Computing desk
< May 4	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 6 >

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.

May 5[edit]

Video plug-in[edit]

Hi all! I'm trying to get something working for a family member and having a devil of a time. They are trying to access this website (French language, but you can see the error in English). The page obviously has a video in it, but on the machine they're accessing it with, it just comes up with an error saying that a plug-in is required. Clicking on the "install plug-in" area in fact brings up another error saying that no plug-in was found. We're directed instead to the WMP page on MS. This is a Vista machine with everything updated, etc. most websites run just fine, but this one doesn't even seem to know what it needs. The browser is Firefox 3.6.3 and, yeah, obviously WMP is installed already. Any help appreciated! Matt Deres (talk) 02:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I may have Silverlight on the brain because of Mr.98's message above, but I do see that some items on that web page want Silverlight; is it installed? Comet Tuttle (talk) 03:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No - and to be honest, I didn't even know about such a thing until reading the question above. I'll try loading that up on their machine, but the website works just fine for me on my machine (XP SP3, FF 3.6.3 - and no Silverlight), so I don't think that's it. Matt Deres (talk) 10:41, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

125% screen size[edit]

At risk of a plethora of "old" jokes, I need some help. I am running Vista and find the 100% size too small. So, I bump it up to 125% and things are much easier on these old eyes. My problem is that when I log off or shut down the screen size reverts back to 100%. How can I get it to stay at 125% and save myself the annoyance of having to change it all of the time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.250.117.26 (talk) 03:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a different idea... Try adjusting your display settings. Right-click on your desktop, choose "Personalize," then click on "Display Settings," and then about 2/3 of the way down, on the left, will be a resolution slide bar. Try sliding it one position to the left, and click on "Apply." If it's still too small, repeat. If you don't like the results, revert. Kingsfold (talk) 10:57, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the resolution will degrade the image - the 'proper' solution is to change the DPI (dots per inch settings) - see this search - most of the links have instructions -

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=windows+dpi+vista+change&meta=&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai= 77.86.70.220 (talk) 15:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

eg http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-vista/Make-the-text-on-your-screen-larger-or-smaller —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.86.70.220 (talk) 15:53, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

77's tip about increasing the font size may work for you, but so may changing the resolution. 77's claim that changing the resolution will "degrade the image" depends on your monitor. If you have an LCD monitor, which you probably do, the image may look worse if you reduce the resolution such that the computer is outputting video that is not in the native resolution of your LCD monitor. The only perfect fix for this is to reduce your resolution to exactly half of your monitor's native resolution. On the other hand, if you reduce the resolution to, say, 75% of the native resolution and the aliasing artifacts do not bother you and you can read OK, then that's all you'll need to do. A CRT monitor would not have the native resolution problem. (Note that I'm definitely not advocating CRTs.) Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:52, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Has Microsoft actually fixed the font size settings so they work properly, under Vista ? In older versions of Windows most applications seemed messed up with larger font sizes, causing the text to be truncated at the end of text areas which weren't extended to fit the new size. StuRat (talk) 13:38, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apache and excess script output[edit]

If a PHP or CGI script on an Apache server has sent a Content-Length header and the corresponding amount of data, can Apache close the HTTP connection while the script is still running? Will the script necessarily be allowed to finish? If so, what happens to any further output from the script? Neon Merlin 11:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I understand apache at the transport layer, the Content-Length header and corresponding data are sent via TCP/HTTP after the PHP interpreter has done its hard work and outputted the HTML for encapsulation in packets. Above, you are describing a race condition that would only occur when PHP hit a script execution timeout (30 seconds by default), in which case the interpreter is halted. There would be no "futher output" as all output would have been sent down the tubes to the destination host.--rocketrye12^{talk/contribs} 22:27, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hardy Heron, Upstart, Keyboard Request not working[edit]

Hi, I'd like to get "keyboard request" working in Ubuntu Hardy Heron.

In Hardy Heron, adding something like

# Action on special keypress (ALT-UpArrow).
kb::kbrequest:/bin/echo "Keyboard Request--edit /etc/inittab to let this work."

to /etc/inittab is deprecated due to the switch to upstart.

So I decided to place a file "keyboard-request" in /etc/events.d with the same permissions as the other files in that directory, and the following content:

#A Keyboard Request (Alt-UpArrow) should trigger this

start on keyboard-request
#        ^This is what the name of the event *should* be
start on kbdrequest
#        ^This is the name according to another documentation

#Added the following just for good measure
stop on runlevel 0
stop on runlevel 1
stop on runlevel 4
stop on runlevel 5
stop on runlevel 6

#This part does the real work
exec /bin/echo "Keyboard Request--edit $0 to let this work."

I also hardlinked the file to

/etc/events.d/kbdrequest

in case the file name is important, and did a

telinit q

afterwards. Still, it doesn't work. What am I doing wrong? -- 78.43.60.58 (talk) 13:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Macbook and TV[edit]

Is it possible connect my Macbook Pro 13" in my LCD TV carryng video signal and audio? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.79.205.8 (talk) 13:59, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If your LCD TV accepts HDMI, DVI, or VGA input, then it is possible; you will need to buy the Apple adapter to connect the video-out to the television. Audio input is usually handled through a separate cable; again, it depends on your TV's inputs. Nimur (talk) 14:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just elaborating a bit: Depending on its age your MacBook Pro will have either a Mini DisplayPort or a DVI plug in it the side of it. You will need to figure out which of the above formats your TV accepts, and then get the right adapter (e.g. DVI-to-VGA). That will output the video. To output the audio, your MacBook has both an Audio Out and a Headphones port. On my TV, the only Audio In port was some kind of optical audio port which could not interface with my computer (or my speakers) without some kind of intermediary converter; I ended up plugging my speakers into the headphone jack of the TV, and then when I do hook the computer up, I plug the headphone jack of my MacBook into the speakers themselves. Check out the ports on the TV before buying any cables or anything. --Mr.98 (talk) 17:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Immune system[edit]

What is the immune system —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.102.70.218 (talk) 15:22, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read our article, immune system? -- Coneslayer (talk) 15:23, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spotify update[edit]

Spotify recently had a major update. It was stated on the services' blog that everyone will receive the update automatically within a week or so. However, this was at least more than a week ago. How can I get my update? Chevymontecarlo. 16:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can download and install it manually from their website: http://www.spotify.com/int/download/windows/ Re-installation should update you to the latest version (at least it did for me). 131.111.185.69 (talk) 19:19, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I had no idea you could grab the update manually. Chevymontecarlo. 17:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

good site to host gigabytes of data?[edit]

hey guys. i had to send my laptop away to get fixed and it has to be reformated so all the data will be wiped. ive back up all the data myself, but im moving on friday and cant bring my storage hdd with me. so i was wondering if any of you guys could recommend sites that would allow me to upload gigabyes of content to them. this way when im done moving in and get my laptop back i can just download all the data to it. paying does not matter, just as long as its not over $20. ill have to store about maybe 40 gb of data. i was thinking rapidshare but i dont know how much i can upload there. thanks.--Tubes4556 (talk) 18:36, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dropbox has a 50GB plan for $10 per month or 100GB for $20 per month. You will need to install their file syncing application if you want to upload things automatically. I'm sure other people have good alternatives too. Caltsar (talk) 19:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon S3 charges 15 cents per gigabyte-month, and it looks like the transfer cost would be 15 cents per gigabyte. So it looks like it's similar to DropBox, price-wise. You'd also need to find an appropriate S3 client, and set it up, which would probably be a little less user-friendly. Paul (Stansifer) 19:37, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at Jungledisk. They provide pretty cheap storage facilities. You can use their client with the above mentioned Amazon S3 storage or (I believe) you can use the cheaper Rackspace storage solution. It's a pretty user friendly client. - Akamad (talk) 16:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try Skydrive. It's free and lets you store up to 25 GB.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 17:10, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why online storage? Upload speeds are often abysmal and gigabytes of data could take a long time to upload. On the other hand, 16GB USB flash drives can be bought for quite low prices these days. Astronaut (talk) 10:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GPU impact on Photoshop[edit]

How important is GPU to Photoshop performance? Is the GPU acceleration in Photoshop CS5 eyecandy or does it do anything useful? If you have US$700 to build a new computer for Photoshop, what would you buy? thanks. 121.72.165.43 (talk) 21:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The feature you are referring to was introduced in Photoshop CS4. Here's a demo of OpenGL acceleration: [1]. A lot of the features he demos aren't directly related to OpenGL. It's just that they work more smoothly and produce a better looking preview on the screen.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 21:36, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fast RAM and a fast CPU are what Photoshop really thrives on. My experience is that GPU doesn't matter a whole lot compared to those things, from the user point of view. I certainly wouldn't spend $700 just on that—not worth it. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I mean $700 for whole computer, not the GPU. 203.167.190.79 (talk) 23:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't spend much more than $100 on the graphics card (which is what the GPU is housed in): [2]. The possibilities are endless in that regard (ATI and NVIDIA are both good GPU makers). I wouldn't go below a 128-bit memory bus width and 512 MB in VRAM. Also, you'll save quite a bit on money on the CPU and the motherboard if you go with an AMD CPU. Both Intel CPUs and motherboards are more expensive. A dual-core AMD CPU over 2.5 GHz should work, but if you want to future-proof your computer, you could go with a quad-core AMD CPU. Those are only about $100: <http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103704>. I'd go with ASUS for the motherboard, since they are more durable than Gigabyte mobos, in my experience. Also get a good power supply. I use Corsair for my PSU because they're more quiet and durable. Go with at least a 450-watt PSU. The higher the wattage the better, again for future-proofing reasons.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 23:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see my mistake. Fast and copious RAM makes Photoshop happy. Loading up images involves swapping huge amounts of information into RAM and playing with it. If you don't have fast RAM, everything you do will choke. If I were building a machine focused around Photoshop, I would make sure this was a very high priority. --Mr.98 (talk) 00:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And if you're talking Windows, a 64 bit version. --Phil Holmes (talk) 08:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If any of the new Photoshop plugins (optionally) rely on CUDA, then a CUDA-capable GPU will make an enormous performance difference - on the order of 30x to 100x speedup, say, on a complicated image smoothing filter or similar operations. Nimur (talk) 15:13, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So does Photoshop CS5 support CUDA or not? 203.167.190.79 (talk) 00:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Certain plugins do (here are some examples), and you can write your own as well. Nimur (talk) 07:18, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

iphone app installation interrupted, stuck[edit]

I have an iPod touch 2g, OS 3.0. I was downloading the app Eliminate Pro via my wifi connection. I walked out of the range, but didn't realize it. Then I just didn't even touch the iPod for a couple days (leaving it out of the range). In those couple days, Eliminate Pro went from being free to actually costing something (and therefore isn't technically the same app; the old one was removed, and the new paid version is an entirely new app).

If you interrupt an app download, the downloading app's icon stays on the home screen, but it says "Waiting" instead of the app title, and it prompts you to give your iTunes password every time you reconnect to a wifi network (and at other times as well) so it can keep downloading the app.

Therein lies the problem. My iPod prompts me to give my iTunes password when I connect to a network. I type it in. Nothing happens, since there is no longer any app to download, because it has been removed from the app store. But the downloading icon and the "Waiting" remain on the app screen. And it asks me for my iTunes password like every ten minutes. Power off-on doesn't help, respring doesn't help.

Is there any way I could perhaps do a hard delete of the halfway downloaded app? I have it jailbroken, and I have several iPhone file managers on my PC. Is there a folder that I can delete or something? Anything? Thanks, [flaming lawyer] 22:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps contact Apple? --Tyw7 (☎ Contact me! • Contributions) Changing the world one edit at a time! 20:56, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]