Computing desk
< July 10	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 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.

July 11

How to delete floppy disk stuff from BIOS (http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3610)

I have searched around inside the BIOS, I have flashed them to the newest version, but it seems I cannot find the command to disable floppy disk anywhere. I need to do this so I could use GParted to partition my drive so I could dual boot linux into that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.0.229.26 (talk) 00:01, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't need to disable the floppy disk in the BIOS. With GParted, you can select which device it is working on - the control for that is in the upper right of this image. If you really, really must disable the drive, why not open the case and try disconnecting the cable. Astronaut (talk) 16:15, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't make this clear but I don't have any floppy drive, who use that today? And if I didn't disable the floppy drive it stuck at scanning devices 140.0.229.26 (talk) 13:41, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why you can't disable the floppy disk in your BIOS is probaly because your mobo has no native support for a floppy disk. This is clearly visible in both the images and and the specs of the link you provided, as well as the manual [1]. I don't know what problem you are having but I don't see any reason to think it has anything to do with a floppy disk particularly if you haven't attached an addin card to that provides a FDD port, and you didn't explain why you believe it's the cause of your problem either. It would be helpful if you better explain where exactly you are having problems and what, if any, error messages you get after waiting a resonable length of time (say 15-20 minutes), what you've tried to do to resolve the problem (e.g. if you have multiple devices did you try disconnecting all but the one you want to work with) and more info on your set up etc etc. Your first post was entirely unclear, you second post only clarified very slightly. I presume GParted getting stuck somewhere, probably at startup, but other then that I don't know much else and as I said it's entirely unclear why you think the problem related to a floppy drive. Nil Einne (talk) 16:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mouse scrolling making BROWSER problems...

I have this EXTREMELY annoying bug... I CAN'T get rid of.

It started a while ago, I don't even know how, just started, one day.

when I scroll on pages, mostly UP, it turns into the normal scroll-up icon and when I press other tabs in google chrome it CLOSES them... and the START BAR won't work either... it's like frosen and when I press back on pages after having SCROLLED, it creates a new with the same page... WTF is going on.. why is MOUSE SCROLLING causing computer problems AND browser problems? This comp is 3 months old............. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.30.207.211 (talk) 02:50, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it's your computer - it's probably Chrome's doing. Have you installed any new addons recently? Disable those one by one and see if the problem stops. If that doesn't work you could try reinstalling Chrome. --Yellow1996 (talk) 16:18, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, pressing the scroll wheel down (this is referred to as clicking the middle mouse button) while pointing at a tab will close the tab. It's meant to do that. That's how browsers are programmed, it's just a short cut. I'm not sure about the rest. Falastur2 ^Talk 21:24, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Point and shoot cameras

Does the amount of megapixels significantly affect image quality in a point and shoot camera? I ask as I find that a 4 megapixel point and shoot camera can take photos with better image quality than an 8 megapixel smartphone camera. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clover345 (talk • contribs) 12:01, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's the usual situation. Megapixel is often mistakenly used as a figure of merit. See Digital_camera#Image_sensors. Pixel count can make a difference, but I often get better results from an old 2 Megapixel camera than a new 14 Mpx one. Jim.henderson (talk) 12:22, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Megapixels will make a difference on print quality, and more megapixels lets you print on larger surfaces. About 8 megapixels allows you to print at a good quality level on a 8.5" per 11" sheet of paper (~300 Dots per inch), so more megapixels than that will generally not be very useful. Digital displays need even fewer megapixels - 1080 HD is only about 2.1 megapixels. More megapixels reputedly allow for more flexibility in post-processing. 64.201.173.145 (talk) 14:24, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It depends. All other things being equal, a higher number of pixels allows a better depiction of fine details. On the other hand, for any given camera design, a higher resolution on a sensor of the same size means that the ccd elements are smaller, and thus more susceptible to (thermal) noise, so that the image often looks more washed out. Also, for most applications there is a useful limit to the number of pixels - your pixel resolution does not need to be better than your optical resolution, or your print/display resolution. Finally, all other things usually aren't equal. Better optics, image stabilization, and even such a trivial thing as ergonomic shape of the camera body will have an influence on the quality of the image. Not to mention the skill of the photographer in picking and arranging motives and knowing about good and bad lighting conditions. I've seen Japanese tourists trying to light up St. Peter's Basilica with the Flashcubes of their Instamatics. Small negative size was not the major problem with those photos ;-).--Stephan Schulz (talk) 14:43, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. For smart photographers with high end hardware, Megapixels can make a difference. When the rest of us point our little P&S, the part that spoils the picture we put in Wikipedia is under our hat. Jim.henderson (talk) 15:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes turning down the resolution on a camera can help get better shots. The camera will still capture at the full resolution, but combine adjacent pixels. This can help smooth out noise or let you get away with a shorter shutter time in low light situations. Your point-and-shoot also probably has a much better lens than your phone. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 15:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Probably 8 magapixels is no better than 4 megapixels on a camera like that. Those cameras have really low-quality lenses and everything else. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 01:06, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

computer infected by virus

My net book is badly infected by a virus."registry editor is disabled by administrator" message appear when ever try to edit reg ,I can not open taskManager ,it is also disabled by admin appears.every computer folder has a subfolder with same name ,I am not able to delete them manually.Run command is missing from start menu,It does not allow me to download antiviruses on line .It does not allow me to download acrobat reader from internet. Is their any online solution or other ,otherwise I have to re install windows xp again, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.187.77.255 (talk) 23:18, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Go to C:\WINDOWS\system32\drivers\etc and you should see a file called "hosts". Open it in Notepad, blank it completely and set it to read-only, then reboot your computer. Can you access antivirus websites after that, or does the virus recreate the file? Post back here, thanks. Ginsuloft (talk) 23:22, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And if it does recreate the hosts file then you can transfer an AV software via USB stick since it won't let you download one directly on the computer. --Yellow1996 (talk) 01:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just my two bits, but I'd go with the wipe and reload. You can fight with the virus if you so choose, but you have no idea how long you will be battling it or how extensive the infection is or if it will still be lurking on your system after you think you've gotten rid of it, only to manifest itself again at a later time. When you wipe and reload, only then can you be certain it's gone.

When you reinstall Windows, get ALL of the security updates before you surf the web on that computer again. Also use a different browser than Internet Explorer. And consider switching to a new operating system soon; support for Windows XP ends on April 8, 2014, which means no more security updates.

If you need to transfer data from the old install to the new, ensure that AutoRun is turned off before inserting potentially virus-tainted media on your fresh install. Transfer no executable files if you can avoid doing so. Images and documents are fine.

Good luck! -Amordea (talk) 03:35, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the taskmanager, try going to C:\Windows\System32\, copy the taskmgr.exe file to somewhere else, rename it winlogon, then try to open it. A lot of malware will let programs named winlogon run since it's required to get windows going. You might also try the same thing with the registry editor (if you're brave). If you can, via this or other, get a copy of hijack this running, if you want to post the logfile on my talk page, I'd be willing to take a look and help you figure out what's gong on.Phoenixia1177 (talk) 03:53, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can also try the following: get a version of linux you can boot from usb, like [2]; boot from it; clean up any obvious garbage; try booting from windows. If you still can't get windows to work: there is a folder on XP, somewhere in the Windows directory, that contains clean versions of your registry files (it's called repair, or recovery, or some such); swap those out with your actual registry; boot in windows; open regedit; load your actual hives; clean them up (I'm guessing you know how from referencing regedit); reboot from linux; swap them again; try windows.Phoenixia1177 (talk) 12:39, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]