Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2011 June 24

= June 24 =

2 x 500 GB (WD) or 1 x 1 TB (Toshiba)
Either option costs the same. Which is a better choice as external HD? Wikiweek (talk) 22:03, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I would go for the two 500GB drives; that way if one fails you only lose half your data, instead of losing everything if the 1TB fails. AvrillirvA (talk) 22:23, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Note that there are probably other factors here — specific models have better failure rates than other, different rotational speeds mean different data access, etc. A pro-tip is to check each specific model on newegg.com first; they're a very reliable place, and you can usually tell which drive models are lemons pretty quickly. --Mr.98 (talk) 22:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I'll check newegg, although I believe both WD and Toshiba are serious manufacturers. I thought also that the formating of the two smaller HDs will occupy more space than of the bigger HD, right? Wikiweek (talk) 23:29, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


 * In the USA, 2TB externals can currently be had for the same price as 1TB externals (I assume retailers overestimated how long it would be before cheap 2TB externals flooded the market). As AvrillirvA said, I wouldn't suggest getting one disk unless you already have a backup plan (another disk with enough space for data you care about), and I wouldn't suggest getting a 1TB because the 2TB models are the same price. &brvbar; Reisio (talk) 00:18, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


 * My experience on newegg is that even with serious manufacturers, certain models have significantly different ratings than others. It's worth a check. --Mr.98 (talk) 23:40, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Different models can definitely have different failure rates even from the better manufacturers. The manufacturers know and probably large scale OEMs and other large companies with a lot of HDDs like Google but us peons don't tend to get access to such data. I'm not convinced looking at NewEgg is much use even more so if you can't buying from NewEgg so may have a completely different supply chain (particularly when it comes to internal HDDs a big reason for failures is probably damage in transport which depends on the supply chain). I don't know much about their methodology for calculating reliability but since it's rather unlikely we're talking about a random sampling here but instead a lot of self selection and user bias I'd suggest 10k minimum sample size per model before you get anything close to useful data which I'm not convinced they have. (I presume we're talking about some sort of NewEgg provided RMA rate not simply random user reviews which are typically next to useless for quantitative data particularly on things like reliability. Even the StorageReview reliability database is IMHO somewhat questionable and they at least try to turn user submissions into something approaching useful quantitative data on reliability.) Nil Einne (talk) 15:07, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not claiming it is empirically rigorous. I'm just saying that when you get lots and lots and lots of people on Newegg saying "this thing blew up after two months" it tends to stand out, especially when there are also instances with lots and lots and lots of people saying, "have been using this for ages without any problems." I trust the Neweggers on the whole more than I do your typical Yelpers or Amazoners or whomever. --Mr.98 (talk) 23:18, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Onboard video card
I want to stop using the video card I brought some years ago, as I suspect it's malfunctioning, and use the onboard video card instead. However, if I connect the monitor to it, nothing happens (neither in windows nor while loading, as if the monitor was not connected to the PC). Do I have to actually remove the video card from the motherboard for the onboard video card to work, isn't there a way to shut it off and activate the other? Cambalachero (talk) 22:20, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm sure there's a way, but I can't think of a better way to stop using a malfunctioning card (or even help rule out whether it's that particular card that's malfunctioning) than physically removing it. &brvbar; Reisio (talk) 00:19, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You first make sure that the on-board video chips are turned on (access your BIOS, they might be disabled there for energy saving reasons, I believe have now made sure that mine does have this option, I can switch for the onboard VGA adapter between  on off and auto; just for reference reasons, my BIOS is a PhoenixBIOS and the machine is some kind of Fujitsu-Siemens Scenic something... which I like by the way) and second make sure that you at least downloaded the necessary drivers for Windows to run on the on-board chips. Check back with us after you try this. --Ouro (blah blah) 07:17, 25 June 2011 (UTC) (Ouro (blah blah) 07:26, 25 June 2011 (UTC))


 * You can often change the settings in the motherboard on whether to init the IGP or the external video card first. You may be able to use the IGP in Windows without changing this but it would be hard to do if you can't see anything. In any case I agree with Reisio, just remove the malfunctioning video card Nil Einne (talk) 14:54, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Looking for an audio media player SOFTWARE
Which could let me play PLAYLISTS in FASTER playing rates. i tried with VLC media player and even asked the VLC support team, but in the current version, there is no working way to do so in a playlist (fasten) rather, only in single media files.

as mentioned, i look for a program WHO WILL (!) let me the option to do so (Fasten a playlist), for i could hear lot's of files faster than they originally played...

many thanks and blessings, would dear much for me!.

Beni. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.179.8.59 (talk) 22:54, 24 June 2011 (UTC)


 * With MPlayer, the command would be .  I checked SMPlayer for a convenient pref to pass   but didn't see any place in a cursory examination; I'd be surprised if it weren't there, though (and actually I'd be surprised if you couldn't make VLC do it).  The simplest way I know of using commandline mplayer on Windows is downloading this, and inside its   directory, placing the contents of this.  You can then add the directory to your path (or just dump it all into  ) if you wish to, to be able to access it from a   window at any location. &brvbar; Reisio (talk) 00:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)