Computing desk
< June 16	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 18 >

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.

June 17

Installation disks

I'm switching to Comcast cable internet service and I bought some new gear to work with it. In the Comcast startup kit, as well as with my new Linksys router, I recieved CDs I'm instructed to run. I'm not entirely sure, but I don't think these disks will run on my computer which has ubuntu. Do you think either of these disks has anything I'd really need (or want)? ike9898 (talk) 01:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may not need either. I put the Ubuntu live CD in and it boots right up into Ubuntu with full internet access. You might have to configure your router to work with your cable modem, but this can be achieved by logging into your router after you connect the wires and turn everything on. Try http://192.168.1.1/ ... all the information you need for that will be in the linksys quick start guide most likely. Good luck. 71.164.115.161 (talk) 02:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

71 is correct. You will not miss any of the junkware. Please do yourself a favor and just store away those CDs in a safe place, though. You might need it when you cancel your cable Internet service. Kushal (talk) 02:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I'm still a little wary is that the router has a big sticker over the ports that says 'run the disk before plugging anything in' and the inserts in the package say the same thing. I don't know if this is relevant, but I intend to replace the router's firmware with DD-WRT. ike9898 (talk) 14:24, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some broadband providers rig their routers so until you do the magic installation procedure, the router won't go anywhere useful except for the provider's "Hello! Welcome to our crappy excuse for broadband!" page. Verizon DSL is currently definitely like that, although Comcast cable broadband wasn't like this when we installed it several years ago. If this is the case, a phone call to your broadband provider's tech support (probably second-level or better tech support) should be able to get this squared-away for you. Your router can probably be "talked to" at 192.168.1.1 or some similar address.

Atlant (talk) 15:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The modem does not require you run any software. It will trap you at a "welcome page" unless you do, but you can call the tech support line, tell them you have an unsupported OS, and they should (are supposed to) register it quickly and without any issue. The router also doesn't require you run the software either; they put that there for less-than-knowledgable people who tend to go headlong into things and screw them up. Just connect to 192.168.1.1 with a browser, set it up for DHCP or Automatic/Dynamic IP, and you're good. And, may I recommend Tomato Firmware as an alternative to DD-WRT; I find it to perform better, it's more stable, and the interface is nicer (plus it has a bandwidth monitor built-in, which is very useful). -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:12, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

>Do you think either of these disks has anything I'd really need (or want)?

The Linksys disc will probably have a PDF manual that you will find useful.
When I installed our SBC Yahoo internet, the install disc included a nice surprise. If you looked in the root directory of the disc, there were clearly marked documents describing how to connect the equipment and register your account without needing to run the setup program or install any software. The documents were HTML files with a very plain layout, so they would be accessible on any computer that has a web browser. You might consider at least looking at the Comcast setup disc to see if they included similar instructions.

>The reason I'm still a little wary is that the router has a big sticker over the ports that says 'run the disk before plugging anything in'

If you see a sticker over the ports on a modem or router that came from your provider, it may have a USB port that can connect to your computer to emulate a network adaptor. USB devices like this often require you install the drivers before plugging in the cable, so stickers are usually placed over the USB port to warn you to install the disc first. If you only use an Ethernet cable, the setup disc is most likely not required.
What model is your Linksys router? --Bavi H (talk) 03:25, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RSS Feed

I'm beta testing my RSS reader software, and I need an RSS feed that updates very frequently--once every few minutes or so--to see if it is working properly.

Thanks, 71.164.115.161 (talk) 01:48, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With FeedDemon you can modify the update options through Tools->Synchronization Options->Check feed for new content every X minutes. I would be willing to guess most readers have similar options.--droptone (talk) 12:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could grab the feed of a Summize search of a very common term - something like this. That should update whenever someone makes a post on Twitter containing "the". — Matt Eason ^{(Talk  Contribs)} 14:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Second Life has stopped loving my MacBook

When I first started using Second Life, it would immediately crash on login. But I found a fix via the Internet that involved changing a couple of settings through the preferences menu, and after I succeeded in doing that, it didn't give me any more trouble than it gives everyone. Today, I tried to log on, which required uploading the new version of the program. "Yay," I said, "I'm curious to see what Windlight looks like." But I didn't, really, because after I log in, I have perhaps five seconds before I crash. But this time, when I try to search the Internet to see if I need to do that same fix again, or if something else is the problem, I can't find anything, because the first ten pages of search results are related to crashes of MacBook Pro's new graphic interface, which I don't have. Am I doomed to never again enjoy a live concert in a virtual pub? Can someone direct me to a fix that might work, ideally, one that assumes I am an idiot? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:33, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My own graphics thing is Intel GMA X3100, if that helps. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 02:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not Second Life specifically, but have you made sure your drivers are the latest available and Mac OS X has all the latest updates? Nil Einne (talk) 02:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a little embarrassing. I assumed I was up-to-date because I have it set to automatically update every week, but when I ran the updater, I found assorted un-updated things. And now, I'm in a virtual pub, listening to a depressingly mediocre singer. Thanks for not assuming that I'd already tried all the obvious things! -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 03:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keyboard troubles

I've been trying to troubleshoot this forever, but I can't seem to find anyone with the exact same problem as me. It's a bit difficult to explain. I bought this laptop about a year ago, and it still works perfectly fine. When I first bought it I noticed that sometimes letters wouldn't register, and I assumed that the keys weren't quite as lite as I was used to, so I took a little more care with my typing and that solved the problem. Gradually it became obvious that it wasn't anything to do with the keys themselves, as the problem got worse and worse, and it seemed to be that keys were getting dropped from the buffer at a pretty unreasonable rate. I can type at about 50-60 wpm with no problems, but as soon as I speed up to my normal typing speed (about 80-90) letters stop appearing, and I have to keep correcting.

I'm running Vista (on a very capable computer), and I've got your standard array of processes running in the background; messenger, skype, uTorrent, gmail notifier, avast, etc. I think it might be a memory problem, I'm not really sure. Has anyone ever come across a problem like this? 210.254.117.186 (talk) 02:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you don't have some sort of spyware or other malware (in particular some sort of keylogger)? Is Windows Defender or someother spyware detector running? Also are you running on the battery or is the laptop plugged in (or does it make a difference). BTW do you have SP1 and all the latest updates (including hardware drivers)? BTW, have you checked to see if there is a keyboard buffer option in the bios? And have you tried disabling all background processes you can to see if it solves the problem? Nil Einne (talk) 03:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. I've always been pretty careful (or lucky) with virii and spyware, but I am running defender and avast! anyways. The laptop is usually plugged in, and I've never noticed any difference. I wasn't aware that there was an SP1 for Vista, but I do have Windows Update running automatically, so I should have all the latest fixes (and I just checked, the last update was yesterday). It's possible that some hardware driver could be out of date, but there is no news about it on the manufacturer website, and I can't think of a piece of hardware that would be conflicting with the keyboard. I just tried running Vista in safe mode, with nothing running, and there is still problem with the keyboard buffer, or typing at least. There is no option in the BIOS concerning keyboard buffers, and in fact it's a surprisingly bare-bones BIOS. I notice now that when I hold down a key and make it type the same letter in repetition, I can see it lag every 10 letters or so, as if there were memory hiccups. It's odd though because the mouse cursor never skips, and neither do any games or other applications, just the cursor. 210.254.117.186 (talk) 05:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd boot off a Linux CD and type fast in a Linux text editor. If that doesn't drop characters then the problem is Windows-specific and if it doesn't then it isn't. Even if you're not interested in using Linux in the medium term it's a useful diagnostic tool in the short term. Morenoodles (talk) 07:22, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say the problem is that the process reading the keystrokes has too low of a percentage of system resources to keep up with you. As already suggested, you could reduce the number of other processes running so, hopefully, your process will get more resources. Also, Vista is a notorious resource hog, I bet you'd do a lot better under Windows XP. StuRat (talk) 14:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was planning on putting the new Ubuntu on this machine soon anyways so I'll give the gparted boot disk or something a try tomorrow. Still, I even have problems typing in my password properly at the Windows login screen so it can't be anything to do with the processes I'm running, and this is a new computer, and Vista runs perfectly smooth on it, so I don't think it has anything to do with Vista taking too much resources, though I guess it's likely it is Windows-specific. I'm not going to switch back to Windows XP though, it's not really practical for me to do so (especially after I've just payed for a new computer). 210.254.117.186 (talk) 18:14, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think system resources (or a lack thereof) should be a problem as far as input like keyboard is concerned. Any decent operating system normally gives the process real-time priority. I would suspect something with the hardware. However, go ahead with a Live version of Linux or a Wubi Install if you want to. Kushal (talk) 21:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could also have some app(s) running that do something periodically, like auto-saving. This is another reason why killing off all nonessential processes with the Task Manager might help you to find the culprit(s). StuRat (talk) 17:24, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did I mention that the problem starts before I even log in to my user? (i.e. at the login prompt before any non-essential processes have been loaded). And it doesn't make a difference how much time I leave the computer to let it's stomach settle after starting up. 210.254.117.186 (talk) 02:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Know thy processes in windows

In the Windows Task-Manager I see a list of processes like: svchost.exe explorer.exe, ... How can I know what these are? (besides googling them). 80.58.205.37 (talk) 09:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You could try killing them off one by one and seeing what no longer works. Expect strange behavior, and save any work beforehand. Morenoodles (talk) 09:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft offers for free a more advanced tool than Task Manager: Process Explorer. You can know more about what a certain process is doing using it. It's nifty, but you won't go very far unless you want to deal with technical info. If that's not the case, Googling is the way to go. — Kieff | Talk 09:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Googling the names will help with many. I can tell you that Explorer and the many instances of Svchost are normal system processes. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 21:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Writing Tests in Open Office, and Filling With Dots

Hello,

I'm trying to write a test with open office writer, and I have a quick question. Is there any way to get open office to fill the remainder of a line with dots? I need a space for the students to write on. I.E. Define refraction: .........[Until the end of the line].

Thank you for any help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.226.54.26 (talk) 10:10, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is normally accomplished with underlines. Turn on underline (ctrl-U). Press the tab key until you get to the end of the line. Do this for each line that needs a "blank" to fill in. Because you are using tabs, you can stop just before the end of the line and each tabbed blank will end at the same distance from the side of the page. Once you do that, you can change the underlines to dots or dashes. Highlight the underlines (you can use your mouse - I hold shift and move the cursor over the whole underline). Right-click on the underlined section and go to "character". Select Font Effects and set the type of Underlining that you want. -- kainaw ™ 11:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In OO.o 2.0 Writer - double click on the ruler bar to open the paragraph format box (or select Format/Paragraph). On the Tabs tab, set a right tab at the right margin, or wherever you'd like the line to extend to. In the lower half of that window, select the Fill character (default is None, the second radio button give you dots). --LarryMac | Talk 13:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Displaying ♥ and other uncommon characters in iTunes

My iTunes is unable to display the ♥ symbol, and certain other uncommon characters, when I put them into the various fields (Track name, album, artist, etc.). Instead I see the rectangular box character that replaces

I have Windows XP SP3, and these characters did not display with SP2 either. Is there a file I could download that would allow such characters to be seen in iTunes? − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 11:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC

If you see a rectangle, that usually means that unicode is supported, but the font that the program is using doesn't have an entry for that character position. If there is a way to change the font used in iTunes, or an option to change the language that all of the menus are displayed in, then you can probably remedy the problem, but if you can't then you may be out of luck. That is unless you're willing to reprogram parts of it. 210.254.117.186 (talk) 18:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

explain properties and methods of generic unordered list ?

explain properties and methods of generic unordered list ? generic unordered list means? is it binary tree ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.110.211.149 (talk) 12:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A list is inherently ordered. The closest thing to an "unordered list" is usually called a bag or just a set. --Sean 16:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It could just be an unsorted linked list that is generic (meaning it doesn't have a type specified for the entries). -- Mad031683 (talk) 15:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

linux os

Hi,

I have SUSE 10.0 and windows xp installed on my laptop. I dual boot using the GRUB boot loader. The problem is I am not able to access(or for that matter see) the windows partition through linux when I have 'hibernated' from XP...but when I boot into suse after shutting down (or restarting) XP, I am able to access the windows partition completely. Also SUSE does not allow me to write into the windows partition. Please help. I am a complete newbie in Linux so please explain the steps in detail...Thanking u... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Piyushbehera25 (talk • contribs) 15:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Recent versions of SUSE use the ReiserFS file system instead of ext3. Because writing to an NTFS drive from a ReiserFS one can potentially damage it, NTFS drives are mounted as read-only in SUSE Linux. You can change this by editing your /etc/fstab file. Find the line with the XP partition and change ro to rw and reboot your machine. There are applications that can do this for you, too. Just search in YAST for NTFS and they should come up.--Hello. I'm new here, but I'm sure I can help out. (talk) 19:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for not seeing the drive, I'm not sure. Check to see if it's in FSTAB, /dev/ and /mnt/. It should be named hda1 or something like that. It might work if you mount the Windows drive from the command line:

mount /dev/hda1 /mnt/xp

But you might also have to use mkdir to make the XP folder in /mnt/.--Hello. I'm new here, but I'm sure I can help out. (talk) 20:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a page to the site

Question moved to Help Desk Astronaut (talk) 21:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The answer was at Wikipedia:Requested articles. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strange problems with some links.

A friend of mine has recently had this strange problem with some links here in Wikipedia and in other websites, especially forums: whenever he clicks on a link that supposedly should go to a, for example, science article, the link immediately takes him to a porn website. Now, I'm pretty sure that the link actually doesn't go to a porn website, because it takes me to a science article whenever I click on it. I'm wondering why it always takes us to different websites, maybe he got hacked or something else, anyone know what could be happening? If you need an example, this is one of the links that we're having problems with; in my case, it always goes to a blog, but as I said before, my friend is saying that he's taking him to a porn website. Oh, and for the record, I don't really think he's joking. --Nkcs (talk) 17:19, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like he's got some kind of malware. He should disconnect from the internet, you should download copies of AdAware, Spybot, and the virus checker of your choice (perhaps Avast) and give them to him on a CD so that he can clean up his pwned machine. --LarryMac | Talk 18:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, Larry. Unfortunately for us, we don't live near each other at the moment, he's actually living in another country, so until we meet again, I can't give him a CD with an anti-spyware program and a virus checker. Any other ideas? --Nkcs (talk) 18:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, his computer seems to have survived being connected to the internet so far. So he should try downloading the software himself. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 18:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He can try to download all that himself, assuming he can get to the appropriate sites. I'd still disconnect from the 'net once they're downloaded and installed (and updated) to prevent ongoing problems. If he can't get to the download sites while in Wondows, another approach would be to boot from an Ubuntu live CD (assuming he can get his hands on one) which would most likely provide a working browser for him. --LarryMac | Talk 18:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Memory Timings

Hello Wikipedia

My computer Bios has a menu for memory timings.

1) I was wanting to know the specifics on how each memory timing works ?

2) How to correctly calculate each timing for any DDR2 Clock when setting timings to manual.

3) How to correctly calculate each timing when overclocking the memory ?

4) Explain how each timing can have a performance impact if not set correctly ?

5) Then also any other important tips & tweaks you may know of when setting these timings ?

Cas Latency Time Precharge Delay (tRAS) Dram Ras# Precharghe Dram Ras# to Cas# Delay Bank to Bank cmd (TRRD) TRC TRTP Write Recovery (Twr) Write Read Command (Twtr) (Influnces Stability) TRFC0 TRFC1 TRFC2 TRFC3 Trdrd Trwtto Twrrd Twrwr CS/ODT Pin Fine DElay Bank Swizzle Mode Auto Tweak Performance Optimal Performance Mode

Thanks Wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.12.147.201 (talk) 18:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody knows. Seriously, I think only the engineers working in RAM manufacturers have this level of technical knowledge, but CAS latency should give you a start. You can use software like CPU-Z to find the default values for your module; if you go manual, you should set them close to these. Basically, any of the parameters will reduce performance if set too high, and reduce stability if set too low. My suggestion would be to leave timings altogether and simply increase the frequency as much as you can. If you do choose to change them, you should stick to the "major" ones - CAS Latency, RAS to CAS, RAS precharge and tRAS - and set them in the ratio 1-1-1-3. The only way to determine the effect on performance and stability is to run benchmarks and stress tests. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 18:46, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What determines processor efficiency?

In a previous question, I asked what the cause of the 3GHz plateau that CPU manufacturers seem to be experiencing. The responses were very helpful in that clock frequency isn't a good method of measuring performance. Today's chips, are faster at executing instructions, even though they have a slower GHz rating? That seems a little counter intuitive. So what makes a chip more efficient (besides adding cores) if speed is not a factor? --70.167.58.6 (talk) 19:14, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Such details require technical expertise beyond what you are likely to find here. The processor is a complex beast, with many circuits that can perform different tasks. Some tasks require a single clock cycle to execute, some require more. The frequency ("speed") quantifies the number of clock cycles per unit time, but processors differ in what they can accomplish in every cycle. In particular, better processors have more transistors and circuits, thus more capabilities.

I'll give a simplified example (which could be wholly incorrect; the specific quantities are certainly way off. the ideas should be valid, though). Suppose my program wants to multiply two 64-bit numbers, but the processor only has a circuit for multiplying 32-bit numbers (and assume it takes one cycle to do it). The processor would possibly cut the digits of each number to two parts, and multiply each half by each of the other halves. That is 4 multiplications. At the end we will need to add all the results appropriately, which could take another cycle. Thus we have used 5 cycles for this operation. If the processor had a circuit capable of multiplying 64-bit numbers in a cycle, the operation would take a single cycle. Thus if all we do is multiply 64-bit numbers, the latter processor will be 5 times faster than the former, if their frequency is identical.

Other improvements could be some sorts of small-scale parallelism. This doesn't mean adding more cores which are duplicates of the original, but rather having one core execute several of its functions simultaneously. Suppose I write code asking the processor to do some action A and then some action B. If the processor can determine that there is no importance to performing A first, and that the two actions utilize different circuits, it can do both actions at the same time. Thus the two actions will require only one cycle.

If you're in the mood for some marketing material, you can go here and click "view the demo" to hear about the imporvements in the upcoming Nehalem. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 19:44, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to be able to recommend the book 'everything you need to know about what makes computers go faster' - unfortunately I haven't written it yet.. Back in the real world key background reading is cache, Pipeline (computing), Superscalar, Instructions Per Cycle amongst others. I'll assume you know what each is and does - If you don't please read though I can't guarantee that the wikipedia articles will be particularily clear for your purposes... Now back to the question: going from say a 3GHz Pentium 4 to a 1.6-2.6 Core 2 Duo there haven't been any major inventions that changed the processor world. In fact a new single core may still be slower than the pentium 4 part, however one of the major factors of modern processor speed is 'pipelining' (different manufactures use different names) - this feature has the effect of doing individual instructions in parallel (or pseudo-parallel; meaning that two or more instructions are being carried out at the same time, but they don't start at the same time.)

For the old pentiums the pipeline was very long, the new core 2 duos etc have shorter pipelines. But for a doubling of pipeline the 'speed' does not necessarily double - this is due to various reasons but the main ones are that (simplified)

a. branching instructions tend to disrupt the pipeline

b. instruction dependancies (see Superscalar#Limitations) have a similar negative effect.

So making the pipeline longer makes the computer faster, but eventually the law of diminished returns kicks in. What the Core Duo etc chips do is to have shorter pipelines which are therefor more effecient than the longer pipelines of the pentium chips.. Having more cores means that overall the multicore chip is faster than the single core chip it replaces..

(This doesn't mean that the core 2 chips are simple - they still are 'speedy' but not to the same extent as the old pentiums.)

I've used the term 'pipelining' here to describe any pseudo-parallelism technique. There are key differences between different versions but the idea is usually roughly similar (again apologies to those who feel I've used the 'wrong' term or over simplified)

Other factors do come in such as decreasing feature size (the 65 or 45nm length you'll often see quoted), changes in cache design, etc in general the chips would have been better anyway even if they stuck with the old design - this can't be ignored.

I assumed you where asking about current x86 and similar designs, in fact the most energy efficient designs are also the simplest - eg 500 1FLOP non pipelined, in-order processors will use (much) less energy that 1 500FLOP processor. The current desktop trend is simply to trim the excesses of previous designs, add the year in improvements and then reap the benefits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.86.73 (talk) 21:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something in your description must be wrong, as the core 2 processors are definitely much faster than older architectures for given frequency and core count, as confirmed by both my own experience and this (e.g. Pentium D 3 GHz = 752, Core 2 Duo E8400 3 GHz = 1988, both are dual core). -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 21:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmh, http://freespace.virgin.net/roy.longbottom/cpuspeed.htm section 4 & 5 .. I don't know why pentium 4's seem so bad on single precision whetstone tests???(section5)(worse than celeron?) Otherwise it looks to me that the performances are roughly similar between them.. In terms of '3d' performance ie 'vector' instructions there has been a major improvement of a type you described above. Would like the poor P4 SP whetstone test figures explained though.. you got me there>87.102.86.73 (talk) 09:38, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way those graphs are just crazy. the E8400 has score 1997, the core 2 extreme Q6850 has score 3382, the core 2 duo E6850 has score 1769 , are you sure those PassMark(TM) figures haven't accidentally replaced prices with performance data?!?! I must be insane.87.102.86.73 (talk) 11:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)Duh, Q means quad, silly me.87.102.86.73 (talk) 11:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LCDs

Is it possible to use an LCD television as a computer monitor? Failing that, is it possible to use an LCD monitor as a television? I'll tell you why I ask. We basically never watch broadcast television in our home - if the cable company cut us off, we would likely never find out. That said, we do watch DVDs and play on our home console (currently an N64, but possibly and XBox360 in the near future). Now, DVDs can be played in our computer, so we'd like to get a nice big computer monitor on which to view them (and other computer graphic type stuff); LCD TVs come a lot bigger and have more selection than big LCD monitors so using an LCD TV as our monitor would be nice. Ipso facto, we may want to plug in our console and play on the big screen. Is there any hope for me in this cruel electronic world? Matt Deres (talk) 20:52, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and yes. In order to use an LCD television as a monitor, you need to be able to plug it in -- if your television has a DVI or HDMI input, it will work with a computer that has a matching output, and most do these days. If the television only has analog inputs -- composite video, component video, or radio-frequency -- it's a bit harder: you may need to find a video card with an appropriate output.

The problem with using a television as a monitor is resolution: a typical computer screen has a resolution of 1280x1024 pixels or larger, while except for high-end 1080p versions, televisions usually have fewer pixels.

Going the other direction is easier: you just need to add a TV tuner card or USB tuner to your computer. Again, the problem is resolution: a computer monitor will show a much crisper image than a television, but it's much smaller -- a typical computer monitor is only 17 inches across the diagonal, while a television is often 30 inches or more. --Carnildo (talk) 21:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure most computers today either use an integrated graphics card or an old discrete card, and in both cases only have a VGA connector. If you're using integrated graphics, you can get for 50$ a card with several times the performance and at least a DVI output. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 21:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TVs and monitors are becoming closer than they used to be. With a 1920×1080 resolution TV, that's quite acceptable as resolution for a computer monitor, where 1600×1200 is the usual max resolution. The TV's actually a few more pixels, although in a widescreen format that will be a bit of a change (unless you have a new laptop, which is likely already a widescreen monitor). The lower resolution HDTV standard, 1280×720, is borderline, and I wouldn't recommend it for use as a computer monitor. Also note that going the other way, and using the full resolution of your computer monitor, isn't easy. Most TV tuner cards will reduce the resolution dramatically from 1080, especially if you record the TV program on the hard disk and play it back later. StuRat (talk) 03:13, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see why you wouldn't use a 1280x720 TV as a monitor. My TV is a 37" 720p (with VGA input), and my monitor is also 1280x720, and I have no problems with either one, other than it's hard to find wallpapers I like in 16:9 aspect ratio. And there's no reason you can't have both a computer monitor and an HDTV conntect to a video card, and switch usage to the monitor when you're reading text and the HDTV for video, or change input on the HDTV to play consoles with and still be able to use the computer with the monitor. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 04:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at computer monitors offered at a typical store (Best Buy), and found only one of the 48 monitors offered had a max resolution of 1280×720, and none was lower than that: [1]. To me this indicates that most people consider this to be unacceptably low resolution for a computer monitor. On the other hand, there were 35 monitors out of 48 with a lower max resolution than 1920×1080, which tells me most people consider that to be a decent resolution for a computer monitor. StuRat (talk) 04:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the replies so far, everyone. If I understand the responses above, there probably won't be a physical limitation, so long as both TV and card have HDMI hookup. I don't use built-in cards, so that won't be a problem, so long as I keep it in mind. I guess what I need to do is try to balance resolution and screen size with cost. Which LCD screen (TV or monitor) is more likely to give me operation trouble? Or is brand name a better way of looking at that? I've used an LG monitor for some time and never had a problem. Anything else I should keep in mind? Matt Deres (talk) 15:29, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't use a tuner card inside your computer, you won't be able to watch TV on your computer monitor. This is because computer monitors don't have HDMI inputs, as a rule, and TVs don't have HDMI outputs, either. So, that leaves you with the option of getting a TV with an HDMI input to use with your computer with an HDMI output. (You'd better check, though, as not all computers have HDMI outputs.) I'd look through online customer reviews for each model, which any good store will list. I wouldn't get any monitor with bad reviews or a small number (or none). I'm a bit worried about the longevity of LCD TVs. I've had some CRT TVs that are still working after 30 years. I get the impression that you're lucky to get 5-10 years out of an LCD that's used constantly. StuRat (talk) 23:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SpySheriff

Why is the SpySheriff website allowed to continue running. It is a malicious program with false information. Why isn't it shut down? Thanks, Ζρς ι'β' ^¡hábleme! 22:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because nobody knows where exactly it is hosted? Maybe because it's legal where its website is hosted? Maybe because the program spreads itself (like a worm)? Maybe <insert your own reason>? --grawity 08:03, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]