Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2006 November 2

= November 2 =

Getting a ST506/412 drive and controller card recognized in a newer machine.
I got an old Tandon TM 262 ST-506 drive and am attempting to get it at least recognized in a new (Pentium II era) machine. I *KNOW* it worked in the XT it came out of, however I cannot get it to "work" with the machine it's in now. When starting up it will run through the POST, read the floppy (normal), and then hang. Is there some step I'm missing, or did I forget to give some information? Thanx. 68.39.174.238 03:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It may be more helpful if you can give the model/manufacturer/etc information about the motherboard you are trying to connect it to, and any steps you may have done to have the BIOS recognize this drive. Also, are you planning to use the drive as a boot drive or a spare?  How is the drive being connected? (the ST-506 article mentions a controller card - is that card compatible with the bus on your P-II motherboard?) Mishatx 01:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't intend to boot off this hard disk, if I can access it from a DOS boot floppy I'll be happy. As to the controller card and the systemboard, I don't know if it's compatible or not. I tried it in an ancient Tandon with a similar ST506 card and drive, to the same result. 68.39.174.238 05:22, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

iTunes 7.0.2.16
I just downloaded the new version of iTunes and now iTunes will not load.

System is a Compaq Presario 061 Processor x86 Family 15 Model 4 Stepping 1 Genuine Intel ~2932Mhz OS Windows XP Home Edition 5.1.2600 Service Pack 2 Build 2600

When I double click the Icon on the desktop the hourglass starts stops and nothing happens. The system does not freeze or anything. It is as if I had done nothing.

74.121.74.151 03:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

XPCOM
When I try to shutdown my XP2 system I get a message that I don't understand:


 * XPCOM: Event Receiver
 * Not responding
 * End Now or Cancel

Any idea why?
 * 211.28.178.86 05:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Something to do with firefox, have you done your homework? google ?

Google already a monopoly
Microsoft has just 20% of the world software market. But google has 25% of world advertising market. So is Google a bigger problem that microsoft?
 * But Windows own more than 90% of the OS market. WP 08:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * And what exactly does the 20% number cover? If it's just conventional office applications, then I'm surprised M$ is so low. But if it includes more specialised office applications (like AutoCAD, Oracle, etc), and/or if it includes games, then it's no surprise. I also wonder if it counts Mac apps. Anchoress 08:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Assuming Google is a monopoly, it doesn't make it a bad thing. People complain about the Microsoft monopoly because in their (and my) opinion they don't play fair and are generally a not nice company, Google on the other hand, for now at least is a warm loving friendly company who cares about it's users and "not doing evil" Benbread 13:39, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * With microsoft cumstomer have a Vendor lock-in problem. With Google you can just go to a different site.  Jon513 14:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * (Please sign your post.) The question is based on flawed information and flawed reasoning. It is trivial to do ten searches in a row, each with a different search engine. It is not trivial to use ten different operating systems, or office applications. Monocultures are known to be a problem for ecologies, for computer security, and for competition. Nevertheless, standarization has advantages. Far more than 25% of searches go through Google; feel free to try their competition at any time. Far more than 20% of computers actively depend on a Windows OS. Courts in the U.S. and Europe have found Microsoft to be a monopoly, which is legal, and also to have abused that monopoly position, which is not legal. This question looks like obvious trolling, so the purpose of this answer is merely a little public education. --KSmrqT 18:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I suppose Google could be a problem, if they methodically bought out all other search engines and shut them down, in an attempt to force everyone to use their search engine. So far, they haven't done this type of thing. The most evil thing they have done is to support the Chinese government in it's attempt to deny it's citizens access to true history, like the Tiananmen Square massacre. This makes me rather wary of what Google might do in the future. StuRat 21:46, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh come ON! They're a software company not revolutionaries, cut them a little slack. Leave the regime change to Bush. Vespine 22:20, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The Chinese government insists that companies doing business in China comply with their restrictions. One legal and ethical choice is to not do business in China, leaving that to others. Another choice, legal but perhaps less ethical, is to do business and silently comply with the restrictions. Google chose a third way, to do business and comply with the restrictions, but put a notice with the search results advising of the censorship. Other search providers (Yahoo and Microsoft) had already gone along with the government, silently, leaving Google almost no ground to bargain. Did they make the right decision? Is it better that the people inside of China see a tiny notice that they are being censored rather than see nothing at all? I'm not comfortable with the decision; I don't think Google is either, from their public statements. But there are worse things than being uncomfortable.
 * One interesting comment made at a UN summit is that Google "chose not to locate servers for its blogging and email services in China. That lets Google, at least for now, avoid the problem that Yahoo experienced — police seizing information in order to identify and imprison journalists or democracy activists." And a Human Rights Watch report released in August said "Tests showed that Chinese Internet users can access greater amounts of information using the censored www.google.cn and MSN Chinese search engines than they can using providers based in China. But the tests showed that Yahoo! China’s level and method of search censorship is as bad and in some cases worse than the heavily censored Baidu, China’s most popular homegrown search engine. The tests also showed that Google is the most transparent in informing users about censorship."
 * And lest anyone imagine that only countries like China and Iran censor, consider U.S. legislation and software as described by EFF. --KSmrqT 03:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Credit bureau software
I have a question regarding credit bureau software:

I’m trying to search for a software company that sells the software that the credit bureau uses to rate that individual or company. This is different than let’s say your credit card company using software that report to the bureau. So let’s say I’m Equifax, Experian, etc… and I decided to open shop tomorrow where do I go to buy my software allows me to hold this information and report it out when people apply for a loan.

End of question.


 * I honestly don't know what software a credit bureau uses, but I would imagine that it would use a database backend of some type, with software written by a third-party for the company. Splintercellguy 06:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It's safe to assume that the core software is proprietary - owned by the the credit bureau. They probably have programming staff to support it, and staff probably also developed it, although it might have been contracted out.  The bureau's product is essentially the service performed by the software, so using some "generic" software wouldn't be beneficial. -R. S. Shaw 05:39, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Accessing an unsecured wireless network (UK)
I've had a fair root around wikipedia and google for information on but can't find anything relevent. Qusestion is, in the UK what sort of laws (of any) are there govening the use of someone elses _unsecured_ wireless network for web browsing (without their prior knowledge, of course). I was under the impression that one can take an unsecured network as being an open network and use it without restriction? Thanks for your help! Benbread 13:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * "UK war driver fined £500". The CPS might take a rather procrustean view and try to apply RIPA too. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 13:53, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * In addition to that offence, The Computer Misuse Act 1990 can be applied to unauthorised access to any computer system. Unauthorised in this case means that you did not know that you had received authorisation. It might be fair to say that the law on accessing open wireless routers is not particularly clear, and that you should seek professional advice! -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * If someone's front door was not locked would you assume you are legally allowed to walk in and take whatever you want? Vespine 22:11, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * If someone left a bowl of candy on their front porch (or, for that matter, their desk at a bank), would you assume you were legally allowed to help yourself to a reasonable amount of it? It's really a better analogy, as an open WAP is actively soliciting the traffic of nearby wireless NICs (typically even broadcasting its SSID to begin contact).  Moreover, when someone borrowing such Internet access finishes, the owner of the network isn't missing anything except an entirely trivial amount of electricity used to power the antennas.  The equation of all forms of co-option, duplication, and use with theft is a pervasive problem in modern legal thinking.  --Tardis 00:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * In australia, most ISPs offer limited bandwidth/$ plans, and some charge crazy prices for exceeding monthly allowances, 0.15c/MB is not uncommon. Meaning if someone steals an extra 1GB over your monthly allowance it will cost your pocket $150. Hardly 'trivial amount of electricity'. Vespine 02:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Then it's certainly worth your time to install some semblance of wireless security! It's not my fault if the candy bowl contains truffles, and you had them air mailed individually to Milan from Saskatchewan.  Also important is that the wireless user isn't pocketing that $150 or anything like it.  (I fear that this has become a talk-page-worthy discussion, though, since the question is the legality, not the justification for it!  Any idea where it should go?  No one has actually written the piggybacking (Wi-Fi) article...)  --Tardis 19:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

firefox2 remembering passwords
My campus's novell proxy login page won't autofill the password from firefox. It's not doing it with javascript, and it's a new problem in firefox2. I think what's doing it is some meta tag that asks browsers not to autofill.

Does anyone know of any about:config items that let you just ignore that flag and remember the passwords? --⁪froth T C  14:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * In a campus setting, I can easily see why the system administrator who installed it might very well chose not to allow remembering passwords, due to security concerns. (They generally prefer the more secure system where everyone posts their passwords on the sides of their monitors with Post-It notes.) :-) StuRat 21:03, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Perhaps it has to do with this old bug report mentioned at Wikipedia_talk:Reference_desk? I don't personally know anything about that, not using autofill, but you might be able to chase something down knowing precisely what it is.  --Tardis 22:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Computer Security
I dont know whats wrong with my computer but i can enter secure sites such as chat rooms or log on to messangers because my internet says that they could not find the web page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.229.196.49 (talk • contribs)


 * Do you mean that you cannot enter secure sites? --Kainaw (talk) 15:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

This could be a number of problems, a software firewall may be blocking Internet Explorer, and thus disallow connections to the internet. Or, it could be incorrect proxy settings, or a download manager that is improperly configured. Please get back with more information about the state of your system software wise and I am happy to help. Ronaldh 13:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Where can I buy very, very old PCs in Australia?
I'm an Australian student with very little money and I'm after my own PC. Does anyone know of a place that will sell very, very old used PCs for next to nothing? (As long as it has a NIC, 16mb of RAM and a 100mb hard disk it's fine). I just need it to run Damn Small Linux with an IRC client and a browser. Thanks.


 * How close is 'next to nothing' from 'nothing'? You can probably get a PC for less than $50AU from EBay (the worldwide outlet for stuff barely worth selling) (i swear) they have an Australian computers site.  Also, Craigslist appears to have a series of AU sites here, where you can probably find someone giving away a PC to anyone who will pick it up (at least thats how it works here in the US). --Jmeden2000 18:29, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * As I'm sure you realise, new PCs are so cheap that the second-hand market is (in the developed world) pretty negligible. But a corollary of that is that lots of people have pretty decent PCs sitting at home or at the office (I'm looking at four right now, sitting idle on top of a cabinet) that they've got no use for, but which they're loathe to chuck out. I tried to give one to a local charity (that refurbs them and gives them to schools) and they didn't want them (they had too many already).  So I think you should be able to get people to give you a PC (and probably one better than the one you want).  I suggest you make up a flier and post it in your local college or uni or community centre:


 *  Wanted: old PC that would otherwise go to the landfill 
 * ''Starving student seeks ancient but working PC to help with college work. If you've got some old fellah that's otherwise off to the landfill but for which you'd like to see a better home, please call me on XXX.  I'll pick it up, and I'll donate $30 to the Wolongolong Stingray Sanctuary in your name.


 * Put up a dozen or two flyers and you'll be snowed under. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I second the craigslist idea, and also try browsing HERE. Or joining Australia's Freecycle site. Anchoress 20:06, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Screenshot
How would I take a large screenshot like Image:Lastfmprofile_thejewel_2006-07-31.PNG? --Stacey 23:48, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If you run Firefox there are some extensions that can do that. The basic version of Pearl Crescent Page Saver is available for no cost, and works with Firefox 1.5 and 2.0. --Kjoonlee 06:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If you want something similar for all programs, not just Firefox, I think SnagIt can do that, but I don't know if the trial version has any restrictions. (Watermarks, etc.) --Kjoonlee 18:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) -- Stacey 18:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Snagit (trial version) doesn't have restrictions; however its feature for screenshooting (is that a word?) large webpages will only scroll down, not sideways. &mdash; D a  niel  (‽) 17:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)