Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2010 March 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.

March 5

seeds

Is the downloading speed dependent on the number of seeds or number of seeds available from the seed pool dependent on the downloading speed of the net service??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.235.54.67 (talk) 01:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I assume you're talking about Bittorrent? If that's the case the service where you got the original .torrent file doesn't really effect your speed. In it's most basic form, your speed is limited by the number of seeds times their bandwidth divided by the number of leachers.

Each seed provides bandwidth that must be shared among the leachers.

So, a torrent with 3 seeds on cable-modem might be slower than a torrent with 1 seed on a fast T1 connection. (A college student, perhaps.)

But in both cases, the more leachers there are the slower the torrent will go.

BUT, it's not just the seeds that provide bandwidth! While you're downloading you're also uploading. So if a leacher is uploading faster than he's downloading, he might actually make the torrent go faster! (This is Bittorrent's greatest strength.)

In short, it's tough to predict how fast a torrent will download. Best to choose one with a lot of seeds and hope for the best. APL (talk) 02:06, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

download speed is dependant on the upload speed of the seeds. you could have 2000837493253434 seeds with no upload speed and your download would be slow. You could have 1 seed with 200mb/s upload and your download would be fast. See upload for more info, R12IIIeloip (talk) 09:56, 5 March 2010 (UTC) R12IIIeloip (talk)

SpyArsenal Internet Spy, Malware?

Does anyone know if SpyArsenal Internet Spy contains any type of malware? Thanks:) 66.202.66.78 (talk) 07:27, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

The word "spy" sounds like it does. Maybe it has spyware. You should run it through some anti-virus checkers 09:52, 5 March 2010 (UTC)~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by R12IIIeloip (talk • contribs)

To me, the name implies that it spies on others, not the user. Of course, if a company is in the business of spying, can you really trust them not to spy on you, too ? StuRat (talk) 13:03, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I did a quick search, looks like it is, look here: http://www.emsisoft.com/en/malware/Adware.Win32.SpyArsenal_Logger-remove.aspx , also http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=X4c&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&q=SpyArsenal+Internet+Spy+malware&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

Computers

I was told they are using computes and dishes to monitor the sky and look for aliens. What exactly are they looking for to determine this? What would be considered evidence for extra-terrestial intelligence? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jetterindi (talk • contribs) 09:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

SETI is probably what you are talking about. In short, they are looking for radio signals coming from space that look like they are generated by an artifical source (i.e. by intelligent aliens). Please ask any follow-up questions if the article doesn't answer you. Zunaid 10:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Floppy Disk

What is the max capasity of a floppy disk? I was always told it was 1.44 but I saw someone format a normal 1.44 disk into 2.88mb. HOW? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Berelera (talk • contribs) 09:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

• Floppy disk#Disk formats should have the answer you need. 2.88MB are what are "Extended density" disks, as opposed to 1.44MB "high density" disks. Extended density disks never really became popular. Please ask any follow-up questions if the article doesn't answer you completely. Zunaid 09:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
• (ec)See Floppy disk. 2.88 MB is the rated capacity of the last generation of widely used 3.5"-Floppies. Since a floppy is just a magnetic platter in a casing, you can always try to format a floppy rated for a lower capacity at a higher one. This may or may not work, based on manufacturing tolerances and your tolerance to data corruption. Especially nowadays, its quite likely that all floppies are produced to the same 2.88 MB standard, but run through different levels of quality control, or possibly are simply down-marked to grab a certain market segment without having two production lines. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 10:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Alphabet used for non-latin-charset licence keys

In general, for versions of popular software products (say Windows, MS Office, Photoshop) localised to non-latin alphabets (e.g. Hebrew, Chinese, Arabic, Cyrillic, Japanese) are the licence keys that one must type in during installation also localised to those charsets, or are speakers of those languages stuck entering latin characters? -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 12:46, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Latin characters. At least in Japan. But I think other countries too. Oda Mari (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Keep in mind, for some of these countries, they're using Latin keyboards. Chinese can't be typed practically on a reasonable size keyboard, so they use an IME to create the Chinese characters from "names" spelled in Latin. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 16:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

how much does putting together a beige desktop quad core intel i7 system cost?

how much would a beige desktop be (no screen) if you configured it yourself from new (e.g. newegg) parts to have these specs:

• 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
• 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM
• 1TB hard drive
• ATI Radeon HD 4850 graphics with 512MB

Also how does this price change for 8 or 16 GB or RAM, respectively? Thank you. 82.113.121.103 (talk) 14:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

If you know that Newegg exists, and you know what components you're interested in, why don't you just price the parts there yourself? If you need help with some specific compatibility questions or something, I'm sure we can help with those. -- Coneslayer (talk) 15:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

(ec) In case you didn't know, NewEgg has a search box at the top of their page. It is trivial to search for these prices:

• 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 = $280-$295
• 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM = $85-$150
• 1TB hard drive = $100
• ATI Radeon HD 4850 graphics with 512MB = $100

You still need a motherboard, case, and possibly a keyboard and mouse. The prices on those depend on what you want. Sometimes the case does not include a power supply, so you'll need one of those also. -- kainaw™ 15:18, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

The reason I asked you guys is because I don't know anything about motherboards or cases or anything else I would have to put in the system. Since you have all of my parts, if you add the appropriate motherboard and an appropriate case, power supply, anything else I don't know about, what would the total be please? Thank you for the work you did to produce the above figures and I hope it is not too much to ask to add the missing parts I don't know about. Thank you. 82.113.121.103 (talk) 17:21, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Then, are you still planning to put it together yourself? I would advise against it- even though it is very easy, there are still a couple of things that can be done wrong...

To answer your question, I pay ~$50 for a case and anywhere from $70 to $115 for a power supply. Your parts are a bit power hungry. You can technically fit this in a mid-tower, but that may be too cramped for your taste. Wired keyboard and mouse set is about $15 or so.

While I'm at it, why do you need such a fast video card/processor, and yet the video card has a very small amount of dedicated video? In my (personal) opinion, you can get an older model card and save a ton of money, or get a fast card with more VRAM. This card is right in between, and seems like a waste of money to me. Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 18:08, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

(Fast video card + processor = games - is 512MB small these days?) ATI 4850 reviews were very favourable - but maybe a 1GB 4850 is a better long term bet.

On top of that you will probably have the price of an Operating System - which will probably have to be windows if you have lots of video games in mind - bought separately windows isn't cheap about £100 (more in $ I think) - that cost can really hurt the price advantage of a self build.87.102.67.84 (talk) 19:10, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

You'll almost certainly need at least a DVD rom? - which are quite cheap ~$30.87.102.67.84 (talk) 19:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

You should get a Radeon 5770 instead. It may cost a bit more money but it's faster and has significantly less idle power consumption which will pay itself back soon. --antilived^{T | C | G} 11:17, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the above figures, guys. I think no one has mentioned the price of an appropriate motherboard yet... any ideas? 82.113.121.94 (talk) 19:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

$200 (and probably more) I think. eg [1] 87.102.67.84 (talk) 19:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

You can go a little less than that, if you want... the ASRock P55 Extreme and ASRock X58 Extreme (depending on which processor socket you need) go for $140-$160. -- Coneslayer (talk) 19:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hard Drives

Are hard drives made with partitions when they're manufactured? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Temporialdisporan (talk • contribs) 16:53, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

No, they're created at the point the operating system is first installed. ZX81 ^talk 17:15, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Rather, when the disk is formatted. A disk need not have an OS at all. —Tamfang (talk) 21:06, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

And, just in case you don't know, partitions can be added, moved, or removed later. Think of them like folding wall partitions, not permanent walls. StuRat (talk) 18:18, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Soundcard synth programming

I'm writing a game and want to add sound effects and music to it while making minimal demands on the processor (so I can use it for more important things, like graphics and AI). I'm happy with these sounds being extremely lo-fi and reminiscent of the 8-bit era. I would like to use multiple channels, though. So, this all makes me think MIDI is appropriate - except it would have to be MIDI in which I use my own custom waveforms or instruments and not the built-in ones. My questions in order of importance are: firstly, can I do that with MIDI, or if not, how should I do it? Secondly, where is the MIDI API documentation for Windows (and, after that, for Linux)? Thirdly, why did they discontinue the offline API files like WIN32.HLP leaving me to search for information in MSDN which is like a big shitty haystack? 81.131.5.159 (talk) 17:24, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

You can do custom sounds with Soundfonts, which is pretty much a sample that you can play (pitch shifted) in place of a sound from the standard mini selection (the "bank"). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 17:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. "The most sophisticated sound cards use wavetables to define the base samples that are used to render their MIDI files." That implies that most of them, the unsophisticated ones, can't make arbitrary noises via MIDI. Still, I might just use the default instruments. Then I read on MSDN "by emulating the behavior of older software and hardware, the midiOutXxx and midiInXxx functions sacrifice the precision timing and enhanced functionality that are now available through the DirectMusic API." So it sounds like MIDI does unnecessary work in software and DirectMusic is a more efficient replacement to it. But then I read over at ASIO "ASIO bypasses the normal audio path from the user application through layers of intermediary Windows operating system software, so that the application connects directly to the soundcard hardware"... so should I be using ASIO instead? Except I would have thought that with MIDI most of the work of playing the note is internal to the soundcard. What's the least processor intensive way to play a (multi-channel) tune? That's my real question. 81.131.5.159 (talk) 18:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

ASIO and MIDI are for entirely different jobs. MIDI is instructions (like playing notes), ASIO is for samples. When you say "with MIDI most of the work of playing the note is internal to the soundcard", you're really entirely incorrect. For almost everyone, the soundcard is a brainless little thing that turns samples into analog audio signals (and vice versa); to play MIDI you need a synthesiser (properly a "MIDI renderer"), and if you have a normal soundcard and no external MIDI device (like a synthesiser or a keyboard or whatever) then you'd use the Windows Media Framework's own MIDI renderer. That takes a MIDI instruction, which reads something like "play a F# xylophone sound for 750ms" into a buffer full of samples to throw at the soundcard. Now there are a few fancy soundcards that do have their own synthesiser (the ancient, excellent, Sound Blaster AWE32 did this, and I think its descendent the Sound Blaster Audigy does too); for these you don't use the Windows MIDI renderer, and instead send MIDI commands to the synthesiser in the sound card, and it does its own rendering. ASIO is, like I said, entirely different - it's just a low-latency version of the normal windows send-samples/receive-samples APIs; ASIO allows you to implement a reverb pedal (say) in Windows rather than have it be a seperate piece of hardware. If you're looking to synthesise audio (and you're not building a recording studio or concert rig) ASIO isn't for you. Personally I'd ignore MIDI too (as you're going to use your own waveforms, and probably want effects like ring-mod that MIDI doesn't do) and just synthesise stuff myself and spray samples out either to a WAV file or to the normal DirectSound output. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 19:26, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I should point out that there are other software MIDI renders too, not just the built-in Windows one. Cubase and things like that do it; I would imagine that the fancy professional renders will be better than the free-bundled MS one, but I'm not really an aficionado of these. Each renderer also has its own bank of instruments (essentially little WAV recordings for each instrument) and some of the fancier ones have a separate sample for each note (because a low note on a piano is more than just a high note slowed down). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 19:30, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I should also point you to stuff like Tracker (music software) (a general family of sequencers and synthesisers) and stuff like reSID (a software emulation of a popular 8-bit era audio chip; emulators like MAME use a bunch of such emulators as the synthesiser element of their emulation of old arcade games. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 19:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

This question was indeed inspired by my fiddling around with some trackers (Goat Tracker and ModPlug) earlier today. I'm interested in giving my game procedurally generated music. However if the overhead of mixing several waves together on the fly is too steep, I probably won't. I guess sound cards typically don't do their own mixing, then? Do they store a chunk of a few K of data, or does the OS have to nanny the sound card to the extent of supplying every little tiny sample (16 bits or whatever) on cue? 81.131.5.159 (talk) 19:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

If you're talking a modern mainstream computer (and not an embedded system like an iPhone) then synthesising basic waveforms and mixing them together is trivial. Normal mixing is just taking an average; mixing with per-channel volume controls is just a simple weighted average. Indeed, soundcards have a buffer and only ask for a bunch more samples occasionally. The OS has to keep that buffer full, and you as an application have to keep the OS's buffer full, but again that's a very straightforward procedure. For something realtime-ish like a game, you'll not want to be writing too far ahead (otherwise the sounds will lag the action). Incidentally might like to read the iMUSE article; it's my understanding that the music description for such game-oriented procedural music generators knows more than just about notes (like MIDI) - it has some idea of key and time signature, to allow it to generate a genuinely musical transition (rather than just fading one to the other). -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 20:37, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Real Player memory hog?

Been meaning to ask about this for a while... Windows vista, HP media center PC (pavilion m9040n). After Real Player runs, by itself or in a browser window (ie or chrome) after it shuts, i can see using task manager that it's still a resident process, using 25% of my CPU!! that's a lot of computing, and bogs things down. i can shut down the process and everything goes to normal. i figured maybe it's indexing/searching, but if i leave it for literally days, it doesn't stop. this has been going on for a few different RP updates. is this in any way "normal"? is there a fix?

thanks in advance Gzuckier (talk) 18:06, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed this, too, and consider it to be unwanted malware as a result. I kill it whenever I see it. StuRat (talk) 18:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

There is Real Alternative. 81.131.5.159 (talk) 18:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I've seen this problem on every PC that uses it. There are too many (free) media players to warrant considering this one. Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 18:23, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not clear what you are talking about - I used RealPlayer SP (free version) for many moons but never had this problem. When using it I see that after closing realsched.exe is left running (auto updater and message checker) - but I'm getting a consistent 0% (<1%) utilisation for CPU. Overall CPU doesn't change with it installed?

I'm sorry- I should note that the Realplayers I encountered are all bundled with the system from manufacturers. That may? make a difference. Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 01:08, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Is that the process you are seeing still active? (I stopped using realplayer - but due to annoying bugs in the library database - wouldn't release files - 'constantly' getting 'database error' messages due to 'realplayer not being properly shut down' - but that's another story.)87.102.67.84 (talk) 18:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

a percent or two i wouldn't mind but it's consistently 25%, unchanging 25% not just peak, and that's absurd! thanks everybody. Gzuckier (talk) 19:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Use VLC —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dataport676 (talk • contribs) 21:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

floating point representation.

how electronic charge(-1.6 *10^(-19)) represent in floating point(in binary)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22ankitjain (talk • contribs) 19:16, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

If you were intending to use Single precision floating-point format see that article - you also need to express the number as A x 2^(B) - to get the mantissa and exponent. To do this you need to use logarithms to base 2.

Do you need any help with parts of that?87.102.67.84 (talk) 19:25, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Am I protected?

I share internet connection with my roommates. We all have laptops. Could they see where I go online? I didn't know they could see my iPod list until they told me. --Reticuli88 (talk) 21:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

this is a reasonable question. Unfortunately, programmers are anything but reasonable. Who knows? 82.113.121.94 (talk) 21:38, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

First serious question would be - how do you share a connection. Second question would be - why could they see ipod list - do you have file sharing turned on or something (using vista/windows7?)87.102.67.84 (talk) 22:03, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

The iPod list sharing is probably because in iTunes you have "Share my library on my local network" turned on (Edit menu -> Preferences -> Sharing). As for if they can see where you go online, who has control/access to login/configure your router/access point? Although it depends on the model, whoever has access to that likely has access to view all the traffic going through it (if they know what they're doing and again it does depend on the model). ZX81 ^talk 22:13, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

It may be possible depending on what software they decide to try to use in order to find this out. See packet analyzer. It is possible to sniff wireless packets, in particular, assemble them, and get access to anything you send over the network. If you use good-enough Wireless LAN security, this becomes impossible — but even if you use wireless encryption that's good enough, or even if you only use a wired connection, most routers also have a log feature where they can track URL requests, and anybody with the router password can turn the log on, and then review the log at their leisure. Or stream the router's debug messages to their machine. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:24, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, they could see what your doing on-line. Using packet sniffers like wireshark they could see everything your doing... unless your logged on to a secure website. Just make sure you have an antivirus and a firewall installed and updated, and you should be relatively safe. I also suggest you set a password for your "administrative" account if your running WinXP. If your really paranoid; set your password for all users on your computer to something longer than 14 characters so its harder to use ophcrack on your computer. – Elliott(Talk|Cont)  22:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

It's more complicated too. If you're using any of the WPA versions then it's harder for people to see your connections. WPA connections establish a unique encryption key when the machine connects to the wifi. If they can see that connection then, if they know the password, they can decrypt the connection. If they didn't see that initial connection ("handshake") then they can't watch the traffic.

All of this is much more detailed though than you're probably interested in. The reason your iTunes list showed up was because iTunes is shared within the program. That's something iTunes is doing. As for snooping on your connection, it requires some technical skill, but it's extremely easy unless the connection is adequately encrypted. And if the other party knows the same encryption key, then they can listen in.

If you post the method through which you're connected, including the wireless security method, maybe we can be more direct. Shadowjams (talk) 11:39, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

87 and ZX81 have a key point, how do you share a connection? In particular, who has physical and administrative access of the router and if seperate, wireless access point (if you're using wifi) or switch (if it's a wired connection)? If this is a university, then most likely this will be under the control over the university in which case they could probably monitor what you do if not encrypted. If this is a home or flat, then someone or multiple people would have control, and anyone who has that control could easily monitor what you're doing. Note even if you use HTTPs, while they can't see what the website is showing you, they could still see what websites you're visiting due to DNS leaks (e.g. if you regularly visit www.ilovesexwithgoats.org they'll be able to see that if monitoring the DNS requests). If you want to avoid this, you'll need to use some sort of secure VPN or similar, and very carefully set it up to ensure no DNS leaks. (Note that this would still allow whoever runs the VPN to monitor you so you'll ultimately need to trust someone.) Tor would work too and doesn't require trust so much but that's only for the web. Of course, if you're really worried about this sort of thing to such an extent, you also have to consider physical access to your laptop and other stuff like tapping into the wired connection or illegitimately accessing the wireless access point, installing a hidden camera in your room etc. In other words, unless you're working for a terrorist organisation or something, there's ultimately such a thing as being too paranoid. Nil Einne (talk) 14:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Tor will work for non-web traffic as well, but there's the tor-exit note issue that might be a bigger risk than the roommate issue. Shadowjams (talk) 19:43, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Well I was mainly thinking P2P since other then web traffic, for the average user it's what they're most likely to use. And I was under the impression Tor will only work for TCP traffic which limits it's effectiveness on P2P networks and also of course doesn't allow you to receive unsolicited incoming connections which again does the same thing. But I may be mistaken on both counts although I believe Tor also strongly discourages it so I'm not comfortable recommending it's use there and exit nodes may even block P2P traffic. Of course Tor would work for FTP if you use PASV mode although FTP is rare enough nowadays that it's not particularly relevant. And some but not all streaming video although nowadays that can usually be considered web anyway even if it doesn't always use HTTP. However I did forget about IM and perhaps e-mail (although SMTP/IMAP/POP3 are probably less common then web nowadays) which would also likely be of relevance.

Incidentally while I'm not sure what exit node issue you're referring to, presuming you use end to end encryption, I'm not aware whether the is much of a risk from tor exit nodes, at least compared to VPNs. The problem with the roommate issue is that even with end to end encryption, they can still tell what you're visiting due to DNS. They will obviously know who you are and as end to end encyption is not possible for some things like P2P they will be able to monitor your traffic (emphasis on the your). Tor is intended to provide anonymity and it probably does okay, although probably not as well as something like Freenet, in particular since it's fairly vunerable to correlation attacks & traffic analysis I believe. Even for unencrypted traffic, while they can monitor what you're doing, knowing who you are is more difficult unless you choose (by which I'm including inadvertedly) to tell them (so even tho they're monitoring your traffic they should have no idea who 'you' are).

I obviously should have made this clearer but I was mainly referring to anonymity in the later part. To put it a different way, if you aren't using encryption, anyone between you and the end point can monitor your traffic. Anyone between your ISP and you will usually have a way of knowing who you are. If you use a VPN, the VPN provider basically becomes your ISP however as the traffic is encrypted, no one between you and the VPN provider can monitor your traffic however the VPN provider should still know who you are and can monitor your traffic if it isn't encrypted. Even if it is, they can still monitor your DNS queries. The advantage with Tor is that in theory (although Tor is far from perfect as I've emphasised) even though the exit nodes (which can now be considered your ISP) can still monitor your traffic and DNS queries, they aren't supposed to know you are (again if you tell them, then the point is moot although it's the same for anyone between you and the end point).

Of course if you're genuinely worried about this sort of thing, as I've said you have to consider other areas as well. I mentioned problems on your end, since that correlated to the roommate issue but how well do you trust the end point (which you obviously have to even if you use end to end encryption)? If you don't then giving away any information which would offer hints are your identity is clearly a bad idea. If you're very careful not to and use something like Tor then as I've said you don't have to worry so much about the external risks but there's still the close to home risks. Ultimately the strength of your adversary should play a big part in evaluation risks, if you're worried about a government agency or someone with nearly unlimited resources out to get you, there's only a limited amount you can do (and at the very least as I've mentioned you have to take very great care to never give away your real life identity).

Nil Einne (talk) 13:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

There is any PC emulator?

There is any PC emulator? PS: Using pc as most common one, not as a the name personal computer. PS: I do not want names of virtualization software. 187.89.197.232 (talk) 21:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Hang on, what do you mean? PC is personal computer.

Can you give a few examples of the sort of thing you were meaning.87.102.67.84 (talk) 22:01, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I was talking about PC as in IBM pcs, there is many personal computers in the world not just ibm pcs.187.89.197.232 (talk) 22:05, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I too am confused. You want a 'PC emulator' where 'PC' does not mean personal computer... and you don't want virtualization programs. Are you asking to higher someone who slaps you in the face when your not "politically correct"? Please clear up this confusion by adding more information. 76.20.35.236 (talk) 22:09, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

The original poster appears to be asking if there is an emulator of an IBM PC that was actually manufactured by IBM. 187, could you explain why an IBM PC in particular is what you are trying to emulate rather than an IBM PC clone? A detailed answer may help us answer you about the emulator. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:26, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Bochs and QEMU. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 22:32, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Maybe you meant PCs as in Commodore Amiga , ZX Spectrum , Apple II etc ? There are emulators for these (many) - if that's what is wanted search for "emulator name of computer type". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.67.84 (talk) 22:35, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually I'm at a loss to think of anything that could be called a PC that doesn't have an emulator - maybe that's the answer? 87.102.67.84 (talk) 22:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Does this mean like a mac being a pc running windows?? see hackintosh —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zonic4 (talk • contribs) 22:47, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I guess the OP has been watching the adverts a lot and is confusing the word 'PC' with 'Windows' (being the 'most common' OS). Windows programs can be run on a Macintosh using either Parallels or BootCamp. On Linux, many can be run using 'Wine'. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 03:09, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

"PC" for an x86 compatible machine is pretty standard usage nowadays. Despite the term's origin. APL (talk) 19:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

You might be interested in DosBox. That is a piece of software that emulates (old) PCs. APL (talk) 19:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

"I do not want names of virtualization software". Perhaps the OP wants a replacement for Windows. Try the free Ubuntu (operating system). 89.240.110.129 (talk) 22:45, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps the OP should respond to these requests for additional information if the OP would like and answer. otherwise the OP should be considered a troll. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.20.35.236 (talk) 07:08, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Google search results

When I do a search on Google, it shows me a one- or two-hundred character preview for each item. Is there a way to increase that amount to, say, four or five hundred? I see that there isn't in Search Settings, but I would think that such smart people would allow for customization in this regard. Thanks. Vranak (talk) 22:44, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

about these also this - google calls these "snippets" searching http://www.google.co.uk/search?rlz=1C1CHMA_en-GBGB367GB367&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=google+snippet+length is a good one.

This [2] suggests they looked at it (small medium and large) - no idea if this will ever be implemented

This is also relevent - [3] longer search terms give longer snippets.

Couldn't find an absolute answer.87.102.67.84 (talk) 22:56, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Have a google account then yes maybe use the preferences section to specify settings —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zonic4 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Not an option yet as far as I can see.87.102.67.84 (talk) 23:06, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks guys. Vranak (talk) 23:32, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I sure know what you mean. The snippet often ends just a word before the thing I need to see. Then I click to see the full page, which is either so full of crap it takes my computer down, or doesn't contain the same info any more. StuRat (talk) 03:37, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Yup, I gotta say that this is the first time Google has disappointed me. Vranak (talk) 15:09, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Well if it takes the your whole computer down, I recommend a better browser and better OS. In any case, using the cache is often useful for cases like this Nil Einne (talk) 15:42, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Another vote for Google's cached links. More specifically, when I want to see the text on suspicious or crap-laden sites, I prefer Google's text-only cache to avoid loading any images or other elements that the full cached version loads. To go directly* to the text-only version, copy the cached link, paste it in the address box, add &strip=1 and press Enter. --Bavi H (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC).

Thanks, that looks better. In Firefox, I right-clicked on "Cached", picked "Copy link location", picked on the URL in the Address bar, hit Control V to paste it in, then added "&strip=1" at the end and hit enter. This produced the page without the crap. This may be quite useful in IMDB, which is chock-full of crap. But is there any way to automate this and make the process faster ? StuRat (talk) 20:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Use a greasemonkey script. (No, I don't know if there is one. Sorry. :P) Ale_Jrb^talk 20:41, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I found a Firefox add-on called Resurrect Pages. It lets you right click on a link (or on an empty spot on a page), select "Resurrect this link" (or page), and choose to view the link (or page) from several online cache, archive, or mirror services, including Google's full and text-only caches. --Bavi H (talk) 05:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

*Just to make sure you're aware, from a page of Google search results, you can normally get to the text-only version by just clicking on the Cached link, then clicking the "Text-only version" link in the header. For sites you trust, this is probably the easiest way to get to the text-only cache.

However, for some shady sites, Google's full cache still shows annoying pop-ups or things I'm afraid could install malware. In those cases I bypass the full cache and go directly to the text-only cache: At work or public computers, I use the copy-and-add &strip=1 method. (At home, I use a home-made Internet Explorer right-click add-on to go directly to the text-only cache.) --Bavi H (talk) 06:28, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Cool. How does the home made IE work ? StuRat (talk) 08:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

A long time ago, I found a download from Microsoft that added items to the IE right-click menu, and used them as examples to make my own. They work like this: A registry entry adds the item to the right click-menu and points to a javascript file to do the work. A Google search for Internet Explorer context menu will give you more information. Some of my home-made add-ons (including the one that goes directly to the text-only Google cache) are here: Internet Explorer Context Menu Items. --Bavi H (talk) 04:14, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Thx. StuRat (talk) 17:48, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Keyboards

Is it possible to connect more than one keyboard to a computer and have them both function? What would be a practical application of having more than one keyboard? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zonic4 (talk • contribs) 22:48, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure. For people who are multilingual and have to work in different languages through the day, having a keyboard for each language they use might be nice (if they can handle the clutter). In addition it's possible to have multiple monitors, multiple keyboards, and multiple mice, and thus have multiple people use the computer (each with their own login session). Here is an example of someone with six "seats" on one PC. All of the preceding is true for Linux; in theory it should be just as true for Windows, but I've no idea whether Windows actually chooses to allow this. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 22:54, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah, yes, with addons - Multiseat configuration#Windows -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 22:58, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

My brother and I always play Jazz Jacrabbit using two keyboards. It would be difficult to play this split-screen multiplayer game with only one keyboard... --Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 01:11, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

what external monitor resolutions (with its VGA out) can an EEE PC 1005h netbook drive?

What resolution modes can an EEE PC 1005H drive with its external vga-out port? What is the largest? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.121.94 (talk) 22:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

It uses a intel GMA 950 graphics chip [4] which goes up to '2048x1536 at 75 Hz maximum resolution'. (I'm not aware of any reason why the particular netbook wouldn't work with that too)87.102.67.84 (talk) 23:00, 5 March 2010 (UTC)