Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2007 December 5

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 5

Do web hosting accounts have bandwidth caps?

I am testing my website's bandwidth speed using Speed Test Pro http://speedtestpro.net[1] and it shows that my maximum bandwidth speed for my website is only 1.9 Mbps. My Internet connection using Speed Test Pro again shows my speed as 3 Mbps so I know it is not my ISP that is slowing it down. Does shared web hosting limit your maximum bandwidth speed? Or do I have something setup wrong on my web hosting account? It is a cheap web hosting account, but their website says they have a 100 Mbit connection to the Internet. I am confused and very frustrated, can someone help, please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jakelittle11 (talk • contribs) 01:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Some providers have caps. It's also possible that the account have a set cap for how fast a single computer can download.

Does the website say they have a 100 Mbit connection, or does it say that they have dedicate a 100 Mbit connection for your site. If it's the former then you share those 100Mbits with other users of the provider, so you only get a fraction of the connection. In the latter you still share with other visits to your site. In addition there is loss,latencies and overhead involved when sending anything over the internet, so you will never get the a throughput equal to your bandwidth, see Throughput.

You might want to try at different times to see if this affects things, expect connections to be better when fewer people is on the net. Taemyr (talk) 08:37, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

radio auction

how do I get an application to enter the auction for the 700 mhz spectrum?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/01/technology/01google.html?em&ex=1196744400&en=6c9bd6fe4276d660&ei=5087%0A —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.217.195.89 (talk) 01:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Look here (http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/spectrumauctions/3gindex.htm) it would appear that you submit a fax to the radio communications headquarters at Docklands. Of course this is a UK ofcom radio auction but similarly contact the area that are auctioning the spectrum and they will direct you how to do it. This (http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/osmhome.html) might be the owners of US ones. ny156uk (talk) 18:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The FCC is responsible for the auction. You would need to register with the FCC. You would then have access to their Auctions Portal. Of course, you would also need several billion dollars in spare change. Information on the 700MHz auction can be found here. — Matt Eason ^{(Talk • Contribs)} 18:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Runescape

What is the first second and third most expencive thing in runescape acording to the grand exchange?thanks--76.235.183.66 (talk) 02:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Please do not crosspost. Lanfear's Bane | t 13:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Freeware video converter.

I know this has probably been asked before but I've been googling for an hour with no luck. is there a half decent windows video converter that can rip a dvd to mpeg4 with a few settings like compression and screen size would be nice, the aim is i want to synch a dvd to my iphone. the only tools I can find have lousy trial periods only allowing you to convert 5 minutes, or some other catch like big watermarks. Surely there must be a basic tool that can do this for free.. Vespine (talk) 02:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Typical, spend an hour searching, almost give up, post the question, and five minutes later happen across what may be the answer, a program called "handbreak".. Well if anyone has other suggestions.. Vespine (talk) 03:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

For the benefit of anyone else searching, that software is called HandBrake. --LarryMac | Talk 13:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

you could try Super (software) - most flavours of video - not sure about from DVD tho . Boomshanka (talk) 03:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

How to select particular columns of a particular row in VBA Excel

I have an excel sheet having data in rows 1 to 15 and columns 1 to 7. I a generating a code in which i need to select a particular row on basis of a condition. If the condition is true, the columns 1 to 7 of that particular row need to be selected and do some formatting on those columns. I want to know the code by which i can select columns 1 to 7 of a row in VBA excel.

Try this (http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa221576(office.11).aspx) Range("1:7").select should work but Vba is really picky so it might take a few tries (can't try on my machine as no excel at home). ny156uk (talk) 18:14, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Computer memory related to hard disk

When we see the properties of our computer it display some less capacity of hard disk comparision of its original capacity (ex. if hard disk is 80 GB the computer show only around 74 or 75 GB) Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by San sharma (talk • contribs) 09:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

80 to 74 or 75 is about the ratio of binary gigabytes (2^30 bytes) to decimal gigabytes (10^9). The Gigabyte article has some background information on this common confusion. --tcsetattr (talk / contribs) 09:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

• There's also some loss of useful space where the operating system will reserve some disk space for its own purposes. --Sean 13:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

When you format a disk, some of the space needs to be used for the file system/index. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 02:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Recovery of hard disk

I format my hard disk without taking backup. Can i recover my data? —Preceding unsigned comment added by San sharma (talk • contribs) 09:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

It depends. You can assume that any date that has been overwritten is lost. This means that if you used wipe options when formatting everything is lost, it also mean that if you have written stuff to the hard disk(this most likely includes booting the computer with this drive as primary) then some of the data is lost. Other than that you might want to take a look at the tools described in Data recovery#Tools. Taemyr (talk) 10:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Difficulty booting Linux in VirtualBox

I'm using VirtualBox to emulate Debian so I don't need to use another computer just for the sake of being able to experiment with Debian. However, there is one thing that seems to prevent the installer/Debian from loading. When I boot into the installer, I can't get into any of them except using installgui since they get stuck at tsc clocksource has been installed and only after resetting the virtual machine several times I managed to get past the clocksource freeze. Sometimes, I see a line saying that the "timer is running x% from normal - aborting" and that usually causes the freeze. I even got a kernel panic stating a sync problem. Even if I manage to get past that and install Debian, I have to perform the reset several times again as it wouldn't get past the few lines after the clocksource has been installed. Only through luck/many resets I could boot Debian and begin using it. What actually went wrong during the booting process causing it to get stuck at a line? --Bruin_rrss23 (talk) 09:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

EDIT: I've just upgraded to the latest version of VirtualBox so the whole thing managed to boot up (only panicked once), only the thing just lags and the clock seems like UTC+16 hrs. It's totally asynchronous except the audio since the clock runs slower while under load. Anyhow, I've already solved the problem, so no need to reply here. --Bruin_rrss23 (talk) 13:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Overnight

Sometimes I leave my pc computer on overnight. Always it is incredibly sludgy next morning and takes a while to limber up. Why? I have checked it as OK with Adaware SE and spyBot. I run Windows XP and AVG. - Kittybrewster ☎ 10:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Often, it has "paged out" everything you're interested in using in favor of whatever it was doing overnight. See virtual memory. It seems slowish until your programs and data get paged back in again.

Atlant (talk) 12:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Windows XP has a habit of moving any program or parts thereof that aren't actively being used to the swap file. By leaving your computer on overnight, almost everything will be considered "not in use", and will be swapped out. The "limber up" time is Windows finding out what you're actually using, and bringing them back off the hard drive. --Carnildo (talk) 23:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

That leaves the question: what is running overnight that uses all main memory? Windows does not page anything to the swap file unless it really needs the memory for something else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.187.70.206 (talk) 02:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

File indexing daemons? Screensavers? Virus scanners? --Mdwyer (talk) 04:36, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Rarely my Apple Mac has the same problem, but it comes up to speed quite quickly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.25.42 (talk) 09:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The only things that work overnight (I think) are MailWasher (collecting new email junk) and AVG (updating and searching for viruses). Maybe some URLs update themselves. - Kittybrewster ☎ 10:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I can't speak specifically about Windows, but some virtual memory paging algorithms are "free space greedy" and wil try to increase the free space even if nothing is competing for space at that instant. They do this on the theory that you never know when there will a sudden demand for free space (for example, to launch a new program) and, hey, you haven't used Word for eight hours anyway!

Atlant (talk) 13:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Windows is super duper non-free-space-greedy. Vista fills all but about 40MB of my 2GB of memory with cached data based on their secrit algorithmz to predict what data I'm going to want next --ffroth 00:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

downloading directory tree from Apache autoindex

Hi, I want to download a directory tree from an HTTP server. The directory and its subdirectories do not have index files, and all are displayed by Apache web server's mod_autoindex, so their format is predictable. I could use something like wget -r, but I want to avoid the "Parent Directory" (I don't want it to go up and download the entire web site.) and the "Name", "Last Modified", etc. sorting column heading (they are just duplicates of the same directory) links that are generated by autoindex. In fact, I don't really need to save the generated autoindex page itself. Is there a good program out there that can do this? Thanks, --131.215.166.100 (talk) 12:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

wget has -np to avoid going into the parent directory, and you could construct a list of patterns for -R to reject the alternate sortings. --tcsetattr (talk / contribs) 21:20, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

WinZip

Where can I find an older version of WinZip? I updated my Winzip, and the new versions are only available for free for 45 days. This was not the case with the older versions. Funsides (talk) 17:58, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

This may be time to change to TUGZip or 7-Zip instead of Winzip. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

With version 10, Corel now requires you to purchase an upgrade on each major update. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 18:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The Zip patents have expired, so pretty much anyone can make a zip program. I think InfoZip is now the standard, but their windows tools pretty much suck, in my opinion. I don't use 7-Zip, but I have heard good things about it. Finally, you could actually buy WinZip. I know, I'm talkin' crazy. --Mdwyer (talk) 04:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I tried 7-zip also but never understood how it works. Funsides (talk) 06:50, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

At the WinZip page on Oldversion.com.--droptone (talk) 15:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Software installer

Thinking about WinZip... we use an older version of WinZip Self Extractor as a simple software installer for deploying drivers. Can anyone recommend a simple installer package that might be better and available under GPL or the like? --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 18:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

NSIS? It's not GPL but it's like GPL. --antilived^{T | C | G} 19:12, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Why is my PC running so SLOW?

I like to think I know quite a bit about computers but my PC has got to the stage where it is really beginning to annoy me as it seems so sluggish compared with other computers I use, for example my laptop, which has a lower spec and the same O/S seems like gresed lightning compared to this PC. I have upgraded virtually every part of it and it still seems slow. It's not particularly noticable for general tasks although opening Firefox takes about five seconds which seems like ages but when I try and do anything more demanding, it doesn't want to know. Movie editing and games can be painfull slow, we're not talking about the latest FPS games with richly rendered 3D graphics here but games a few years old. Even 16 bit SNES games (played on an emulator, yes I do have all the original games but it's a real pain having to keep dragging the old consoles out and going behind the TV to plug them in). These only use like 16Mb or RAM so not exactly resource intensive! Trainz 2006 and Roller Coaster Tycoon 3 also run like snails when I try and do anything beyond the most basic tasks, Trainz only needs 32Mb of graphics RAM which is much less than I have. It is making these games completely unplayable. What is supposed to last a second in the game lasts three seconds, it doesn't drop frames, just serves them a lot slower than it should do, the graphics freeze in between frames while the audio just stutters.

Here are the vital stats:

CPU: Pentium 4 - 3.00 GHz
Motherboard: ASUS P5PE-VM
RAM - 1GB DDR400 (in one module I think)
GFX: GeForce FX5500 AGP Card with 256Mb RAM
Audio: Creative Audigy Platinum
HDD: 80Gb; 25Gb free. This 80Gb 'drive' is a partition of a larger (250Gb total) drive.
O/S: XP Pro

Could it be any of the processes I have running? I'm not sure about some of them listed but here is what is running in Task Manager after a boot up where I have loaded nothing other than Firefox, Notepad and the processes that Windows starts up out of the kindness of its heart without being asked:

ALG.EXE (3,168K) What is this?
AVGAMSVR.EXE (308K) something to do with AVG antivirus?
avgcc.exe (240K)
AVGEMC.EXE (1,644K)
AVGUPSVC.EXE (596K)
CRSS.EXE (3,608K) what is this?
CTHELPER.EXE (5,508K) what is this?
CTSVCCDA.EXE (1,152K) what is this?
E_FATIACE.EXE (2,048K) what is this?
Explorer.EXE (18,660K) Win XP 'GUI'
firefox.exe (32,280K) Should Firefox really be using 32Mb RAM?
jusched.exe (2,060K) What is this?
KHost.exe (11,708K) What on earth is this?
KService.exe (12,078) ditto
LSASS.EXE (1,128K) What?
MsPMSPSv.exe (1,328K) What is this?
notepad.exe (2,996K) running in order to type in processes running
NVSVC32.EXE (2,674K) What?
SERVICES.EXE (3,844K)
SFAgent.exe (10,556K) SpamFighter (email filtering) agent I think?
SFUS.EXE (5,128K)
SMSS.EXE (372K)
SPOOLSV.EXE (4,268K)
SVCHOST.EXE appears five times, uses up about 35Mb total
System (220K)
System Idle Process (16K)
taskmgr.exe (4,208K)
WDFMGR.EXE (1,548K) Eh?
WINLOGIN.EXE (892K) Is this dodgy?
wscntfy.exe (1,744K) What is this?

All the above processes are apparantly using 229Mb of RAM in total - why is over a quarter of the RAM being used before I even do anything? I would very much appreciate any suggestions. Upgrading to Vista is not something I wish to entertain as the benefits are dubious and the prices even more so. Going over to Linux is not practical either - while I would dearly love to bid farewell to Bill Gates and his empire, most of the software I have only works with WinDoze. GaryReggae (talk) 22:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

A windows machine using only 229Mb just sitting there sounds pretty good to me. Is the computer slower now than when it was new? It could easily be some form of malware slowing you down, or it could just be normal windows slowdown over time. If practical in your situation, you might consider wiping clean and reinstalling the OS and all your apps. Of course, it'd probably pay to try less invasive fixes first. Friday (talk) 22:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Try installing Linux as a dual boot and see if you can use your programs with WINE. --Duomillia (talk) 22:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

A slow windows machine is not unusual, but your machine still has a pretty good spec, so it should zip along nicely if you take care of what is running on it. The first step should be to do a complete scan for viruses and run a spyware scanner (I use the free version of Ad-Aware, but there are others available). As for the list of processes, I think the following are supposed to be there for windows to run: CRSS, Explorer, LSASS, SERVICES, SMSS, SPOOLSV, SVCHOST, System, System Idle Process, WINLOGIN. And these other programs are there because you said you are running them: Firefox, Notepad, taskmgr.

To try to find out what the other stuff is, search for each program on your disk, right-click on it and select properties to read the version info. Many programs have version info in them (for example, my notepad.exe says "Copyright Microsoft Corporation..."). See if you recognise these programs as belonging to Microsoft, your video card maker, your anti-virus or anti-spam, your printer maker, etc.

Take a hard look at your system tray. Are all those updaters, checkers, configuration tools, etc. really necessary. Many of these things in the system tray get started at boot time and if you don't need them they just make your computer slower. There's a tool in XP (maybe called msconfig) which lets you modify what starts up. Use it to cut out the unnecessary stuff; and remember ... Is it really that important that Java runtime checks every day that it is the latest and greatest? Or that you have the ability to call up Real Jukebox from the system tray as well as the start menu?

Maybe your disk is highly fragmented. Delete your temporary internet files, delete the temporary files, and empty the recycled folder before you start.

After a good clean up, maybe you won't have to reinstall windows :-)

Astronaut (talk) 00:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your replies so far:

@Friday: Reinstalling Windows helps a bit but it's a lot of work to keep reinstalling all my apps and I only did it last in September this year.

@Duomillia: I might give Linux another try as I wasn't aware of WINE and not being able to run my Windows apps was the only thing that put me off it. I've got a few spare HDDs (although I'm not sure they're much good, 20Gb is probably the best of the bunch) so I'll have a play around with Ubuntu or something.

@ Astronaut: Thanks, I will do a virus and spyware scan (I must admit it often doesn't get a chance to do a full system scan) as well as a proper defrag. As for the system processes, it appears ALG is the MS Application Layer Gateway service (whatever that is), all the ones beginning with AVG are AVG antivirus files, CTHELPER.EXE must be related to my sound card as it is from Creative Labs, CTSVCCDA.EXE is again fro Creative and something to do with CD-ROM access, E_FATIACE.EXE is related to my Epson print/scan/copy machine, JUSCHED.EXE it appears is Java Update, I have disabled automatic updates to this in the Java Control Panel as I will update it manually, KHost and KService, each of which are using up 12Mb of RAM are soething to do with Kontiki Peer-to-peer software which is something to do with the BBC IPlayer; I have disabled them on startup as I only use them occasionally and don't need the to start up every time! MsPMSPSv.EXE seems to be something to do with Win Media Player which I rarely use as I prefer WinAmp. I can't see any way of disabling this as it is not in the list in MSConfig (I'll come onto that later). NVSVC32 is related to NVIDIA so I'd better leave that as it is, SFUS and SFAgent are related to SPAMFighter although I don't see why it has to run all the time, it only needs to run when I am in Outlook but there is no way of disabling it. WDFMGR is another MS driver thing, WSCNTFY is 'Windows Security Center Notification App' which is annoying but I guess unavoidable.

Onto my System Tray now, all I have is the icon for removing USB devices, TaskMgr, Security Centre, AVG and Epson Status Monitor 3. Interestingly, I've just noticed my audio settings systray icon has vanished but I can access that fro the Start Menu anyway.

Now onto the contents of MSConfig.exe. The Services list is worrying long but it all looks like mainly MS and AVG stuff. Now for the Startup tab, here is a list of the contents: NVCPL (NVIDIA), NWIZ (NVIDIA again), NVMCTray (NVIDIA again), UPDReg (Creative Registry Update), avgcc (AVG), CTHELPER and CTXFIHLP (both Creative), E_FATIACE (Epson), SFAgent (SpamFighter), MSOffice Common Startup.

As I say, I will run a virus scan, spyware scan and defrag now and let you know the results. Thanks again for all your help.GaryReggae (talk) 07:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Well after several hours, Spybot Search & Destroy has finished searching and found 68 items!

AdRevolver - 12 entries - This is just a Cookie

AdViva - 1 entry - Another Cookie
BFast - 1 entry Another Cookie
BurstMedia - 2 entries - more Cookies
CasaleMedia - 5 entries - Cookies again
CommonName - 1 entry - Quite a nasty one this, apparantly it hijacks searches and displays pop-under ads although I haven't seen any evidence of this although then again I don't use Internet Explorer (at least very rarely)
DoubleClick - Cookies x 3
FastClick - Cookies x 6
HitBox - Cookies x 10
MediaPlex - Cookies x 4
StatCounter - Cookies x 18
TradeDoubler - Cookies x 3
WebTrends Live - Cookie x 1

I have 'fixed' the lot using Spybot although I don't think there was anything that could be causing slowdown apart from perhaps the CommonName one. Now onto the Defrag which will probably take hours although there shouldn't be much fragmentation as I haven't deleted or moved much stuff on the Win partition since I did a fresh install.GaryReggae (talk) 11:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Late I know but:

Assuming the file names are legit (AVG should ensure they aren't viruses):

• ALG.EXE (3,168K) — Application Layer Gateway (Builtin Windows Service): You may be able to stop this and get away with it if (Like me) you're obsessed with a clean process list.
• CRSS.EXE (3,608K) — Client
• LSASS.EXE (1,128K) — Local Security Authority System Service (Built in to Windows): This one very deeply rooted, I'd leave it be.
• SERVICES.EXE (3,844K) — Obviously runs some services (Built in to Windows).
• SMSS.EXE (372K) — Session Manager System Service (Builtin): Don't try too much around this or you many not be able to login!
• SPOOLSV.EXE (4,268K) — Spooler service: If you stop it, Windows wont see any printers!
• SVCHOST.EXE — Service Host: Some belong to services you can stop/disable, some don't. NEVER try and kill a SVCHOST process without saving your work: If you kill the one that belongs to RPCSS (Remote Procedure Call), Windows will tell you it has to shut down in a minute (If you got hit with MSBlaster, you'll know what that looks like)!
• System (220K) — NTOSKRNL housekeeping (Don't really know, can't do anything with it either!)
• System Idle Process (16K) — Housekeeping: This is what makes the sum of all process time add up to 100, this one usually hangs out around 99 % CPU when the machine is idling (Unless you have SETI@Home or similar).
• taskmgr.exe (4,208K) — Obviously, Task Manager!
• WINLOGIN.EXE (892K) — Windows' Login system and activation checker: Screw with this and it'll screw with you(r user account)!
• wscntfy.exe (1,744K) — "Windows Security Center NoTiFYer": That annoying "shield" in your systray that wants you to install updates, automatically update, install Windows Defendant, update your AV, turn on Windows Firewall, enable UAC (On Vista), etc, etc. Open Security Center, click "Change how Security Center notifies me" and uncheck all 3 and it should go away.

Other processes:

• Explorer.EXE (18,660K) Win XP 'GUI'
• firefox.exe (32,280K) Should Firefox really be using 32Mb RAM? — If that's truely all its using, that's amazzing.
• jusched.exe (2,060K) — Java Update Scheduler: If you install Java, it has this run at login to see if there's an update to annoy you with. You can get rid of it by opening Control Panel > Java > Update and telling it to NEVER check for updates.

WRT these:

AVGAMSVR.EXE (308K) something to do with AVG antivirus?
avgcc.exe (240K)
AVGEMC.EXE (1,644K)
AVGUPSVC.EXE (596K)
CTHELPER.EXE (5,508K) what is this?
CTSVCCDA.EXE (1,152K) what is this?
E_FATIACE.EXE (2,048K) what is this?
KHost.exe (11,708K) What on earth is this?
KService.exe (12,078) ditto
MsPMSPSv.exe (1,328K) What is this?
("Microsoft PMSP Server", PMSP="Personal Messaging ..."?) NVSVC32.EXE (2,674K) What?
("NV SerViCe 32") SFAgent.exe (10,556K) SpamFighter (email filtering) agent I think?
SFUS.EXE (5,128K)
WDFMGR.EXE (1,548K) Eh?
(Maybe "Windows Driver Foundation ManGeR")

Goto Start > Search and search for the file names. If they turn up in a program files directory, that should tell you more about what they are. If they turn up in \WINDOWS\System32, rightclick and select "Properties" and then "Version" tab and go through the entries (any) that are there. Company name, etc may tell you something. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 02:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

O blast it!, I completely missed your huge block of text above; ignore what I've got there, it's all redundant... 68.39.174.238 (talk) 02:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I left the defrag process running overnight and I was wrong about how fragmented the Windows parition was, it was pretty bad although my data partition didn't really need doing. I have defragged both and still things are running slugishly. I will have to try plan B...experimenting with Ubuntu. GaryReggae (talk) 14:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Personally I would perform a registry scan. My PC was also going slow until I scanned and found out that my registry had >5000 serious problems. Also, SVCHOST.EXE has been known to overload and use up 100% of processor time and anywhere up to 300,000KB RAM space. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.11.5 (talk) 15:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Resolution in HDTV

I have a chance to get a good deal on a Panasonic HDTV that has resolution described as: 1366 x 768.

I see a reference in Wikepedia that if the resolution is not "1080" (presumably 1920 x 1080)the HDTV may not be compatible with computers (I would presume for showing things like photos on the HDTV display from a computer)

Can anyone shed some light on this. The articles I have looked at do not mention 1366 x 768 resolution.......Gary B. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GSBens (talk • contribs) 22:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes it will be compatible with computers, as long as it has a VGA or DVI input. It simply means that the TV is only capable of 720p and not 1080i/p, and will be scaled down if such content is displayed. --antilived^{T | C | G} 02:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Personal experience -- if you've got a laptop, try to hook it up in the store. I've got a Westinghouse that reports the same resolution as your panasonic, but for the life of me I can't get it to run from a computer at the native resolution. The best I can do is 1024x768... --Mdwyer (talk) 04:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Depending on your graphics card adding the custom resolution should be a relativly painless task. If you have an Nvidia card then this will be of use. With an ATI card you will have to use a program called Powerstrip, unless there is something I have missed (I seem to vaugly recall a button to add HDTV compatible resolutions in the catalyst control panel.) If not (or you have another brand of graphics card) then look up a program called Powerstrip. With regards to connectivity there is a good chance the TV will have a DVI connection, and if your graphics card has DVI outputs then just plug it in. Otherwise you will be looking for some sort of converter. If it only has HDMI then you can find HDMI to DVI cables for a small price at most good electronics stores. I am willing to bet there are HDMI to VGA cables as well although I have never looked. TheGreatZorko (talk) 10:49, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Hard disk partitioning question

I'm about to upgrade my Linux system to an altogether new one, which has a bigger hard disk. Previously, I used to have my hard disk partitioned so that about two thirds were root (/) and about one third was home (/home). But then I found out that my digital photographs filled up my entire home partition. So I bought a new hard disk solely to store them. Now I have about 5.4 GB in use in root, 1.4 GB in use in home, and a staggering 28 GB in use on the new hard disk (almost all of it is digital photographs).

My new hard disk will be bigger than both of my old ones put together. Should I keep with the current partitioning (root, home, and digital photographs), or combine the latter two together, so that one sixth would be root and five sixths would be home?

All the above is ignoring the boot and swap partitions. Their size is negligible in comparison to the root and home partitions. JIP | Talk 23:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I know most distributions suggest some elaborate partitioning scheme but - it's bogus. The filesystem is a lot better at assigning space to your data than the partition table. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.187.70.206 (talk) 02:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Distributions suggest elaborate schemes so that an overflowing log (in /var) or process writing to /tmp can't bring down the whole system. It prevents a user filling their /home directory from impacting other services on the box. It isn't totally bogus.

Now, that said, I personally don't do the partitions. I have a tiny /boot, a sizable swap, and the rest is /. --Mdwyer (talk) 04:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

On my Linux box I have two partitions (plus swap): a big one containing /var and /home and a smaller one containing the rest. The idea is to split off the mostly static OS files from the mess of frequently changing stuff under /var and /home, thereby hopefully reducing fragmentation and seek times. I haven't really checked if it has any actual effect, but certainly it works no worse than any other scheme I've tried. Of course, the down side to this setup is that I had to make /home a symlink to /var/home — though I suppose I could've used a bind mount instead. Anyway, I have found that, for certain infrequent but occasionally necessary operations, such as OS reinstalls or even data recovery after a disk failure, having multiple partitions is convenient, simply because it allows you to work on the system in more manageable chunks; the exact choice of how to set up the partitions is of secondary importance there. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 05:12, 8 December 2007 (UTC)