Computing desk
< January 20	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 22 >

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 21

Keep losing connectivity on wireless connection

I recently hooked up a wireless router in my home but I keep losing connectivity and am unable to regain it. It doesn't seem to be a problem with signal, as that still shows up strong. It's more like access to the Internet can't be transmitted past the router to my computer.

When I connect my computer to the router using an Ethernet cable, I do get connectivity. Furthermore, doing this does allow me to regain wireless connectivity. I am using WPA2 security if that might also have something to do with the problem. Does anyone know of any possible solutions? --71.103.86.9 (talk) 02:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[1] MrsBucket (talk) 13:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you running torrents? some routers are unable to cope with the type of traffic they generate and will cut out/lock-up. --Fredrick day (talk) 13:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not likely to be the solution to your problem, but I get occasional interference between my computer wireless link and my AV transmitter which re-broadcasts a TV signal to another room. I think they use similar frequencies. dbfirs 18:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But interference is very likely for wireless networking. If you can improve your signal with a better location or antenna, or remove the source of interference you will improve the situation. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:01, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What to do with laptop monitor?

I have a monitor that previously belonged to an Acer Aspire 3620 laptop. The laptop itself is toast, but I think the LCD should still be good. Is there a way to connect this monitor to another computer? - RedWordSmith (talk) 05:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you are refering to the laptop's built-in monitor, than probably not. Sadly, It is notoriously difficult to repurpose laptop displays for general purpose use. The problem is that circuitry that on a desktop would be part of the monitor, is part of the computer's motherboard. For some panels controllers can be purchased (sorry, I don't have links handy.), but this would probably cost as much as a new monitor. APL (talk) 17:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, and I had such high hopes... thanks anyway. :) - RedWordSmith (talk) 01:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The one thing it is near certain to be useful for is as a replacement part for another laptop of the same model, or a similar model from the same manufacturer. You might be able to make a few bucks off it on ebay. 84.239.133.86 (talk) 21:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help with deleting photos

I need help please to delete hundreds of photos on my computer. I have only just recently learned how to burn them on a disc so wanted to free up my computer. All that is happening is that they are copying over and over when I try to delete and now I have hundreds making my computer even slower than ever. If you can help could you tell me step by step as I am not that good at this type of thing. Thanks Norma —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.16.22 (talk) 08:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In general you highlight the file you wish to delete (click once with mouse), and follow your operating system's deletion process. PCs have a delete key. I am unsure about Macs.

Please follow that for a single file and see what the problem is, then come back here and report success or failure, and, if failure, please give full details of what happened. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What I do is drag and drop the files to the trash icon in the dock. later, if you are sure that you can delete the files safely, you can right click the trash icon and delete it from there. Kushal^t 03:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Watching videos on iPod and Video formats

I'd like to know how to convert videos of some common formats, so that I can watch videos on iPod. iPod seems to support .mov and .qt only (or some more?), but even when I tried to put some .mov files, it didn't work. May I know if there is any specific converter in-built in iTunes or.. any other converters?

Specifically, I'd like to know how to convert .wmv and .rm files. --61.92.239.192 (talk) 10:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

just google for 'free ipod video converter', but read carefully, a lot of them are full of shit (demos only, etc. really read several of the links first, and find someone who says somethign positive about one (and make sure it's free) ). you might also add "windows" or "freeware" to your search. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.51.122.23 (talk) 10:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've found some. Thx. As expected, there isn't really a direct way of converting stuff...--61.92.239.192 (talk) 13:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Incase you check back Videora iPod converter is the best one I have found, with SUPER a close second. You can find links to both of them via Google. TheGreatZorko (talk) 13:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

is $336 too much for a 1200 lumen 800x600 projector USED?

There's a projector at a used technical shop across the street from me for $336. They say the price isn't negotiable, and in fact had been $396 until recently. It's a panasonic.

Would I get a good image from that? Is that good for watching DVD's on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.51.122.23 (talk) 11:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It depends a lot on the model. And whether it's the sort designed for presentations or the sort designed for 'home theater'. However, one thing to remember is that it may need a new bulb soon, and those can cost up to four or five hundred dollars, depending on the type of bulb it takes. If you have a model number it would help. APL (talk) 17:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How long do you anticipate/expect the lamp to last? Kushal^t 00:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

projector specs for dvd-watching

what specs do i need to watch dvd in good quality at home wiht my family (3-4 members), like resolution, lumens, contrast ratio and anything else. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.51.122.23 (talk) 11:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have an Optoma HD70 and I'm quite happy with it. [2] It cost me about $1000, but replacing the bulb when it burns out is going to cost me over $300. APL (talk) 17:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Radiation in computers.

I need to know how much/if computers produce any radiation that could cause a disease. Having this argument with my friend. Thanks in advance. Dr Alcohol (talk) 16:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CRT monitors produce small amounts of soft X-rays, but LCD displays don't. All electronic devices produce small amounts of electromagnetic radiation; the amount produced is unlikely to be harmful but some debate still is occurring; see Electromagnetic radiation and health. Computers with radios in them also contain point sources of EM radiation (the Wi-Fi antenna, the Bluetooth antenna, the wireless internet antenna, etc.). And finally, laptop computers that are actually placed in your lap may caused testicular heating if you are so equipped; this is certainly bad for your sperm count and may be bad for you in general.

But mostly, overuse of the computer rots your brain ;-) ...

Atlant (talk) 17:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's worth noting nuclear radiation specifically since that's what people think of. Computers don't put out any more nuclear radiation than any other hunk of metal and plastic. APL (talk) 17:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe even Ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation is a Bad Thing for computers -- it can cause bits to flip. Traces of radiation can destroy a microchip production line. So, it would figure that they wouldn't emit much of their own. So, EM (magnetic), RF (radio), and IR (heat) are all that's left, really. --Mdwyer (talk) 19:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So how long would you need to sit in front of the computer to get radiation sickness? I don't care if it's absurd, just curious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr Alcohol (talk • contribs) 08:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forever. Computers don't produce radiation. Ariel. (talk) 10:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Computers don't, but (as I said above) CRT monitors do: X-rays.

Atlant (talk) 12:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This link [3] looks useful. It estimates that 3% of the average persons lifetime exposure to radiation comes from consumer products (CRT's: tv's, computer monitors). The bulk is from natural radiation on earth. It's too bad it doesn't give the data source, so you could adjust it for length of time in front of a CRT. 3% seems quite high to me BTW. Ariel. (talk) 13:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not for a real Wikipedian ;-).

Atlant (talk) 15:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The same length of time you'd need to get radiation sickness from a bicycle. There are no nuclear reactions happening in your computer, it will not produce the ionizing radiation that causes radiation sickness. The only forms of 'radiation' your computer emits take the forms of Light, radio interference, and heat. None of those things will give you radiation sickness. (EDIT Oh, I'd forgotten about X-rays from CRTs. I was thinking of LCDs.)

Now, of course, nuclear decay happens in minuscule, barely even measurable, amounts in virtually all matter. If you had a bicycle or a stack of books (or a human being) that weighed the same as your computer you'd get roughly the same amount of nuclear radiation. I don't have a figure for this, though. Perhaps someone else can do the math and tell you how many years (probably millions) you'd have to be exposed to a computer to get a dose considered "dangerous".--APL (talk) 14:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even taking X-rays from a CRT into account, "forever" is still the correct answer. Your body can heal itself faster than the computer can cause damage. --Carnildo (talk) 20:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your monitor emits radiation in the form of visible light! --wj32 ^t/c 03:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GOOGLE EARTH HATES ME!!!

hi,

everytime i open up google earth (the normal free one) it will work for about 5secs.....possible up to 20secs then a box with a white cross on red background will appear telling me that google earth is experienceing technical difficulties and needs to close....then asks if i want to send info about the problem to google bla bla bla.........then it lets me see the info on the problem.....it says that it is to do with, i think, docs. and settings\[user name]\local settings\temp\google earth [lots of random #s].dmp

help...............how do i make google earth live.............???

thanks, --84.70.111.146 (talk) 17:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MORE INFO: it seems only to happen in Southern and Eastern parts of England, in particular Essex!!!!!!!! strange!!!--84.70.111.146 (talk) 18:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try switching from D3D/DirectX to OpenGL mode, or the other way around. That might help. Also, if you are running a dual-core AMD processor, consider getting a processor driver update. This fixes some strange timing problems. --Mdwyer (talk) 19:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can we have your computer specs? If you are under XP go to run on the start menu, and type DXDiag, and tell us Processor, Memory, and Chip type under Display, and Name under Sound. TheGreatZorko (talk) 13:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non Destrucitve Partitioning

(I'm using a Mac.) I have an external 200gb hard rive with 3 partitions:

/dev/disk2

  #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
  0:     FDisk_partition_scheme                        *186.3 Gi   disk2
  1:                  Apple_HFS Time Machine            90.1 Gi    disk2s1
  2:                 DOS_FAT_32 VIDEOS                  30.0 Gi    disk2s2
  3:                  Apple_HFS Data                    66.2 Gi    disk2s3

I'd like to remove the 'Data' partition and resize the 'VIDEOS' partition to fill up the empty space. Is their anyway to do this without losing my Time Maching partition?--Ryan (talk) 19:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If they are laid out as it's shown I don't see why it cannot be done. Try use gparted from a Linux LiveCD to losslessly resize it. --antilived^{T | C | G} 20:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gparted works wonders and is super easy to use. It makes partitioning totally non-scary. Give it a shot. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 22:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I used to love gparted until it stopped working. Now when I try to resize my NTFS partition it gets halfway through and fails with terrifying messages "sorry we suck because you likely experienced systemic data loss" :O but then everything's fine after a chkdsk. I have to use vista's NTFS resizer any time I want to shrink it :/ --f f r o t h 12:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vista won't allow its install partition to be resized externally, possibly because of its indexing service.TheGreatZorko (talk) 14:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I used to be able to resize my vista partition.. also I have the indexing service disabled, and anyway it works on top of the filesystem so it knows nothing about where files are on the disk --f f r o t h 21:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I used an Ubuntu liveCD, it worked great. No errors, everything looks clean. No errors yet, and everything md5s the same. Thanks everyone!--Ryan (talk) 23:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leopard's Disk Utility allows you to non-destructively alter partition sizes too. --64.123.119.253 (talk) 06:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DVD burner for old laptop

I have an old laptop and want to buy a DVD burner for it. How do I know which one is going to fit or are them all the same?217.168.3.246 (talk) 19:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

since space in a laptop is at a premium, you normally cannot get an internal drive, uless you buy from the laptop manufacturer. You will get better luck with a USB connected burner. Hopefully your laptop has a USB 2 port. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not entirely sure, but all laptop optical drives i have seen, have had the same size and same type of connector. Such form factor DVD burner might be 2-3 times more expensive than 5.25'' DVD burner used in desktop computers. -Yyy (talk) 10:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you can get USB-connected, external DVD burners for around USD 200 or less. Kushal^t 00:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to get them for A LOT less. I see them for half that at major big box stores... even less if you go with an off brand. --64.123.119.253 (talk) 06:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe, that laptop DVD burner, which costs more than USD 80 is overpriced. -Yyy (talk) 07:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got a really nice sony dvd burner (tiny profile, black aluminum design, all +-r,rw,ram,blah blah) for $100 from newegg, but that's the verrry top of high end external burners. Most will run $40-70 --f f r o t h 21:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questions posted on 18th, 19th, 20th, and 21st?

Why can I only see questions posted up to the 17th., despite doing a CRTL F5 refresh? Whats haoppened to later questions, including my own? I had the same problem yesterday. Thanks 80.0.97.32 (talk) 21:27, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now after posting this question, they suddenly appear. Why? 80.0.97.32 (talk) 21:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

JavaScript

I was trying to get a piece of code to replace the background of a page with a local image, but I only know how to change the colour of the background. So far I've got

javascript:var nuStyle=document.createElement('link');nuStyle.rel='stylesheet';nuStyle.href='data:text/css,* {background:'C:\Documents and Settings\family\Desktop\Image'; color:#FFF !important} :link {color:#00F !important} :visited {color:#93C !important}';void(document.documentElement.childNodes[0].appendChild(nuStyle));

With Documents and Settings, I've checked out _'s but they didn't change anything. There aren't any double quotes to conflict with the a href tags, so what am I doing wrong? Yamakiri ^T_C § 01-21-2008 • 21:45:11

I might be wrong but have you tried linking to its filename with the file:// protocol? That's more standard for local files than just using a regular command line. Also, couldn't you just do:

document.body.style.backgroundImage = "url('file://path')";

That would seem easier to me than the way you are doing it (though I haven't tested it). --Panoptik (talk) 00:06, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox doesn't like it... I tried that alone and coupled with the other code. Besides, I'm sure that (excluding the background part) that's the only way to do it. Yamakiri ^T_C § 01-22-2008 • 00:55:33

It works for me in Firefox. I think the problem is your link needs to be of the file:/// sort. How to get the right link is easy: open up the local image within Firefox, and look at how it handles it in the command line. I run OS X so mine command line will look different from yours, but mine is along the lines of: file:///Users/myusername/Desktop/myimage.jpg.

Now note that you can't run this code before the BODY has started to load! That means you either 1. put it in the body itself somewhere, or 2. have to make it run in the onload property of the BODY.

I don't see why you'd need to do anything the way you are doing it up above. Why create a link to a non-existant stylesheet full of values when you can just directly modify the stylesheet values with javascript? --24.147.69.31 (talk) 14:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question about scripts

Just in the last few days I have been having this problem: When I click Preview on particular articles, the browser grows pale, then I get an error message saying something like "This script has stopped working. Do you want to terminate?" The only solution is to close that page. That just happened on the article Bas-relief to me repeatedly - each time because I had made an error in formating an image I was trying to put on that page. However, it has happened several times today.

I am using Firefox/2.0.0.11 with Greasemonkey. Do you know what is causing this? Many pages, even if I make a mistake, this does not happen. And it happens when I am not trying to put an image on the page. What script is running on Preview? Thanks, Mattisse 22:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After an experience on an off-wiki site, I think it is Greasemonkey. But I have had Greasemonkey for a while with no problems. Mattisse 22:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I use the same including Greasemonkey, and don't have any problem. Maybe you could try temporarily clearing your monobook.js. The only other thing I could think of would be re-installing FireFox. Do you have a problem seeing it in IE? If it's just Show Preview, we've got a separate monobook script for Quick Preview that's different.Yamakiri ^T_C § 01-21-2008 • 22:18:35

I never use IE. But I just talked to someone on Wikipedia who says he is having the same problem, and he thinks it is a wikipedia server problem. It has been slow lately. If it persists I guess I will have to reinstall. Thanks, Mattisse 22:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not use GreaseMonkey but I am very certain it is not Greasemonkey. It is just one more reason to use Mozilla Firefox! Kushal^t 00:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC) Update: In Firefox, we do get messages in case a script stops responding. However, this does not have the silly "yes" or "no" buttons with windows popping up repeatedly no mater which one you push. In Firefox, you get "Stop script" or "Continue" message and it does not pop up again unless there is another error. Kushal^t 00:51, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greasemonkey is an add-on to Firefox. --LarryMac | Talk 14:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

keyboard vs. Tablet pc

What is faster, writing on a keyboard or on a Tablet pc?217.168.3.246 (talk) 22:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keyboard. On average keyboards are twice as fast as writing, unless you don't use Ten Finger Touch Typing. 70.186.217.199 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you know how to type, a keyboard is much faster. Even when doing mathematics, I use a keyboard and formula markup language instead of writing. It takes far too long to write. This holds true for many languages and in some even more-so than English. In Mandarin, the type-ahead features allow you to select whole phrases with relatively few key presses. The drawback is that children who grow up only typing in China have had trouble writing without a magical write-ahead feature. This is really no different than American children who can't spell anything with more than four letters due to knowing only texting. -- kainaw ™ 03:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]