19 hours 43 mins 55 secs)
    ->  ns2.cisco.com
        internet address = 64.102.255.44
        ttl = 167339 (1 day 22 hours 28 mins 59 secs)

 ------------
 Non-authoritative answer:
 Name:    www.cisco.com
 Address:  198.133.219.25

 >

I suspect something is hooking the gethosytbynumber or whatever it is called, but maybe not. Rich Farmbrough, 21:28 26 October 2006 (GMT).

MacBook vs. PC laptop[edit]

Here's my situation: I'm a college student, living in a dorm, currently using an approximately 3 year old custom built desktop. I have a dual monitor setup just because it makes it much easier to view more at once. However lately I've been really wishing for a laptop, which would likely become my desktop replacement. I've always been a PC user but recently I've been using Macs (a couple of my roommates have powerbooks) and I've gotten to like them a lot. The new macbook pro release has got me thinking that I should consider a mac over a pc laptop.

My question is, what would you guys personally recommend for a laptop? Mac or PC? What is the overall better choice? I used to play a lot of computer games but lately I haven't really been doing that, though I assume eventually I will get back into a game or two. I want something powerful but also sleek and easy to use. I really like the macbook keyboard from previous experience.

Also I've been reading about Leopard, which will be released sometime in Spring 07. Would you guys recommend, if you do recommend a Mac, waiting till spring, when Leopard is released? Also I have heard rumors about a new, much more powerful chip coming out sometime next year, could anyone shed any light on what is coming for the future, either spring or early to mid-summer?

Now that macs are on the i386 architecture, any "new chips" coming out will probably be available for PCs and macs, though of course only PCs are upgradable. Personally I despise mac OSX and quite haughtily scorn it.. though I read that many pioneers of computer science rather like it, my "hacker subculture" sensibilites demand that I hate it and my left hand is all too happy to oblige. If you like to play windows games, you could just install windows on your macbook. As for the keyboard, I'll offer my usual Thinkpad plug- it has a full size keyboard- indisputably one of the best on the laptop market. I urge you to stick with a PC, if only because the macbooks are uglier than deep fried diahhrea and you'll end up paying a big premium for the mac name, with the only "plus" being that you'll be able to run osx and it'll be a bit easier to dual (or triple) boot with linux. Also consider that Vista won't be compatible with boot camp. --⁪froth^{T C} 23:55, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why even consider a Mac? They're horrifically overpriced, especially when it comes to laptops. Get a PC. --Wooty Woot? | contribs 00:48, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both of the above responses are citing the oft-repeated mantra that Macs are horribly overpriced and you are paying a premium for the brand name - while this may have been true several years ago, I don't think Macs are that expensive compared to PCs, particularly for brand name PCs such as the IBM Thinkpad touted by Froth above. Apple has numerous budget options such as the Mac mini, iMac and MacBook which are on par, if not cheaper than brand name PCs.

Let's compare the price for similarly low-specced machines on the IBM and Apple websites:

IBM ThinkPad T60: Intel Core Duo 1.83GHz / 512MB / 60GB / TFT14.1 / Combo / WinXP Pro = US$1,154
Apple MacBook: Intel Core Duo 1.83GHz / 512MB / 60GB / 13.3 / Combo / Mac OS X = US$1,099

Hello! Can this be? The Mac is actually cheaper! Note: the screen size is slightly smaller on the MacBook (13.3" at 1280x800), but the resolution is actually higher (and the guy asking the question has an external screen) than the ThinkPad (14.1" at 1024x768).

Thinkpads are even more overpriced than macs, I was just giving an example of a comparable keyboard on the "non mac" side --⁪froth^{T C} 06:06, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where is it stated that Windows Vista won't be compatible with Boot Camp. I'm not saying it's not true, but I've only ever read that it would. As for the MacBook being uglier than "deep-fried diahorrea", that's purely subjective and your opinion. I don't despise Windows XP, but I find Mac OS X much easier to use, fewer gaping security holes, it does everything I need, it's much more versatile (as stated above, you can run XP, Mac OS X and Linux if you wish... and it just works, as they say. You also get the free iLife package, which is pretty powerful music/video/DVD/photo software. --Canley 02:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually possible but it doesn't work without some serious hiccups, and the average user probably wouldn't be able to figure it out. Something to do with vista not supporting EFI I think. By the way the reason I can't stand OSX is that it's like a mp3 player... it looks ok, does its function well, easy to use.. but that freedom that you have with a PC is completely missing. Yeah you can hack your mp3 player to load the linux kernel I guess and some other tricks or whatever, but it's not the same. With a PC you can take it apart, build it yourself (build your own components even if you wanted to!), see it go from its very base components up to the low level functions that make an OS possible. Then you never take high level functions for granted- you know and can intimately understand what's going on under the hood. There's no character in the bootstrapping screens that can't be changed if you can find the proper memory address. You could just never install an OS and use all the hardware in something else. I know that OSX is just that, and operating system, but the whole dynamic of OSX and macs in general is that it's just something you type at and click at and it does everything for you easily.. it's more like an embedded system than a computer! It's like an mp3 player rather than an open environment --⁪froth^{T C} 06:06, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody buys computers from IBM. 71.217.195.83 04:36, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Thinkpad article describes them as "highly successful" and anyway Lenovo thought it was worth $1.25 billion of their money just to be allowed to manufacture the things... --⁪froth^{T C} 06:09, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For any computer purchase, but especially for Macs, good timing can bring good values. If you don't need a new computer today, there will always be a better one tomorrow. How long do you want to wait? Around the time of new releases, older models often become bargains. Many computer companies reveal important plans in advance; Apple Computer usually does not.

For current facts, the venerable MacInTouch site will help. For when to buy, MacRumors has a guide combining facts and speculation. Sites like AppleInsider and ThinkSecret also blend insider info and speculation. And would you believe it, Wikipedia has an article dedicated to the Apple rumors community. An outdated survey of Mac-related web sites, but possibly still helpful, is the Best Of the Mac Web Survey conducted by Low End Mac.

If your experience with Macs draws you in that direction, that's probably your best choice. The Intel Macs will run Vista under either Parallels or BootCamp or iEmulator or some improvisation, and Mac OS X already has a FreeBSD-like Unix under the hood (for power users). The MacWindows web site may also be of interest. --KSmrq^T 14:16, 27 October 2006 (UTC)][reply]

IIRC, vista specifically destroys the mac partitions on install... --⁪froth^{T C} 16:48, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want portability and battery life, a Sony or Lenovo is your best bet (I made myself choose between a Lenovo Thinkpad X60s and Sony VAIO TX3; Sony won, I'm happy with it, although I've heard the Lenovo support is really great, and they have coated screens - better for your eyes...) However, if battery life and small size aren't considerations, go with Mac all the way! You may be able to get Windows OEM deals from your local Mac retailers, as well as cheaper deals on RAM than from Apple direct. On the other hand, local retailers can't give you the full educational discount, so you'll have to weigh those against each other. Not that you'll ever want to use Windows unless you have some very specific program you need to run (like GIS software, alas!) Btw, all the laptops I've mentioned will run large external displays via VGA, but probably not dual head. Iirc the graphics cards in Macs are capable of doing this, but not sure how you connect them. Samsung make nice laptops, too. - User:Samsara (Mr. Gates took my tilde key)

if battery life and small size aren't considerations, go with Mac all the way. That's not necessarily the case either. Because it's not a proprietary standard and blahblah, you can find companies that make insanely powerful Windows-based laptops. They are larger and heavier, but if battery life and small size aren't considerations, they're hella powerful. I've seen a few laptops with at least X1600 GPUs that are close to the price of Macbooks (which have horrible Intel GPUs), rather than the more expensive MacBook Pros (with the X1600s). It really, really depends on a variety of personal criteria. I got a Windows laptop because I found a Dell that's smaller than the Macbooks, cheaper than the Macbook Pros, and actually has a decent GPU rather than the integrated Intel nonsense. I personally have no preference for OS X, I'm just as happy with Windows and Linux. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 15:55, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blahblah? Which bit of my post were you unable to compile? - User:Samsara

No no, not part of your post. I was just explaining that non-Mac laptops come in far more varieties because far more companies develop them for far more types of users. However, I didn't want to type all that out, so I substituted it with blahblah. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 16:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My main point is that unless you want something that is very portable, there is no reason not to be running OS X. And if you're going to run OS X, you're best off buying a Mac, despite how much fun it might be to hack it. - Samsara (talk · contribs) 22:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OSX is one of the least portable OSes on the market --⁪froth^{T C} 18:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I HATE MACS I HATE MACS I HATE THEM... DO NOT GET ONE SETTLE FOR A WINDOWS BASED ONE... the only thing that i like about macs is that some of the desktop screens have handels in them...... this way i can attach a chain and use them as a BOTE ANCRE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!pulo 08:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you've won me over with that convincing argument! --Canley 03:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's from a mac commercial parody (here about 1:40 into it) good stuff lol --⁪froth^{T C} 18:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My sister recently bought a Mac Powerbook as her only computer. She is the only Mac user in our entire family. I'm the only Linux user. Neither of us have Windows. JIP | Talk 15:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The best 15 inch laptop[edit]

that weighs under 9 pounds. What company sells it, do you think? Are there any companies that allow you to make absolutely custom laptops that are any good? 70.108.215.106 23:50, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

get a thin client laptop --⁪froth^{T C} 23:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would that be a good idea? After all, a thin client has to be connected to a server to be of use, which makes them rather impractical for individuals, and they need a constant network connection (to connect to the server) which could be problematic when on the move with a laptop. -- AJR | Talk 18:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well then use your old desktop as a server. --⁪froth^{T C} 18:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Best" is highly subjective, I have asked myself that question many times. I personally own a vaio which I am very happy with and my gf has a MacBook which she is very happy with too. Both machines are generously specced and have not failed at any task we have thrown at them. Vespine 01:16, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]