Warp wrote:

>   I'm pretty sure that to this day he is still convinced that "linux" is
> something which breaks your IE.

...still, in a way, I guess it does. You can't run IE under Linux, 
right? ;-)

Post a reply to this message

Jim Holsenback wrote:

> Well then try this on for size. I get a call from my sister-in-law .... 
> don't know why but my computer is running real slow! OK .... going into town 
> anyway so I stopped by. 78 Mahjong games running. I asked .... How did you 
> manage that!!! Turns out she thought she WAS quitting the game when she was 
> done. She was clicking on the (-) instead of the (x). Doesn't the (-) mean 
> take away she asked. Lord help my aching head! Now my wife wants to get her 
> a digital camera for Christmas.

1. Why would having unused programs running make the computer slow? 
Surely mahjong doesn't consume any CPU time if it isn't "doing" anything...?

2. Didn't notice the taskbar then? Heh. I've noticed more non-experts 
seem to think that the myriad of status indicators on the screen are 
"just decoration". They don't comprehend that these things *tell* you stuff.

3. Digital camera? Oh, enjoy supporting it... ;-)

Post a reply to this message

"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>  Given that linux is not something you simply "download and run" in 
> Windows,

With the new Ubuntu, it kind of is.  >:3

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net

Post a reply to this message

"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
news:49392211$1@news.povray.org...
> 1. Why would having unused programs running make the computer slow? Surely 
> mahjong doesn't consume any CPU time if it isn't "doing" anything...?

consumes memory even if it's idle .... right?

> 2. Didn't notice the taskbar then? Heh. I've noticed more non-experts seem 
> to think that the myriad of status indicators on the screen are "just 
> decoration". They don't comprehend that these things *tell* you stuff.

Nope she didn't. I tried to give her the quick tour and gave up when I 
noticed she had that glazed over look in her eye's as I was trying to 
explain "auto hide"

> 3. Digital camera? Oh, enjoy supporting it... ;-)

haha .... i'm hoping my wife settles on the Fisher Price camera. It has the 
fewest buttons and settings!

Post a reply to this message

>> 1. Why would having unused programs running make the computer slow? Surely 
>> mahjong doesn't consume any CPU time if it isn't "doing" anything...?
> 
> consumes memory even if it's idle .... right?

Right. And the virtual memory system will swap that out to disk since it 
isn't being used. And, unless the program tries to "do" something, it 
will never be swapped back in again. Should have no impact on anything.

>> 2. Didn't notice the taskbar then? Heh. I've noticed more non-experts seem 
>> to think that the myriad of status indicators on the screen are "just 
>> decoration". They don't comprehend that these things *tell* you stuff.
> 
> Nope she didn't. I tried to give her the quick tour and gave up when I 
> noticed she had that glazed over look in her eye's as I was trying to 
> explain "auto hide"

...you have AUTO HIDE on???!? o_O

No wonder she's confused...

>> 3. Digital camera? Oh, enjoy supporting it... ;-)
> 
> haha .... i'm hoping my wife settles on the Fisher Price camera. It has the 
> fewest buttons and settings! 

Fewest buttons doesn't necessarily mean it's simple. ;-)

Fewest settings, though... that shouldn't be too bad.

Post a reply to this message

stbenge wrote:

> 
> My question is how does does this happen? And why does it happen to some 
> people more than others? How can a person be downloading and installing 
> software without even knowing it? All I can guess is that it must be 
> like what I experienced a few weeks back, when I accidentally clicked 
> "yes" to a pop-up dialog. (my one and only incident in over ten years of 
> computing [yes, I'm proud])
> 

This happened to me once. I downloaded an application that allowed my 
Razor phone to connect to the computer and manage files on the phone 
(seeing as I couldn't get pictures without paying for a special service) 
It was a bit fidgety, so I clicked the link in the program to check for 
updates. It was hardcoded to I.E., and the download site it was pointing 
to was hosting malicious "ad banners" Suddenly an installer popped up 
for an imitation anti-spyware program (Windows anti-spyware, it was 
similarly named to what Windows Defender used to be). I clicked cancel, 
and it proceeded to install itself, even though I clicked cancel.

The rest, as they say, was history. I managed to carefully pick apart 
the dozens of adware, spyware, junkware, and shovelware that installer 
forced onto my system and delete and/or uninstall it. Windows defender 
helped some. I thought I had cleaned it all up, but there were still 
remnants in my registry and filesystem, which were discovered by 
Defender when it got the latest updates. Norton Antivirus sat happily 
aside and watched the whole thing without uttering even a peep.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> 
> Right. And the virtual memory system will swap that out to disk since it 
> isn't being used. And, unless the program tries to "do" something, it 
> will never be swapped back in again. Should have no impact on anything.
> 

Just because the application is minimized doesn't necessarily mean it's 
doing nothing. Every windows program has a window loop. Messages about 
system status and the like are broadcast to all windows in the system 
occasionally. So, even if the program is idle, it will still have some 
minimal working set that must be loaded into memory, get a few dozen of 
these running in the background, and you'll eventually bring a computer 
to its knees.



-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:45:52 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I clicked cancel, 
>and it proceeded to install itself, even though I clicked cancel.

I always do Ctrl + W or click the "close" X
Some popup have two install buttons called Install and Cancel :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

>  I suppose that it wouldn't help to install a good firewall and resident
> malware scanners in their computers because they would nevertheless pay
> zero attention to what the software is telling them and allow everything.


I believe they are being sent out with Windows Defender and Symantec 
Antivirus. The firewall is activated when the machines go out, but if people 
are being indescriminate about the software they install then they are still 
going to have problems. I don't have those problems and I tend to use my 
work laptop for all manner of things that are not work related- I'm using it 
now in just such a manner.
In the office, we have a well-designed efficient network with Cisco 
firewalls and VPN. We haven't had any bandwidth problems since they sarted 
filtering certain types of traffic and all our french interns went back to 
school.

-- 
H²

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Halbert <hal### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> I think most of the time these people aren't paying attention to the things 
>> they click on including reading the license agreements, etc.
> 
>   I suppose that it wouldn't help to install a good firewall and resident
> malware scanners in their computers because they would nevertheless pay
> zero attention to what the software is telling them and allow everything.

Yeah. Part of the problem is that companies get paid *big* bucks (relatively 
speaking) to put thngs like Google's toolbar and Yahoo's toolbar and AOL's 
tool bar and every other piece of crapware out there that they can. You can 
(or at least could) get something like $5 every time some customer agrees to 
install Yahoo's toolbar, which is a *lot* of money when you're distributing 
ad-supported software with a $0.05 click-thru payment on the ads.

I bought a 4-core x64 2.88GHz machine with 6G of RAM and gigabit ethernet. 
And it came with a 56K modem card, so they could put Earthlink and AOL and 
Juno and ..... links on the desktop. They *have* to be getting a kickback on 
those icons big enough to justify putting in a modem card nobody in their 
right mind is going to need. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Given that linux is not something you simply "download and run" in Windows,

Some are!  That's one of the most cool things about Linux! :-)

(But you knew that, of course.)

>   I'm pretty sure that to this day he is still convinced that "linux" is
> something which breaks your IE.

Well, in some sense.... ;-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Fewest settings, though... that shouldn't be too bad.

I like that after 10 years of digital cameras, they're finally getting 
around to making them "better" than film cameras.  Like, finding and 
recognising faces and focusing on the people automatically, rather than only 
focusing where you're pointing.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> and it proceeded to install itself, even though I clicked cancel.

And people complain about UAC.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> and it proceeded to install itself, even though I clicked cancel.
> 
> And people complain about UAC.
> 

You know ... I never turned off UAC.. It really doesn't annoy me at 
all.:) In my general day-to-day usage of the computer it never comes up. 
But then, the same situation hasn't presented itself since I upgraded to 
Vista.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:

> I always do Ctrl + W or click the "close" X
> Some popup have two install buttons called Install and Cancel :)

Try that with the window that just won't close. Oh, I know, just kill 
the process in Task Manager ;)

Yeah... stupid me, trusting the "Cancel" button actually did what it said.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Yeah. Part of the problem is that companies get paid *big* bucks 
> (relatively speaking) to put thngs like Google's toolbar and Yahoo's 
> toolbar and AOL's tool bar and every other piece of crapware out there 
> that they can. You can (or at least could) get something like $5 every 
> time some customer agrees to install Yahoo's toolbar, which is a *lot* 
> of money when you're distributing ad-supported software with a $0.05 
> click-thru payment on the ads.

Grr, Yahoo bar pisses me off. It seems everything includes it in its 
installation, and if you blindly click "Next" it's usually on a page 
somewhere, typically toward the end of the options screens, and already 
helpfully selected for you.

I swear FireFox needs a feature that says "Hey, while you were away from 
the browser, someone else decided to add a plug-in. Did you really want 
to do this?"

> I bought a 4-core x64 2.88GHz machine with 6G of RAM and gigabit 
> ethernet. And it came with a 56K modem card, so they could put Earthlink 
> and AOL and Juno and ..... links on the desktop. They *have* to be 
> getting a kickback on those icons big enough to justify putting in a 
> modem card nobody in their right mind is going to need. :-)
> 

Heh. They still make 56k Modems??!

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:

> Heh. They still make 56k Modems??!

Not only do they make them, but they're *cheap* now!

I can remember when you had to actually pay _money_ for one... o_O

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Mike Raiford wrote:
> 
>> Heh. They still make 56k Modems??!
> 
> Not only do they make them, but they're *cheap* now!
> 
> I can remember when you had to actually pay _money_ for one... o_O
> 

Yeah, I'll bet. Probably be able to pick one up for a quarter from a gum 
ball machine.

I remember paying $300 for a 14.4 modem.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:

> I remember paying $300 for a 14.4 modem.

I have a CD burner sitting less than a foot away from me. My dad bought 
it for about £300.

I have a second optical drive that's slightly closer to me. It reads and 
burns CDs and multiple types of DVDs (including dual-layer). It cost me £24.

I notice, however, that all these devices seem to have a "minimum price" 
that they never fall below. E.g., it is *impossible* to buy a harddrive 
for less than £20. Once they get small enough, they just stop selling 
them. They never decrease the price below £20.

I hypothesize that £20 is how much pig-iron there is an a HD. ;-)

(In a world where everything is made of cheap, flimsy plastic, I've 
always found it comforting that HDs have a lot of good, honest, solid 
*metal* in them...)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:51:02 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>
>> I always do Ctrl + W or click the "close" X
>> Some popup have two install buttons called Install and Cancel :)
>
>Try that with the window that just won't close. Oh, I know, just kill 
>the process in Task Manager ;)
>
>Yeah... stupid me, trusting the "Cancel" button actually did what it said.

Call me cynical, but that's what I'd do if I wanted to do something bad.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:

> Call me cynical, but that's what I'd do if I wanted to do something bad.

Right, or if you wanted to guarantee your garbage software would get 
installed, and you get the money from the spamware it also installed. So 
people will do anything to get more cash.


-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 15:42:42 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Stephen wrote:
>
>> Call me cynical, but that's what I'd do if I wanted to do something bad.
>
>Right, or if you wanted to guarantee your garbage software would get 
>installed, and you get the money from the spamware it also installed. So 
>people will do anything to get more cash.

So I believe. Some people will even vote (your least favourite political party
here) ;)

Some people are scum.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> 1. Why would having unused programs running make the computer slow?
> Surely mahjong doesn't consume any CPU time if it isn't "doing"
> anything...?

Hahahaha.

It's a *game*. Many use 100% CPU no matter what you're doing or how fast
your computer is.

Post a reply to this message

Tim Cook wrote:
> "Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
>>  Given that linux is not something you simply "download and run" in
>> Windows,
> 
> With the new Ubuntu, it kind of is.  >:3

Wubi has existed for quite a while.

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> 1. Why would having unused programs running make the computer slow?
>> Surely mahjong doesn't consume any CPU time if it isn't "doing"
>> anything...?
> 
> Hahahaha.
> 
> It's a *game*. Many use 100% CPU no matter what you're doing or how fast
> your computer is.

True. So does Access 97, BTW...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> I notice, however, that all these devices seem to have a "minimum price" 
> that they never fall below. E.g., it is *impossible* to buy a harddrive 
> for less than £20. Once they get small enough, they just stop selling 
> them. They never decrease the price below £20.

  Well, it makes sense: At some point it costs more to produce the device
than its selling value is, it doesn't make any sense to produce it anymore.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
> > Right. And the virtual memory system will swap that out to disk since it 
> > isn't being used. And, unless the program tries to "do" something, it 
> > will never be swapped back in again. Should have no impact on anything.

> Just because the application is minimized doesn't necessarily mean it's 
> doing nothing. Every windows program has a window loop. Messages about 
> system status and the like are broadcast to all windows in the system 
> occasionally.

  Also, if the mahjong program was created with a GC'd language, the GC
might completely nullify the benefit of swapping.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>   Also, if the mahjong program was created with a GC'd language, the GC
> might completely nullify the benefit of swapping.

Only if the GC actually runs.

If the program isn't "doing anything", it shouldn't need to run the GC 
either. Typically the GC is set to run only when no more objects can be 
allocated. (Altough sometimes they're set to run when idle as well...)

Of course, if the GC doesn't work properly...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> 
>>   Also, if the mahjong program was created with a GC'd language, the GC
>> might completely nullify the benefit of swapping.
> 
> Only if the GC actually runs.

I think Warp might mean that the program might tend to hold onto data longer 
than it really needs to, in the event the GC doesn't run. Since a GC sweep 
by an otherwise mostly-idle program would only bring stuff into core once, 
so it wouldn't nullify the benefits of swapping it out.

However, many GCed languages will take messages like iconification and 
priority lowerings and do a GC before going quiescent. In this case, you 
might even get better behavior than in a language where you can't compress 
used memory because people are holding raw pointers.

Windows already trims your working set and swaps much of your program out if 
you're idle and the window gets iconified, as well.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>>   Also, if the mahjong program was created with a GC'd language, the GC
>>> might completely nullify the benefit of swapping.
>> 
>> Only if the GC actually runs.
> 
> I think Warp might mean that the program might tend to hold onto data
> longer than it really needs to, in the event the GC doesn't run. Since a
> GC sweep by an otherwise mostly-idle program would only bring stuff into
> core once, so it wouldn't nullify the benefits of swapping it out.
> 
> However, many GCed languages will take messages like iconification and
> priority lowerings and do a GC before going quiescent. In this case, you
> might even get better behavior than in a language where you can't compress
> used memory because people are holding raw pointers.
> 
> Windows already trims your working set and swaps much of your program out
> if you're idle and the window gets iconified, as well.

Oh come on, don't start yet another pro-GC flamewar.

(just today I had the pleasure of reading the old thread "the POV-ray
SDL--similar to Java and/or Python?" in p.advanced-users)

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Oh come on, don't start yet another pro-GC flamewar.

Honestly, I think I'm flamed out. :-) It wasn't a flamewar. It was a lively 
discussion. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Warp wrote:

> >   Also, if the mahjong program was created with a GC'd language, the GC
> > might completely nullify the benefit of swapping.

> Only if the GC actually runs.

> If the program isn't "doing anything", it shouldn't need to run the GC 
> either. Typically the GC is set to run only when no more objects can be 
> allocated. (Altough sometimes they're set to run when idle as well...)

  But as commented in other posts, the program may well be doing things
from time to time, such as updating animations or whatever.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Raiford [mailto:"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com]
> Heh. They still make 56k Modems??!

What do you think people use when there's no Cable or DSL service in a 
particular area?

Although it seems to me that it's a bad idea to target a consumer group 
that is actively dwindling.

...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Raiford [mailto:"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com]
> to was hosting malicious "ad banners" Suddenly an installer popped up
> for an imitation anti-spyware program (Windows anti-spyware, it was
> similarly named to what Windows Defender used to be). I clicked
cancel,
> and it proceeded to install itself, even though I clicked cancel.

For the record, I've seen malware which switches the labels on the "OK"
and "Cancel" buttons, so it installs itself when you click on "Cancel".

This is one case where the Vista UAC comes in handy... I'm at the point
where I click through when I'm expecting it, but if it ever pops up when
I'm not expecting it I get *real* careful about what's running.

...Ben Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:

> What do you think people use when there's no Cable or DSL service in a 
> particular area?

Satellite or mobile? ;)

> Although it seems to me that it's a bad idea to target a consumer group 
> that is actively dwindling.

Yup.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mike Raiford [mailto:"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com]
>> Heh. They still make 56k Modems??!
> 
> What do you think people use when there's no Cable or DSL service in a 
> particular area?

My guess? Not a quad-core 3GHz 6GigRam machine? :-)

I'm not surprised the modems are still made. I'm surprised they're still 
standard equipment even when not on the motherboard. If most people wanted 
them, they'd still be on the motherboards, I expect.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> I'm not surprised the modems are still made. I'm surprised they're still 
> standard equipment even when not on the motherboard. If most people 
> wanted them, they'd still be on the motherboards, I expect.

What amuses me is how every motherboard you can possibly buy comes with 
an on-board 350-channel ultra-hyper-surround-sound card built-in. I 
mean, as *if* you'd actually wire that up... :-P

(I wonder how many people think you have to connect a PC to special "PC 
speakers"?)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>
> What amuses me is how every motherboard you can possibly buy comes with
> an on-board 350-channel ultra-hyper-surround-sound card built-in. I
> mean, as *if* you'd actually wire that up... :-P
> 

If it really is ultra-hyper-sound it will also be quality sound and
therefore I could use one. Wiring up is easy, just plug one fiber-cable
in and let the music play.

> (I wonder how many people think you have to connect a PC to special "PC
> speakers"?)

Thanks for that mental image :/.

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> (I wonder how many people think you have to connect a PC to special "PC 
> speakers"?)

Errr, you do.  A "PC speaker" is one with an amplifier built in.

And yes, I use the high-def audio on my computers. One of them is running my 
stereo/TV/etc, so that's a no-brainer.

Amusingly enough, we struggled to hear the audio at work that people had 
phoned in. Pressing the speakers up against your ears trying to hear, and 
all that. Then, when we closed the office, and I was taking apart the 
machines, it was all "Oh gee, there's a USB connector on the speakers, and 
that's for *power*, not for machines that only have USB speakers." Pretty 
amusing all around.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

>> (I wonder how many people think you have to connect a PC to special 
>> "PC speakers"?)
> 
> Errr, you do.  A "PC speaker" is one with an amplifier built in.

Errr, you don't. There needs to be an amplifier somewhere in the signal 
path, for sure. But there's no particular requirement for it to be built 
into the speaker, or indeed for the speaker to be specially designed for 
use with a PC. I'm sure that (for example) a set of iPod speakers will 
work fine, provided you can power them.

Personally, I have my PC connected to a real HiFi amplifier - along with 
my CD player and so forth. (Not that my mother lets me turn the actual 
speakers on very often... but that's another story!)

> And yes, I use the high-def audio on my computers. One of them is 
> running my stereo/TV/etc, so that's a no-brainer.

Do you actually have 17 (or whatever it is) individual speakers set up 
around you? :-D

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 23:08:57 +0100, Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>>> (I wonder how many people think you have to connect a PC to special  
>>> "PC speakers"?)
>>  Errr, you do.  A "PC speaker" is one with an amplifier built in.
>
> Errr, you don't. There needs to be an amplifier somewhere in the signal  
> path, for sure. But there's no particular requirement for it to be built  
> into the speaker, or indeed for the speaker to be specially designed for  
> use with a PC.

Indeed, I used to have unpowered speakers (made for use with PCs)  
connected to my PC and they sounded just fine. Of course, sound cards back  
then (about a decade ago) had built-in amplifiers powerful enough to drive  
small speakers to a decent volume.



-- 
FE

Post a reply to this message

>> Errr, you don't. There needs to be an amplifier somewhere in the 
>> signal path, for sure. But there's no particular requirement for it to 
>> be built into the speaker, or indeed for the speaker to be specially 
>> designed for use with a PC.
> 
> Indeed, I used to have unpowered speakers (made for use with PCs) 
> connected to my PC and they sounded just fine. Of course, sound cards 
> back then (about a decade ago) had built-in amplifiers powerful enough 
> to drive small speakers to a decent volume.

Like I say, you can easily connect your PC to an ordinary stereo system 
if it has the appropriate inputs. You don't have to buy a magical set of 
"PC speakers". ;-)

But I wonder how many other people know that? Maybe all this "25-channel 
surround-sound" stuff is merely a ploy to sell more PC speakers? :-D

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> 
> Like I say, you can easily connect your PC to an ordinary stereo system
> if it has the appropriate inputs. You don't have to buy a magical set of
> "PC speakers". ;-)
> 

And if the system doesn't have the appropriate inputs, they usually can
be made (makes a bit work, though) :p.

> But I wonder how many other people know that? Maybe all this "25-channel
> surround-sound" stuff is merely a ploy to sell more PC speakers? :-D

Not to imagine how many sources actually provide more than 7.1 (even
which is really rare - 5.1 is much more usual) channels.

-Aero

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> (I wonder how many people think you have to connect a PC to special 
>>> "PC speakers"?)
>>
>> Errr, you do.  A "PC speaker" is one with an amplifier built in.
> 
> Errr, you don't. There needs to be an amplifier somewhere in the signal 
> path, for sure.

Well, yes, fine. I was just saying, there's something called "PC Speakers" 
and it means speakers with an amp built in.

> Personally, I have my PC connected to a real HiFi amplifier - along with 
> my CD player and so forth. (Not that my mother lets me turn the actual 
> speakers on very often... but that's another story!)

That works too. I got tired of needing 23 switches to decide what I was 
listening to, routing music thru the pieces like plumbing a house.

> Do you actually have 17 (or whatever it is) individual speakers set up 
> around you? :-D

Six, actually. Eight would be overkill.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:

> Six, actually. Eight would be overkill.

What? No DTS? Still Dolby Digital, eh?

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> 
>> Six, actually. Eight would be overkill.
> 
> What? No DTS? Still Dolby Digital, eh?

It took me most of a day to post-hoc run the speaker wires for what I have, 
let alone more. :-)

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Mike Raiford wrote:
>> Darren New wrote:
>>
>>> Six, actually. Eight would be overkill.
>>
>> What? No DTS? Still Dolby Digital, eh?
> 
> It took me most of a day to post-hoc run the speaker wires for what I 
> have, let alone more. :-)
> 

Eh... I'm expecting to receive a blu-ray player sooon, and have a 5.1 
system, no intention to add the new speakers, even though the receiver 
supports 7.1 I'm sure there's some marginal gain ... I suspect I'll 
hardly notice.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

FWIW and my last post here: simple answer: ur brother installs them; 
free this, free that, BUT u need to install this "small" app (usually 
malware as a trojan) and similar actions on The Net.

Possible solution in case u don't know:
- Turn off Windows Firewall (if u use it) and download 
personalfirewall.comodo.com (freeware, with and optional payed extended 
security) select Defense+ type install, don't install th Antivirus, let 
it install Safe Surf, configure The zones(intranets, DNS, etc. try to 
add the localhost (127.0.0.1) in the Stealth Ports Wizard to avoid too 
much asking from Security+). Is a great firewall, but don't take the 
word of a pirate for it, look for urself:
http://www.testmypcsecurity.com/view_results.html
http://www.testmypcsecurity.com/view_results_xp.html
http://www.testmypcsecurity.com/view_results_vista.html

- Install Avast! Home Edition (freeware, for better protection u can buy 
the full ver.) here: 
http://download609.avast.com/eng/download-avast-home.html. Manual update 
can be download it here: http://files.avast.com/iavs4pro/vpsupd.exe

- Go here: http://www.vengine.com/ download it and install it. Checks 
authenticity of websites.

- Finally go to http://www.lavasoft.com/single/trialpay.php download it 
and install it to run it manually in case of suspicious behavior from 
the PC.

Optionally: Clean & Secure ur Windows Registry:
- http://www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt/ donwload and 
install ERUNT (includes NTREGOPT), ERUNT secures by creating executable 
Registry Back-ups and NTREGOPT cleans it. U may want to add this to the 
command line parameters of ERUNT on the Startup Folder: /days:7 (default 
is 30) and redirect the back-up copies if u need to.

- http://www.ccleaner.com/

If all these doesn't work try to re-install Windows and apps, always the 
securest solution but not always best. Good luck.

Post a reply to this message

The adding the local host (127.0.0.1) to the Stealth Ports Wizard is 
only good once the PC is clean, coz both, software and malware use it to 
access PC resources.

U may also put the COMODO Firewall' Defense+ in Paranoid mode until is 
clean and acitvate 'Show ballon messages' to everything Windows and 
programs are doing, also check the active connections to see 'weird' 
.exe files accesing The Net(Internet) or the localhost (ur PC).

Post a reply to this message

Self correction the speed site was www.Speedtest.net.

Post a reply to this message