Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2006 September 18

< September 17	Computing desk archive	September 19 >

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.

< August September October >

September 18

iPod

My sister unplugged a video iPod from it's USB port, after the computer " The iPod is now after going into iTunes safely. What shouldedo? 71.230.34.245 00:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

You should reset the ipod. See http://www.apple.com/support/ipod/five_rs/ Note: this does not remove the music, it just reboots the iPod. Oskar 01:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Better link: http://docs.info.apple.com

DVD-R vs. DVD+R

Hello. I bought a DVD burner to archive some of my videotapes. It can burn both DVD-R and DVD+R formats. In your opinion, which of these formats is better overall? Wikipedia and some technical websites suggest DVD+R is better. Agree or disagree? Thanks in advance for all of your comments!--El aprendelenguas 00:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

A couple of years I also googled around to decide which disks to use, and I found the same as you: like DVD+R suggests + is a bit better than -. Didn't found anyone saying the other way round. The quality of the blanks is also important. I've bought a box of DVD+R's that gave 20-25% coasters — all blanks aren't compatible with all burners. Don't buy the absolute cheapest "B grade" disks, and don't buy a huge box of disks you haven't tried first. Weregerbil 10:22, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

If I remember right, DVD-R is for only video, while DVD+R is more for "data." I don't know how to say it clearer. — [Mac Davis](talk) (SUPERDESK|Help me improve)05:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Typing

How do you type with boxing gloves on? NeonMerlin 01:23, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Can you handle a mouse? There are accesability tools which provides on-screen keyboards. Oskar 01:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I know how to answer this one: DELETED!! --Maxamegalon2000 01:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I think you'll find it's actually BALEETED! -Canley 03:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I can't believe that's an article. --Maxamegalon2000 05:02, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

what a stupid question

Lord of the Rings MIDI

Where can I find a good MIDI with the (main) theme from the Lord of the Rings trilogy movies? --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 06:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

You can use this link to figure out the title of your song and then plug it into this page. If it exists, there's a good chance of finding it. --Russoc4 11:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Did you read my comment? Anyways, I checked it again and didn't find it. --hello, i'm a member | talk to me! 02:26, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Where I can find information?

hello...i need more information about the software "PRINT STUDIO and QUICK TIME" ....Where i can find this?

For the second, take a look at QuickTime. For the first, I'm afraid I have never heard it... — QuantumEleven 06:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Print studio is an archaic Mac program. I can't even remember what system it was on. — [Mac Davis](talk) (SUPERDESK|Help me improve)05:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Follow-up question

... to the "Windows recovery CD" question above: More out of curiosity than anything else, why do PC OEMs ship their machines with recovery disks instead of OS disks? In the end, the software is the same (so no less license fees for them), and I have to admit I don't see the advantage of storing the backup data on a hidden HD partition when it could just as easily have been put on a CD or two (my hidden partition has just over 1GB of data, so a measelly extra two CDs). And it just makes things difficult for the end user if they mess around with their partition table. What am I missing? — QuantumEleven 06:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

No-one is saying, but I'll bet MS does charge them less for a licence which doesn't include the capacity to install the OS on another machine - they certainly do for Office licences - BIOS-locked Office licences (Office installers that only work on a specific OEM's machines) are a good bit cheaper. Secondly it's a big support gain for the OEM - when someone screws something up, their helpdesk people just tell the customer to boot into the restore program and restore the OS - that's a huge amount easier for them than talking people through a whole new XP install followed by the ten reboots they'll go through as they install each of the platform-specific device drivers. That's also the reason its in a special partition (it's much easier) and there's no danger you'll not be able to find the disks (which, after a year or two, seems to be inevitable). They don't care if this inconvenciences more advanced users who repartition machines - they figure that if you're technically minded enough to repartition the machine, you're technical enough to get yourself out of any problems this way of handling OS images poses. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 07:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

How did it go btw? Not really answering your question, but Walter McFinlay (or whatever your name is ;) did it so well. Oskar 12:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Mr. McWalter. There is also the fact that you can't install Windows yourself on a another new computer with no OS installed with just a restore disk, which would probably translate into more money for Microsoft (or more repeat customers for the computer manufacturer).  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  14:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

There is software "print studio" in apple.com website...i need more information about that

Couple of things I've noticed... this is speculation, but a friend of mine just bought a new computer from HP. It was loaded with garbage. 9 gigs compressed of it. Utterly ridiculous. But hey, if they can make a few dollars selling ad space on brand new computers, they can lower their MSRPs... or raise profit margins (if there is such a thing on PCs :). In order to guarantee that ad space is actually going to be there, they can't just give you a stock copy of an XP install and let you install a bare bones OS after purchase. Also, from hunting around in the drivers on the recovery partition of this HP, it looks like they use DOS (!!) to prepare these machines. So it's possible that any modifications to the partition table might mess up DOS enough that it won't be able to find the recovery partition during a later recovery attempt. Just a warning. Anyways, the recovery partition on this HP DID include a Windows MCE install, but they had modified a few of the files to streamline the recovery process. Fortunately, they left original copies of the modified files in a DIST subfolder, so I was able to copy those back an install fresh, without all the ad garbage. Good luck with your Linux experience :). --Silvaran 05:44, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Pentium 4

I have computer pentium 4 , 3000Mhz , 1 level cache , 1 GB RAM

when i start FIFA , when FIFA 2002 loading , the screan is stop. and give me the Desctop?

whats the problem?

It seems that your computer is actually too fast for the game. That's EA for you... anyway, try this link here. --Russoc4 11:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard : ). Well at least they'll give you a free version of FIFA 2003, as long as you have a warranty.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  14:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Utterly unacceptable - I thought this had died out a decade ago. I guess there are still too many lasy programmers about... Robmods 21:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

hidden fields

Can u clearify the usage of hidden fields in passing of parameters between pages in asp.net?

Icons are not visible on desktop

I purchased a new e machine and cannot see any icons on my desktop. When I go to my computer and check desktop, they exist. Is there a feature that hides or prevents me from sending so that they may be viewed?

vinniedej

If you're using Windows XP, right-click on the desktop and go to Arrange Icons By -> and click Show Desktop Icons. That should do it.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  14:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

What a rediculous feature. Horribly implemented too, it takes like 10 seconds --froth^{T C} 22:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

where does a file go when i delete it from my computer?

where does a file go when i delete it from my computer?

Assuming you are using a common operating system, the file doesn't go anywhere. It is still there. All you are deleting is a little note in a special area of the disk that says where the file is located. Eventually, since that area isn't reserved anymore, it is possible for space to be overwritten. This concept is clouded by the concept of the "trashcan". You delete a file and it goes to the trash. That is not true. It doesn't go anywhere. It is just relabeled as being trash and, if necessary, it is deleted so another file can use the space. So, you can also see that when you copy a file from from directory to another on the same drive, it doesn't go anywhere. It is just relabeled. --Kainaw ^(talk) 12:22, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

A little clarification. When you delete a file in Windows, like Kainaw said, it goes into what's usually called the trash bin. This effectively does absolutely nothing except mark the file as "ready to be deleted". Not only does the file still exist and store space in your hard-drive, the marker pointing to it still does too, although it has been hidden from view unless you look inside the "trash bin". When you delete the contents of your trash bin, the marker pointing to the file is deleted, and doing that tells your computer that the space is no longer needed, so space is freed up on your drive as well. Since a hard-drive doesn't swipe clean automatically, the arrangement of code representing the file still exists on it, although most modern operating systems give you no method of accessing that data, so it can usually be considered to be "deleted".

Problems happen when hard-drives get stolen, and people use specially made tools to recover the previously deleted "files" on the hard-drive, by applying arbitrary labels to them using special tools. If you use the space on your hard drive a lot, the files will eventually get scrambled up and over-written by other files, but other than by using special programs, the only way to really completely and securely delete the data on your hard-drive is to reformat it, which is not something you'll want to do all the time. Most people don't store that kind of top secret information on their hard drives though, so simply removing the label suffices.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  14:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

However, as noted in the Disk format article, that is not secure; the data can be recovered (sometimes very easily). A Disk wipe is necessary to be really safe. --LarryMac 14:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I keep suggesting that our MRI dept put boxes on the sides of the MRI machines for us to put hard drives in. A couple days sitting next to an MRI and the drives should be completely wiped of any and all patient info. --Kainaw ^(talk) 23:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

You can't still use magnetic fields can you? What about the neodymiums in the harddrive? — [Mac Davis](talk) (SUPERDESK|Help me improve)05:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Limited data recovery is still possible after "wiping" a hard drive with a strong magnet --froth^{T C} 22:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

can firefox 1.5.0.7 and IE 6.0 be simultaneously used?

recently i dwnloaded Mozilla Firefox 1.5. i also use IE 6.0 and don't want to reject it yet. can i use them simultaneously? also, if i use them separately one at a time would there be any problem (i mean, is it safe to keep them both?)? i have a P4-2.4GHz chip with 126 MB ram and 40 gb hdd.

You can have both installed at the same time, you can run both at the same time. One of them will want to be your default browser (i.e. the one that opens when you click on a link in an email or some other program), but other than that, they co-exist quite peacefully. --LarryMac 14:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

You might also find this FireFox extension useful. It will allow you to open up a Firefox browser tab with internet explorer running. Mitaphane _talk 21:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Q's about firefox

thanks, Larry. i dwnloaded firefox couple of minutes ago but when i 2clicked the Firefox Setup 1.5.0.7 icon an error msg generated :- Extraction Failed

              File is corrupt

I dwnloaded it in D:\ and IE is stored in C:\ what seems to be the problem?

Your download was corrupt. Download it again. When given a list of servers, pick a different one. There is absolutely no connection or relationship between Firefox and IE, so if IE was installed on a P: drive during a full moon on Tuesday at 11:43pm while balancing a half-cup of grape juice on an 18-inch ruler, it will have absolutely nothing to do with a Firefox install. --Kainaw ^(talk) 17:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Native windows xp video format

Recently I have started using a dvd camcorder to make videos (for school and for fun). However, a problem I have been encountering is that when it comes time to present videos in class, my teachers computer never seems to have to correct codecs, being that they never download additional codecs. (I usually convert the mpeg-2 files into H.263 avi's so that i can edit them in open source editors) This is no problem at home, since I use the k-lite mega codec pack, which has virtually every codec out there. I am wondering if anyone could provide me with a list of video codecs/formats that come standard with windows xp so that i can convert my videos accordingly so that they will be compatible. I have already attempted to search google, but the results seem slightly too cryptic to me. (I have little to no experince with digital video) - Ridge Racer 21:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The Microsoft Knowledgebase has a list of default codecs in Windows Media Player 9 and 10 here. --Canley 00:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)