Computing desk
< February 28	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 2 >

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.

March 1

Iomega external hard drive

My external hard drive has no power button. How can I turn it off? Should I just unplug it? 74.14.108.10 (talk) 01:24, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

n short, Yes General Rommel (talk) 01:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Longer and more accurately, yes, but only after you've either powered down the computer, or told the computer that you're done using it. (Usually the operating system has an "eject" or "disconnect" option for removable media.) Turning off the drive while the computer is still using it could lead to data loss. (Aside from the dangers of stopping the drive while the computer is in the middle of writing, operating systems may cache (delay) writing to disk, sometimes for quite a while, meaning that what you think has been written to disk hasn't been yet.) Modern computers should be somewhat sophisticated about caching writes to removable media, but it's safest to inform the computer that the drive is going away soon, and allow it to do whatever finalization it needs. -- 140.142.20.229 (talk) 02:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically in Windows the small "Safely remove hardware" icon is in the system tray of the task bar. 130.188.8.12 (talk) 18:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have such a hard drive. I plug it into a power strip and turn that off, rather than pulling the plug, to prevent wear and tear on the cord (and on my back, from bending down to the insanely low electrical outlet). I also wait until the platter stops spinning from the last operation (does Control Panel + Power Options control when external hard drives do this, too ?). StuRat (talk) 02:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you're running Windows 7, just go to the Computer folder, right-click the removable HDD and press J, before you unplug the HDD. Rocketshiporion ♫ 07:33, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Migrating MS Outlook

I'm currently using Windows XP, and for e-mail I use Outlook from MS Office 2003. My e-mail is actually web-based, but I have Outlook set up to call up my e-mails from the web server and let me open them, reply to them, and store them locally. But now I'm buying a new computer with Windows 7, and I'm going to get MS Office 2010. But I can't figure out what file(s) I have to save from my old computer and take over to the new one in order to keep all my old e-mails, contact list, calendar dates, etc., in my new Outlook. Any suggestions? Thanks! —Angr (talk) 07:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update: actually before I spend ~~€100~~ €350 on Office 2010, I'm going to see how well I survive using Open Office instead of Word and Excel and Windows Live Mail instead of Outlook. (I never use the other Office programs anyway.) So the question is modified to: How do I make all my e-mails, contact list, calendar dates, etc., from Outlook 2003 and currently stored somewhere (I'm not sure where) on one computer available to Windows Live Mail on a different computer? —Angr (talk) 10:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IDK much about Office 2003, but AFAIK I think you've save all the PST files, and register them on the new computer. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable will come along soon and answer your question. Rocketshiporion ♫ 11:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Try Windows Easy Transfer. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 14:37, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but I don't have an Easy Transfer Cable, so I was going to copy all the files needed on my new computer to my external hard drive. Is Rocketshiporion right that the only files I'll need to copy to the external drive are the .pst files? —Angr (talk) 15:05, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just use the external drive with Windows Easy Transfer? Nil Einne (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. I have used a USB drive to do this. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 20:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But to do that, I still have to get the files from my old C:\ onto the external drive, and I don't know which files to move. I suppose I could move the entire contents of C:\, if there's room on the external drive. —Angr (talk) 06:38, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused. Isn't the idea of Windows Easy Transfer that it's supposed to automatically know what to transfer and so copies the files itself without you needing to know what's supposed to be copied, all you need to do is provide a way for it to copy and as the article explains, that includes external HDs. I don't know how well it works, I've never used it but going by the article this is how it's supposed to work. Personally I'm reluctant to trust such things so can understand if you don't want to but it's not clear that this is your objection to Easy Transfer (actually it sounds to me like it's not). Although if you're only worried about Outlook given it is MS I would hope it works with Easy Transfer properly anyway. Also, I presume it's supposed to be run from the computer with the old settings so if you've already deleted your OS there or otherwise don't wish to boot it I guess it won't work but from the sound of your message you're still running the old OS. Nil Einne (talk) 15:18, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't object to Easy Transfer. But it can't automatically know what to transfer from computer A to computer B if computer A and computer B have no way to talk to each other (since I don't own an Easy Transfer Cable and have no intention of buying one for this single occasion). That's why I want to move the files from computer A to the external drive, and then let Easy Transfer get them from the external drive. But first I need to know which files to move to the external drive. And I think the answer I'm gradually getting from this thread is "as many as will fit, to be on the safe side" - as in the entire Documents and Settings folder, the entire Programs folder, maybe the entire WINDOWS folder. Or even (if there's room on my external drive) everything on C:\. —Angr (talk) 15:51, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I have no idea what your fascination with the cable is, it's completely irrelevant. All it apppears to be is some sort of USB ethernet cable thing for direct connecting 2 computers via USB. Nothing in our article suggests it's essential, not even close. I suspect the vast majority of people who've used Windows Easy Transfer either use ethernet or external media and have never even touched or seen one of those cables. Also I don't get why you believe the computers need to talk to each other. AFAIK that's not how Easy Transfer is designed to work, it's definitely not what the article suggests. When run on computer A Easy Transfer copies data and settings files to the external hard disk from computer A and then when run on the computer B it copies these to B from the external HDD. There's no need for the computers to talk to each other, there's no reason why there has to be a need either. All computer A needs to do is copy the data and settings files somewhere. All computer B needs to do is to copy these files from computer A into the relevent locations. It's not like the computers are trying to set up a life long partnership.

If you have to know where the files are then it's defective and our article also needs major work. But given this is Microsoft I highly doubt that. As I said I'm not saying it always works, but I'm pretty sure it's a case of it either works or it doesn't. You knowing where the files you want to copy are is completely irrelevant since I strongly suspect Easy Transfer doesn't even give you the option to manually select extra files that you want unless they are in locations it's designed to copy in which case it obviously doesn't need you to specify the locations since it already knows them hence why it gives you the option to copy them. (It may give you the option of what you want to copy at best.)

In other words, all you need to decide is whether you trust Easy Transfer to copy all that you want. If you do then I don't see why you won't use it. As I said, all this talk of cables and needing to know where the files you want to copy are is completely irrelevant since that's not what you want to do. All you want to do is to use Windows Easy Transfer to do what it's designed to do.

Nil Einne (talk) 19:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A quick search found [1] and also [2] which is continued in [3]. While I skipped thru them they clearly shows what me and others have been talking about. You will note they used the external optical media in one and external HDD option in the other. In the second they actually copied the files to a network drive in the end but there was clearly no direct communication between the computers. (The second one also appears to show something to do with mail perhaps that will help.)

This is what me and others have suggested multiple times, so if you still don't accept that, I guess this question has reached a dead end since I'm not sure what more we can say or do to convince you a cable and communication between the computers unneeded and irrelevant.

I will note that [4], the place you download the software also says "You can transfer data using an Easy Transfer Cable, removable media, or across a network" (emphasis added) which clearly implies you do not need a cable. One of the refs used in the article suggests something similar.

Nil Einne (talk) 20:00, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The part that I didn't realize before was that I would have to download WET from Microsoft's homepage and install it on my old computer, and that it would then do the copying of files from the old computer to the external drive. I tried that, and after working for about 2 hours (of the 20 or so it predicted it would need) it "detected an error and had to close" without further explanation. So I have to everything manually after all. But at least now I understand how WET is supposed to work in theory. —Angr (talk) 12:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personally in Outlook migrations I always migrate the .pst file but I specifically export the Contacts and Calendar to their own .pst files and import those. This is probably because of superstition and not because you have to. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would Mozilla Thunderbird be able to help? BTW, after using OpenOffice for some time I have started to use the much slimmer MSWord-clone Abiword and probably Gnumeric instead of OpenOffice, with Sumatra PDF in place of Adobe. 92.15.29.32 (talk) 22:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If this helps at all, I had a similar problem migrating Outlook Express XP to Outlook 2007 in Windows 7. After a lot of dead ends I found the best method was to import the outlook files into Windows Live Mail and from there export into Outlook (or import Live Mail from Outlook; can't remember). An added benefit of this is that you have a backup in Live Mail. Sandman30s (talk) 09:42, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in the second paragraph, I'm not going to use Outlook 2010 after all, but only Windows Live Mail. But I still don't know how to import Outlook files from one (internal) hard drive to another when I can't have both computers up and running at the same time. That's why I want to move the files to the external drive (as a glorified USB stick), but I'm not sure which files to move. If there's room on the external drive, I suppose it's easiest to just copy everything from the old C:\ onto the external drive and then let Windows Easy Transfer move them from there. —Angr (talk) 12:00, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can check Tools, Account Settings, Data files. My outlook files are in C:\Documents and Settings\<name>\Local Settings\Application Data\Microsoft\Outlook. It should work if you backup the entire Documents and Settings folder (good idea anyway) and ask Live Mail to import from there. Sandman30s (talk) 13:07, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks! I was looking under C:\Programs\Microsoft Office and not finding anything useful-looking. —Angr (talk) 13:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that storing settings or data files or anything of the sort in in the program files directory has been strongly discouraged by MS for a long time. With Vista and Windows 7, Microsoft has gone even further so that when poorly designed programs try to write to files there it virtualises this to a location in the user directory. This has meant many programs have finally got the message and stopped with that behaviour. Microsoft programs have never written settings there for a very long time AFAIK if they ever did. In other words, there's often no need to look in the program files directory for settings and other such data files. Nil Einne (talk) 15:18, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I didn't know that. —Angr (talk) 15:22, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Map creation

I want/need to create a simple schematic map for wikipedia. (I need fairly accurate street data) - the obvious choice appears to be to base my efforts on data from open street map. Here are my problems:

I get a map on open street map which is far too detailed - I was expecting some method of only showing certain layers (eg "A" roads), no buildings etc.. but can't find anything like that - is there an easy way to turn it into a simple map excluding using a map as a background in a paint program and digitally tracing...
Can anyone suggest a good way to go about creating 'simple' maps with limited data presentation eg Main bus routes in a city, high speed train lines in a country. Starting from zero - ie programs, data source, general advice etc.. ? 213.249.225.149 (talk) 13:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can have OpenStreetMap export to an SVG, then open that in an SVG editor like Inkscape, and delete the excess detail with that. But you're right that there's a lot of detail and even with this method, cleaning up is a lot of work. You might be better off asking on the openStreetMap forums if there's a way to limit what's exported in the first place. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 13:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger would do that, but it has been discontinued. Maybe someone will know if another service took over Tiger's service. I checked and I found nothing useful. -- kainaw ™ 13:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Google maps certainly adds more detail as you zoom in further, and I'd expect most mapping programs to do the same. So, by zooming out far enough, hopefully you can get the right level of detail without losing too much resolution. If you intend to do a screen grab, then using a large monitor set at the max resolution will enable you to grab the largest pic at highest resolution. StuRat (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well I need a specific area - and at that level there's too much stuff - including stuff I definately don't need (I'm making a historical schematic map - so I don't need the 1960s motorway it shows... :)

Anyway I found that CityEngine appears to do it simply eg but isn't free (or cheap enough), JOSM can turn items with 'tags' on and off but I don't actually know what the tags are... - probably this program does more but I haven't found it yet. Loading a SVG in Inkscape of my local city is a little too much for my little computer - too much stuff for it.. I considered just editing the raw XML which is probably quite a good solution if I knew the tags.. Also http://maperitive.net/ looks promising .. For now I've just decided to "trace" over the maps using a simple paint program as I only need a very simple schematic .. though I probably should try to learn one of the proper programs. Hopefully maperitive will have evolved in terms of user interface by the time I actually need it.. If anyone knows of something user friendly for making custom maps from the data( and substantially less than $1000) I'd be interested. (signed in)Sf5xeplus (talk) 00:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CSS box model

I heard a while back that CSS was planning to introduce a width attribute that was the total width: margin+border+padding+content. I can't find anything about it now. Was it just a rumor? Was it replaced with some other word than "width"? Does it exist now? -- kainaw ™ 14:29, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://w3.org/tr/css3-ui/#box-sizing ¦ Reisio (talk) 22:49, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal's comeuppance

Just curious: Do we know whether any vandals have been disciplined/sacked by their employer/college etc for vandalizing Wikipedia from their employer's computers?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:54, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I figure that this is the most popular case. The employee was first suspended and then found guilty of more than just vandalizing Wikipedia. -- kainaw ™ 18:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the Seigenthaler incident qualifies to you as vandalism rather than a libellous hoax, the guy "quit", but was rehired later. Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Google Maps

How does google maps get my location on my pc? I dont think my laptop has a gps chip.Accdude92 (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How accurate is it? If it's your town, it's probably just through your IP address. If it's a university or a company, that's also often easy from an IP address. If it is more specific than that, then it must be something else (e.g. you may have told Google it at some point in the past and forgot about it). --Mr.98 (talk) 22:08, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, its really accurate, like just a few feet off and it isnt any of the reasons you listedAccdude92 (talk) 22:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a link to different ways it can be done that it can be done (http://code.google.com/intl/en/apis/maps/documentation/javascript/basics.html) - they don't need a GPS chip in your phone as they can use phone-networks/etc. to determine location pretty accurately. ny156uk (talk) 22:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The networks thing is really cute and deserves explicit mentioning. As long as someone with a GPS and WiFi in the same device wandered through your vicinity (and shared the data with whatever system does this), it can be identified by the names of the wireless networks in range. Paul (Stansifer) 04:33, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's a neat trick! So if anyone has ever looked at a map on their android based phone in range of your wifi hotspot, Google will be able to guess where you are? Clever. APL (talk) 06:02, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is an option on my Android phone to enable or disable Wi-Fi location services, so yes. It's only accurate to 300 yards or so though. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 21:37, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So, despite being a Brit with a British ISP, Google maps defaults to the USA for me. Perhaps it's because I use a US keyboard, or because I always use google.com rather then google.co.uk. On another point, I've generally noticed the who-is page for many European IP users geolocates only to the ISP's location which may be hundreds of km from the subscriber's home. Like Google says, the IP address can only provide a very rough location. Astronaut (talk) 12:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For countries where a local Google Maps service has been launched, maps.google.tld defaults to the country of the TLD. maps.google.com always defaults to the US, because .com has unfortunately become the new .us. It has nothing to do with geolocation. Xenon54 (talk) 21:45, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]