Computing desk
< December 14	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 16 >

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.

December 15

Windows cannot install important updates

Information as of 2009: OS Name Microsoft® Windows Vista™ Home Premium Version 6.0.6001 Service Pack 1 Build 6001 Other OS Description Not Available OS Manufacturer Microsoft Corporation System Name System Manufacturer HP-Pavilion System Model KT369AA-ABA a6512p System Type x64-based PC Processor Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU E2200 @ 2.20GHz, 2200 Mhz, 2 Core(s), 2 Logical Processor(s) BIOS Version/Date American Megatrends Inc. 5.23, 4/21/2008 SMBIOS Version 2.5 Windows Directory C:\Windows System Directory C:\Windows\system32 Boot Device \Device\HarddiskVolume1 Locale United States Hardware Abstraction Layer Version = "6.0.6001.18000" User Name Time Zone Eastern Standard Time Installed Physical Memory (RAM) 4.00 GB Total Physical Memory 3.99 GB Available Physical Memory 2.15 GB Total Virtual Memory 8.18 GB Available Virtual Memory 6.13 GB Page File Space 4.28 GB Page File C:\pagefile.sys And on 7 August 2009 I was told to always say I HAVE A DSL MODEM.

Last week my computer would not start and I got a message saying I could tell the computer to repair itself. It went through system restore and everything seemed fine. During the time right after the computer is turned on, I have been getting numerous messages, on a blue screen, that the computer had to shut down to protect itself. And that happened again yesterday. I had to restart the computer because of Windows updates, which had also happened prior to the system restore. I waited until I was ready to turn off the computer after the updates finished installation because I didn't want to have to figure out how to get back to what I was working on. But today, the monitor went black and said "no signal", and the computer started beeping. This has happened a couple of times, mostly right after the computer was turned on, but also once when I did the virus scan and left it alone and it was "asleep" after that finished. So I unplugged the computer and when I turned it back on, I was told I should probably do a system restore. Which I did. Everything seemed to work after that, but surprise! The logo in the lower right corner is there again, and when I move my mouse over it, it says "Windows is downloading updates (46% complete)". Earlier, I got a little popup message saying Windows could not install important updates, and to click to find out more. It went away before I could click and I don't know where to click. But obviously I need to stop Windows from installing any more updates until this problem is fixed.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:34, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to say you're having so many issues with your computer.. This is a computer reference desk, it's not really "troubleshoot" your windows issues, I'm sure people will be happy to give you some tips but do you have an actual question? is it just "how to disable automatic updates?" That should be fairly simple, this is the 1st result of a google search. Vespine (talk) 21:39, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what my actual question should be. I'm up to 61 percent now and will be turning off the computer soon unless I remember that I want the download to be completed. Though I probably don't. But I'm trying to figure out what could be causing all these problems. I don't really get specific enough error messages when these problems happen. McAfee also downloaded updates and I don't know whether these could be causing the problems. But if they did, that's harder to deal with since I know I need McAfee to be up to date. They have tech support though I don't have time for that today, and if the problem is serious enough they might charge me extra. How to explain all this to them I don't know.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:11, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

From the symptoms you describe, there's a fair chance a hardware fault is the cause although I'd try and rule out overheating by cleaning any fans first. Nil Einne (talk) 22:28, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I'm not sure cleaning a fan is something I can do. The computer doesn't feel hot and I don't feel heat around the vent. Going inside is not something I feel confident about. I'll ask McAfee for help Wednesday and see if there's anything related to their software that can be fixed.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:32, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaning fans is something a child can do. Get a can of gas duster (often referred to as "canned air" though this is not actually correct), which you can find all over the place, remove the side panel, and blow dust out. You don't even have to touch anything inside. You'll probably want to do this outside. This is something you should do periodically, since computers accumulate dust over time, which makes them hotter, which is bad for the hardware. If you want to watch someone doing it first there are fifty billion videos online. --71.119.131.184 (talk) 05:43, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A corrupted update downloads or update database can be fixed by clearing the folders catroot and catroot2, located in Windir or System32. Usually, these services are running and access the files. Stop all services to see the ms knowledgebase to find which services needs to be stopped to release the files in the catroots and allow to delete the files in the folders. When done, restart as the best way to restart all the services. The catroot files wil be rebuild automatically. It will take longer to check for updates the next time, but do not interrupt it. --Hans Haase (有问题吗) 00:00, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"The monitor went black and said 'no signal', and the computer started beeping" strongly suggests a hardware problem, possibly with the video card. I doubt that Windows Update is causing the problem, or that disabling it will help, though I suppose it's worth a try. -- BenRG (talk) 00:53, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Windows successfully installed updates. I forgot and turned off the computer when downloading was not complete. It resumed at 72 percent and is up to 76. I had a McAfee support person preparing to look at my computer in case anything from them caused any problem. The connection was lost 20 minutes ago and I am trying to resume.

And today, I went to McAfee first rather than my email. There were no problems but I can't say why.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:27, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The person from McAfee said to call. I did. We just finished up and the other person found no obvious problems. Part of that was turning on the computer. Still no problems. Windows is at 99 percent.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:40, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Windows can take an unreasonably long time if it is doing lots of updates over a slow modem. If it finishes, you will probably be OK (at least we hope so). Dbfirs 19:21, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I turned on the computer today, and I got the beeping (and the screen was black) and had to restart. Everything seemed fine after that. Then the power went out while I was doing a scan and when I came back to the computer and turned it on, I got the screen that I get when the computer shuts down to finish installing updates. So that has been done. No more problems to report today.

I want to add one more detail about the screen going black and beeping. Although I don't remember if this happened any of the other times, it did happen this time. There was what I would describe as a grinding noise, one of the normal sounds the computer makes, sort of like a pencil sharpener with a hand crank. This is the first sound I hear whenever I turn the computer on, and I also hear it if it has been "asleep" and I start it back up.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:58, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The grinding noise will be your hard drive. They do this sometimes before they fail, but some hard drives can make this sound for years before actually failing. You might like to run CHKDSK to see if there are any obvious problems, and, of course, ensure that you make regular Backups. Dbfirs 09:48, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dbfirs I didn't mean this was a bad sound. This is the sound the hard drive has made since the first day I used it. But thanks.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:56, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

With the latest updates installed, I was told the computer couldn't start and to do a system restore. So I cancelled automatic updates the way I was told to above. Now it is time to tell someone. Maybe there's something specific about my computer that needs fixing or maybe there's relly something wrong with the latest update. Anyway, once I did the fix, all was well. My plan is to go back to the store where I bought the computer seven years ago (that could be a problem by itself) and ask them for advice. I could easily replace if I had to because I keep everything most people would in emails sent to myself.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unbelievable. I intended to start the computer and eat lunch. So I hadn't eaten and I went to eat. Another update was installed but this one looked different. But I got a list of updates so I have this information about the one that preceded the latest incident:

Definition Update for Windows Defender - KB915597 (Definition 1.213.134.0)

Installation date: ‎12/‎18/‎2015 1:32 PM

Installation status: Successful

Update type: Important

Install this update to revise the definition files used to detect spyware and other potentially unwanted software. Once you have installed this item, it cannot be removed.

More information:

http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/spyware/software/about/overview.mspx

Help and Support:

http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=52661

At least this tells me where to go to tell them what happened.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:29, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. That wasn't anything but a Bing search and it was for Windows 10. The computer I have is Vista. And substituting Vista was no help.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:05, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You must have your computer in a quiet environment if your disc drive sounds like a mechanical pencil sharpener, but glad to hear that it is the usual sound (some of the older drives can be noisy) and that a crash is not imminent. I've had problems with Microsoft trying to force me to install Windows 10. I keep getting rid of the upgrade option and it keeps coming back, but I don't think that will be your problem. The fact that your computer has succeeded in implementing some updates sounds promising, but there does seem to be a problem with one of them. You could try upgrades one at a time, and see which ones succeed and which fail. Dbfirs 20:57, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Devices in and out

You know when you put in a device like a cam or such and Windows XP goes "blong bling" and when you take it out, the computer goes "bling blong"? Sometimes when I take it out, it doesn't go "bling blong" for a long time or not at all. Is there anything I can do? Many thanks. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:34, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is a very low priority process. It isn't necessary, so it tries to play the little tune, but the system is perfectly happy to skip it if the CPU or sound processor is too busy. Why is the CPU busy? If you are running XP, the probability that you have malware on your computer that is using up all your CPU cycles is very very very high. 209.149.113.52 (talk) 13:16, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. But it is more than just the tune. If I reinsert the device, it is not recognized unless that tune happens. Also, I don't think my cycles are being used up. My computer is very fast, my task managers's CPU usage history shows it stays at near 0% all the time. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:29, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Problem in running a OBB file

I have an OBB file in my pc, but I don't know the exact software to run it. Please, suggest me a software through which I can extract the contents of my file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.176.38.113 (talk) 05:38, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on Opaque binary blob, but you might need an Android emulator to run it on your PC. Do you just want to inspect the file? Dbfirs 10:52, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I want to run this file without using android emulators. I want to extract its contents and hence, install the program using the extracted setup file.182.66.101.114 (talk) 06:18, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You must have a clever PC if it can run Android code without an emulator. It should in theory be possible to extract the data files from the OBB, but I don't know how to do that. The creators of OBBs tend to obscure the structure. Dbfirs 08:39, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of Android programs are shipped as Dalvik/ART bytecode, so it depends on what you mean by "emulator", which is an ill-defined term. Certainly if you want to run the software unmodified you need to provide the Android platform's bells and whistles, but you don't need to emulate a processor architecture. Although there are native-code Android executables, so you can't guarantee that for any arbitrary Android software. Wine is a better-known example of this fuzziness; it doesn't do any CPU emulation. For that matter, "PC" is similarly ill-defined. There are Android netbooks and the like. People don't always mean Wintel when they say "PC" (especially if they aren't computer nerds like us). --71.119.131.184 (talk) 05:36, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in my experience, "PC" is synonymous with "Wintel" these days, even though a "personal computer" originally meant any computer used by an individual instead of an organisation, and even IBM PC -based computers can run a variety of OSes. There are even IT professionals who market their software as "PC, Mac, Linux" as if Linux was a separate physical computer and not just an operating system for PCs (and possibly other computers too). JIP | Talk 20:38, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well Wine would provide compatibility the other way round, unless our article is out of date. I admit I hadn't taken into account that the OP might have meant a Tablet computer. Dbfirs 19:07, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dbfirs: I took the liberty of fixing your wikilink. Wine goes to the actual alcoholic beverage, you want Wine (software). JIP | Talk 20:35, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Thanks for that. I hadn't been drinking it, honest ossifer! Dbfirs 20:53, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Video upscaling question

When displaying a video (or image) whose resolution is lower than that of the display panel, the video is upscaled.

Assume that I have 2 monitors of the same physical size but difference resolutions: 720p and 2160p. Is there any difference when they display a 720p video? I think the 2160p monitor just use 3x3 pixel block to simulate a 1x1 block of the 720p video, and there is no pixel stretching at all. 14.177.58.42 (talk) 20:30, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There won't be stretching but you might notice the lesser quality of the 720p video. After all, there's less pixels and therefore less detail in the 720p video frames, which are now being displayed at 2160p. FrameDrag (talk) 21:37, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are many, many ways of upscaling...and the visual results are different in each case.

Pixel replication - so if your monitor is 2x higher resolution than the image, then you'll have 2x2 areas of completely uniform color. This can result in visible aliassing.
BiLinear interpolation - the system blends the colors of adjacent image pixels to fill in the gaps between them...so on a 2x resolution screen, a hard black/white edge in the original image looks like a soft blend through mid-grey. This can result in the image looking blurry.
Cubic/Quartic interpolation - similar to the above except the blending of adjacent colors is done gradually, then steeply, then gradually again. Looks better than bilinear - but is more expensive for the electronics to calculate.
Lanczos resampling - a yet more complicated way to do this that results in yet better images.

Then those things may be done in linear color space or gamma-space...much other things may be involved.

The results are therefore extremely dependent on the algorithm being used. On a moving picture, the results can be even more involved. If the video image is compressed then the motion compensation can be done pixel-perfect at the higher resolution, resulting in smoother motion on the higher resolution device.

Bottom line...it's not that simple!

SteveBaker (talk) 00:35, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that you have a nice integer ratio, that makes for the best upscaling. On the other hand, say when upscaling from 720 to 1080, then some pixels are duplicated while others aren't, resulting in distortions. Either that or the software does some type of interpolation to turn 2 pixels into 3, which still won't look all that good. I wish there was always an option to just keep it at the lower resolution, and use only a portion of the screen, but I've rarely seen that option. StuRat (talk) 06:57, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not particularly hard on pretty much any computer, or most smart TVs. Nil Einne (talk) 13:22, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean displaying at a lower than native res on a computer monitor by only using that portion of the screen, so you still have 1 pixel to 1 pixel mapping, I don't believe I've ever seen that option on a computer monitor. Instead, they automatically upscale to use the full screen. StuRat (talk) 17:09, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to SteveBaker's comment, see image scaling. madVR is a popular video renderer on Windows for people interested in high quality video upscaling. It's GPU assisted and supports quite a few different upscaling and downscaling algorithms. This includes increasing the resolution by 2x, 4x or 8x as necessary and then downscaling or upscaling as needed. super-xbr and NNEDI3 are popular but demanding scaling methods. (Modern GPU generally have their own algorithms, but madVR is normally considered to offer better quality if your hardware can support it.)

I don't think the claim "A 720p video on a 720p screen always looks better than the same video on a 1080p screen due to pixel stretching" is universally true. I'm fairly sure there are people who prefer the look of a 720P video (or whatever) upscaled with a quality upscaler on a 1080 display, than on a 720 display (i.e. displayed natively) even everything else being equal (which is almost impossible with displays anyway). Once you get to significantly higher resolutions like 2160 (or even a non integer like 2520) it will get even more likely.

An existing common example would be that many people would prefer the look of a SD video upscaled with a quality upscaler played on a 1080 display even if that SD video resolution was non integer (as they often are) to 1920x1080 (or whatever resolution needed for the aspect ratio); than they would that same video non upscaled. Although we are talking far lower resolutions here, and finding a display equivalent in every other way but the resolution would be very difficult. (Probably the best you can do is to use a projector and different lens or distance to achieve the same size while using different numbers of pixels, but that still wouldn't be perfectly equivalent.)

Of course, as was discussed very recently, many people also fool themselves in to thinking they notice some difference when they actually don't (and given the distance, size and how well they see, perhaps can't), so that also needs to be taken in to account in any test. In particular, I suspect the most common thing would be that people won't actually notice the difference between any of these: 720P content played natively on a 720 display, 720P content played upscaled with a fancy algorithm on a 1080 display and 720P content played upscaled with a resonably simple (well better than nearest neighbour) on a 1080 display; if everything else is equal.

Still the takeaway message remains sound, it's foolish to assume everyone prefers something, just because someone (perhaps you) does.

Nil Einne (talk) 13:44, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It really depends on the content you are upscaling. For things typically displayed on a computer monitor, like text and lines, you really want to avoid non-integer scaling. For example, if every other line of pixels alternates between black and white on a 720 image, and you upscale that to 1080, it's going to look horrid. But for typical TV images, like moving pics of people, I don't think it much matters if you view native 720 or 720 upscaled to 1080. StuRat (talk) 17:15, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The tough thing is text - particularly text that's overlaid on live action video. As you say, for live action video, simple pixel replication works reasonably well - but for text you need some kind of interpolation. But interpolation can make other kinds of image blurry. If you're watching some sporting event and you have overlaid stats and logos and such - you have every kind of image all on the screen at once. What's optimal for one is pessimal for the other. My TV has modes for viewing different kinds of content - and probably that setting changes those kinds of decisions - but most people are not willing to dive into the menus to change the settings every time they flip channels or watch a different show. So the TV inevitably winds up in some compromise mode that's optimal for the "In-Store-Demo" and never changes from that. SteveBaker (talk) 16:47, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

However, the example I gave, of alternating lines of one pixel color and another, I still can't see how you can change one black line and one white line into 3 lines and still have it look like one black line and one white line, of the same thickness. StuRat (talk) 06:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]