Slashdot Mirror


20 Things They Don't Want You to Know

theodp writes "PC World spills the beans about a bunch of things technology companies would rather you didn't know, including the lowdown on exploiting Windows' bad security, unlocking cell phones, using an IPod to move music and useless specs." Nothing groundbreaking, but might be a good primer for the non-techie in your life.

403 comments

  1. Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by ReformedExCon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Know anyone who uses Windows Messenger as their instant messaging client? Me neither."

    That's strange, because I don't know anyone who doesn't. Except for a new guy who uses Trillian, but he'll come around when he gets tired of fighting the firewall.

    PC World seems to be in a kind of limbo. It's not technical enough for anyone serious about computers, and it's way over the head of anyone who isn't familiar with computers. I guess that makes it prime reading material for CIOs.

    But seriously folks. I was at the bookstore the other day and picked up a Computer Shopper. When did this new thin format happen? What happened to 500 pages of advertisements?

    I wonder why Slashdot never gets any links to Dr. Dobbs Journal.

    --
    Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
    1. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Karaman · · Score: 1

      at least 30 people at my office use it to chat with wives and girlfriends! And we also use corporate ICQ to chat about work!

      --
      sex is better than war!
    2. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Windows Messenger != MSN Messenger.

    3. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Loconut1389 · · Score: 1

      I suppose it depends on who you know, I know quite a lot of techie people who don't use it, including myself.

      In general, blanket statements don't work (perhaps including this one).

      As for Trillian, last I knew, it was a multi-protocol messenger that could use AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, etc? As a caveat, I don't recall it supporting MS Messenger, so I think that adds some validation to your statement about the guy switching from Trillian.

    4. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Tezkah · · Score: 4, Informative

      Trillian supports MSN Messenger as well as AIM/ICQ/Yahoo!/IRC/Jabber etc. It's basically the same as GAIM, and supports most protocols (also supports plugins).

      What I don't understand is what the grandparent is talking about, why would he have to change to MSNger to stop having to fight the firewall? Trillian mimics MSN Messenger in order to connect to MSN servers. The only problems with Trillian for me are high memory usage (although not so bad when compared to MSNger 7.0), slow interface, and Audio/Visual capabilities that only work half the time.

      I've switched to MSNger exclusively because I don't have anyone I chat with regularly on AIM or Yahoo, so the benefits of Trillian/Gaim are much less than the frustrations of incompatibility with MSNger buddies. Besides, you can always break the EULA and remove the ads and such from the MSN client, I recommend SpeedyMSN. Really cleans up the interface, if you can find the download for 2.0 (both speedymsn.tk and speedymessenger.net are down at the time of this writing.) You can bet Microsoft doesn't want people knowing that they can get rid of that pesky ad.... :)

    5. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by adtifyj · · Score: 0

      That's strange, because I don't know anyone who doesn't.

      My goodness. Where have you been hiding?
      To quickly come up to speed, you might like to start here.

    6. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      There's a difference between Windows Messenger and MSN Messenger.

      WM is bundled with XP, and is hard to kill; MSNM needs downloading. Though they both run on the same network, MSNM is far more up to date, so everyone downloads that and uses it, while WM sits in the system tray using resources. Hence the point in the article.

      HTH

    7. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Funny

      My goodness. Where have you been hiding?

      Under a bridge. Duh.
      P.S. You shouldn't feed it...

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    8. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Darkon · · Score: 2, Interesting


      Windows Messenger is sometimes worth keeping because you can run it and MSN Messenger simultaneously - handy if you have two MSN accounts.

    9. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Agret · · Score: 0

      What's your point? It uses the same services and removes all the crap that MSN tries to shove down your throat i.e. Advertisements everywhere, custom emoticons, winks, nudges, backgrounds, all the useless shit you'll never need. However it might be better if it had the display pic feature implemented, also custom statuses are a must although you could always use Plus! for those.

      --
      Have you metaroderated recently?
    10. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Westley · · Score: 1

      The point is that the original poster is almost certainly wrong - chances are they know very few people who don't use MSN Messenger, but that's not the same as Windows Messenger, which is what the article was talking about.

    11. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by PatrickThomson · · Score: 1

      Having read the article, I understand it. Windows messenger is a feature-poor MSN client that comes with windows. most, if not all, the typical MSN users I know (14 year old cousins) have installed MSN 7, for things like webcam support.

      However, Windows Messenger keeps running in the background and signing them out of MSN Messenger, and this used to drive them crazy, which by extension meant it'd drive me crazy because I'm the computer guy. Even deleting all the Windows Messenger files didn't help. This article is a lifeline.

      --
      I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
    12. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the hell modded this up? This is anecdotal at best. I actually don't know anyone who uses MSN messenger (or windows messenger). So he's getting modded up insightful for being surrounded by n00bs?

      Slashdot is funny. You get modded down for using windows or anything by microsoft just 'cause it's not linux or F/OSS. Then someone posts about n00b MSN crap - Microsoft's version of AOL for lusers - and he gets modded up for admitting using it? Woha. Do I get any modded up +5 insightful if I say I don't know anyone who doesn't use AOL?

      Even as a die hard MS products user (I use just about everything they make - windows/office/vs.net/sql server and all) but MSN shit? Not a chance in hell. The day they tackle the "MSN" word onto Windows Vista is the day I switch to linux and never look back.

    13. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      since when is "net stop messenger" hard?

    14. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Alex+P+Keaton+in+da · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think any of us really choose our instant messenger. At work I use ICQ because everyone else at work uses it. BUt I also use AIM, because my little sister is away at school, and she uses AIM. I hate AIM, but if I choose not to use AIM, I am only hurting myself because then I couldn't IM my sister.
      The next logical Question- Why can't I get my sister to switch? All her friends use AIM. And so it goes.

      --
      And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
    15. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by jpmkm · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Once again, Windows Messenger != MSN Messenger.

    16. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by displaced80 · · Score: 4, Informative

      True, but Windows Messenger != Windows Messenger, either :-)

      There's MSN Messenger. We all know what that is.

      Then there's Windows Messenger. Which is a sibling of MSN Messenger included in Windows XP

      Finally there's that other Windows Messenger. The one which used to be called WinPopup.

      It'd be nice if different parts of MS could at least make sure this sort of naming confusion didn't happen. Oh well.

      --
      What's the frequency, Kenneth?
    17. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by DrWhizBang · · Score: 1

      Additionally, Windows Messenger supports SIP and MSN, whereas MSN Messenger only supports MSN. I use Windows Messenger so that I can talk on both our company's SIP service, and to the rest of the world.

      --
      Schrodinger's cat is either dead or really pissed off...
    18. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows Messenger != Messenger Service

    19. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by secolactico · · Score: 1

      WM is bundled with XP, and is hard to kill

      Odd, I always uninstall it using the Add/Remove program applet in the control panel. It's one of windows components and is *very* easily removed.

      As for winpopup, I don't uninstall it. I simply set it to "disabled" in the services control panel applet.

      --
      No sig
    20. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Txiasaeia · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hard to kill? You right click and exit out of it in the taskbar, then rename C:\progra~1\Messenger to C:\progra~1\M. There, dead.

      --
      Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
    21. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by MerlinTheWizard · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't use MSN messenger anymore. It's impossible to use behind a decently configured router, especially the latest version, and MS is perfectly aware of it. Talk about security. Don't make me laugh with fighting firewalls with trillian. MSN Messenger uses uPnP, wich is my worst nightmare - I have always steered clear of Windows firewalls anyway. A good old router is perfectly fine if you want true security. But uPnP? It's exactly like putting sophisticated locks all over your house's doors and giving the keys to all your neighbors, the mailman, some guys that beg for money down the street, and a couple more guys that you know from the local bars. :))

    22. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by MoreDruid · · Score: 4, Informative
      nice to see the distinction between the two Windows Messengers... you almost got it right too! (I'm nitpicking here though)

      Windows Messenger is included in Windows XP and can be used for IM-ing through Microsofts servers (they connect to the same servers as MSN Messenger), but can also be used for IM-ing on your own network using an Exchange Server. MS also has an Exchange IM client if you're using win2k or below.

      Now for the Windows Messenger #2... this is actually called the Windows Messenger Service and is indeed used for popup messages (intended for networks). You can use WinPopup, but on the command line "net send \\IP.here.x.x "message"" will work too. I can remember doing a txt adventure game with one of my collegues using this before IM-ing was invented.
      Heh... those were good times... Anyway, I definately agree with you on the naming convention, but the Windows Messenger Service was around way before Instant Messenging was even invented, so what were they supposed to come up with after AOL and Yahoo! both created a product with "Messenger" in the name (yes I am aware that Google uses the name Talk, but I think that's because their future plans with it are in the voice/VOIP arena)?
      --
      The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.
    23. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by kronchev · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry that you aren't bright enough to get around a firewall to use a real IM client.

    24. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by NetRAVEN5000 · · Score: 1

      I don't know anyone who uses MSN Messenger OR Windows Messenger. Everyone I know of uses either AIM or Yahoo!. As far as the actual programs themselves go, I don't know what they use, but I'm certain it's not Windows/MSN Messenger. I use Kopete (for those of you who use Windows, it's KDE's IM program and can handle AIM/ICQ, Jabber, Yahoo!, and supposedly MSN, among others).

    25. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by drew · · Score: 1

      This seems to vary an awful lot depending on who you talk to. I only know one person who uses MSN- fortunately she also uses Yahoo, so i can still talk to her without creating an account on MSN (She's also the only contact on my Yahoo account, but I already had the account anyway because I had to create an account to do some tests with their webmail interface). Almost everyone I know (including the last three companies I've worked for) uses AOL Instant Messenger, and the rest are still on ICQ after all these years.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    26. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by julesh · · Score: 1

      Until Windows File Protection recreates it about 2 minutes later, yes.

    27. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Digital+Pizza · · Score: 1
      But seriously folks. I was at the bookstore the other day and picked up a Computer Shopper. When did this new thin format happen? What happened to 500 pages of advertisements?

      I haven't thought about Computer Shopper in years! It used to be a great resource for ordering computer parts (like individual RAM chips, back when they were necessary). What happened to them (and other mail order rags) is the Web; it's so much easier to order online now. Kinda sad, really; I used to enjoy flipping through it "window shopping".

      --
      We apologize for the inconvenience.
    28. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by ShecoDu · · Score: 1

      There are MSN messenger patches available to do just that, run two (or more) MSN messengers at the same time with different accounts, it's called the polygamy patch.

      It's available at Mess.be

    29. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Txiasaeia · · Score: 1

      Windows File Protection applies to DLLs, not applications. I've been doing this since XP came out several years ago, and I can guarantee that the trick I listed above kills Messenger and doesn't let it come back.

      --
      Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
    30. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by julesh · · Score: 1

      OK, I just tried it and you're right, it does work for Messenger. It doesn't work for a couple of the other directories under Program Files, though: "Movie Maker" (including moviemk.exe, so it isn't restricted to DLLs as you suggest), the usually-empty "xerox" directory, and NetMeeting.

      Why they didn't cover Messenger with it is beyond me.

    31. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Relgar · · Score: 1

      I used to use Trillian (now GAIM). They support the "normal" protocol for MSN and Yahoo, for the basic messaging functions anyway.

      However, the "proper" MSN and Yahoo clients also support modes that work when only outgoing traffic to an HTTP port is allowed. I believe MSN switches automatically, for Yahoo it's a separate Connection mode.

      My experience with the alternative clients is that they don't support that HTTP protocol. I have to use a SOCKS proxy and configure Trillian and GAIM to connect.

    32. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Truth_Quark · · Score: 1
      You can bet Microsoft doesn't want people knowing that they can get rid of that pesky ad.... :)

      Or maybe they do. Once they've killed off AIM and Yahoo they can close the loophole, but until then having the ad free version out there is better for them.

    33. Re:Know anyone who uses MSN Messenger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
      "Know anyone who uses Windows Messenger as their instant messaging client? Me neither."

      No one in the real world. But it's the crappy firm standard here at Deloitte Consulting.

  2. All in one page/printer friendly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:All in one page/printer friendly by trb · · Score: 5, Funny

      this is one of those things they don't want you to know.

  3. Re:Pretty interesting by Loconut1389 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Original poster mentioned it would be a good intro for a non-techie person. I'd say you're restating the obvious in hopes of a first post.

  4. One more thing they missed... by snotclot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    BITTORRENT...! o_O

    / bet you were expecting something creative like Linux eh? // bleh, 3rd post!

    1. Re:One more thing they missed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      BITTORRENT...! o_O

      USEN...

      I'd say it, but the first rule about "it" is... I do not talk about "it." The second rule... you know the rest.

    2. Re:One more thing they missed... by Frankie70 · · Score: 1

      What does that mean?
      What's o_O & what's ...!?

    3. Re:One more thing they missed... by snotclot · · Score: 1

      o_O think of as a person's two eyes with one wider open. O_o o_O and ...! means.... a pause and then surprise...!

  5. My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by Monte · · Score: 5, Funny

    You mean my speakers can't sink 1,000 watts?!? The deuce you say!

    I love the power ratings on speakers. If those numbers were half true, playing an MP3 would make the streetlights dim in time to the music. And all that power somehow coming from a little 500 mA wall-wart. Science, wonders, and miracles!

    1. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by HateBreeder · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually,
      they usually are true.

      But most users don't know how to interpret the numbers.

      For instance, when they said you speaker system is "1000 Watts" I'm pretty sure they meant the PMPO (Peak Music Power) rating, which means:
      (According to http://www.epanorama.net/documents/audio/amplifier _power.html)
      "So called "music power". This power figure tells the power which the amplifier can maximally supply in some conditions. PMPO rating gives the highest measuring value, but this info is quite useless, because there is no exact standard how PMPO power should be measured.

      The reason for this power rating was to show the max capability of equipment for recreating strong musical transients like kettle drums and the like. Similar thing (music power rating) was used in the sixties, and I think it assumed a square wave that swung the whole supply range of the output stage. This alone gives them a factor of two over a clean sine wave note. But the ugliest thing they did was to assume that the high power lasted such a short period of time that the power supply caps would hold the voltages steady without any drooping. In the real world, an under powered PS could be hidden by this ruse and the PMPO might be a factor of 10 or more higher than what could be sustained on a nice instrumental performance.

      Forget what adverts say about peak power or other "power terms" because they are not standardized and anyway comparable between equipments. Just look for "RMS continuous Power" or other reliable power rating (like DIN power). "

      Generally, there isn't any direct mapping between PMPO and RMS (Root Mean Square) since every manufacturer formulates his own PMPO measurements....
      Most of the time the RMS value of a speaker is about 10 times lower than the PMPO rating.
      Which in your case, Means ~100 Watt RMS (This is VERY good for a single channel... but it's kind'a low for a large multi-speaker system).

      Hope this helps.

      --
      Sigs are for the weak.
    2. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by Handyman · · Score: 5, Informative

      Also, when comparing speaker performance, Watts are definitely not the complete picture.

      The first thing you need to find out is the efficiency of speakers. For instance, my speakers have an efficiency of 92 dB/W, which means that at a power level of 1 W, they will produce 92 dB of sound. As dB is a logarithmic scale, doubling the wattage will increase the number of dBs by 3, so a power level of 64 W will get me a 92 + 3 * 6 = 110 dB sound level. However, a speaker with an efficiency of 80 dB/W will only produce 98 dB for the same amount of power. I've seen efficiencies ranging from 70 dB/W up to the high ninety-somethings, so be careful to check these numbers.

      The second thing you need to find out is the impedance of the speakers, combined with the impedance your amplifier is rated for. For instance, my amplifier is not simply rated as 50 W, but as 50 W for speakers with an impedance of 8 Ohms, and 100 W for speakers with an impedance of 4 Ohms. This can make some difference. Watch out with getting a speaker with very low impedance though: if your amplifier wasn't designed to handle that, they will probably draw too much power, causing the amplifier to get overheated. In addition, you will not be able to open up your volume knob more than a couple of millimeters -- and volume is probably something you like to have detailed control over.

    3. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by zootm · · Score: 5, Funny

      RMS continuous Power

      Great. Now I have a mental image of Richard Stallman transforming into a fire-breathing, behemoth-sized Godzilla-style Free Software monster.

      "No! Free Software must prevail! I need CONTINUOUSSSS POOOOOWWEEEEERRR"

      Sparks, flames, etc.

    4. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Great. Now I have a mental image of Richard Stallman transforming into a fire-breathing, behemoth-sized Godzilla-style Free Software monster.
      Transformation? What transformation? I guess the fire breathing is new, but I don't think that's going to work too well with his facial forest...
    5. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by aurelien · · Score: 1

      Speaker efficiency is db/W/m, IOW 92 means "that at a power level of 1 W, they will produce 92 dB of sound" at a distance of one metter of the speaker.

      --
      aurelien
    6. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by NotAgent86 · · Score: 1

      PMPO = Peak Maximum Power Output

    7. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by Reverberant · · Score: 2, Informative
      The first thing you need to find out is the efficiency of speakers. For instance, my speakers have an efficiency of 92 dB/W, which means that at a power level of 1 W, they will produce 92 dB of sound.

      Everything you wrote is true, but I have to nitpick just a little ;)

      The effeciency of a speakers is given in terms of output per watt at a reference distance (e.g. 92 dB 1 watt at 1 meter). It's generally understood that the sensitivity is measured at 1 meter, but if a loudspeaker specification doesn't give the distance, you might want to be a little suspicious - for example a speaker with an sensitivity of 92 dB 1 watt at 1 centimeter is going to be a lot less efficient than a speaker with an efficiency of 92 dB 1 watt at 1 meter.

      Also, you may sometimes see the speaker sensitivity given as xx dB at 2.83 volts instead of 1 watt - 1 Watt is 2.83V into 8ohms, so a reference voltage of 2.83V is used for non-8ohm speakers.

      One last point for people who buy separate amps and loudspeakers: you're more likely to damage your speakers by using a amp that outputs too little power than too much power. Most speakers can handle a lot of juice for short periods, given enough cool-down time. However, a low-power amp played loudly can cause clipping, and clipping will fry your tweeters pretty quickly.

    8. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by Svet-Am · · Score: 1

      Watch out with getting a speaker with very low impedance though

      not only those effects, but 2-Ohm load impedance horribly alters the output sound. Such a low load generates all kinds of nasty higher order harmonics that degrade the sound and the beta-droop that those loads introduce into the amplifier circuit will eventually not only overheat the circuitry, but begin to change its quiescient point and make the equipment fail prematurely.

      --
      [move .sig! for great justice, take off every .sig!]
    9. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      PMPO, does NOT stand of Peak Music Power it is Peak Maximum Power out and if you actually studied electronics you'd realise there is a formular to convert PMPO to RMS

    10. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by 40000 · · Score: 1

      The silliest power ratings are those advertised for USB powered speakers. Bus powered gear can't draw over 500mA at 5v so any output power rating greater than about 1 watt per channel is impossible.

    11. Re:My Super-Bad Computer Speakers by KillShill · · Score: 1

      " If those numbers were half true, playing an MP3 would make the streetlights dim in time to the music."

      now THAT'S a visualization!

      eat that jeff minter!

      --
      Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
  6. Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by squoozer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We all know this but I can't believe that PC World are actually saying it. They are one of the hardest sellers of extended warranties that I know. They once tried to sell me a warranty for a £10 mouse. IIRC the warranty was £15 but covered me for 3 years! No I don't shop there on a regular basis I just needed a mouse quickly.

    As far as I can tell they make their money from running virus scanners on ill informed customers PC's. Their customer service is awful at best even when they are taking large sums of your money. I suppose that is the result of them being the only show in town. The last thing that really bugs me though is that they always have a security guard on the door.

    --
    I used to have a better sig but it broke.
    1. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think I'm right in saying that the PC World (US) publication and the PC World store you're thinking about are completely different.

      Still, you're right about PC World being pretty useless, highly inflated prices etc.

    2. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Monte · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I would agree that extended warranties on PCs aren't worth it, but my rule is:

      1) If it's something that goes on the shelf/table and just sits there, forget the warranty: TV, DVD player, stereo, laptop, PC, etc

      2) If it's something you carry around, small, expensive and likley to break when dropped, consider the warranty: CD player, tape system, mini-disc, PDA, etc

      This has served me in good stead, the two or three extended warranties I have gotten have definitely paid for themselves. But then I'm a klutz.

    3. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by richy+freeway · · Score: 0, Redundant

      It's not THAT PC World...

    4. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by RJabelman · · Score: 1

      They sell many small expensive items. Why shouldn't they have a security guard on the door?

    5. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Threni · · Score: 1

      > The last thing that really bugs me though is that they always have a security
      > guard on the door.

      If you had a building with thousands worth of computer equipment, what would you use to stop people from just walking off with it? It's probably a requirement of their insurers.

    6. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by DingerX · · Score: 1

      Extended Warranty? How can I lose!

    7. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by MadChicken · · Score: 1

      2 might not work. When I got my Palm, I asked if the extended warranty would cover the screen breaking, and they said no (Future Shop). So it covers basically nothing that needs covering.

      --
      SYS 64738 NO CARRIER
    8. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by rooster9 · · Score: 0

      "No I don't shop there on a regular basis I just needed a mouse quickly."

      What? If you need a mouse quickly, you order one over the internet? How backwards is Britain? You need WalMart...

    9. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by rob.wolfe · · Score: 1

      Insightful??

      How about interesting but not germane. The magazine/website PC World that is being referred to in the article is not the same as the STORE being referred to in the post.

    10. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by generic-man · · Score: 1

      The warranty on my last laptop, a Compaq (long story), cost $100 and saved me $1000 in repairs to a busted LCD in the first month of extended coverage. If you carry your laptop to and from work every day, even if you have a padded case for it, a one-year warranty is simply not enough.

      As for TVs, I took some advice from a coworker when buying a projection TV: buy the floor model for $500 less than the new model, then buy a $400 four-year warranty. The extended warranty covers parts like the lamp that might not last four years even for a new product. It also guarantees on-site service which is nice when the TV weighs at least half as much as I do.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    11. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Monte · · Score: 1

      Ahh, me dumb. "Laptop" should have been in the #2 list (GET WARRANTY!), not #1. I too suffered a broken LCD, got a new lappie because of Dell Extended warranty, thank God. The LCD was the single most expensive thing on the beast.

      I was pretty specific when I asked the salesdroid about the Dell warranty: "It covers any damage? If I drop the laptop down four flights of stairs..."

      "Just sweep the parts into the return box and we'll send you a new [well, refurbished] one."

      Works for me!

    12. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1

      If your rear projection TV only weighs half as much as you do, you might consider gastric bybass surgery.

    13. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Alistar · · Score: 1

      Yes, I agree, all my little gadgets, mini-disc, pda, and I say laptop too, I always get the extended warranty and I always use it.

      Although admittedly I only get it at one store cause when I bring it in and say I have the extended warranty I can magically get it back within a day or two, if I don't its usually, oh Im sorry that will 6-8 weeks. The 60 bucks it cost it worth it to get my fix rushed to the head of the line or actually cared about.

    14. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
      There's quite a few other places - Staples, John Lewis, games shops, and local computer guys.

      It's a shame there isn't a really good franchise of computer stores/internet cafes out there. Somewhere that you know that whatever town you are in, you'll get at least a reasonable level of service.

    15. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by xigxag · · Score: 1

      We all know this but I can't believe that PC World are actually saying it. They are one of the hardest sellers of extended warranties that I know.

      FYI, PC World, the American magazine, and PC World, the UK Superstore, are completely unrelated establishments. The magazine does share a common ownership with the UK Mag "PC Advisor."

      --
      There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
    16. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in the uk, pcworld is a store like compusa.

    17. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by bw5353 · · Score: 1
      2) If it's something you carry around, small, expensive and likley to break when dropped, consider the warranty: CD player, tape system, mini-disc, PDA, etc

      Come on! They wouldn't sell extended warranties unless they made money from it. Buying a warranty is like gambling - the bank always wins in the end. On average that is.

      The only situation where you should consider an extended warranty is if you absolutely need the object and you will not be able to afford a second one if it falls to pieces - like a car or a house for many people.

      Or if you happen to be, as you admit, a klutz.

    18. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You idiots need to wake up and realize that some extended (if not all) warranties spell out that CUSTOMER CAUSED DAMAGE is NOT covered.

      Geesh. If you drop your shit and it "develops a bad LCD" it really shouldn't be covered by any sort of "warranty".

      Now, an insurance policy? Maybe, if it covers "accidental damage".

    19. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 1

      I'd add TVs to the list personaly. I haven't actually bought a TV in 9 years and I'm on my 2nd TV (and I just need one more service call for this one). I just pay for a new fat 5 year warranty and before the warranty is up I've had 4 service calls (of which they have to give me a new TV that cost the same as the old TV for where I shop at). Maybe one day they'll make a TV that actually lasts from being used mainly to just play games one day, but I doubt it. I still have my first TV from 20 years ago that still works like a champ. They just don't build em like they used to.

    20. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by baggers · · Score: 1

      Dude, PC World UK is not the same as PC World Magazine. One is a store that'll try and sell you an extended warranty on a CD-R disc in the UK, and the other is a very popular and well-known magazine in the USA

    21. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by halcyon1234 · · Score: 1
      I would agree that extended warranties on PCs aren't worth it, but my rule is:

      1) If it's something that goes on the shelf/table and just sits there, forget the warranty: TV, DVD player, stereo, laptop, PC, etc

      I would also add printers to this list. Printers break down all the freaking time. Between me, my father, my girlfiend and her mother, we've owned several HP, Canon and Epson (I refuse to own a Lexmark), from low to medium to high end. And each and every single one of them, within three years, has stopped working. Either it's some mysterious "internal hardware error", or the (non-replacable) print heads jam up.

      At that point, I just take the $60 - $120 printer down to Future Shop/Best Buy, and produce the reciept with my $15 3-year warranty. I say "Please fix it", knowing full that:

      1) They won't bother to fix it, because either they can't, or they just plain won't.
      2) They'll bitch at me for actually bringing something back with "only" a few months left on the warranty. (And I file it under "suck it up").

      They keep the printer for a few days. I then start calling and harassing them daily. Finally they say "We can't fix it, bring in the accessories." I do. Then the spend a few minutes rooting around the back of the store, only to find that *gasp* they don't have my 2 year old printer in stock.

      So, they'll replace it with a brand new one (often a model or two above what I paid for... sometimes even an "end" or two above. Low end sometimes gets replaced with medium end...).

      They bring out the new printer. I make sure everything's in the box, and sign for it. Then they ask me "For $15, would you like to purchase a 3 year warranty on it?"

      I say yes, and the circle of life begins again.

      As a result, I haven't had to buy a new printer in 6+ years. I don't concider it a warranty. I concider it a sure thing that I'm going to get a new printer every 2.5 years.

      (However, I agree with the parent about the rest of their list. It's a crap shoot, and the odds don't work out. If they break in 90 days, they're covered. If they don't break then, they're not likely to break anytime within a warranty period, if at all. EXCEPTION: Get one on your laptop, since it falls under #2 of their list.)

    22. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by julesh · · Score: 1

      They once tried to sell me a warranty for a £10 mouse. IIRC the warranty was £15 but covered me for 3 years!

      I'd pay that for a 3 year warranty on a ten quid mouse. I tend to kill a mouse every 9 months to a year, so I figure I'd get 3 of them out of that... better read the small print first though. ;)

      No I don't shop there on a regular basis I just needed a mouse quickly.

      You can get some good deals from them, actually, particularly on laptops. A friend recently purchased an IBM ThinkPad (a cheap Celeron model) for ~£400. That's quite hard to beat. Their wireless networking kit is quite cheap too.

    23. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by generic-man · · Score: 1

      My Samsung HL-4663W only weighs about 70 pounds, less than half as much as I do. It doesn't have a giant center speaker. I can lift it but it's virtually impossible to fit safely in my car.

      --
      For more information, click here.
    24. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Monte · · Score: 1

      Sure the bank wins in the end - because people are also buying extended warranties on things that they'll never make claims on (see category #1). That's where the profit comes from.

      If the big resellers (Circuit Buy, Best City, et al) were to do actuarial analysis on the claims made on warranties vs the money they're asking, they could set prices according to risk (like an insurance company does) and things would be very different indeed. AFAIK, the do not do anything like this, warranty price is set very broadly, perhaps just a percentage of item price.

      As long as they do it this general way, we "smart" warranty buyers will make out like bandits, subsidised by the "dumb" warranty buyers.

      That works for me. And I'll repeat: I'm ahead of the game in extended warranty purchases - the paid claims I've gotten outweigh the premium (warranty cost) by at least 2 to 1.

    25. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by squoozer · · Score: 1

      Doh! Should have guessed that PC World (the shop) wouldn't be shooting themselves in the foot like that. Thanks. I'll go hide my head in shame now.

      --
      I used to have a better sig but it broke.
    26. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by squoozer · · Score: 1

      I've noticed that I've been getting through a few mice recently as well. Perhaps I should have gone for the warrenty after all.

      I admit that a very small number of items aren't badly priced. They really sucker people in on things like CD-Rs and cables though. Their component section (if they have one) is always very expensive as well. I have considered buying a projector from them as well.

      --
      I used to have a better sig but it broke.
    27. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by yardena · · Score: 1

      Um, I think you're confusing PC World, the retail operation (in Great Britain) with PC World, the magazine (in the US and elsewhere). They are not in any way related. The referenced article is in the U.S. magazine and therefore does not reflect the opinions or practices of the U.K. computer stores.

      The reason for the confusion is that the people who own the PC World stores in the UK got the name before IDG (the privately held US company that owns PC World magazines all over the rest of the globe) could claim it, so the UK counterpart of PC World magazine is PC Advisor.

    28. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Buy extended warranties on things you are likely to keep for four years or more and things that are likely to keep some value after being use for that long.

      This mean a warranty for your mac, no warranty for your PC.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    29. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by GaryPatterson · · Score: 1

      My iBook, bought early last year, had two motherboard replacements in the normal warranty period. The second was just before the warranty ran out, so I bought the Applecare extended warranty to give me another two years.

      The other day the hard drive failed in a catastrophic manner (a meteor hit it). The replacement drive was a warranty repair, but to get Apple techs to do this out of warranty would have cost me far more than the extended warranty did.

      It's already paid for itself. I'm hoping that I won't see further value out of it, but suspect I will...

      A desktop machine is less prone to fail like my laptop did, and if it did, is more easily user-servicable.

    30. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by MadChicken · · Score: 1

      Why do you call me an idiot when I didn't buy the extended warranty?

      --
      SYS 64738 NO CARRIER
    31. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by POWuhuru · · Score: 1

      "2) If it's something you carry around, small, expensive and likely to break when dropped, consider the warranty:"

      From Where_do_i_buy_this_Dept. A warranty on my cerebral lobes.

    32. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by sootman · · Score: 1

      Are you really saying a laptop is not a small, expensive, likely-to-break thing that might get carried around?

      Or are you from the UK, where a fry is a chip, a chip is a crisp, a cookie is a biscuit, and, apparently, a laptop is a desktop? :-)

      I look at fragility and percent of price, and then factor in depreciation. Laptops and LCD screens are fragile, so they get warranties. For other things, it's like gambling: say a $100 item has an optional $50 3-year warrant. You're basically saying "There's a 50-50 chance this will break within 3 years." True or false? Your answer to that question determines your purchase.

      As for depreciation: I bought one of the first DVD players that was $300 and paid, I think, ~$100 for a warranty. I figured it was still a new-ish technology, it was a newly released model, so I said yeah, what the hell. 3 years later DVD players were below $100 every day of the week and a year later they're $35-40 at Target. If you're buying something where technology will drive the prices down that fast (not really "depreciation" but I can't think of a better word right now), take that into consideration: does the warranty cost more than the replacement will in the same timespan?

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    33. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by anagama · · Score: 1

      How do you break a mouse? Particularly optical mice? I have a logitech here that's probably 3 years old -- the mouse it replaced was a ball mouse I'd had for many years -- it worked when I replaced it (I just wanted to get an optical). The only thing that's gone goofy with this mouse is that the scroll stopped working. So I took it apart and discovered a little dustball obscuring a sensor -- the wheel is a multispoke dealie with an optical emiter/sensor setup. The spokes break the beam and are translated into motion. Picking out the lint cleared up the entire issue. So anyway, what kind of abuse do you heap on your electronics to break the mouse every 9 months?

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    34. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      Be very carefull with extended warrenties in some places however. In many cases they exclude 'neglect and abuse' determined at thier 'sole discression' or simular.
          The result is if you drop said laptop, or the little one poors milk all over it, it's 'neglact and abuse', as is just about any other 'failure' to keep said item in perfect condition.
          If you MUST get an 'extended warrenty' (actually an insurance policy and regulated as such in many places) make shure it's of the 'no fault' kind where they don't care why it's broke, they just fix/replace it.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    35. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      Except for one thing, an 'extended warranty' is actually insurance in many cases, and is often regulated as insurance.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    36. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by evilviper · · Score: 1
      1) If it's something that goes on the shelf/table and just sits there, forget the warranty: TV, DVD player, stereo, laptop, PC, etc

      Monitors are one where I WOULD strongly recomend a warranty. The cheap-ass monitors from Best Buy routinely die on me shortly after the 1-year manufacturer's warranty ends. TV repair shops can't get the necessary specs from the random Chinese manufacturers, but Best Buy can.

      For $50 extra I've had my cheap-ass monitor fixed about 4 times now. It also strikes me as funny that the price for almost exactly the same monitor has gone-up about 1/3rd over the past 3 years.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    37. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by julesh · · Score: 1

      The most common problem with my mice these days is that the cable develops an intermittent break somewhere near where it enters the mouse body. I've lost two that way in the last year: my current one I've reinforced with Duck tape and a couple of pennies, and it seems to be doing a little better.

      No idea what causes it. I don't think I'm over-extending them on a regular basis, and they're not a particularly cheap brand (Genius).

    38. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mike, since your journal is closed to comments, I'm posting this version of your journal here, made legible and mostly understandable:

      Some notes on improving Linux for the home user (A.K.A. Joe Sixpack) and related rantings and concerns.(FYI you can read BSD or others for Linux in many places here, but my experience is primarily with Linux)

      First off, this is just my considered opinion and I make no claims otherwise. Second this all assumes that Linux as a major player on the common desktop is a desired goal, if you disagree with that then feel free to keep Linux on your machine exactly how you like it. Open source it great that way. Third this is a VERY rough draft, little to no spell checking or grammar checking, heck some of the ideas aren't even entirely fleshed out well explained or well organized yet. My point here to show some of my thinking and hopefully get others thinking about some of these things.

      There are many things Linux does that rate good to incredible. There are a few areas, however, where Joe will find not find it useable enough to adopt without significant motivation. Joe doesn't care enough about lofty ideal to switch to Linux. Cost can be, but since from Joe's perspective he got Windows free and installed with his PC and Linux is separate box of software he has to pay for and go through the hassle of installing, cost is actually against us here.

      Two other major issues for Joe are usability and Software. How many software boxes on the shelves at Joe's local store? Say they run under Linux- of those, how many does he actually care about, and how many actually will run right out of the box on HIS install of Linux? This is a bit of tough one, as it's a chicken and egg problem. The Joes won't buy Linux because it won't run their favorite games and programs. The software Joe cares about are not ported / written for Linux because not enough Joes use Linux. Fortunately the increasing corporate adoption of Linux is helping here, as more and more people are exposed at work and find a need or desire to run the same software at home. This factor helped the original spread of the home PC. However, this alone may not be enough, and will certainly be slower than it could be. There are however things that CAN be done to help. And proselytizing random strangers like a religious cult is not it (kinda fun though isn't it:) ).

      First of all, software has to install easily for Joe. He should be able to put the CD in the drive, click a single icon, and wait for the install to finish. Which brings us to DLL hell and the file system layout. It wasn't that long ago I downloaded an app of some sort, it required a newer version of some lib than what I had so I downloaded that and the libs. THAT required new versions. Now, of course, somewhere someone decided backwards compatibility wasn't important between version 4.5 (for example, not exact ver numbers) and 4.6 of some lib and a good chunk of my system became useless.

      THIS IS STUPID! now if it had been from say version x.0 and version x+1.0 I could almost buy it if x is no greater than 2, but within a major number compatibility should be backwards-maintained.

      Indeed, if a function in version x is to be replaced by an incompatible version in x+1, every effort should be made to keep the deprecated version as well until x+2 unless the release cycle is fairly slow. Another factor of dependency hell and install hell is package management. What's needed is an install system for apps, not for distros. Almost every windows app is distributed this way and it just works almost every time. Now you could argue there being only one distro maker for Windows makes this much simpler, and you'd be right. Doesn't change the need for it, though. It's my seat of the pants guess that if an installer that could handle the top 5-10 distros was built, and done such that others could adapt it to their distro's without breaking it, then that hurdle would be mostly dealt with.

      Now I would like to bring up the Windows registry: good idea, poor i

    39. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      Ahhh apparently it's to old, /. decided to close it as to old
          It's definately got the formatting and line breaks all screwed up (unless it firefox, why the hell is it wrapping half way through sentences less that 1/2 way across the page?!?), compared to how it was a year ago when I posted that. I can see why you found it hard to read even discounting my mispelling and bad punctuation, etc.

      Mycroft
        PS I've replaced what was there with the version you cleaned up so it apears open for comments now.

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
    40. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by F_Scentura · · Score: 1

      How about not buying cheap-ass monitors?

    41. Re:Extended Warranties Aren't Worth It by evilviper · · Score: 1

      I would if I could find some. Buying online doesn't work well for large heavy items, and the big stores that sell monitors are all aspiring to have as little quality as possible, ala Walmart.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  7. Another thing wrong by dbIII · · Score: 4, Informative

    They recommend buying things from Dell. For those who are already stuck with things from Dell it is possible to get replacement parts from third parties (even Dell laptop batteries) without having to spend hours on the phone.

    1. Re:Another thing wrong by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      Buy from the "business" selection (optiplex and lattitude, just about all servers) and you can get the 3 year next day on site warranty. I've called at 4:30pm, spoke with Bob (in Indiana, not India), had a tech with new parts in hand at noon the next day.

      I personally build my own machines, but at work we have almost 2000 Dells, and the repair guy doesn't come out more than once a month typically.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  8. Re:Mostly useless. by ruebarb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    every hacker or geek had to start somewhere -

    maybe learning how to copy Ipod tunes to multiple computers is just what the Dr. ordered to start someone down the road to unlocking the next propritary file format -

    RB

    --

    ----------
    ah honey, we're all resplendent - Bill Mallonee
  9. It's PEEEEPLE!!!!! by flyingsquid · · Score: 5, Funny

    Soylent Green is PEOPLE!

    1. Re:It's PEEEEPLE!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So's what they serve at the local curry house, but I'm not wingin.

    2. Re:It's PEEEEPLE!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, To Serve Man is a COOKBOOK!

  10. I miss BYTE! by Elrac · · Score: 1

    There's a reason I don't read brain-mushing, dumbed-down trash mags like PC World. /. is in many ways a horrible waste of time and brain cells, but I learn more from it than I would from PC World.

    And yes, I once read a few issues of PC World, so my opinion is not completely unfounded. TFA just substantiates it a little more.

    --
    When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Rel
  11. Not clever by Ronald+Dumsfeld · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Is it just me, or does anyone else think this is dumb...
    I keep my Windows system pretty well secured, but somehow that doesn't prevent Windows' Security Center from informing me that 'Your computer might be at risk' every morning when I turn on my computer. That message gets old fast. To banish it for good, go to Start, Control Panel, Security Center. Then click Change the way Security Center alerts me in the resources box and uncheck all of the boxes on the resulting screen.
    Your average user should not be doing that.
    --
    Where's the Kaboom?
    There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
    1. Re:Not clever by ettlz · · Score: 1
      Your average user should not be doing that.

      Come on, it's not going to make the slightest bit of difference. The average user ignores these messages and carries on using IE with an admin account anyway.

    2. Re:Not clever by earnest+murderer · · Score: 1

      Your average user should not be doing that. The average user doesn't care.

      --
      Platform advocacy is like choosing a favorite severely developmentally disabled child.
    3. Re:Not clever by B1ackDragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I like the other replies, but I think the answer is less "the user doesn't care" and more "it trains the user not to care." The operating system crying wolf every 10 minutes for things that aren't problems (yes, Windows, anti-virus is updated) only serves to mask real security concerns.

      I guess, as always, if you want it done right don't leave it to Windows.

      --
      The snow doesn't give a soft white damn whom it touches. -- ee cummings
    4. Re:Not clever by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If security centre is popping up that message regularly, that would seem to indicate that he is not keeping his system well secured.

      The only time I ever see that is if AVG hasn't had a chance to update itself for a couple of days (eg the machine just hasn't been on at the appropriate time, I've been away, etc) and warns me about it.

    5. Re:Not clever by PunkOfLinux · · Score: 1

      And that's also why the new security features in whatever MS puts out will make NO difference -- the average user just will not take the time to enable them. It's sad, really -- all this talk of new security features in (insert product name) and the average user doesn't give a shit.

    6. Re:Not clever by jo42 · · Score: 1
      How to banish those stoopid wedgies:
      [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\S ecurity Center]
      "AntiVirusDisableNotify"=dword:00000001
      "FirewallDisableNotify"=dword:00000001
      "UpdatesDisableNotify"=dword:00000001
      :p

    7. Re:Not clever by Bastian · · Score: 4, Funny

      Heh, doesn't everyone ignore those little speech bubbles? Windows spams me more than the v1@gr@ people.

      My personal favorite: On a Windows XP box at work which has no USB2.0 bus that, I get a warning from Windows about having plugged a high-speed USB device into a low-speed USB port every time I plug my USB2 key in.

      Come on, that's not helping me. That's just mocking me for not having the latest hardware.

    8. Re:Not clever by PReDiToR · · Score: 1

      Heh, doesn't everyone ignore those little speech bubbles? Windows spams me more than the v1@gr@ people

      TweakUI is the thing you desire most in life.

      All those bubbles can be turned off with one registry key, but TweakUI will do far more than that one incredible fix.

      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
    9. Re:Not clever by Bastian · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Ignore that that. I suck.

    10. Re:Not clever by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      And here I thought the answer to Windows problems was Linux.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
  12. My geek life is complete... by mj_1903 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ...now that I have made the front page of slashdot.

    Perhaps I can move out of my parents basement now. :) j/k

    1. Re:My geek life is complete... by m00j · · Score: 2, Funny

      Was the joke that you don't actually live in your parent's basement or that the idea of moving out of it is preposterous? :D

    2. Re:My geek life is complete... by mj_1903 · · Score: 1

      I don't live there.

    3. Re:My geek life is complete... by mo^ · · Score: 1

      just crashing there while your mansion gets refurbed huh? /me ducks

      --
      bah!*@%!
    4. Re:My geek life is complete... by mj_1903 · · Score: 1

      Yah I guess that was a bit off topic but the link to the iPod transfer mentions software that I wrote so it was on the front page.

  13. 20 Things I don't want to know by stoolpigeon · · Score: 5, Funny
    well I can't come up with 20 but here is a start

    • no matter what piece of hardware I buy, at any price, a faster and cheaper one will be out a week later
    • I really do look like a middle aged dad/geek- regardless of my #insert cool tech gadget here#
    • I spend more time getting my apps 'dialed in' than I do actually using them
    • I'll continue to upgrade every time my distro puts out a new release, even though everything works just fine now and my old hardware is having a tough time keeping up
    • At least once this week I'll continue explaining to someone about relational databases long after they have lost all interest.
    • I'll be showing my dad how to burn a cd at least 3 times in the next 2 months
    • my blog peaked that time 3 people read it in one day
    • When I 'signed' that one web petition for 'that cause' nothing happened
    • I'll get to use this in a couple days when this story gets posted again
    • Once again, I'll spend too much time at slashdot
    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    1. Re:20 Things I don't want to know by bhiestand · · Score: 5, Funny
      my blog peaked that time 3 people read it in one day

      Sorry to be the one to tell you, but that was just a faulty counter. The first page hit was when you went to the site to post to the blog. The second was from you viewing the page after posting it, just to make sure everything came out right. Then the third was when you returned a few hours later to check for any replies.
      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    2. Re:20 Things I don't want to know by zalle · · Score: 1

      I really do look like a middle aged dad/geek- regardless of my #insert cool tech gadget here#

      Ever considered that it's not regardless, it's because?

    3. Re:20 Things I don't want to know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least once this week I'll continue explaining to someone about relational databases long after they have lost all interest.

      But do you explain to them about Home Cities in AoE3?

    4. Re:20 Things I don't want to know by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      I really do look like a middle aged dad/geek- regardless of my #insert cool tech gadget here#

      But middle aged Dad/Geek is hot an trendy... at least with Middle aged Mom/Spouses and Kid/Cynics.

      Just look at the way it makes them laugh. Uncontrollably. When they squirm in public like they don't want to be seen by you, it's because they are jealous. They wish they had one too.

      Lalalalala. Life is fun in my world. What color will the sky be today...

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  14. Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Informative

    I always wondered where they got this shit. The first time I encountered it, I literally did a double take. I was poking around computer speakers, I don't remember why, and I came across a little set of desktop speakers. Nothing remarkable except that they were rated to about 300watts.

    Ok now WTF? As it happens, I own professional speakers. They are about 5 feet tall, dual bass drivers, 3-way, etc. Serious speakers in other words. I check on them and they are rated to 200 watts a peice. Sounds reasonable for their size, but would still be pushing it. I'm sure they could handle 200 watts of RMS power, but I really wouldn't want to try it.

    So how the hell can these little speakers handle 300 watts? I mean I can't even figure out a peak computation that would figure it. So I find that it's "PMPO" power. I don't know what PMPO means, Peak Momentary Power Output I've heard but I think SWPOOA would be a better term, Shit We Pulled Out of Our Ass. It seems to have no relation to reality, purely somebody's fantasy.

    For that matter I can't figure out why you'd want that kind of power out of computer speakers. I drive my speakers with a 150 watt amp, that's 75 watts per channel so a little less than half of what they are rated to take. It's overkill in the purest sense of the word. For normal, modern music I rarely drive them beyond 1 watt each. For classical dynamic music, maybe 5 watts. This drives it to nearly painful levels.

    More power is useful in large venues but for computers, who the fuck cares? Speakers are right next to you.

    1. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by blane.bramble · · Score: 1

      PMPO = Peak Music Power Output. It uses the figure at the top of the peak, usually at a highish distortion level (1 or 2%), and then multiplies that by the number of speakers etc. to get a stupidly high figure compare to the RMS (Root Mean Square) calculation. It seems to vary from 4x to as much as 10x a sane calculation.

    2. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by Babbster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The truth is that people who care and know anything understand the situation and are not fooled, while the people who care and don't know anything will never tell the difference. It's always seemed like a nonissue to me...

    3. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by hattig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think I once heard that they simply multiplied the actual Watt ratings for the speakers by the number of speakers. So a pair of 10W computer speakers would be 10W * 10W * 2 = 200 MarketingWatts!

      I saw these from a brief Google search: "According how audio industry seems to use the term PMPO (peak music power output), in can be anything from 5 to 100 watts of PMPO that equals one real RMS watt." and "The vendor of the product calculates PMPO based on the maximum power output of the device under perfect conditions and 100% efficiency. These conditions are impossible to obtain, and no device can sustain the PMPO power for any significant length of time without being ruined. The PMPO power relies on the fact that amplifiers can provide short bursts of very high power. Over time, these short bursts when averaged with the lower output powers, gives the real value."

      I have heard a lot less of PMPO in the UK in recent years, maybe they were banned from using it because it is purely a marketing term that has no grounding in reality.

      As an aside, would most computer users be better off getting a real amplifier and real speakers and using them for 10 years rather than dealing with shitty PC speakers? I'm not talking audiophile stuff here, just stuff that you can pick up for a reasonable price. For gaming you'd probably want a decent surround system of course, but most other users?

    4. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by justforaday · · Score: 1

      So how the hell can these little speakers handle 300 watts?

      They simply add up the wattages of all the speakers. Chances are what it was a 5.1 set rated at 300 watts. This could break down to 30 watts for each satellite with a 150W sub. Of course, those are all peak ratings, too...

      --
      I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
    5. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The vast majority (think 90+ percent) of the sound you get out of your speakers is delivered from the first watt of power. People need to be buying more efficient speakers instead of speakers rated to handle more power that are, in general, very inefficient.

    6. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      As an aside, would most computer users be better off getting a real amplifier and real speakers and using them for 10 years rather than dealing with shitty PC speakers?
      In terms of audio quality, yes. Even a mediocre hi-fi system will beat the typical computer speaker hands down.
      Ther are, however, two small caveats:
      1) The "real" amplifier plus speakers tends to use up more desk space.
      2) If you still use a CRT monitor, make sure that the speakers are not too close to the tube. The magnetic fields from the speakers' magnets can distort the path of the electron beam. Alternatively, look for magnetically shielded speakers.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
    7. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by hankwang · · Score: 2, Informative
      I don't know what PMPO means, Peak Momentary Power Output I've heard but I think SWPOOA would be a better term, Shit We Pulled Out of Our Ass. It seems to have no relation to reality, purely somebody's fantasy.

      Indeed. A couple of posters try to explain somewhat reasonable ways to define the number, but the ratings are clearly utter nonsense. To dissipate 50 W peak power (100 W PMPO over 2 speakers) through an ordinary 8 ohm speaker cone, you would need 20 volts and a current of 2.5 amps. Neither the tiny +/-5V power supply nor the small transistors (high internal resistance) would be able to deliver such a power, not even for a microsecond.

      The only definition that I ever read that might produce these PMPO numbers in a measurement is that you shortcut the capacitors in the power supply over a resistor with a value equal to the internal resistance of the capacitors (maybe 0.1 ohm). In that case, PMPO = V^2/4R, where V is the power supply voltage and R the internal resistance of the capacitors. Which has no meaningful value to the sound output whatsoever.

    8. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by DrLex · · Score: 2, Funny
      I don't know what PMPO means, Peak Momentary Power Output I've heard
      Sorry, you heard that wrong. It's Putrid Marketing Power Optimism. While some other posters still try to give a definition of it, I think your SWPOOA comes closest. There might be an official definition of it, as far as I remember it involves measuring the power of a ridiculously short pulse. Even your standard PC case speaker could probably endure 1000W, if it was only applied during 1 microsecond (1000W*1e-6 = 0.001 joules, that surely won't burn the coil). The peak amplitude is only limited by the breakthrough voltage of the coil, once this is reached it's only a matter of applying a pulse short enough to stay below a lethal power dissipation for the speaker. Otherwise all speakers would have an infinite PMPO rating.
      In other words, this rating is so bogus that if you go into a store and a clerk tries to sell you speakers toting their PMPO rating, you should seriously consider shoving the things up his ass.
      I also once saw a speaker in a leaflet with an RMS rating, where RMS was explained as "Real Music Source". I wouldn't buy speakers there either :)
    9. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by MoonBuggy · · Score: 1

      I've been using a nice pair of mid-end "real" speakers (~£300/pair) and a nice ~£100 amp for a year or so, and even to my untrained ear they blow the crap out of even high end computer speakers. Fair enough, that setup cost maybe 3 times what an integrated computer speaker system would have done, but the quality is great, they look very nice indeed and they should last for god knows how long. Seems like a good purchase to me.

    10. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by Glonoinha · · Score: 1

      You know that ultra bright light that lightbulbs make the instant they go 'pop' and burn out? That's the light bulb equiv of PMPO.

      Why yes, this light bulb does put out 6.023E+23 lumens of light. Just not very long.

      --
      Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
    11. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by hattig · · Score: 1

      Good points. Of course a deep shelf would keep the components out of the way of the desk, and maybe the speakers could be wall-mounted.

      It's just that soon I'll be getting a new setup for my main hifi (Cambridge Audio 640C and 640A), so an older Marantz amp and (sometimes skippy) Technics CD player will be free for this type of application. I might simply relocate them to the room-that-contains-computers.

    12. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by hattig · · Score: 1

      I'll be migrating my 8 year old Marantz amplifer to the computer room soon (it is being replaced by a Cambridge Audio setup, my current CD player is skipping so I'm getting a 640C to replace it, and I'm now too aesthetically minded and need a matching amp!), so I may soon be getting rid of the cheapy speaker system I'm using currently. I'll probably migrate my equally old Mission 731s up a couple of months later. Considering that these two can still do pretty damn well at 25% volume on the amp downstairs, they should be fine upstairs, hehe.

    13. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by Peyna · · Score: 1

      I think I once heard that they simply multiplied the actual Watt ratings for the speakers by the number of speakers. So a pair of 10W computer speakers would be 10W * 10W * 2 = 200 MarketingWatts!

      That's correct. If people bothered to read the box, they would know that too. From Logitech's website:

      Logitech® Z-5500 Digital (500 Watts)
      Total RMS power: 505 watts RMS
      Satellites: 317 watts RMS (2 x 62 W front, 2 x 62 rear, 69 W center)
      Subwoofer: 188 watts RMS

      --
      What?
    14. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      I've actually found that good speakers don't even tend to be RMS rated, they give an unqualified watts value. I asked the manufacturer what it was and they said maximum rated amplifier power. Basically they claim you can't give an overall spec for what the speaker can do since it depends on what is being fed in. They can take a lot more power if it's over the whole musical spectrum, and thus working all the drivers, than if it's a sine wave on one frequency.

      So what they do is give you an idea that, for normal use, a 200 watt (per channel) amp at the rated impedeance is about all you want. Any more than that and you are risking your speakers at high volume levels. In the manual (which I never had bothere to look at) that's made more clear and it recommends an amp not less than 25 watts per channel and not more than 200.

    15. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by Arcanix · · Score: 1

      This kind of reminds me when a friend of mine asked what sort of system I would suggest for playing music very loudly in his house. I told him he should get what I have which is two big 200 watt floor speakers and a good amp.

      What does he do? Goes to some electronics store where they told him he shouldn't get floor speakers, that he should get five really small speakers that plug into a very crappy sounding sub. Their system was more expensive and due to this in his mind had to be better.

      Anyways, he had me over after he set them up and they sounded pretty bad to me, especially at the high volume we were listening at. Needless to say, the speakers were completely blown in a couple weeks.

      The funny thing is I've told him they're blown and there is insane distortion and he doesn't seem to really mind. I no longer give him advice on audio components...

    16. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by bhiestand · · Score: 1
      As an aside, would most computer users be better off getting a real amplifier and real speakers and using them for 10 years rather than dealing with shitty PC speakers? I'm not talking audiophile stuff here, just stuff that you can pick up for a reasonable price. For gaming you'd probably want a decent surround system of course, but most other users?

      Yes, absolutely! I used a system like this for several years. I had my entertainment center several feet away from my computer desk, and I had some awesome speakers setup. We're talking the 50+ pound variety. I believe they were rated at about 400W/piece. Anyways, I just ran a simple splitter from my computer into one of the inputs on my receiver and was good to go. Great for watching DVDs on the computer, playing Counter-Strike, or listening to MP3s! I highly recommend setups like this to anyone.

      Even your standard crappy home theatre system is generally a lot better than the computer speakers being sold, and you can get used speakers pretty cheap. You don't need any of the spiffy new 7.1 channel digital receivers, so an old Harmon Kardon receiver should be pretty cheap to get too.
      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    17. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by Federico2 · · Score: 1


      Hey! Check out my new 3000 W PMPO speakers! It means...
      People May Party Overnight

    18. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by nyckidd · · Score: 0
      Ok.. this bugged me the first time I read it in the parent post, but now that we have this statement "proving" the correctness of the parent, I must interject... The parent was INCORRECT.

      10W * 10W * 2 = 200
      is NOT the same as
      2 x 62 W , 2 x 62 , 69 W = 317, because this statement means:
      (2 x 62W) PLUS (2 x 62W) PLUS (69W) = 317
      (note the locations where addition is done where the parent multiplies all factors.. )

      thus, USING THE GIVEN LOGITECH EXAMPLE, the correct calculation in the parent post would be:

      10W * 2 = 20W (assuming 2 speakers)

      OR, if logitech used the method of calculation used in the parent post, they would have:

      2 * 62 * 2 * 62 * 69 = 1060944W

      I know many manufactures do (incorrectly) pull all sorts of calculations out of their nether regions, but I just wanted to clarify that what is being stated in the example product, and the original post, are NOT the same, and thus correctness has not been proven.

      Correct me if I'm wrong.

    19. Re:Ahhh yes, computer speaker ratings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The grandparent's statement was correct, his application was wrong.

      "I think I once heard that they simply multiplied the actual Watt ratings for the speakers by the number of speakers."

      So, we have 5 speakers putting out 50 watts a piece, 5*50 = 250 watts;

      The grandparent just misapplied his own "rule of thumb."

      But, my comment provided evidence from a manufacturer showing how they do it; and the grandparent was pretty close in his interpretation (he just misapplied it), so is the purpose of your comment just to say "Haha, you're wrong I'm right, look at me I'm so great?"

  15. Re:Mostly useless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    20 things any geek worth his salt already knows

    The submitter has an AOL address! What do you expect?!

  16. Re:Mostly useless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Nothing groundbreaking, but might be a good primer for the non-techie in your life.

    Most geeks can read however.

  17. How is this a troll mods? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The AC is giving a better link than what the submitters gave, WITHOUT ADS AND SANS THE TON OF PAGES.

    Please inform me how that is troll after you are done modding stupidly.

  18. Expensive Printers and warranties by Nightspirit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've found that printers typically only last a year, at most (I'm in college, so I use them alot). I've tried most brands (canon, HP, epson, lexmark) and not one of them have lasted over a year.

    Finally I bit the bullet and got a 3 year extended warranty on an all-in-one, and couldn't be happier. Whenever that thing finally breaks (and it will be soon) I'll simply turn it in for a new one.

    1. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      I've found that printers typically only last a year, at most

      If you don't need colour, get a laser. If you have the room, get an old HP5 (NOT 5L). You can get these for less than $40, they literally have a lifetime of millions of pages, and refill toner is cheap.

    2. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

      Make sure you print something every week or so, if you leave it for more than a few weeks most printers will dry up and need a head replacement.

      --
      This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
    3. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by bladernr · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I've found that printers typically only last a year

      I've had an HP 4000 since 1997. I've printed lots, and I've never had a problem. I know someone who still has an HP 4si (circa 1993). Its not cheap to buy a quality laser printer, but, since I've only bought one printer in 8 years, I think it works out cheaper to buy quality.

      Or, as with anything else, you get what you pay for.

      --
      Sarcasm and hyperbole are the final refuges for weak minds
    4. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      I've found that printers typically only last a year, at most (I'm in college, so I use them alot). I've tried most brands (canon, HP, epson, lexmark) and not one of them have lasted over a year.

      If I buy another Epson in my lifetime I totally plan to get an extended warranty on it. In fact, i'm seriously considering buying an Epson r200, a printer I have direct experence with clogging and running amuck, leaking, and doing all sorts of crap other than printing with an extended warranty just so I can bug the living hell out of the people who sell these blasted things and perhaps in doing so, perhaps after a few million returns the stores will stop selling crap that they need to be accountable for under the extended warranty.
      But I hope for too much.

      What I don't understand is most printers are under some sort of warranty for at least a year. If they don't last a year you might be lucky and get a referb with free ink, which is no small potatos. Canon i've observed has a decent warranty where the most likely thing to go wrong with them is either a head clog or a head burnout, which in you can send them pictures of your nozzle test they'll send you a replacement head free of charge... so long as you jump through their tests. Not as cool as a referb with free ink, but still standing by their product. HP has had some dogs... but even those can be replaced.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    5. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So true. I nearly shit myself when I saw an old HP IIIp at a thrift shop for $2. I guess people thought since it was so old, it was worthless ..?

    6. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whenever that thing finally breaks (and it will be soon) I'll simply turn it in for a new one.

      Heh. You realize an extended warranty means they fix the old one, not replace it? Good luck printing during the six weeks it will take them to fix your printer.

      Sucker.

    7. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i second that i still use a HP4. never gives me any trouble cheap toner and it has a network interface for my lan

    8. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I just get me a shitty cheap all-in-one device every 2 years or so, thats how long they seem to last for me anyway..

      Getting a new one every 2 years is about as expensive as getting the extended warranty and then still having to replace it every 3 or 4 years anyway... and it gets me 'newer technology' on a regular basis.

      Interesting enough, the utterly cheap and crappy HP PSC 1200 I have now is way past its expected lifetime of 2 years already, without any signs of giving up.

      There is one reason why I happen to like those PSC all-in-one devices btw.. after a few months of being left unused, they just print without any trouble, no dried ink or such, no cleaning/replacing of print heads.. But then, thats about the only good thing I have to say about them, print quality is acceptable, scanner is crappy (for anything beyond 300dpi that is), and you just don't want to know how much ink it wastes on 'cleaning' the heads (only use when you really need it). Hmm.. there was actually aother positive thing to say about thise devices.. the cartridges are extremely easy to tefill, almost as if they were made for it (and yeah, you can get the original ink for them with some hunting around)

    9. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Or if you really have the room, get a LaserJet 4Si. Built like a tank, heavy (40 kg or so), damn near indestructable, and easy to service yourself.

      I bought mine for EUR 125 two years ago, it was discarded by the local tax office. It still runs, but damn, it is big.

      Mart
      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    10. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by Ratbert42 · · Score: 1

      My HP LaserJet 4MP is 13 years old. It's not fast, but it's been rock-solid. Really considering a color laser now though.

    11. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by mrdogi · · Score: 1

      I'd quite agreee. I've got an Apple LaserWriter Pro that I've had for 4 years, and it was given to me by a friend at a dental office. It was one of three printers I received from there (the other two were LaserWriter Selects). I just checked, and it has a date of July 1993. Only 'problems' I ever really have with it are when it's time for a new toner.

    12. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by kcb93x · · Score: 1

      Plus, when everyone else buys a new printer inkjet for $49-$149 each, and I can buy one toner CARTRIDGE for $89 at Office Max (that lasts well past 5,000 pages...) its significantly cheaper. Plus, can sit without the ink drying out. (Just shake the toner and it works)

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    13. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by braindead · · Score: 1

      I've had an HP LaserJet 4 since 1997 or so. Still works perfectly. Maybe your experience is with an inkjet printers? These, in my limited experience, are nowhere near the quality of even a decent laser printer -- and at the same time, they're much more expensive to use.

    14. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I bought a used HP Laserjet 4 Plus when I was at college (I paid something like $65 at the time). It was a network printer, so I plugged it into the network and let my roommates use it too. Went through a bunch of paper, still haven't used up the toner that it came with (must of been pretty full when I got it, no idea how to check it). Still works flawlessly, and is a much better printer than the stupid inkjets that I wasted my time with before. Whenever I wanted color (very rarely) I would just use the printing center at the library.

    15. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by apdt · · Score: 1

      If you do get a colour laser, make sure you check out the cost of consumables before you pick one. I recently had to get a new set of toner cartriges for our Epson c900, and they were £100 +vat (rrp) for each colour. I managed to get them for about £80 +vat each by searching online, but that still hurt. The black cartridges are only about £30 by comparison.

      Add to that the fact that they ship the printer with only quarter full cartridges...

      --
      I lay awake last night wondering where the sun had gone, then it dawned on me.
    16. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by phillymjs · · Score: 1

      I've found that printers typically only last a year, at most.

      /me looks over at his Apple LaserWriter Select 360, purchased in January of 1994 and still going strong. I plan to keep it until it totally dies.

      IIRC, the innards of the LaserWriter Selects were made by Xerox-- dunno if Xerox lasers made today are as good, but back in the day they certainly were.

      ~Philly

    17. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 1

      I like the "Corbis" watermark on your picture of the body. It adds so much legitimacy to your case as a whistleblower.

    18. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that Corbis made the photo available didn't make this any less true, even today.

      But since you had to be an ass, I found a different link. Enjoy.

      ~Philly

    19. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the US you need to be careful with the 4Si (and 5si) series. Many of them only have commercial FCC ratings and using them in a residential area can not only cause TV and radio inteference but get you an unwanted and most likely unpleasent visit from government authorities.

    20. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by Hannah+E.+Davis · · Score: 1

      I have a Brother laser printer (HL-1435, in case you're curious). It's about 2 years old so far, and has enjoyed heavy use via big comp sci assignments and my boyfriend's rpg habit. I have yet to have a problem with it.

      Incidentally, this printer was initially ordered online and shipped to Halifax, moved into storage for a summer, moved to a new place (still in Halifax) and then shipped via Canada Post from Halifax to Vancouver. I think it's experienced more wear and tear than the average printer, but it's probably one of my most cooperative pieces of hardware.

    21. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by julesh · · Score: 1

      I've found that printers typically only last a year, at most (I'm in college, so I use them alot). I've tried most brands (canon, HP, epson, lexmark) and not one of them have lasted over a year.

      What are you doing to them? My LaserJet 5L has lasted me since '98, doing a duty cycle of ~5 sheets per day average with regular peeks of 100-200 sheets, and occasionaly up to 500 or 600 sheets in a day. And I bought it second hand.

    22. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by ACorrosionOfDeviants · · Score: 1

      Hear, hear.

      My HP LaserJet 4L is nearly twelve years old, and still churns out over a thousand sheets each month in my home office. For your workhorse products, buy quality and you won't be sorry.

      My father, with the best of intentions, recently decided to buy a toner cartridge for me at a big box store (don't ask why -- it's a long story). He was, of course, stunned by the high price. The salesman, also meaning well, nearly talked him into a new low-end (translation: piece of crap) inkjet, arguing that it was way better value than throwing money into an old obsolete printer. He almost went for it on the spot, thinking that he would be doing me a favour.

      "Newer is better" is a seductive arguement until you crunch the numbers.

    23. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by Macdude · · Score: 1
      I've found that printers typically only last a year

      I've had an HP 4000 since 1997. I've printed lots, and I've never had a problem. I know someone who still has an HP 4si (circa 1993). Its not cheap to buy a quality laser printer, but, since I've only bought one printer in 8 years, I think it works out cheaper to buy quality.

      His printers aren't breaking down, he's just realised that it's cheaper to just buy a new printer when the ink runs out then to buy ink-cartridges.
      --
      "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
    24. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by anagama · · Score: 1

      I refill my cartridges -- get about 3 refills for each one before the drum starts degrading. I can't recall the name of the company off the top of my head, but I bought their "kit" which consists of a cheap soldering iron with a metal tube attached to the hot end, some pliers, an egg timer, and some other things. I think it was $15. Then I just buy a bottle of toner -- they ship it with nice big yellow cloth, plugs for the hole in the cartridge, and some M&Ms. Big bottles of toner are something like $30 for my massive Lexmark (3 drawers and a duplexer). The cartridges for that beast are about $200-250 (17.5k page). It takes about 5 minutes to refill, 10 if I have to punch the hole. I refill about 4x/year so my savings are substantial.

      I have owned 3 printers for my home systems over the course of my life. A 9pin DMP for my TRS-80 CoCo bought in the early 80s. It never broke, was simply replaced. An HP Deskjet 500 from 1992-1995 (worked great, sold it to a friend). An HP Laserjet 4L 1995-present -- I WISH that thing would die -- 4 ppm is so freakin' slow ... but it just keeps plugging away and because I don't actually print that much at home, I'd rather spend the money on some other gadget.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    25. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by loraksus · · Score: 1

      Not to rain on your point, but "printed lots" on a Laserjet 4000 is around 65,000 pages a month.
      If you've printed more than two or 3 times that since '97, I'd be surprised.
      They were designed to last a long time, but most people tossed them because they didn't want to buy the $40 paper pickup, etc, rollers.
      That said, starting from the 4100, HP's printers are built to... shall we say... less exacting standards and have been having more and more issues (4100 was plagued with fuser issues). Now that Carly is gone, perhaps something will change in the high-er end printer division, but low end will always be low end printers.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    26. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      I work for a volunteer organization, and am more or less the custodian of the computer equipment. I'm still printing letters envelopes and labels off of an HP 1100 that was purchased back in 1992(?). I periodically have to drop in a new toner. The only major repair was applying a little sticky pad to one of the rollers to correct for a design problem. I'm not kiding, HP mailed us a cardboard frame with a punch of sticky points on the end that we jammed into one of the orafaces to keep the pages from jamming after so many years.

      Cute little thing, it's still printing. My only beef is the speed. It prints 4ppm, so a 200 page reports requires the better part of a lunch break.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    27. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by loraksus · · Score: 1

      Duty cycle of the 5L is 4k pages per month. That said, most of the 5L's out there haven't done so well.

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
    28. Re:Expensive Printers and warranties by Jakeypants · · Score: 1

      "I've found that printers typically only last a year, at most (I'm in college, so I use them alot)"

      You missed #7 on the PCWorld list - you can replace ink cartridges.

  19. 21... by advocate_one · · Score: 3, Funny
    how to survive a slashdotting...

    they're not gonna let that one out...

    --
    Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
  20. Re:Extended Warranties sometimes are Worth It by wantobe · · Score: 1
    I won't mention again how you're talking about a completely different PC World (oh, wait...) Anyway, sometimes extended warranties are worth it. For instance, a new battery for my laptop costs more than the 3 year extended warranty did, and it covers new batteries without limiting the number of replacements I can get.

    I will agree with another poster in this thread, though, that it depends on what it is. If it's a stationary piece of equipment, don't bother (unless it's really expensive and the warranty cost is 5% or less.)

  21. Sometime fibs are good by vivekg · · Score: 2, Funny

    BAD fib
    You know Upstream & downstream stuff they will say you will get 256 kbps, 512kbsp and so on. Few weeks back I was at friends place. When sales guy of local DSL Company came to give all info and started to explain how good DSL is from Dial up. He told my friend *DSL is your own lease line* :/? So I interrupted him and said you mean LL? He said like that... Hee so this is how they sales connections and they don't Want to know much about technology. Okay don't explain technology but don't fib... coz one day s/he will know this!

    I found hardware vendor especially owners and a tech guy gives more fibs... for example somebody in shop would like to purchase 2 gig USB pen. Owner told lady that it has driver in USB that take some space so you will always not get exactly 2 gig space. Deal went very well. Some time fibs are good for example in this case you can't explain all the stuff to old lady about why you don't get 2 gig space on USB.

    --
    The important thing is not to stop questioning --Albert Einstein.
    1. Re:Sometime fibs are good by DerekJ212 · · Score: 0

      You are saying there is a problem that the sales person called the acronym by its full name and that is a problem?

    2. Re:Sometime fibs are good by Loonacy · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm amazed you even understood what s/he was talking about. I thought it was just a bunch of random words strung together to resemble sentences.

    3. Re:Sometime fibs are good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      TRANSLATION

      A few weeks ago, while at a friend's house, I heard the local DSL company's salesman trying to convince by friend to purchase their product. When trying to explain how fast an ADSL line could be when compared to a standard dial-up modem, he said that "DSL is like having your own leased line".

      On another occasion, I overheard a conversation in a shop between a salesman and an old lady. The salesman was trying to explain the difference between 2GB and 2GiB. Rather than use numbers, he said the difference in space was due to a "driver" on the pen.

    4. Re:Sometime fibs are good by Bozdune · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thank you. WHen I read the original post I felt like my dog must feel when he tilts his head sideways.

    5. Re:Sometime fibs are good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yet Another Translation, by a professional:

      "Sometime Fibs are Good"

      An example of a bad fib:

      Marketing representatives often use fibs to misrepresent the speed of communications service. For example, while visiting a friend a few weeks ago, I heard a local DSL company's sales representative pitching his company's service. He began to explain the advantages of DSL over a dial-up connection, and in doing so he told a fib: he said that DSL is the same as having a leased line. I interrupted him and asked him for confirmation, using the standard acronym "LL" for "Leased Line" to make it clear that I wanted to know if he was suggesting that DSL and a Leased Line were equivalent. The marketing representative replied that DSL and Leased Lines were the same thing, which is patently untrue.

      This example of a bad fib demonstrates the underhanded marketing tactics some sales representatives choose to employ. These fibs lead the customer further from the truth, in the hope that the customer will make an ill-informed and unwise purchase. This tactic is unwise, however, because customers will grow unhappy with their service once they learn the truth.

      An example of a good fib:

      Hardware salespeople, especially the owners of stores and technically oriented sales representatives, sometimes tell less harmful fibs. Once, a merchant was pitching a 2GB USB pen to an older woman who did not seem to understand much about storage space. The merchant, being at heart an honest man, did not want to give his client the impression that he was selling her a full two gigabytes of storage space, because that was untrue, despite the manufacturer's claims. So, he disclosed the truth by telling a small fib: he told her that some of the space on the USB device was already used by software needed by computers accessing the device.

      Although the owner said did not fully explain the difference between the product advertisement and the truth, he did make an effort to show his client that the packaging was misleading and that the product would not fully live up to the expectations advertised. By telling a small fib, he avoided allowing a client to believe a larger lie or allowing her to become confused by technical jargon and unfamiliar concepts. In this case, the result of telling the fib was to bring the client closer to the truth so that she could make an informed purchase.

    6. Re:Sometime fibs are good by LordKaT · · Score: 4, Funny

      I've got some Mod points, and if there was a "+1 What the fuck?" you'd get it.

    7. Re:Sometime fibs are good by locokamil · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Reason #18774952 to not outsource: all your tech support will sound/read like this.

    8. Re:Sometime fibs are good by Anti_zeitgeist · · Score: 1

      i appluad you

      --
      If it wasn't for C, we would be stuck using BASI, PASAL and OBOL.
    9. Re:Sometime fibs are good by Jakeypants · · Score: 1

      "WHen I read the original post I felt like my dog must feel when he tilts his head sideways."

      Me too.

      "How am I going to lick all that peanut butter off of Bozdune's junk?"

  22. find-a-human by krunk4ever · · Score: 4, Informative

    i found the find-a-human section quite helpful:

    https://www.quickbase.com/db/bam6rdiey?a=q&qid=5

    You Can Get a Human on the Phone

    Follow the directions at Paul English's Find-A-Human IVR Phone System Shortcuts site to reach a human operator at any of more than 60 cell phone, PC, and travel firms.


    when i know i can find the info online, i won't bother. i need some help that an automated system can't provide or wastes too much time trying to get it to recgonize what i'm saying.

    another winner i thought was:

    Useless Specs: Digital Zoom

    definitely the most useless spec i can't think of at the moment. it tricks unsuspecting buyers into believing their digicam has more 'zoom' than it really has.

    1. Re:find-a-human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When taking party photos with a 4megapixel camera, digital zoom IS useful, you can use the full 40x zoom and the pitcures still looks better than those from a cell phone camera.

    2. Re:find-a-human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can get a human at Charter Communications. They recently changed their phone answering menu to recognize your voice. I had to call them about not being able to connect to the internet and had to go through ALL the steps that I knew how to do already. When I finally got a human, I asked him how to avoid having to do all that useless shit. He said, "Just don't say anything to the prompts."

    3. Re:find-a-human by Jetekus · · Score: 1

      That's a nonsense. Digital zoom doesn't actually zoom in the real sense, it just takes that part of the picture and blows it up. It's exactly the same as going into photoshop, cropping a picture around someone's face then scaling the image to 1000%. Except the camera won't be using photoshop's algorithms - it'll be using it's own terrible, but quick to use ones.

    4. Re:find-a-human by davesag · · Score: 1

      me too - would love to find similar for outside the usa. all these automated systems must have hackable control codes.

      --
      I used to have a better sig than this, but I got tired of it
    5. Re:find-a-human by krunk4ever · · Score: 1

      i've actually tried that for several support lines when hitting 0 failed. sometimes it worked, other times it thought because of no response, they'd say 'goodbye'.

    6. Re:find-a-human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Proper digital zoom is done by taking 4+ pictures in rapid succession with a 1280x1024 500fps sensor, or not-so-rapidly of a static object with a run-of-the-mill vga cam, then do some superresolution calculations and profit !

    7. Re:find-a-human by Rob+Parkhill · · Score: 1

      If the company you are calling is not on that list, just try doing nothing when you call. A lot of times if you don't press any buttons the system will assume you are using a phone without touch-tone and will transfer you to an operator.

      The down-side is that you might have to listen to 10 menu options before you get kicked over.

      --
      "Tomorrow's forecast: a few sprinkles of genius with a chance of doom!" - Stewie Griffin
    8. Re:find-a-human by F_Scentura · · Score: 1

      "when i know i can find the info online, i won't bother. i need some help that an automated system can't provide or wastes too much time trying to get it to recgonize what i'm saying."

      If we could find the information online in all cases, we wouldn't need this service.

  23. None of this is news to us... by Red+Samurai · · Score: 0

    This is stuff the average nerd already knows.

  24. Road to Riches - Bet against MS by aelbric · · Score: 4, Funny

    From the article:

    "My PC's firewall, antivirus scanner, spyware remover, pop-up blocker, and spam filter all agree: Windows is sorely lacking in PC security. That situation may not change until Windows Vista (formerly Longhorn) comes out sometime next year."


    Wonder if Vegas is giving any odds on this. Might be easy money.

    --
    nos laetus epulor qui would domito nos
    1. Re:Road to Riches - Bet against MS by ari_j · · Score: 1

      Even Vegas won't let you make that risky of a bet.

    2. Re:Road to Riches - Bet against MS by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      Wonder if Vegas is giving any odds on this. Might be easy money.

      That would be Wall Street. They don't gamble in Vegas.

      --
      What?
  25. Over-what? by rasty · · Score: 1, Funny

    Thank you for telling me CPUs can be overclocked! I thought Intel and AMD always worked to make my life easier and provide me with the best products at the lowest possible price, enriching my multimedia and internet experience with the best technology available!
    Now my world is falling back on me!

    I really hope they won't tell me my precious DVD collection could be copied next...

    1. Re:Over-what? by Anti_zeitgeist · · Score: 1

      Yup!

      And guess what?! You can download all those programs, movies and music you have been paying for! Shhhhh....dont tell anyone.

      P.S. - Save BIG BUCKS when downloading open source apps!!

      --
      If it wasn't for C, we would be stuck using BASI, PASAL and OBOL.
    2. Re:Over-what? by dedded · · Score: 1
      CPUs should not be overclocked. First, you do not have the extensive set of tests that manufacturers use. So while an overclocked CPU might seem to work, it may well be that you simply haven't exercised the appropriate critical circuit path. Nor have you likely tested the CPU at the extremes of temperature. And even if the CPU does work at the speed you're clocking it, you may have pushed the current it draws high enough that electromigration of metal traces will lead to a premature failure.

      CPU manufacturers particularly dislike overclocking because it leads to CPU failure that makes the manufacturer look like it didn't make a quality product. But since it did, that's not fair.

      Lord only knows how pricing is done, but your part should be running as fast as it reliably can. There is no incentive for a chip maker to cripple clock speeds; the faster the part runs the more they can--and do--charge.

      Now, if it ever came to be that there were only one CPU manufacturer, the game would change. The lone manufacturer might under-clock some parts to spread pricing options.

    3. Re:Over-what? by Mycroft_VIII · · Score: 1

      "Now, if it ever came to be that there were only one CPU manufacturer, the game would change. The lone manufacturer might under-clock some parts to spread pricing options."

            It doesn't have to drop to one for this to happen, given that it doese and there are certainly more than one.
            As yeilds go up on a particular process line a higher and higher percentage of chips per run are capable of running full out, yet the market spread on who will pay what for how much stays fairly constant. Thus even if a particular line of chips (athalons or PIVs or whatever) has over 90% of it's ouput capable of handling max or near max the number of people wanting high-end and willing to pay $800+ stays roughly the same as does the percentage just fine with a $120 dollar part.
          Now eigther they fail to cater to one segment (what do you mean I can't get a cpu under $800, I'm only willing to spend $150 max) or the other that might feel cheated if everyone can afford a 5biggahertz for $200, or they underate some chips and sell them cheaper while leaving others at full speed and price. The latter makes them much more money.
          The problem with overclocking is that you can't tell if you've got a top notch chip that is marked below the top end because it's not quite good enough, or because they needed an extra 1000 in the 'slower' bin to make the most money untill you crank it up and see if it works or sorta works or just plain lets the magic smoke out.
          Some enjoy the challenge and risk (must enjoy it, sometimes thier uber-coolers cost more than the high end chips they're trying to match), some just play it safe or buy a high end chip to start with.

      Mycroft

      --
      https://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4c3ed6600b6ea
  26. Ink for inkjet printers by daffy951 · · Score: 2, Informative

    There are inkjet printers where it would have been cheaper to buy a brand new printer than buying ink to the old one...

    1. Re:Ink for inkjet printers by kurt_ram · · Score: 0

      Actually, this is not true. You can very well get a printer for a lower price than an ink cartridge. But, the printer will not come with a cartridge. Most of the times, printer companies sell their printers at a loss. But, they make huge profits from their cartridge sales. It depends on their marketing strategy. So, when you are buying a printer, it would be a good thing to pay a little more for the printer whose ink costs less instead of buying a cheap printer whose ink costs a lot more because buying a printer is just a one time thing. But, you'll be buying cartridges for a long time.

      --
      Clearly, Google is the next Microsoft.
    2. Re:Ink for inkjet printers by daffy951 · · Score: 1

      Actually, it IS true (at least in the country where I live). For example, a "Lexmark Color JetPrinter Z515" cost ~$50, with black and color cartridges included. Extra cartridges cost ~$58 for the black and color, small version (which is the ones you get with a new printer).

    3. Re:Ink for inkjet printers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lexmark = disposable printers

      Now in landfills everywhere!

    4. Re:Ink for inkjet printers by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 2, Informative

      The cartridges that come with the printers have very little ink in them. They call them "starter cartridges" or something of the like. So while the printer with ink installed is cheaper, it's probably not cheaper per milliliter of ink.

      --
      I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    5. Re:Ink for inkjet printers by Alistar · · Score: 1

      Yea it is, when the ink goes out on my parent's printer I always get a call asking what one they should get next. The printer usually costs them around 30-50 dollars and comes with ink whereas new ink cartridges costs about 70 dollars. Then so its not a complete environmental disaster buying a new printer 3-4 times a year I always take the old one to my work's technology recycling program.

    6. Re:Ink for inkjet printers by saskboy · · Score: 1

      If I ever break down and buy a bubble jet printer, I'm going to look at the refill's mL value. Many printers used to have a tank of at least 30 mL, but now you're paying the same price, for 14mL or less! And to top it all off, each picture probably uses more ink too! That's something the printer industry doesn't want you to notice.

      --
      Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
    7. Re:Ink for inkjet printers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Find / buy an old Epson ink jet (like a Color Stylus 740 or 800), then buy cheap Chineese ink cartridges. I pay $2 for black and $6 for color. Even cheaper than refilling or buying a refilled one at the store...

      Always check the price of generic replacement toner/ink before you buy a printer. My old laser is sitting in the corner because it would cost $500 for the drum and toner to get it working again...

    8. Re:Ink for inkjet printers by dlapine · · Score: 1
      That's why I bought a Canon PIMAX 4000. Has 5 seperate ink tanks, and I can get refills for less than $3.00 a tank. All they do is hold ink, and lots of it.

      Given that an IP4000 can now be had new for ~$100, why buy HP or Lexmark again?

      I got tired of paying HP 1/2 the price of the printer every time I refilled my DJ895.

      --
      The Internet has no garbage collection
  27. Quite a specifica article by rasty · · Score: 1

    Jokes aside, this article really looks a little bit too specific and out of personal experience. Won't actually make your whole life easier but just give a few tips here and there. Pretty simple ones too.
    Some are also, imho, quite wrong as with the dead pixel warranty. In most conuntry in fact, despite what the manufacturer claims, warranties have to cover all defects of the purchased product, and it doesn't matter really what the manufacturer says they will or will not replace.

    So, as usual, please also use own brain.

  28. OMG MORE INFO'z!!1! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lol here is more great information: LINK
    thank god i read it now i am at least informaed.
    lol how do i get to the contrl panal??????? SOMEBODY HELp PLEASEQ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  29. The deal with the pixels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The manufacturer has to replace any defective part. That's the starting point here.

    The question is what constitutes a defective part? Luckily for LCD manufacturers (and not so luckily for consumers) is that LCDs are specified to allow x number of non-working pixels and still be considered non-defective.

    The same holds true for Flash RAM. Bad memory blocks are a fact of life in Flash RAM. And you can't get a replacement if the number of bad blocks isn't above the technical standards document.

  30. LOL POST LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    LOL POST LOL

  31. Burst Rates on Hard Drives Do Matter by Dangero · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think part of the reason that the non-tec savy people stay non-tech savy is because they get so much conflicting bad information. Of course the DSL sales guy lies. He only knows enough about what he's selling to sell it. If he knew more, he wouldn't be selling it or installing it. He'd be doing something much more interesting. But regarding hard drives, I can't believe they are saying that the burst rate does not matter. With a 10 MB+ hard disk cache you better believe that a lot of the information you request is coming burst transfer from the cache. Sounds like they just ran out of good ideas for their list, but they are complete morons for making such an unsubstantiated claim.

    1. Re:Burst Rates on Hard Drives Do Matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anything in that tiny hard drive cache will almost certainly already be in the OS's filesystem cache.

    2. Re:Burst Rates on Hard Drives Do Matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but they did not say that it din't matter at all.
      they said that substained transfer would have a bigger imapact than burst rate.

      150mb/s burst rate and 10mb/s substaiend
      or 70mb/s burstrate and 40mb/substained what would you chose.

      ok clearly fictional numbers

    3. Re:Burst Rates on Hard Drives Do Matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You say "a 10 MB+ hard disk cache" like it's a huge capacity, but it really isn't.

      It's a good rule of thumb in caching systems that a fast cache memory should be close to 1% of the size of whatever memory it's caching from for optimum performance. For instance, a meg of cache for every hundred megs of ram, or a gig of ram for every hundred gigs of disk space.

      In real life cost-conscious consumer systems, we rarely see quite that much cache because the faster media is so much more expensive. There the ratio tends to drift downward, but still remains in the .1-1% range.

      But the hard drive cache is miniscule compared to even the smallest of other caches. Today's highest capacity drives have 4 or 5 hundred gigs of drive space, but a mere 8-16MB of cache. That's in the neighborhood of .001% of the drive capacity.

      And that small number becomes even more irrelevant for read performance when you realize that the information in that cache is usually duplicated in the operating system's filesystem cache in main ram. In fact the filesystem cache can generally be expected to contain a good deal more relevant information per unit of capacity, simply because the OS has more knowledge of file structure, and open files and access patterns than the drive's hardware can.

      The hard drive's cache is useful for two reasons, write caching so that writes can be made to disk in large blocks at convenient times, and track-caching so that the drive can read all of one track in a single revolution. And while both of these are essential for a decent performing hard drive, neither of them benefit all that much from larger caches.

    4. Re:Burst Rates on Hard Drives Do Matter by gpoul · · Score: 1

      The burst rates don't matter because they're not sustained rates and even the unsustained rates are highly unlikely because the HDD is actually very dumb about it's content and has no idea what or why you just requested some tracks/blocks. - Most of the time it won't be of any use. Even in write caching, because transfer rates drop substantially as soon as the cache is full or you try to read additional data.

      It is correct though that burst rates have some limited impact on performance of the HDD but for the usage of a non-tech savy person and even for the home-use of tech savy persons it is just plain useless.

    5. Re:Burst Rates on Hard Drives Do Matter by KillShill · · Score: 1

      and slapping in 256 or 512 megs of cheap sdram would cost them how much more to make the drive?

      wouldn't you spend, let's say 50 bucks more to have a huge hard drive with 512MBs of cache?

      and no, the memory is nothing special. i even heard people say that it's a very expensive "special" kind of ram... i didn't give them a reply.

      --
      Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
    6. Re:Burst Rates on Hard Drives Do Matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wouldn't you spend, let's say 50 bucks more to have a huge hard drive with 512MBs of cache?

      No, I wouldn't. Not when I could spend the same $50 on more system ram and have it used as more than a disk cache when I need ram for other things.

      The same thing that makes a little ram on a hard drive useful for write and track caching, it's position on the far end of a relatively narrow bus from the processor and near the drive, makes large banks of ram in that configuration a waste of money. That hypothetical 512 MB cache on the drive will be less efficiently used than a similar software controlled cache in main ram, will be much slower to accesses, and will be useless for any other purpose when it's not needed as a cache.

  32. MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by gotr00t · · Score: 4, Informative
    I think you're getting MSN confused with Windows messenger. While the former is a popular chat service that I must admit has a huge user base and lots of features, the latter is a built in "feature" of windows that allows people to display messages on your desktop.

    Many spammers have taken advantage of "windows messenger" spamming by throwing packets at windows messenger in hopes that it will appear on the users' desktop. Disabling the messenger effectively eliminates this.

    1. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by ravenlock · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, there are three messengers.

      MSN Messenger is the ad-ridden MSN client
      Windows Messenger is the version without all the blinkety blink, but it's still a MSN client
      Windows Messenger Service is the thing that displays pop-up messages from other conmputers.

    2. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Grandparent was right in saying Windows Messenger is not MSN Messenger - since most people do use the full client - but he was wrong in his detail.

    3. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "Messenger" service is not the same as Windows Messenger. Windows Messenger was before MSN Messenger. Almost no features, obviously smaller, etc. It stopped at v5 from what I remember. MSN Messenger is the extension of Windows Messenger (neither is related to just plain ol' Messenger service which is what the spammers started to use a number of years ago).

    4. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by wfberg · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're confusing "Windows Messenger" with the "Messenger Service".

      MSN Messenger - instant messenger with a lot of doodads, a new version to be downloaded every day. AKA "msn".

      Windows Messenger - instant messenger that can log on to the MSN Messenger network, but also to Exchange/SIP servers, doesn't have many doodads. AKA "that crappy ancient version of msn that won't go away even if you install the newest version".

      Messenger Service - runs in the background on NT and higher, displays irritating "press OK" dialogs with spam from viagra sellers or system administrators. AKA "winpopup".

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    5. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And to reply to myself, I use it because it doesn't have the annoying crap of MSN Messenger. The same reason I'm starting to use Google Talk, it's slimmer...

    6. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by Bobman1235 · · Score: 1

      Popular? Huge user base? Who uses MSN Messenger? I know no one, but my AIM buddy list has 150 people on it. I don't know where all this pro-MSN Messenger sentiment is coming from, but it must be a localized clique.

    7. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. The Windows Messenger Service is what you are talking about. Windows Messenger is a cut-down version of MSN Messenger that comes with Windows XP.

    8. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1
      I think you and the GP are both right. It really depends on your peer group. I would not choose to use MSN Messenger, but sadly since everyone I know uses it I have no choice. I could switch to AIM or Yahoo or some obscure client but I would have to also search for new family and friends, which isn't really practical. And they are not all going to change with me, because they also have their own family and friends who would have to be persuaded to change.

      I'm pretty sure that most people I know are not "pro-MSN" - they are simply pro-being-in-the-loop. Much like yourself, they probably don't know anybody that uses AIM, but have MSN contact lists as long as your arm.

      To put it another way, assuming you are an English speaker, do you suppose that French, Spanish or Mandarin Chinese are just localised cliques?

    9. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 0

      Windows messanger IS MSN messanger.

      Windows messanger SERVICE however...

      Yeah, it's stupid and confusing. Go Microsoft!

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    10. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by Bobman1235 · · Score: 1

      No no, I figured that was the case. I was just surprised to hear it. I literally know of NO ONE who uses it, yet EVERYONE I know uses AIM, I was surprised that it could be true that there are people for which the opposite is true. I had no idea MSN messenger had ANY popularity at ALL u ntil I read this thread. Even most BB websites I visit, you can enter an email address and an AIM name... occasionally a slot for MSN, but ALWAYS for AIM.

      Like I said, not knocking it in any way, just very surprised.

    11. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by Inf0phreak · · Score: 3, Informative

      This localized clique you're talking about is called "Europe". Yes, AIM is widespread in USA (*AOL* Instant Messenger... not really surprising considering all those CDs and whatnot they pollute the world with, now is it?), but the rest of the world has to the best of my knowledge welcomed our messenging overlords.

      --
      ________
      Entranced by anime since late summer 2001 and loving it ^_^
    12. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have seen these general trends:

      College Students and adolescents = AIM

      Windows MS developers (.Net, VB6, etc) = MSN Messenger

      Windows non-MS developers (Java and Open-Source) = Yahoo & ICQ

    13. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by neongrey · · Score: 0

      I know MSN is really big at my school. Of course, this probably has a lot to do with the school network blocking the ports used by, you know, every other instant messenger service. I just tunnel out, use Trillian anyway. Screw my classmates; if they want to hear something from me, they can turn around and yell at me.

    14. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      germany here
      we are still using icq

      --
      Conservatism: The fear that somewhere, somehow, someone you think is your inferior is being treated as your equal.
    15. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have 120 people on msn messenger, no one i know uses AIM, only people in the USA use it

      (I'm in australia btw)

    16. Re:MSN messenger IS NOT Windows Messenger by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      Who uses MSN Messenger? I know no one, but my AIM buddy list has 150 people on it.

      Ah, that settles it. Virtually no one uses MSN Messenger, then.

  33. Uk version of speak to a human? by fantomas · · Score: 1

    Has anybody done a UK version of find - a - person? would be really useful...

  34. Windows' Bad Security? Give me a break. by Ravatar · · Score: 4, Funny

    TFA states that your Windows Product Key being retrievable is a security risk. What??

    Not to mention the fact that the author uses Windows to manage his passwords, which he cites as another of the software's "security risks". The only security risk in this situation is the article's author.

    1. Re:Windows' Bad Security? Give me a break. by 2008 · · Score: 1

      Someone else using your machine can grab the serial number, put it on the net and get it potentially banned from windows update by MS.

      Of course, physical access breaks most security measures, but it didn't have to break this one. But given that a fair number of machines have a Microsoft sticker on them with the key in plain view, and that recovering a lost key you own is potentially pretty useful, it's hard to complain about this.

      --
      I quit!
    2. Re:Windows' Bad Security? Give me a break. by Sigma+7 · · Score: 1
      TFA states that your Windows Product Key being retrievable is a security risk. What??
      The other poster beat me to it, but...

      The WPK is equivalent to a CD-key for most online games. It may only be used once. While there is no way of verifiying it at the time of install, a red flag will be raised when you have to do a reinstall (by that time, your hardware cycled slightly.)

      Don't say that it can't happen - I tried to keep my WinXP system clean, only to have it eventually black-screen on bootup. Thankfully, this was not my primary system.

      Not to mention the fact that the author uses Windows to manage his passwords, which he cites as another of the software's "security risks". The only security risk in this situation is the article's author.


      Actually, this can be considered a security risk. If another person can gain physical access to a machine with no password protection (New user accounts have this setting by default in WinXP home.) However, it is minor unless this password recovery feature can bypass the fact that the Windows account password has changed.

      In addition, consider that the early versions of IE were configured to auto-install software (or failing that, pummel the user with popups saying that software needs to be installed.) A password stealer could easily sneak in through this method. While modern browsers are more secure, there are still security flaws that allow popups to slip through.
  35. Some more notes about speaker efficiency by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The average small to medium hi-fi loudspeaker tends to have an efficiency in the mid eighty-something dB/W. With something like 50 W of power, this is is quite sufficient for moderate volumes.
    If you want something loud for the party cellar, look for something with 90 dB/W or better. This kind of efficiency is usually found in larger loudspeakers, which can also handle 100W RMS or more. I guess Handyman's speakers belong in that category and would do fine in the party cellar.
    Big P.A. systems for rock concerts tend to have around 100 dB/W, combined with a few thousand watts of power. The resulting volume is quite impressive even in a large hall.

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
    1. Re:Some more notes about speaker efficiency by astro-g · · Score: 1

      Also note, that the flatter and wider the responce curve is, the lower the efficiency rating is going to be.
      Really high fi monitor speakers might be down in the 70's.
      A really big tuned sub might be as high as 115.
      Of course, it only has a range to 70-80Hz, but thats what you want it for.

    2. Re:Some more notes about speaker efficiency by Reverberant · · Score: 1
      Also note, that the flatter and wider the responce curve is, the lower the efficiency rating is going to be.

      That's not true - the frequency of a speaker and its efficiency are not related at all. (exhibit 1: the Wilson Watt Puppy has a sensitivity of 93 dB 1 W/m)

      That's not to say that you might not see a speaker with a flat-response and low efficiency, but it's not a causal relationship.

    3. Re:Some more notes about speaker efficiency by Handyman · · Score: 1

      I guess Handyman's speakers belong in that category and would do fine in the party cellar.

      In fact, not really. I have a pair of Linn Keilidhs, which have a pretty clean, high-end sound to them -- not the kind of thing you want for your party cellar. I must admit that the efficiency of these speakers is pretty high for speakers in the (sort-of) high-end segment.

    4. Re:Some more notes about speaker efficiency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      My $85 Monster cables help with all of that - AND they came with a free can of wall lubricant.

  36. Slashdot by FLOOBYDUST · · Score: 1
    Truth #1:


    Slashdot := (Hack-A-Day) | delay (24 hrs)


    Slashdot:= (Slashdot *(t-120 Hours))


  37. Locked Cell phone / DRM crap by SynapseLapse · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you don't want to pay the ridiculous rates that cell phone companies charges for the luxury of putting .jpg/.png/.mid/.mp3/whatever on your cellphone, try out this site:

    http://www.phoneuploader.stellernet.com/

    I've spent the last couple hours uploading Mario .mid files to my phone, it's way too much fun.

    1. Re:Locked Cell phone / DRM crap by suitepotato · · Score: 1

      Paying a small amount to a site like 3gupload.com has worked for me. I don't know why so many people limit themselves to what they can get from their carrier. Also, Radio Shack does carry cable/software packages for a wide variety of cell phones which will allow transfer of your own ringtones and bitmaps. Lack of knowledge maybe.

      --
      If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
    2. Re:Locked Cell phone / DRM crap by AaronW · · Score: 1

      For uploading stuff I've had good luck using BitPim, an open source cross platform program for accessing various phones, usually CDMA based ones. With that and a $5 USB cable I was able to get around all the restrictions Verizon placed on me to upload my own ringtones and move pictures back and forth between the phone without paying to download them. Plus I love using it to update my address book, and for that matter, just backing up my phone.

      -Aaron

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
    3. Re:Locked Cell phone / DRM crap by KillShill · · Score: 1

      expect that to go away once they implement more "security" in the next gen models.

      for your protection, of course.

      --
      Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
  38. Extended warranties are worth it by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'd add laptops to that list. I have had three of them, my first was a Toshiba which developed a broked LCD display (a month before the 1 year warranty expired) and a loose power connector (After warranty expired). The next one was an IBM laptop which I had for a loooooong time that also developed a broken LCD (After standard warranty expired but this time I bought an extended one). My current machine is a Powerbook which so far has gone through two defective LCD's (Factory flaw which Apple fixed without complaint) and an improperly re-assebled CD/DVD drive that assassinated a Microsoft Office 2004 for Mac disk (Original not pirate copy, also replaced without complaint by Apple although it was not a warranty issue). So does it pay to have an extended warranty? My opinion is a big fat YES but then perhaps I am phenominally unlucky with laptops. I am actually looking forward to finding out what will break down on the Intel-Mac PowerBook I am planning to buy as soon as they become available. One thing is for sure I will buy all the extra insurance for it that I can get.

    --
    Only to idiots, are orders laws.
    -- Henning von Tresckow
    1. Re:Extended warranties are worth it by tremspeed · · Score: 1

      the extended warranty has saved my ass on several occasions- once for a 40gb ipod, and once for a 17" crt.

      the best thing about the extended warranty is that you get a new one at the store, no (or very few) questions asked. no mailing the thing and waiting around for months.

  39. That's funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Nothing groundbreaking, but might be a good primer for the non-techie in your life.

    I could have sworn this was 'news for nerds', not 'non-techies in need of primers'.

  40. When shopping at Dell.. by Trogre · · Score: 5, Funny

    When shopping at Dell
    always, and I mean always, remember to never actually buy your computer there.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    1. Re:When shopping at Dell.. by big_groo · · Score: 1
      Dell Customer Service 800-624-9897 option 1, xt 7266966, option 1, option 4, option 4

      Indeed. Reaching a human...from TFA. This should tell you something.

    2. Re:When shopping at Dell.. by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1

      Hey, my router in the basement is a Dell. Its recycled from a client of mine, and runs ^#$!#$&!@@$%&^!$# ^H[+++Connection Terminated+++]

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  41. Better yet.. get a decent phone... by Animaether · · Score: 1

    I.e. a phone with IR, BlueTooth or even a USB cable interface that allows you to put exactly those kinds of files (and others) on your phone.

    I have a Sagem my-V55 (Vodafone special*) that cost around $100 and allows me to do all that and then some.

    Compared to my girlfriend's old phone (some Samsung clam model with T-Mobile), which doesn't even have a third of the features - most importantly of which is that you -have- to use T-Mobile to get anything on or off it.
    It was more around $300.

    She now as a SONY/Ericsson w800i - much, much, much better.. though also $500-something stand-alone. Eek.

    --

    * yes, it is locked. But not locked in features - only in whose prepaid cards / "fill up" cards I can use.. namely only Vodafone's.

  42. Yes! by volsung · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Between my iBook and my friend's Dell, we've each averaged about 3 serious warranty repairs over the 3 year extended manufacturer's warranty. The first 18 months were usually flawless, and then all that carrying to and fro started to make things fail. Failures included main boards, LCDs, and optical drives, any one of whch could have easily cost more than the $250 warranty to fix.

    I build all my desktop machines with crap parts and no extended warranties, but laptops need the 3 year full service warranty.

    1. Re:Yes! by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      Me to, desktop machines that's fine but I'd always buy an extended warranty or an insurance for a laptop. Furthermore I would be very hesitant to buy a laptop on Ebay, especially not over a national border, precisely because I would have no warranty except the International one which can sometimes be very hard to cash in.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    2. Re:Yes! by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      I'd go as far to say that a new notebook is only as good as its warranty. Anything beyond that is bonus time.

    3. Re:Yes! by asavage · · Score: 1

      What is the warranty is 400$ after tax for a 1400$ laptop?

    4. Re:Yes! by drew · · Score: 1

      Maybe I've just been lucky, but I've gone through three different laptops and never needed a warranty repair on any of them. Neither did either of the other two people at the consulting group I used to work in who also had laptops. (We bought the warranties anyway because they were company owned instead of personal property, but we never used them.) We had one issue where the lcd screen cracked because one of the partners tried to slide his car seat back while the laptop was sitting behind it, but that was on a >5 year old laptop and no warranty that I am aware of would have covered it.

      In fact, the only computer related warranty-like repair I've ever needed was getting fedex to repair a damaged case and motherboard that were mishandled in shipping. Other than that, I have always been perfectly content to do as the article suggests- use the standard manufacturers warranty, and if the item breaks after the standard warranty is up, use the money I saved to buy a new one.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    5. Re:Yes! by Pendersempai · · Score: 1

      Your sample size needs some work.

    6. Re:Yes! by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      Extended warranties are like insurance.

      On a Desktop, if you build your own, or at least are comfortable swapping out your own parts, it does not make sense.

      On a notebook, where a single repair of anything will be as much as the extended warranty or even more, yes it does make sense. In 4 years, I would give 75% odds on something breaking. Consumer hard drives are crap. Optical drives are only a little better. The DC input jack are notorius for breaking as most companies only use a solder joint. The LCD hinges tend to get stress fractures. Touchpad buttons go bad. Keyboards are subject to a lot of abuse.

      Some of these items are relativly easy to replace on some models of notebooks. On some models changing the memory is a nightmare. It is usually wise to get an extended warranty for four years as one will likely keep a good notebook that long. Besides, it is easy to get a hard drive replaced. Just say you got a S.M.A.R.T. drive failure and the tech reps won't even question it.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    7. Re:Yes! by volsung · · Score: 1

      I'll be sure to let you know how it turns out in another 20 laptops...

    8. Re:Yes! by drew · · Score: 1

      In 4 years, I would give 75% odds on something breaking.

      but how much of that 75% is in the first or fourth year? most computer makers have a one year manufacturer warranty as standard. Off the top of my head, the laptops that I bought offered an option of a three year warranty for a substantial extra amount of money. i'm not saying warranties are bad- i've had several items that i've replaced under the manufacturer's warranty. however, i've never had a single case where the standard manufacturer's warranty was not sufficient.

      and if i ever do come accross the case where the extended warranty may have helped, all the money i've saved over the years by not paying for an extended warranty will easily be enough to cover a repair or replacement, even for a laptop.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    9. Re:Yes! by Thuktun · · Score: 1

      I build all my desktop machines with crap parts and no extended warranties, but laptops need the 3 year full service warranty.

      I agree completely, laptops start to drop parts on the surrounding countryside as they pass the two year mark, based on my experience.

      On a related note, I managed to get a brand spankin' new laptop to replace the lemon I had that they couldn't fix properly. Never mind it was because they outsourced the repairs to a company that was terminally clueless and they had a fix-it-in-so-many-attempts-or-we-replace-it policy. ("Customer reports that batteries won't charge? Why should I actually test the charging assembly when a hard drive is so easy to replace?")

    10. Re:Yes! by swv3752 · · Score: 1

      For a Sony Vaio, any repair that does not involve replacement of the motherboard or LCD is $249. It is $699 to replace the LCD or Motherboard. You can get a 3 year onsite warranty for $249, for $315 you also get accidental damage protection.

      Any part on a notebook will run you $100 at least it seems.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
  43. And the best of them all by mkro · · Score: 4, Funny

    What PC World doesn't want you to know, is that you can read articles how Tim intended by going straight for the printable version. I give you gold here.

    --
    I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
    1. Re:And the best of them all by robogun · · Score: 1

      It's the only way to get around those popups.

      How the hell are they doing that and how do you block them without turning off javascript. (Mozilla 1.7.11)

  44. Article IS talking about the IM client by gentoo1337 · · Score: 1

    Fair enough.

    And a note to GP: that aside, they are in fact talking about Windows Messenger as in the IM client...

    RTFA? ;)

  45. Run "C:\Program Files\Messenger\msmsgs.exe" by antdude · · Score: 1

    :P That's Windows Messenger (IM client).

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  46. Re:That Mind.Forth is True Artificial Intelligence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has anyone written a program to identify egomaniac crackpots solely by the linguistic patterns they use? Read this post, read Timecube, and go dig up your favorite physics crackpot. There is something distinctive about the word usage and arrangement (beyond a Fondness for Capitalizing Words to make them seem More Important).

  47. Re:Pretty interesting by mo^ · · Score: 1

    regurgitated or not, it sure beats yet another "FROSTY PISS"

    --
    bah!*@%!
  48. Another Windows security issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If you've forgotten your windows XP admin password, or just want to peek into someone's computer, boot with a windows *2000* install CD and go into recovery console. you won't need a password for anything. if you use an xp CD, this won't work.

    1. Re:Another Windows security issue by Cougem · · Score: 1

      Erm, yeh. But you could say the same for Linux. With LILO installed, boot into single user mode and you have root.

    2. Re:Another Windows security issue by Chemical · · Score: 1

      That kind of trick works for just about any OS. Security begins with physical security. If you have physical access to the machine, it's pretty much yours.

  49. There's worse by Casandro · · Score: 1

    Well at least in germany there's worse. There's a magazine named "Computer Bild" which is B-Movie grade bad.

    I've seen a bit of that magazine some years ago, they had little pronounciation tips. The nice thing about them was that the tips were completely ununderstandable. They even wrote words everybody knew, phonetically. This results in nice words like "Preimäri" or "Mänädscha". (primary, manager)

    1. Re:There's worse by arose · · Score: 1
      This results in nice words like "Preimäri" or "Mänädscha". (primary, manager)
      I can't believe someone does that... On the other hand you have c't.
      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    2. Re:There's worse by Casandro · · Score: 1

      Ohh c't, they occationally have good articles, but the quality of most computer magazines has gone down rapidly. The only magazine I'm subscribed to is "Die Datenschleuder".

  50. Noobs = Half the planet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "This is anecdotal at best. I actually don't know anyone who uses MSN messenger (or windows messenger). So he's getting modded up insightful for being surrounded by n00bs?"

    MSN is used pretty much exclusively by everyone who isn't in the US.

    US domestic IM usage stats

    1. Re:Noobs = Half the planet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and I'm not in the US either... eh!

      Or maybe we should call ourselves Northern USA? :)"The Far Away Cold Land Up North" sounds fitting as well...

      Thanks for the link though. Personally, I've known (and still do) more people on EVERY single other IM than MSN (ICQ, AIM, Jabber, etc). If someone only has MSN, then too bad, you're just not gonna be able to get a hold of me - every other means is ok. Heck, there's more chances I'll switch to AOL and put a 20ft sign on my lawn saying "We use AOL and it rocks!' than ever use anything MSN related.

  51. JavaScript popups = ass by tuxforever · · Score: 0

    Welp, I stopped RTFA right after the site started vomiting javascript popups on my screen.

    1. Re:JavaScript popups = ass by PReDiToR · · Score: 2, Informative

      I didn't get those once I started opening each page in a new tab instead of simply clicking the next page link.

      HTH

      --

      Do not meddle in the affairs of geeks for they are subtle and quick to anger
  52. unlock sim-locked cell phones for free by n01 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just wanted to let you know that there are lots of site's on the internet that let you unlock your cell phone for FREE (especially Nokias). All you have to do is to enter the IMEI of your phone in some web form, plus some additional info. There's a list at:
    http://www.yesss.at/index.php?id=W01
    It worked great for 'a friend of mine', who had an older Nokia phone.
    Not sure how legal it is to do this, after all you OWN the phone after you bought it, you are allowed to through it against a wall and destroy it, why shouldn't you be allowed to unlock it?

    1. Re:unlock sim-locked cell phones for free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All you have to do is to enter the IMEI of your phone in some web form, plus some additional info.

      Er, isn't that the number you should never give out, because it lets people report your phone as stolen, clone your phone, etc?

      Not sure how legal it is to do this, after all you OWN the phone after you bought it

      Dunno where you live, but over here in the UK, people who buy their phones don't generally get locked ones, but people who get phones as part of a contract (i.e. they don't own their phones, but merely lease them), do get locked ones.

  53. Good heavens by lahvak · · Score: 3, Funny

    what language is the parent written in?

    --
    AccountKiller
    1. Re:Good heavens by DrLex · · Score: 1

      I think the translation is:
      What happen?
      Somebody set up us the bomb.
      We get signal.
      What!!
      Main screen turn on.
      It's you!!
      How are you gentlemen!!
      All your base are belong to us.
      What you say!!
      You have no chance to survive make your time.

    2. Re:Good heavens by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Perl?

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    3. Re:Good heavens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahahahahahah

  54. Unlocking Phones is not so easy by Insipid+Trunculance · · Score: 1

    I have been trying to get IMEI Unblocking codes for my Motorola and its impossible.

    --
    Wanted : A Signature.
    1. Re:Unlocking Phones is not so easy by Thumper_SVX · · Score: 1

      Actually, it sort of is... just don't go to Motorola for it. They won't give it out because it's down to your provider.

      I got an unlock code for my MPX220 when I went to Cingular and explained to them that I was travelling to Europe (specifically England) in October and had a requirement to have a local phone while I was there. They suggested International Roaming but I just explained patiently that this didn't cut it and I would rent a phone if I had to. Voila... one unlock code.

      The reason? Well, I'm picking up a Virgin Mobile SIM card for my phone while I'm in England so that I can make local calls and people can call me. No international roaming. I want to bring my phone with me partly because it has my trip itinerary and everything in there too... would be a PITA to copy down onto paper or something to carry.

    2. Re:Unlocking Phones is not so easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually a good one is to say that you are going to a country to which they do not provide service. I travel to Algeria a lot and t-Mobile do not have a roaming agreement with anyone, so no problem getting unlock code.

  55. Re:Mostly useless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot. News for imaginary friends. Stuff you already know.

  56. Hmm...Secrets by GreyOrange · · Score: 5, Informative

    Secret #576:

    That if you switch to the printer friendly version of most websites you can read the full article without switching pages or having to go through tons of advertisements.

    --

    Insert Witty Remark Here ===>____________________________
    1. Re:Hmm...Secrets by fideli · · Score: 1
      --

      Insert Witty Remark Here ===>____________________________

      http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=161779&cid=135 25666
  57. It's MAAAANNEQUINS!!!!! by WilliamSChips · · Score: 2, Funny

    Imitation Soylent Green is MANNEQUINS!

    --
    Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  58. 20 Things you don't want to know by Doc+Ri · · Score: 1

    At first, I misread the title "20 Things you don't want to know".

    I thought "Wow, Zonk is working to increase his dupe-posting efficiency!"

    --
    617B3B7F7E7C7D7F00EOF
  59. Re:That Mind.Forth is True Artificial Intelligence by bro1 · · Score: 1
  60. ESN on Samsung A650 by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

    Go to the menu. Hit 6 (display). Hit *. System Prog password is 000000. Your ESN will show up. I strongly suggest you now hit end and then exit unless you really know what you're doing. And don't tell anyone your ESN. That can be used to clone your phone.

    There are other hidden screens that are easy to get to too. The one thing I haven't figured out is how to brew test enable the phone, this way I can run self-signed brew apps. Supposedly you have to turn it in to the manufacturer to do that, but there must be another way...

    I also haven't gotten the GPS screen to work, but I believe the problem there is that verizon hasn't yet turned on the service for non-911 calls. It'd be nice to at least get the raw data, but this doesn't seem to be accessible either.

  61. Isn't it great to feel loved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Okay - so maybe the extended warranty isn't worth it to you and me as we know what components cost and what to do when we're staring down a BSOD, but what about the man in the street?

    Now I'll have to admit I'm biased here (You'll never guess where I'm sat typing this from... ) but most people do get a lot of peace of mind from being able to call up when their machine 'is ***ed' (the usual description I get) and roughly 85% of the time the 'hardware fault' they're experiencing is down to a mass of spyware, which gets removed and advice given on how to prevent it happening.

    And I know we ask what you may term 'stupid questions' (is it plugged in? where is it plugged in?) - but if I gave you free run of our call logger for a day or so you'd more than appreciate why - it's because it works.

    So far as speed of service is concerned in the last few weeks the only queue I've seen is us waiting to answer....

  62. Re: Security Center by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've found it's a lot easier to disable it in services rather than go through this convoluted procedure. It's another nearly useless Microsoft product as most third party Antivirus and Firewall products don't hook into it.

  63. Digital zoom vs. optical zoom, an example by DrLex · · Score: 2, Informative
    Nope, it's not exactly the same, unless you use a camera which allows raw storage of images without lossy compression. But cameras which allow that, will either have no digital zoom, or are not targeted towards the average consumer who thinks digital zoom must be better than optical zoom because it sounds cooler.

    The difference is: with digital zoom, the image is enlarged before compressing. If you just take the image, and enlarge it in Photoshop afterwards, you're also enlarging the compression artefacts. Here's a test with a simple Canon Ixus-i camera:
    Digital zoom: http://www.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/~athomas/images/Zoo mDigital.jpg
    Photoshop: http://www.esat.kuleuven.ac.be/~athomas/images/Zoo mPhotoshop.jpg
    The 'stains' you see on the car's hood in the digital zoom image are not artefacts, but raindrops. As you can see, modern cameras do have quite good interpolation algorithms, maybe even better than Photoshop's bicubic interpolation. The contrast in the digital zoom image is also better because the camera can adapt to the zoomed part only, instead of having to make sure all the irrelevant parts of the image look good as well. In the photoshop image, you would need to increase the contrast to have the same effect, further amplifying the artefacts.

    Nevertheless, the use of digital zoom is never justified unless optical zoom is not available, like with my Ixus-i camera. Or, when you really want to photograph something tiny in the distance and you're already at the maximum of your optical zoom.

    1. Re:Digital zoom vs. optical zoom, an example by jools33 · · Score: 1

      And any serious photographer wont go near a zoom lens either - fixed focal point lenses give far less/no image distortion. All zoom lenses suffer from barrel distortion at wide angles and pincushion distortion at telefocal distances to varying degrees - nothing beats a fixed focal point lens.

    2. Re:Digital zoom vs. optical zoom, an example by Jetekus · · Score: 1

      True, but aren't modern zoom lenses pretty darn good now?

  64. 21. You Can just read slashdot and the `manuals` by zenst · · Score: 1

    Well after reading thry them Ican honestly say I half expected a how to do my shoe laces, least from my point of view. But there again I'm a geek so the only aspect of an article like this is all the people who didn;t actualy know this stuff and will now bore the crap out of me down the pub. I'm supposed to bore them! Articles like this are bad Hmmmk - just say no to mind-dupes.

  65. "Faster Shipping Isn't Always Faster" by artemis67 · · Score: 1

    I recently ordered a cell phone from Amazon (Motorola e815), and I selected 3-5 day shipping. The phone was on backorder for a week, though at the time I placed the order the product page said that it was in stock and ready to ship.

    After a couple of days of waiting, I decided that I needed it fast, so I logged in and upgraded the shipping to two days. At that point, I lost my place in the backorder queue, and had to wait an additional 10 days beyond the initial estimated shipping date.

    Amazon's customer support told me there was nothing they could do about it.

    Moral of the story, Don't ever upgrade the shipping on backordered items on amazon. :-P

  66. Re:Mostly useless. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why is this modded troll. I knew most things and I am far from a hard-boiled geek. 'overclocking is possible', 'look for discounts', 'watch out with warranty deals'... Quid novi?

  67. My 2 cents by KarMax · · Score: 0, Troll

    Your CPU May Be Much Faster Than You Think

    When you overclock your cpu, its "lifetime" will be reduced.

    High-End Manufacturers Don't Always Make Their Products

    This one its true, but AFAIK the difference will be in the tests that the product has passed. That way they set the brand.

    My opinion about the other points, already has been treated in others posts. But in general the article is poor and somehow little useful.

    Good Bye

    PS: The other day I wrote an article, which was not published, so taking advantage of this space, check this out Nmap 3.90 Released!

    --
    Rock and Roll
    1. Re:My 2 cents by fmaxwell · · Score: 3, Insightful

      When you overclock your cpu, its "lifetime" will be reduced.

      Like most blanket statements, that one is incorrect. In some cases, the difference between two different speed CPUs is nothing more than on-chip jumpers and markings. If the manufacturer produces 1,000 CPUs and all 1,000 of them can run at the highest speed, they label some for a high speed, perhaps after testing to verify reliable operation, and then label others for the lower speeds. Besides, very few enthusiasts are trying to keep a CPU working for seven years, so even in those cases where there is some reduced lifetime, it's seldom a concern.

      This one its true, but AFAIK the difference will be in the tests that the product has passed. That way they set the brand.

      Seldom is that the case. A Lite-On DVD+-R/W drive sold under the Lite-On name undergoes the same tests as one sold under the Sony name, Hi-Val name, or any other name. Sony, Hi-Val, etc. could not remain price-competitive if they had different, more expensive testing procedures -- especially when Lite-On has already come up with tests that confirm that the drives are functional. Who would you expect to be able to devise a more effective test suite; the manufacturer who designed the product or some third-party reseller who rebrands the drive?

      But in general the article is poor and somehow little useful.

      Another untrue statement. Did you know Amazon's phone number for customer service? Did you know the shortcut to reach a human operator at the list of over 60 cell phone, PC, and travel firms? Did you know that Philips had a zero-dead-pixel guarantee? Did you have a utility to reveal a Windows XP license key? The article provided a lot of useful information. I knew much of it, but that doesn't mean that everyone knows everything in it.

    2. Re:My 2 cents by KarMax · · Score: 0

      Above all, I want to clarify that I did not want to sound aggressive or troll, simply was an opinion.

      Besides, very few enthusiasts are trying to keep a CPU working for seven years, so even in those cases where there is some reduced lifetime, it's seldom a concern.

      Thats a good point, but I have a Celeron (P4 based), and in a time I will sold it to an office, where surely it will be up for various years. Here in sudamerica the need does that many pc be maintained during years, and not exactly because they are enthusiasts. Besides that, i know what you mean and you are right.

      The article provided a lot of useful information. I knew much of it, but that doesn't mean that everyone knows everything in it.

      IMHO it treat certain points in an incorrect way (as the Windows Security Updates, becouse the "regular" user, must leave that enabled) and some others in a really poor way like that of Windows Vuln. And I am not seeing it from my personal point of view, since the things that already know were treated badly or very poor and the ones i dont, did not have anything of interesting.

      Really i dont want to sound troll but this article sucks, maybe the "monitor and pixel guarantee" is usefl but there is more than 10 pages saying nothing or doing wrong recommendations.

      Good bYe

      PS: Do you overclock your cpu?

      --
      Rock and Roll
    3. Re:My 2 cents by fmaxwell · · Score: 1

      IMHO it treat certain points in an incorrect way (as the Windows Security Updates, becouse the "regular" user, must leave that enabled) and some others in a really poor way like that of Windows Vuln.

      The article does not recommend turning off the Windows updates -- just the constant barrage of messages from the Security Center. We've got lab systems at work behind serious hardware firewalls and we don't want to run the Windows firewall, Zonealarm, etc. If we have no software firewall, then the Windows Security Center complains.

      And I am not seeing it from my personal point of view, since the things that already know were treated badly or very poor and the ones i dont, did not have anything of interesting.

      To each his own. I found the utility for displaying the Windows license key to be handy (I hadn't searched for one, but having one drop in my lap was handy). I also liked having the phone numbers and direct-to-operator codes for so many companies.

      PS: Do you overclock your cpu?

      One of my systems has an overclocked CPU from the factory (an i-opener at 200mhz with a 180mhz CPU). My primary Athlon system is fast enough that I really don't feel a need to overclock. In the past, when systems were really CPU-bound, I overclocked some, though generally mildly (less than 20%).

  68. I doubt you do much printing by panurge · · Score: 5, Informative
    If you are a college user, bet you hardly use printers at all. (BTW I work for a printing consultancy, and I do happen to know what I'm talking about.) A cheap laser printer is typically designed to last for a couple of hundred thousand pages, a Kyocera will do 350-400000 before even the drum needs replacing, and HP LaserJet 5 and 5M, and the 4000 series, will just soldier on and on. A good ballpark is that a printer is close to optimal loading if it goes through an ink cartridge or a toner a month, and under those conditions with minimal care you are likely to throw it away only when you get tired of it for some reason.

    The probable cause of your problem is that you don't use your printer very much and it dries out/gets full of dust/gets dropped.

    Most cheap all-in-ones are actually designed for low use SOHO owners, but a Canon LIDE series scanner, a cheap base model photo printer and a basic laser together are more capable, more reliable, and cheap to fix if something goes wrong (replacing one item is cheaper than buying the extended warranty on the all-in-one.)

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
    1. Re:I doubt you do much printing by Nightspirit · · Score: 1

      I print about 200 pages a week. I'm in medical school, and all the notes are online. I considered laser, but for a color laser I'd have spent many times over what I've payed for inkjets.

    2. Re:I doubt you do much printing by B1ackDragon · · Score: 1

      The probable cause of your problem is that you don't use your printer very much and it dries out/gets full of dust/gets dropped.

      I've wondered about this, and now I've got reason to ask as I just bought a new (ahem) printer.

      I just picked up a HP Photosmart P1000 at Goodwill for about 8 bucks, and after some minor mechanical/cosmetic fixes (seems it had been dropped), it appears the printer is going to work fine. I've never had much luck with inkjets in the past, but this looks like a solid unit and I'd like to keep it working well. Should I run a test page through it once in a while, and if so, how often? Any other tricks you would suggest?

      Thanks!

      --
      The snow doesn't give a soft white damn whom it touches. -- ee cummings
    3. Re:I doubt you do much printing by jimicus · · Score: 1

      I considered laser, but for a color laser I'd have spent many times over what I've payed for inkjets.
      Don't know if you're aware of this, but colour lasers have really plummeted in price these last few years. OK, the refills are expensive but they last thousands of pages rather than hundreds.

      Or you could do what I did in Uni - pick up a cheap & cheerful half-decent secondhand B&W laser for any printing that doesn't require colour, and just use the inkjet for when you do. If you've got the space, this is probably the most economical way to handle occasional colour.

  69. Bad assumption by laing · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From TFA: "You Too Can Exploit Windows' Bad Security
    My PC's firewall, antivirus scanner, spyware remover, pop-up blocker, and spam filter all agree: Windows is sorely lacking in PC security. That situation may not change until Windows Vista (formerly Longhorn) comes out sometime next year. Meanwhile here are a few ways to turn Windows' poor security to your advantage."

    As most people here already know, Microsoft does not focus on bug fixes in their new releases. Their primary focus is on new features. Sure, some of the old bugs may be gone -- but some new ones will be sure to pop up with the new functionality. Just because Longhorn is newer, that doesn't make it better or more secure.

      In my personal opinion, Microsoft deliberately ships shoddy software so everyone will flock to the new releases. It's human nature to believe that "newer is better" but that is not always the case. It has proven to be a highly successful business model for M$.

    1. Re:Bad assumption by rev_sanchez · · Score: 1

      In my experience features sell software. It could be argued that an absence of bugs is a feature of sorts but it isn't the same thing. You can list features on the box or on some spec sheet but things like "tested very well" don't really belong there.

      Over the long run releasing junk will hurt your business but as far as selling something today features often trump quality.

      --
      If you didn't come to party don't bother knocking on my door. Prince '1999'
    2. Re:Bad assumption by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Just because Longhorn is newer, that doesn't make it better or more secure.

      Of course not. You could say this regarding Linux as well. Just because the latest kernel is newer, that doesn't make it better or more secure either. It's because of other factors (push towards security, increased security designed in, etc.) which makes recent Windows and Linux releases more secure.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:Bad assumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My PC's firewall, antivirus scanner, spyware remover, pop-up blocker, and spam filter all agree: Windows is sorely lacking in PC security. That situation may not change until Windows Vista (formerly Longhorn) comes out sometime next year.

      I love you.

      The check is in the mail.

      I promise not to cum in your mouth.

  70. Probably an age thing too... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most of the people who use MSN are those who needed a free e-mail account during the years 1999-2004. Now that gmail's out, it's a much better solution to that problem.

    Naturally, that means mainly teenagers. "I already have a hotmail account, I'm already giving out my hotmail address to all my friends. Signing up for things is hard!"

    For me, though, MSN was the smoothest, simplest, least cluttered IM client in 2002. It isn't that way anymore, but of course I have my contact list.

  71. re: Trillian by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    What's the beef with Trillian. I've used it for years without any problems.

  72. Re: Trillian by ReformedExCon · · Score: 1

    Honestly, I don't know. Until now, no one's used Trillian on the network. It just doesn't get any of the guy's accounts online.

    When he tries with MSN Messenger, he has no problem. And when he circumvents the firewall, it works great.

    Any ideas?

    --
    Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
  73. read a bit of the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a samsung printer it rocks!. I have had it for 12 years now. I have replaced the ink in it twice. Once because the demo cart that came with it ran out. The other two because for some reason just about every prof I had at my 4 year wanted me "just" to write 4-5 papers averaging 30 plus pages.-The warentee? Collecting dust. My Old POS e-machine has outlasted all my "better" desktops-Two hard drives one with FreeBSD the other with windows, does all that I could ever ask it to do and then some it's 10 years old and counting. so far it just works. ---What's happend to computer electronics where they kinda breakdown out of the blue?

  74. Here's a good test by laing · · Score: 1

    If the speakers have an 8 Ohm impeadance, and the power rating is over 1800 Watts, simply plug the speaker into the nearest 120VAC outlet (7200 Watts for you 240VAC guys). (Double the numbers for 4 Ohm speakers.)

    When the speakers explode in a violently loud manner, simply return them to the place of purchase.

  75. Re: IDIOT POST IDIOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hahaha the AC that rips on someone else, yet uses starwars quotes... wow.

    everything you just said applies to you, ya know ;)

  76. Why is this crap posted in /. ?? by cdn-programmer · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    That rag is full of the worst spin doctoring in the industry. So why is this posted here?

  77. CRT Monitor Sizes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, I know, hardly relivant anymore, but somewhere along the line 21 inch (19.8 inch viewable) monitors started being called 22 inch (19.8 inch viewable). What's up with that?

  78. Bass response by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is a (rather indirect) relationship:
    High efficiency is promoted by either
    1) light membranes or
    2) a horn
    Unfortunately, 1) translates into a high resonance frequency, below which the response curve falls off. And 2) requires uncomfortably large enclosures to work for deep frequencies.

    If you don't mind going for big and expensive speakers, however, huge enclosure volumes help with 1) and 2) becomes an option as well. Especially as a "corner horn" that uses your walls as an extension of the horn:
    http://www.klipsch.com/product/product.aspx?cid=2

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
    1. Re:Bass response by Reverberant · · Score: 1

      Efficiency (especially for a sub) can be increased by several methods including:

      1. Increasing cabinet volume (or, alternatively stuffing the cabinet with some appropriate material).
      2. Enclosure type (obviously a ported enclosure will be more efficient than a sealed enclosure since you're using the output from both sides of the driver).
      3. Driver spider/surround stiffness.
      4. Efficiency of the magnetic motor (which includes the strength of the permanent magnet, diameter and length of the voice coil, tightness of the winding, size of the gap).
      5. Mass of the diaphragm (as you pointed out).

      I suppose you could say that there is an "indirect" relationship between freq response and sensitivity. However, the reality is that here are a lot of parameters that you can play around with such that it's not really a problem. For example, a small sealed enclosure might reduce efficiency, but that can be offset by choosing a driver with a low moving mass and high Bl motor.

    2. Re:Bass response by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

      1. and 3.:
      Will mostly change the resonance frequency and damping of the system. Around that frequency, the amount of damping will influence efficiency, but that only applies to a small frequency band. Maybe one octave. Above that, cabinet volume, driver suspension and damping have little influence on efficiency.
      Of course, if you are only interested in that small frequency band (as in a subwoofer) this is OK.
      If you build a typical 2-way speaker, where the bass driver also has to handle the mid-range frequencies, your mid-range efficiency is dictated by the driver and you have to match the bass response to it as good as you can.
      2.:
      Is also limited to a small frequency band. Unless you go for a horn design. Let's assume a well-tuned bass reflex system for now:
      Again, for a subwoofer design that small frequency band may be all you need.
      For the 2-way box it still can extend the freq response to lower frequencies, which is pretty nice. But it will not do much for overall efficiency.
      4.:
      Here I absolutely agree, a higher BL motor will immediately increase efficiency.

      --
      C - the footgun of programming languages
  79. Re: IDIOT POST IDIOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    But keep in mind, there are still plenty of mod points left over for TripMaster Monkey.

    --
    Bonk the Zonk!

  80. No, you didn't already know it. by fmaxwell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is stuff the average nerd already knows.

    Some is and some is not. I don't believe you already knew Amazon's customer support phone number, that Philips has a zero-dead-pixel warranty, how to get to a human on 60+ companies' phone systems, and where to download a utility to reveal a Windows license key. You may have known some of what was in the article, but I'll bet that you didn't know it all.

    Sure, the article was not a revelation with each and every paragraph, but it probably provided some useful information to most of the people on Slashdot who read it. I even found one of the linked utilities to be handy.

  81. A matter of taste I guess by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 1

    a pretty clean, high-end sound to them -- not the kind of thing you want for your party cellar
    Well, I would like a clean, distortion-free sound in the party cellar too. So that would not disqualify the Linn Keilidhs to me.

    My own speakers are a pair of JBL L 90A from the late 90s. Very clean and neutral sound, but with the capability of getting quite loud. 90dB/W, rated at 200 W RMS and with a bass driver that can take high amplitudes. On a few occasions where consideration for the neighbors allowed it, I cranked them up with Heavy Metal. I found that the sound was MUCH preferable to that of cheap "disco" loudspeakers. Perfect for the party cellar ;-)

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  82. Awesome! by CarbonJackson · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Nothing groundbreaking, but might be a good primer for the non-techie in your life."

    Cuz that's what I read slashdot for anyway, finding good primers for my non-techie friends to read.

    --

    MikeAtIF*ckStuffedAnimalsDotCom
  83. oh god by kronchev · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Your CPU May Be Much Faster Than You Think"

    In related news, the resulting fires from morons trying to overclock their Dells can be seen from space!

    1. Re:oh god by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, that's the experiments with water cooling..

    2. Re:oh god by kronchev · · Score: 1

      if you cant hook up basic watercooling, end yourself

  84. How-To Paginate by FEEBLE*BMX · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This article is in the How-To section of the PCWorld site for some reason. They should write another article called 'How to paginate a 4 page article into 20 pages to maximize your ad revenue.'

  85. Re:Mostly useless. by Anonymous+Luddite · · Score: 1

    Forget the mod questions, why was this posted to /.?

    So far there seem to be several posts to this thread basically saying "the article is shit". They're all modded troll, fair enough. Mod however you like but I gotta say I think they're right.

    I went to read the article and learned on the first page about overclocking something called a C-P-U. Truly amazing. I would have hung around for more wisdom, but the pop-up ad in the center of my screen kind of pissed me off, so I left.

    This article might be good for my Mom, or maybe my manager, but any regular /. reader? Give me one of those insightful Roland P. posts over this any day.

  86. It's too bad. by Inoshiro · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let's look at this from another perspective:

    "I don't think any of us really choose our mailer. At work I use Compuserve because everyone else at work uses it. BUt I also use AOL, because my little sister is away at school, and she uses AOL. I hate AOL, but if I choose not to use AOL, I am only hurting myself because then I couldn't mail my sister.
    The next logical Question- Why can't I get my sister to switch? All her friends use AOL. And so it goes.
    "

    If only there was some kind of simple message ttransport protocol that could communicate between servers, allowing the server type itself to be abstracted out of the equation. People on different ISPs could mail people on others! It'd be a miracle.

    Why do we have the same problem we had with email in th 80s, now with IM clients? The Jabber protocol is designed to work just like SMTP was designed to allow messages between servers. Google's talk service is Jabber (mind you, their Jabber won't connect out to other Jabber servers, which is a pretty lame thing to do).

    Personally, I'm looking into setting up a Jabber server on the same system that does my email/web stuff. When it's working, I'll begin to try and migrate people over (Kopete works with it just fine).

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:It's too bad. by psyon1 · · Score: 1

      Isn't it Simple Mail Transfer Protocol?

    2. Re:It's too bad. by StarKruzr · · Score: 1

      I can't understand anti-AIM hatred. It's full-featured, well-written, gets the job done with a minimum of fuss, and fast.

      --

      +++ATH0
  87. Re: IDIOT POST IDIOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah, fuck that guy.

  88. Before IM was invented, eh? by ari_j · · Score: 4, Informative

    The talk manpage says that the talk command appeared in 4.2BSD, which was released in August, 1983, according to this history of BSD. Does Windows Messenger Service predate that?

    1. Re:Before IM was invented, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except talk only worked on the same host (originally). I imagine the messenger service dates back to late 80s OS/2, but can't be bothered to verify that.

    2. Re:Before IM was invented, eh? by ari_j · · Score: 1

      Who cares if it only worked on the same host originally? The assertion wasn't "before Internet instant messaging was invented," but rather "before instant messaging was invented." Of course, you don't verify any of your statements, so it's probably safe to assume that they're 100% false as with the majority of AC posts which can't be bothered to verify themselves.

    3. Re:Before IM was invented, eh? by Adam9 · · Score: 1

      Additionally, talk required/requires the receiving party to "answer" the call. I think "write" would be more of a instant messenger.

    4. Re:Before IM was invented, eh? by sconeu · · Score: 1

      And prior to that there was "write", which worked on Sys III and V7 machines.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    5. Re:Before IM was invented, eh? by dedded · · Score: 1

      And I was using 'phone' on VMS in 1984. VMS dates to 1978 or so, don't know if phone goes back that far or not.

  89. IANA iPod owner... by Norfair · · Score: 1

    ... i much prefer Irivers, so I didn't know you had to shell out actual dough to copy your songs. Is this true? I know it said the Ipodrip only *automates* the process, but why not just stop at the instructions they gave? The point here is to try to save the end-user money, after all? I thought there must be a OSS/freeware program that does the same thing, but then i wouldn't really know, the UMS system on my Iriver does everything I need in that regard...

    1. Re:IANA iPod owner... by klang · · Score: 1

      the file are on the iPod, they are just hidden a bit. Because some people find it easier to find their credit card, than finding things out for themselves, there is a market for products like iPodRip .. some are shareware, some are free, some more commercial .. some are even sold in nice shrink wrapped packaging ..

      the bar for computer ownership theese days, is pretty low :-)

  90. RMS Watts do not exist! by JrMcL · · Score: 1
    Although many manufacturers use the term, RMS watts are a fiction. Volts RMS, however, can be used to easily calculate the average power delivered to a load. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_mean_square.

    It's disappointing to see spec sheet writers using units that don't exist.

  91. Working in the computer repair sector.. by TheJOsh!(tm) · · Score: 1

    I find that I quite like Dells...they keep me imployed :) JOsh

    --
    Rise up in the cafeteria and STAB them with your plastic forks!
  92. Here's one they forgot! by soft_guy · · Score: 0, Troll

    Windows sucks.

    Use Linux or MacOS X.

    --
    Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
  93. Top Thing PC-World Doesn't Want You To Know by pensivepuppy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    If a company buys enough advertising in their magazine, they'll give their product a nice review regardless of how crappy it is.

  94. You Can Get a Human on the Phone by torgosan · · Score: 1

    Sorry if this is a repeat...didn't find it.

    Swear...swear...SWEAR. No kidding...next time you're confronted with a menu and want to bypass that waste of time, swear up a storm. Random or a string of expletives...result is ususally the same - a real human being on the other end in no time.

    --
    "If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand". -Milton F.
    1. Re:You Can Get a Human on the Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Often saying aloud "I WANT TO SPEAK TO A HUMAN," or "HUMAN BEING PLEASE" works as well--imitate a frustrated pre-digital era grandparent.
      But regarding swearing... many companies keep track of attitude. A friend of mine is consistantly given "special" treatment by sprint after once being a bit too assertive with a phone bank operator.
      Note, too, that when when you are on hold, you are often recorded. That's not TFH stuff, but imagine such information being shared among companies. You would have an attitude "credit rating."

  95. getting to the bleepin beep by jmarkantes · · Score: 1

    How about getting to the beep for leaving voiocemail faster? Some people have the fucking longest greeting, and then the provider's voice adds options for other bullshit never used. Christ, say your name and get it over with, get to the beep, let me leave a meaningful voicemail and get on with our goddamn lives. This beer won't drink itself.

    I think for verizon you can press the pound key to skip all that. But what about cingular and such?

    J

  96. or buy a non-locked phone... by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    Really, if you want to transfer things to and from your phone for free, it'd be best to show phone companies that it matters to you by buying a phone which doesn't have these restrictions.

    I have no problems moving files up and down to my phone with Bluetooth, because I bought a phone which could do so.

    Note that following these rules will lock you out of almost all Verizon phones. I solved this problem by leaving Verizon.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
  97. I just get the ones that go to eleven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Problem solved.

  98. How about... by UseTheSource · · Score: 1

    They STILL lie about hard drive capacities. For example, it kind of irks me that a device sold as having a 5 GB capacity really is only approximately 4.65. AFAIK, both Creative and Apple do this with their mp3 players.

    Of course, the majority of the public doesn't realize that there is a substantial difference in the correct, base 2 definition of these capacities and the decimal lie the manufacturers are pushing, as capacities increase. 1000000000 bytes != 1073741824 bytes!

    As an aside, it always bothers me when co-workers don't account for this when quoting filesystem sizes. For example, when df reports 1048526848 kbytes... Some might say, oh, that's like 1.05 TB, when in fact it's more like 0.97 TB, or 999.95 GB. When you're talking about sizes like those, there is a substantial-enough difference!

    --
    "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer." -Adolf Hitler
    "We are one Nation, we are one People." -The One 'leader'
    1. Re:How about... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lets review our SI units, shall we?

      Kilo = 1,000
      Mega = 1,000,000
      Giga = 1,000,000,000

      Lets review our data units, shall we?

      Kibi = 2**10 = 1024
      Mebi = 2**20 = 1,048,576
      Gibi = 2**30 = 1,073,741,824

      From the way it looks to me, hard drive manufacturers are actually the *most truthful* in their product descriptions. But I'm still not going to complain to DRAM manufacturers about getting an extra 24,870,912 bytes of RAM in my "512MB" stick.

    2. Re:How about... by UseTheSource · · Score: 1

      AC, check this:

      The result is that today "everybody" does not "know" what a megabyte is. When discussing computer memory, most manufacturers use megabyte to mean 220 = 1 048 576 bytes, but the manufacturers of computer storage devices usually use the term to mean 1 000 000 bytes. Some designers of local area networks have used megabit per second to mean 1 048 576 bit/s, but all telecommunications engineers use it to mean 106 bit/s. And if two definitions of the megabyte are not enough, a third megabyte of 1 024 000 bytes is the megabyte used to format the familiar 90 mm (3 1/2 inch), "1.44 MB" diskette. The confusion is real, as is the potential for incompatibility in standards and in implemented systems.

      Faced with this reality, the IEEE Standards Board decided that IEEE standards will use the conventional, internationally adopted, definitions of the SI prefixes. Mega will mean 1 000 000, except that the base-two definition may be used (if such usage is explicitly pointed out on a case-by-case basis) until such time that prefixes for binary multiples are adopted by an appropriate standards body.

      Clear as mud, right? It ain't an industry standard (yet), and it still depends on who you ask.

      Besides, do the abbreviations MB, GB or TB refer to the "Mega, Giga, Tera" version or "MiBi, GiBi, TeBi"? What's the definitive answer to that? That's what I thought. ;)

      In the IT world, at least, we still always use the base two definition when quoting sizes. This includes both RAM and storage (think filesystems). While hard drive manufacturers may still quote base 10, (in the Unix world at least) we still quote base 2 when dealing with these sizes on the OS level. What do "df -h", or the Veritas volume manager GUI report? ;)

      --
      "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer." -Adolf Hitler
      "We are one Nation, we are one People." -The One 'leader'
    3. Re:How about... by nasor · · Score: 1

      I'd say you've got it backwards. The prefixes "kilo," "mega," and "giga" have all had well-defined definitions in science and engineering for hundreds of years. If you asked someone from 1850 what a megabyte was, he would tell you that it's a million bytes - even though he wouldn't be able to tell you what a byte was. That's the nice thing about words: they have meanings. If you start arbitrarily changing the definition of words (or in this case, prefixes) language becomes substantially less useful.

      As far as I can tell, some computer scientist back in the early days of computing said "Hey, 2^10 is 1024...that's pretty close to 1000. Why don't we define 2^10 bytes as a kilobyte? It's only off by 24..." and the other computer scientists decided to go along with it rather than follow well-established conventions.

    4. Re:How about... by UseTheSource · · Score: 1

      True. But in this industry (meaning IT), if I asked you to create me a 1 TB filesystem, and you gave me 1,000,000,000,000 bytes I'd ask where the other 99,511,627,776 was. Almost 92 GB is not a trivial amount of space to be short.

      --
      "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer." -Adolf Hitler
      "We are one Nation, we are one People." -The One 'leader'
    5. Re:How about... by nasor · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. But as a someone who isn't a computer scientist but paid attention in elementary school when they taught us the metric prefixes, if someone told me that I needed a megabyte of memory for a file and it ended up taking 1048576 bytes I would wonder why they underestimated the memory requirement by 48576 bytes.

      It's silly and arrogant of computer scientists to arbitrarily change the meaning of something that's as well-established as the metric prefixes and expect the rest of the world to go along with it just because it's convenient for their binary mathematics. What if the oil industry decided to redefine a gallon as being exactly 4 liters? Would automobile manufacturers be lying to people is they still advertised their cars as having 15 gallon gas tanks, rather than 14.195 gallon tanks?

  99. Secret #21: SprintPCS sucks devil's cock in hell by gelfling · · Score: 1

    Oh wait that's not a secret. Every SprintPCS customer knows that.

  100. Power doesn't have to be for loudness by ruiner13 · · Score: 1

    More power isn't always just to get more loudness, it can also increase clarity. With more power given to the speakers, there is less need to increase the gain all the way up to listen at normal volumes, which increases distortion. Using an amp that puts out more power than your speakers can produce won't blow them unless you crank the volume to absurd levels. I've seen more speakers blown from having a low power amp cranked causing distortion than ones blown by using a powerful amp with clean sound joined with weaker speakers.

    --

    today is spelling optional day.

    1. Re:Power doesn't have to be for loudness by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Most consumer amps that I'm aware of lack an adjustable gain. Instead you either vary the input signal level, or attenuators (varsistors) on the amplifiers.

      For this reason it's actually usually in your best intrest not ot get an amp that's extreme overkill. If you operate an amp at very low signal levels, you don't get as good a SNR since the signal is closer to the inherant noise of the system.

      I have seen a couple recievers that have dual gain settings. They'll operate on a low gain normally, and then if you crank it switch to a higher gain. However I gather that with most designs, making a variable gain is a pain. When I built a headphone amp a variable gain would have been a pain and a continously variable onw nearly impossible. It would have involved 4 varsistors, all which would need to move in synch.

  101. Optical zoom is also a useless spec by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 1
    So, some camera tells you in the box that it has "10x optical zoom." What does that mean? That the longest focal lens you can extend the lens to is 10 times the shortest one. So of course, a bigger number is better, right?

    Not really. They've left out a couple important pieces of information:

    1. The actual focal lengths at the extremes of the range, and their 35mm camera field-of-view equivalents. How "far" it can zoom is not necessarily more important than wide-angle capability. Your typical point-and-shoot digital camera has, on the short end of its zoom range, the equivalent of a 38mm lens on a 35mm camera. But that is within the range that photographers call "normal perspective"--that is, neither wide angle nor telephoto. With such a camera, you have a choice between two kinds of perspective: normal, and telephoto. A much more versatile deal is a camera with a lens that can reach the equivalent of 28mm on the short range of the zoom. That way you have the additional choice of a wide-angle perspective, which is very useful in many, many situations, and can be used to create its own range of perspective effects.
    2. Zoom lenses with smaller zoom factors, as a general rule, have better optical performance. Zoom lenses compromise sharpness and contrast for the flexibility of variable focal length--and the more variable the focal length, the more the compromise. In selecting a lens, ideally, you want to seriously evaluate how much of a focal length range you need, and whether the reduced optical performance for that range is acceptable to you.
    3. Zoom lenses on digital cameras can often reach very long focal lengths, but you may not be able to hold the camera steady enough to take a sharp picture at that focal length. There's a term called motion blur, which means the unsharpness in a picture that's due to the fact that the camera wasn't completely stable while the picture was taken. Long focal lengths, such as the ones that many point-and-shoot digital cameras provide, magnify motion blur. Ways to control motion blur involve using a tripod, and increasing shutter speed. The latter means that less light hits the sensor during the exposure, so this means that motion blur limits your ability to use the long end of your zoom in low light.
    In short, you shouldn't blindly assume that a bigger optical zoom factor is better than a lower one. You should evaluate what focal length range is best for you, and buy a camera with that. And I think for most people in that calculation, point (1) above should be a really big one, when it comes to point-and-shoots: wide-angle capability is a really, really big plus that only comes in some cameras, which tend to have smaller zoom factors.
  102. But even then by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    I can't come up the those kinds of numbers. You often see peak numbers advertised for amps and subwoofers and such. It's generally about twice the RMS. It is a somewhat useful spec, I suppose, as it tells you how high it could peak in theory if needed to.

    Well in the case of the 300watt PMPO spec it was for little like 5 watt (collectively) desktop speakers. I cannot figureout any combination that might allow you to reach that number through anything other than just making shit up.

  103. Why I am not a paying member of Slashdot: by Hosiah · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Because of articles like these, pointing to content-free airhead blathering sites that are the internet's equivalent of Fox "news" and the "National Inquirer", which exist solely to smack a bunch of ads and pop-ups in your face when you click on anything.

    Viewing it in lynx is barely worth the bother, even. Some people complain about the dupes. I complain about these sites.

  104. Not Groundbreaking ... by GISGEOLOGYGEEK · · Score: 1

    Indeed, nothing between the covers of PC World has ever been groundbreaking. In fact it is generally way dumbed down, with articles that are little more than an advertisements.

    I recall a PC World article some time ago ... the headline was something like '101 windows tricks no one knows'

    The first trick was using the ' X ' in the top right corner of a window to close the window.

    If you believe that was unknown, i bet you also believed in WMD's in Iraq, and that 'no one could have anticipated a levee break' in New Orleans.

    --
    George Bush + Linux = "I will not let information get in the way of the fight against Windows"
  105. I must disagree by 56ksucks · · Score: 1

    Extended warranties are worth it. I use to work the tech bench at best buy. Trust me if it were a rip off I wouldn't give it a second thought. For sometihng cheap like a printer I'd say don't worry about it. You can get a printer for $30 at walmart. But, for a high dollar item like a PC, big screen TV, appliance or some high end car stereos I wouldn't buy those without an extended warranty. I've seen plenty of customers come up to the desk with something a year and a half old that broke and they had to shell out some major cash to get it fixed because their warranty is run out. That happens once and it's payed for itself. And I'm not sure about other places but I know at best buy if it breaks more than 3 times and you have the extended warranty they will replace it. Not only that but when it runs out you can renew it! True it's mostly profit. Without them they couldn't stay in business. But saying they aren't worth it is pure bull crap. Lets see someone pay $8000 for a big screen plasma tv and have to pay to fix it in 1.5 years and see if he doesn't think $100 extra for the extended warranty was worth it.

    --

    ---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"

  106. Re: IDIOT POST IDIOT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Half the point of moderation is to get the teenagers modded down so that people can view at a threshold of 1 or even 0 and not get their screen flooded with that crap. You can't "waste" something that's automatically generated by the system. There are too many lame posts being modded up anyway.

  107. Difference of exposure by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Actually the differences you are seeing there I think are all from differences in exposure - which in one way is helpful, a person using digital zoom will get more accurate exposure for the section of picture they care about when using an all-around exposure mode. But they could probably also have gotten then same exposure just by using the spot meter.

    The photoshop version actually appears sharper to me, just more washed out.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  108. Security Centre by WookieinHeat · · Score: 1, Informative

    "I keep my Windows system pretty well secured, but somehow that doesn't prevent Windows' Security Center from informing me that 'Your computer might be at risk' every morning when I turn on my computer. That message gets old fast. To banish it for good, go to Start, Control Panel, Security Center. Then click Change the way Security Center alerts me in the resources box and uncheck all of the boxes on the resulting screen."

    Another way is to disable Security Center all together...

    Go to "Control Panel - Administrative Tools - Services" and find the one for Security Center, then disable it.

    Also in the services window you can disable many other annoying features, like messenger, not the IM client, but the client that lets any one send those annoying messages to your desktop... You know, the grey boxes that say "Go to this website and pay us $50 to stop these annoying messages with our message blocker!"

  109. don't forget refurbs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i bought me a cheap 22" refurbed monitor from fry's electronics and got the warranty on it (just in case)... and wouldn't you know, two rows of pixels died all the way across the middle of the monitor!

    good thing i got the 3 year plan for $20.

  110. Re:It's other CAAATS and DOGGGSS!!!!! by surelyserious · · Score: 1

    That's what most commercial pet food is made of. And these dead animals are purchased from vets and SPCAs. (Ask a vet.) The process wherein pet corpses are turned into pet food is called "rendering." http://www.sniksnak.com/ac/petfood2.html

    --
    "We're millions of miles from earth, inside a giant white face, what's impossible?"
  111. Photosmart printers by panurge · · Score: 1
    Yes, you do need to use them regularly, otherwise the cartridges can dry up on you. Unfortunately with Photosmarts you probably do need to use HP's expensive ink. The important thing is you do not need to do a large print to keep them running. Printing a thumbnail-size photo every few days is all you need.

    With low-use inkjets it's possible to use more ink in the head cleaning process than in actual printing. For anybody else reading this, the real bargain in inkjets is an HP Business Inkjet. The quality isn't as good as the consumer models but it isn't bad, and they are almost as cheap as lasers to run. I couldn't possibly comment on the (totally unfounded) idea that HP could probably produce an inkjet as fast and cheaper to run than a laser, with better color, but doesn't want to because they want to get the full amortisation out of all their laser families first.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  112. Adaptors by phorm · · Score: 1

    I love having power-rated items that come with a DC adaptor that can provide max-juice of like 50W, but claim to have power output in the hundreds of watts...