Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2010 September 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Computing desk
< September 10 << Aug | September | Oct >> September 12 >
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.


September 11

[edit]

Storage Area Networking: Difference between SAN Group & SAN Pool

[edit]

Hi.

   In regard of Storage Area Networking, what is the exact difference between a group and a pool? Is either one a subdivision of the other, and what are the purpose and properties of each? These two terms in SAN literature do always confound me.

   Thanks to everyone. Rocketshiporion 02:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

operating system

[edit]

what is mean by semaphores? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Govindaraj.s.2012 (talkcontribs) 04:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

see Semaphore (programming). basically, they are signals that allow different processes to use shared resources in a multi-tasked environment (flags that indicate whether a resource is currently in use, so that two processes don't try to modify/access it at the same time). --Ludwigs2 06:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft Publisher 2003

[edit]

Okay, I have a problem that I need to be fixed as soon as possible. I'm trying to send a Newsletter using Microsoft Publisher 2003, is there a way using my Gmail account that I can send to be a read-only file? It seems like it won't let me do anything without an Outlook account (not a big fan of outlook). Thanks. Moptopstyle1 (talk) 05:51, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're trying to distribute the newsletter for other people to read (and not edit), the issue is not with your e-mail program but with Publisher. Generally speaking you should not send Publisher files out if you want them to be just read and not edited (I'm not sure there is a reliable way to do that, and most people don't have Publisher anyway, and so wouldn't be able to read it). What you generally would do in this situation is convert the Publisher file into a PDF, and then distribute the PDF file. There are lots of free PDF "printers" available that can convert it for you (CutePDF and PDFCreator are commonly-used ones), if you need one of those. Basically you install one of those, and it shows up as a new "printer" that makes PDF files. You then open Publisher and "print" the document to the new "printer" and it then saves the information as the PDF file (it doesn't actually print it, which is why I've put all of that in scare quotes). --Mr.98 (talk) 13:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So, you're saying I have to get a new printer? oh joy. Moptopstyle1 (talk) 20:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, not a new printer, just a programme that will convert the files to pdf. Most people won't have MS Publisher, and won't be able to read your newsletter if you send it as a .pub file. Sending it as .pdf means that they will be able to read it. DuncanHill (talk) 20:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, you don't have to get a new printer. The "PDF printer" is not really a printer. It's a program that you print to as if it were a printer, and instead of sending it to an actual, physical printer, the software outputs a PDF file. It's a piece of software that allows you to take any program and output its files into PDF format. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Put very simply: Download and install CutePDF from this link. After you have installed it, go into Publisher. Click "Print" as normal, but instead of selecting your regular printer, you should have something like "CutePDF Printer" under your printer options. Select this, click Print, and it should ask you where you want to save your new PDF file. After you save the PDF file, take a look at it, see if it is what you wanted to distribute. If so, send it on to your friends, and you are done. --Mr.98 (talk) 20:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OH! I'm such a dork, I read through the first response and realized that I was wrong saying that "I needed a new printer", okay, I'll try downloading the file. THANK YOU SO MUCH! you do not know how much this helps, this takes SO much stress away! THANK YOU THANK YOU! I will reply if the converter works. Moptopstyle1 (talk) 03:43, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Do not look for any application to run. Just print your document using CutePDF Writer (the printer) to get PDF output. 1. Open your original document and select Print command in File menu of your application to bring up Print dialog box. 2. Then select CutePDF Writer as the Printer to print (DO NOT select "Print to file" option). 3. You will get a Save As dialog box prompted for saving created PDF file. 4. Select a folder to Save in and enter a File name, then click on Save. Go to that folder to find your PDF file."

Option "3" did not happen. is there anything else I can try? Thanks. Moptopstyle1 (talk) 04:25, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It works OK in Publisher 2000, though there is a pause before the "save as" box appears. Dbfirs 06:48, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Try PDFCreator or PDF995. Otherwise Google for "export to PDF" or "print to PDF" freeware, but be careful of malware. Zunaid 06:34, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Running commands on another (Windows) computer

[edit]

Hello,

I'm wondering about the best way to run commands on one Windows computer from another Windows computer connected to it (and also how the two computers should actually be connected and configured). To be more specific, I have two computers running Windows XP and I'd like one of them ("computer A") to be able to run commands on the other ("computer B") as if the commands were entered in the command prompt on computer B. Currently, the computers aren't connected (physically or otherwise).

What's (typically) the best way of setting this up? Apparently there's a program called PsExec available to download from Microsoft that allows this, but it looks like it might require the computer issuing the commands to be running Windows Server. If so, what other (preferably free) options are available? Additionally, can I just connect the two computers directly with an Ethernet cable (assuming they're not already on the same network) and adjust their IP protocol settings appropriately or are there additional settings in Windows or specialized versions of Windows (e.g. Windows Server) that are required for this to work?

Any comments or suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks,

-- Hiram J. Hackenbacker (talk) 13:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remote desktop Quadrupedaldiprotodont (talk) 14:25, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion, but remote desktop wouldn't be suitable for my needs. To be more specific about what I wish to accomplish, I need computer A to trigger commands on computer B while still performing tasks itself (e.g. computer A starts process 1 on itself, runs a command on computer B to start process 2 on computer B, then runs process 3 on itself while computer B is running process 2). This will be part of an automated procedure (potentially stored in a batch file or something similar), which I should have specified initially, as that seems to rule out remote desktop (unless there's a command that can be run on computer A to instruct it to indirectly execute a command on computer B through a remote desktop connection). Hiram J. Hackenbacker (talk) 19:16, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
While it is possible to pass a command name to Remote Desktop, I'm not sure if this will work for connections to a client machine (say, Windows XP, Vista or 7) - I've only seen it in connection with Windows Terminal Services on W2K and W2K3. For the scenario you describe, the psexec tool you already found out about yourself is the way to go, and last time I saw it, it did work from a client, no Windows Server required. There's even a Linux tool to remotely execute commands on Windows machines, it's called winexe and Debian and Ubuntu distributions carry it in the wmi-client package. Depending on your usage scenario, you might be able to recycle an old computer by running linux on it and have it control not one, but two Windows boxes. -- 78.43.71.155 (talk) 01:37, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EMAIL

[edit]

I WISH EMAIL TO FAMILY IN INDIA

HOW EMAIL, EXPLAIN PLEASE.? WHAT SITE —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shantie.jevla (talkcontribs) 13:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Email client. This is a program - which you may need to download, although it's likely you already have a suitable program which came with your operating system, typically Outlook Express - into which you put details of your email address, which should be provided by your internet service provider. See also the section Email client#Webmail, which may be an easier way. 213.122.17.213 (talk) 13:47, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The location of the recipient of an email doesn't matter. Email addresses are globally unique, and (generally speaking) the Internet is unaffected by national boundaries. Paul (Stansifer) 16:56, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The easiest is to go to google and click on the gmail link. Sandman30s (talk) 19:39, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, webmail (such as Gmail) is a free option that doesn't require downloading anything (especially useful if you use many different computers). Your family in India also need to set up a free e-mail account and let you know the address. Dbfirs 08:33, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly was the connection between these two things? The BBC micro had a "teletext mode" (mode 7), and teletext pages always looked as if they had been designed using it. I know of no other computer with this particular screen mode. So:

  • Was there a BBC B at the other end, being used to compose the teletext pages?
  • If so, was it also in some sense transmitting the pages - were they coming live from an Acorn computer, so to speak?
  • Are the chips in TVs which decode teletext Acorn-derived?

213.122.17.213 (talk) 13:40, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I highly doubt they used an actual acorn computer for broadcasting Teletext. Most likely they used an emulator or modern program that simulated the old one. Quadrupedaldiprotodont (talk) 14:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Teletext existed when these computers were new, you know. The BBC micro wasn't created old. 213.122.17.213 (talk) 15:10, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Teletext (in production by 1974) pre-dated the BBC Micro (1981). In short, I don't think any of teletext has much to do with Acorn, beyond Acorn providing emulation facilities within the BBC B. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:18, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Teletext in your TV (until quite recently) and in your BBC Micro do indeed look essentially identical. That's because they both contain(ed) a Mullard SAA5050 character generator chip. That contained the character ROM (which defined how the characters appeared) and equipment to encode a TV signal to represent them (which affects the "feel" of the characters - their subtle analog character). -- Finlay McWalterTalk 15:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That explains it! And the chip was used in at least one other home computer. Thank you Finlay. (I still wonder if there was somebody in the TV station tapping away on an 8-bit machine to make the pages, though, and how they were stored.) 213.122.17.213 (talk) 15:32, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not (at least not initially). Our Videotex article mostly talks about client-side equipment (which is 8-bit equipment based on the SAA5050 and similar technology). The Prestel article (Teletext's dialup interactive cousin) talks about the Minicomputers used to run it; it's likely that the transmission elements of Ceefax, Oracle etc. used much the same technology. That leaves design of the pages, and their entry, about which I can't find much. A lot of Ceefax pages are formatted essentially, so it's likely they had a simple content management system which allowed users on a serial terminal to enter news stories. I'll bet some of the design was simply done on paper by someone with a big table of the character set. At some point (before highly integrated ICs like the 5050 were available) they'll have had to build some adapter cards for whatever minicomputer they were using (which did the same job as the 5050, at a much greater cost) so they could have some basic WYSIWYG editing and previewing. I'd imagine that once the 5050 was available it was integrated into terminals so they could do that easier and cheaper (it would be tempting to do it with a BBC micro, but I don't know that they did). -- Finlay McWalterTalk 15:57, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As to how they were stored, they'd be stored as blocks of character data in the Ceefax (etc.) broadcast minicomputer, encoded in the 7 bit ASCII-based alphabet listed in TABLE 1 in the Mullard document linked from its article. For teletext they'd have a special program that cycled through the available pages, emitted that (and the other lines of data, like the bookies info that they had on their own lines), encoded that in the Videotex analog format, and sent that off to be time-multiplexed into the master PAL signal that the BBC were sending for BBC1 (etc.). Given the pioneering nature of much of this, and the BBC's technical strengths and willingness to build its own technology, you can bet much of this stuff was BBC built for BBC use. -- Finlay McWalterTalk 16:10, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I found some references to support this: this article talks about the initial Ceefax backend. Firstly a single "VDU" (which mostly means "terminal", but doesn't say terminal of what, and may really mean a paper-punch machine) generating paper tape (with the above data encoded) feeding into something (presumably some home-cooked broadcast thingy) which stored its mighty 30 pages in core memory. You can bet at this early time all the pages were hand-designed on paper. A year later they've got themselves a minicomputer (it doesn't say what kind) called Esmeralda, with six terminals (again it doesn't say what kind). I guess at some point they built an electrical interface between Esmeralda and the core-memory-broadcast thingy. -- Finlay McWalterTalk 16:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can add a couple of items, the minicomputer in question was a pdp11, it's on the page source of: bbcmu0583.shtml , note you need to look at the page source. The terminals were Aston Intelligent Terminals, but I can't find references to what exactly such machines were, except perhaps it was an Aston University project? The BBC Micro of course had Teletext graphics, because it was part of the BBC's specification for the BBC Micro (Personal Computer World December 1981, I believe).--TheOriginalSnial (talk) 08:21, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to recall that programs for the BBC Micro could be "downloaded" from some Ceefax pages. DuncanHill (talk) 07:40, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was right, see BBC Cheese Wedge#Teletext Adapter. DuncanHill (talk) 07:42, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Configuring Toshiba Satellite 3000-X11 to use LAN and Wi-Fi (urgent, please answer if you can, cause it's not my laptop)

[edit]

I'm trying to configure this laptop to connect to the Internet via conventional methods, but it connects only with a WAN miniport (it won't seem to connect to anything other than dial-up). Is there any way I can set it to connect with a LAN or wirelessly? I'm not too sure if it can do the latter, since it seems to show no signs of wifi capability. 24.189.87.160 (talk) 19:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Searching for this particular model is proving particularly difficult. This page suggests the 3000 series has a built-in ethernet port (which will accept a RJ-45 jack), a PC card slot and some USB ports. You can connect to the internet via a standard ethernet cable, you can buy a Wirelss LAN PC card, or you can get a USB wireless adapter. Astronaut (talk) 03:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Display

[edit]

In greasemonkey, how can I make some text display on any page. Similar to the php echo function. I tried

document.writeln("Hello");

but nothing is displayed. 82.44.55.25 (talk) 20:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Date handling with XML in Expression Web

[edit]

I use Microsoft Expression Web to maintain a couple of websites. I've just come across the Data View feature which allows you to access XML databases (it generates XSLT). There seems to be a feature allowing you to format numeric values eg as currency, but what I need is the ability to format dates, as one of the potential applications is to present a list of future events. Can anyone suggest a way to do this (without constructing XSLT by hand)? Thanks --rossb (talk) 22:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your question isn't clear. Do you mean with a particular programming language?Smallman12q (talk) 23:52, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Freeware old fashioned database

[edit]

I recall simple databases from many years ago, in the days of CP/M. You would be able to define the fields on a virtual "index card", fill them with data with each virtual card being one entity, and then search through the fields. Is there anything available like that now please? I have tried to find one and been unable. I do not have the time or patience to learn anything complicated or non-intuitive or anything that involves programming. Thanks 92.15.7.75 (talk) 22:35, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like what you want is something like Filemaker or Bento but freeware. OpenOffice.org Base can do what you want, so can Kexi. How easily, I'm not sure, but what you are asking for is really pretty simple and I'm sure that it would not take much effort to set up either of those in the fashion you're describing, and without doing any scripting. --Mr.98 (talk) 23:44, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Microsoft Office Access 2010 does everything you describe, plus it also provides user-friendly wizards for the construction of tables, forms and queries. As the OP did not ask that it be freeware, I assume that commercial software is acceptable to them. IMHO, Microsoft Office Access 2010 is the gold standard for databases. Vickreman.Chettiar 00:41, 12 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vickreman.Chettiar (talkcontribs) [reply]
Actually, the subject line explicitly says "freeware"... --Mr.98 (talk) 01:33, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think Microsoft Works is often available at no cost these days (though it is still priced at $39.95 on Microsoft's website). It has a basic database without the sophistication of Access. Dbfirs 06:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]