Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2012 March 24

= March 24 =

Google Voice Recovery Issue
I have an issue with my new Google Voice account.

I know my password and my google voice number. I also have a cell phone attached to the account which i of course know the number to. I dont, however, know the exact username i created. I know it pretty closely and this is one of those things where i am one letter or number off and that is causing me to not be able to log in.

I know Google voice has a recovery thing in which you can send your Google voice number to them and they send a recovery email, but since that email is a google email, i am back to square one because i dont know the username to access that (Gmail and google voice are linked to the same account)

I also am aware of the option to email to a backup account, but since i created this just yesterday, that option is not set up.

Since i know alot of info about the account, it SHOULD be that i could recover this. Is it possible? Does anyone know a solution please?

Thanks!

137.81.118.126 (talk) 01:02, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit: I solved the issue by hours of guessing :( The issue is resolved but i hope google voice can still offer more options for those who recently created an account. I hope noone else ever has to deal with what i just went through!

137.81.118.126 (talk) 06:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Strategies for buying computers
Hi, I'm trying to figure out the best way to buy a desktop computer. I'm looking for a gaming computer that can run Starcraft II (and its future expensions) on the highest settings. As far as price for the same thing goes, would it go:


 * buy all the parts and pieces yourself and assemble it together (cheapest)
 * buy a computer premade from a brick store (middle)
 * buy a computer online choosing all the individual parts and pieces (highest)
 * upgrade current computer (not feasible, my desktop computer is from a decade ago)

I know very little about computer hardware, so the first option seems unattainable. My biggest concern is that I'll put it all together and the thing won't turn on, or give an error. Or is it easier than I imagine it to be?

The second option has the advantage of being immediately ready as soon as the purchase is made. But the disadvantage I foresee is that the pre-made computers may have a bunch of bells and whistles that I don't need, like 2 DVD drives or a big enough hard drive to mirror the pirate bay.

The third option seems to be the best way to get exactly what I want, but could possibly be overpriced. The other disadvantage is waiting for shipping. But how much of a price difference would it be between buying it from the store?

As far as price goes, I'm looking for a long-term (10+ years) investment.

As an aside, what sort of specifications and price tags do the computers that professional Starcraft II players have? That could help with deciding what to buy.

Thanks very much.--99.179.20.157 (talk) 03:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Can one be a professional Starcraft II player ? I'd say check out the brick-and-mortar stores, price the computer closest to your needs, then check to see if online build-it yourself computers can beat it, shipping included.  Considering that a stray spark from your hand can destroy the motherboard, it seems foolish to attempt to build your own computer unless you're an electronics expert. StuRat (talk) 03:20, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes. Thanks for the advice, that does seem like the best bet.--99.179.20.157 (talk) 03:38, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * From what I've seen, it doesn't make sense to buy the parts to build one yourself these days (years ago that was a viable option). In recent years I've mostly got my computers from local retail stores.  However, for my current one I went to an online retailer.  The reason is that it is so difficult to move to a new computer on a Windows system that I want to delay that as long as possible, so get a powerful computer that I can use for a long time.  The ones in local retail stores are low-end or middle tier machines. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that it still can make a lot of sense to build your own computer, depending on what you want to go in it. It's really not difficult to assemble a computer - think of a LEGO set with about twelve parts.  There exist lots of handy video guides for it too    (those videos take about 2 hours to watch - if you think you might want to assemble your own computer, or even know more about what goes into a computer, it would be good to watch them).  Especially for higher end machines, it can be advantageous to pick your own components so you don't end up paying a bunch for something you don't need, and then still having to buy a better graphics card (for example).  Tom's Hardware has a lot (perhaps confusingly so) of data on how different components perform, and such.  For example, it has lists of graphics cards - a $150 says that it will play most games at moderate resolution on high settings.  You might also want to check out their quarterly system builder marathons - check out maybe the last 3 or 4 (older than that, and the components are different) and see what they put into gaming computers at different prices.  The $1000 computers should have no problem playing Starcraft II at good resolutions and high settings.  No computer is going to be able to play new games at high settings in ten years, but pretty much any computer you buy today will probably be able to do basic tasks (web browsing, e-mail, word-processing) in ten years. Buddy431 (talk) 17:17, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, I would argue that 10 years is an incredibly long time in computer-land. Moore's Law tells us to expect that the power of cheaply available processors would go up by between 32 and 128 times in 10 years. Computer games tend to be written for the available hardware, therefore you should expect to have to upgrade your computer at some point if you want to keep up with releases. There are two ways to do this - either to buy a new computer, or to upgrade the components one at a time. Obviously, by doing the former, you would have to lay out a hefty chunk of cash each time you upgrade, whereas with the latter you could upgrade one component each time you have funds available. My own recommendation would be to go down the gradual upgrade path. If you want to do that, I would recommend building your computer yourself. That way, you will know it (literally) inside out, and be able to easily identify the best parts to upgrade each time. Don't be scared of DIY computing - there are many many good teaching resources out there, and the best way of learning about how computers work is to get your hands dirty. Whilst it is more than likely that the first time you power your PC on you will get some sort of horrible, confusing error message, you can Google the message and find that someone else has had exactly the same problem, and has left instructions on how to fix it. Then you will know how to fix it next time. Buddy's links above will give you a great start, but let me recommend my own favourite resource - http://lifehacker.com/5828747/how-to-build-a-computer-from-scratch-the-complete-guide. You can search around on that site for more helpful guides to computer building. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 17:58, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

It's very easy indeed to build a computer; I've done so several times with no problem, and most of those times were back in the middle ages of microcomputers when less was integrated into the motherboard and thus more circuit boards and complexity was necessary than it is now. However, while pricing where I happen to live may be very different from that where you happen to live; here, building it myself would be a surefire way to spend the most money. Companies such as Dell, Toshiba and Sony can get quantity discounts from their suppliers. True, you do have to pay for their corporate advertising, and you're also almost always forced to pay for an OS that you may not want -- when I last looked, Dell charged as much for a computer with Ubuntu as for the same computer with Windows (presumably in order not to offend Microsoft). But buying something ready assembled still works out cheaper. And in the unlikely event that something does go wrong, you have one "maker" (marketing company) to complain to, and fixing it is their problem. So I'd never again build a computer from scratch, unless it were for some vanity project (e.g. that I must have a computer in a turquoise case with fifty flashing diodes). -- Hoary (talk) 00:38, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll chime in... I build almost all of my Desktops myself, and I buy laptops from an OEM (as 99.99999% of the people do I suspect). It's not hard to build your own, but it's also not necessary, and there's less of a safety net when you do so. Also, having a 10 year time-frame is unrealistic. It'd be much cheaper for you to buy a computer that's of 1/3 the price, 3 times, over that 10 year period, than for you to try and make one computer now that will be competitive in that time-frame. There's a law of diminishing returns when it comes to building/buying computers, and 10 years is definitely past that window. Shadowjams (talk) 19:21, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've build my own PCs from parts for decades. It is "easy" but it's a kind of easy like changing brake pads: easy for someone who has the tools, the space, and a bit of assumed knowledge. If you don't have all those and something goes wrong (admittedly there's only a small chance), you're up a creek without a paddle. Especially if you don't have old or spare parts to troubleshoot with.. Where I live, there are several reputable computer shops around that let you choose your own components and will assemble the PC and test it for something like $40-$50. For a PC that will cost you, I dunno, $500-$1000, that's really not that much, considering also that assembling the PC will no doubt take you a few hours, will require a bit of patience, space, and will leave you with boxes to get rid of, and probably a few other "things" I haven't thought to mention. It's not such a bad option... Vespine (talk) 04:54, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

draw something
Does anyone know how i can get this draw something program onto my phone? I cant get the apple or android version on my silly £10 phone so i was told to look on favebook but after signing in there i found nothing but a few pictures frim it. Anyone able to provide me with a better link? Also the mobile version of this page doesnt work, the adk question button is inaccesable. Someone should fix that 82.132.138.157 (talk) 17:52, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * What sort of phone do you have (make/model)? - Cucumber Mike (talk) 17:58, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Umm... Samsung? Thats all it says. Its from tesco if that helps. 82.132.138.157 (talk) 18:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok. Unfortunately your phone is not compatible with Draw Something, which requires either the Android or iOS operating system. Some (in fact, quite a lot) of Samsung phones run Android, but some of the cheaper and/or older models run Samsung's own operating system. I would hazard a guess that it's also your phone's internet browser which is causing your problems with this page, too. It works fine on my (Android) phone. Sorry to bring you the bad news. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 18:18, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok. I can still get it to work on the desktop version of this page hence how i can ask this. Any chance i can get the program to run on my proper computer, didnt i hear somewhere that android stuff is compatable with windows? 82.132.138.157 (talk) 18:22, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The answer is pretty much 'no'. Draw Something is designed to be used on a phone, so it won't really work on a desktop machine. Having said that, there is an Android Emulator, which basically gets an imitation phone running in a window on your computer. However, it's aimed at people developing apps for Android phones, and the instructions are a little technical. If you feel like giving it a try, go to http://developer.android.com/guide/developing/tools/emulator.html - but don't expect it to run Draw Something well, or indeed at all. That's not what it's designed for - as I say, it's aimed at programmers developing new apps. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 18:27, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I would not recommend trying to use the android emulator to play games. It simply doesn't perform well enough to make that a satisfying exercise.
 * You may have better luck with the iPhone emulator, actually. But you'd still need to get your hands on a pirate version of the game, an emulated phones can't pull apps from the app store. APL (talk) 19:38, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Ah, it seems I must apologise. There is a PC version, found here. Although it's called Draw My Thing, it's the same game, developed by the same people. It's not clear to me whether you can play against someone using the phone-based Draw Something version with this, but at least you can play it. Sorry for not spotting it sooner. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 18:44, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The Entry On Microsoft Dynamics Is Unclear-- Can Someone Fix It?
I don't need an answer back this is just to let you know of the problem in one of your entries. I use Wikipedia often in my work to get a better understanding of topics with which I am not completely familiar. When I looked up your entry on Microsoft Dynamics to see if it was a cloud based service I got a very confusing description of the technology that never answered my question. As I said, I don't need an answer back, I've already had to look elsewhere as my question was time sensitive, I just thought you should know so someone could fix it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.28.153.202 (talk) 18:12, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting us know. One of the beauties of Wikipedia is that you can add any missing information yourself. If you have the time, simply go to the article and click the edit button. You don't need to sign up for an account, or log in. However, I understand the time pressures on you, so maybe you could just leave a link here to the information you found to answer your question and I'm sure someone will be able to add it to the article if it's found to be useful. Thanks for helping us improve Wikipedia. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 18:22, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

PHP - getting data across pages without forms
In PHP how can I get data across pages without using forms? For example, I've got a page which accesses a MySQL database and prints out a table of all the employees and now what I want is to have each employees name to be a hyperlink to, say, EmployeePage.php where you will be able to see certain information about that particular employee. So how can I get data (in this case the employeeID) to the page. --TuringMachine17 (talk) 20:44, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The easiest way to do what you want in this example is to modify the URL variables. E.g. instead of just linking to EmployeePage.php, you link to EmployeePage.php?employeeId=4040 or something like that. Any information after the question mark is known a URL variable and can be accessed as if it were sent via the GET form method (e.g. $_GET["employeeID"] would equal 4040 in this example). --Mr.98 (talk) 21:25, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * You could store the value in a cookie, and then the other page could read the cookie to get the value. RudolfRed (talk) 21:33, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That would require both javascript and a page load, so it's highly discouraged. --145.94.77.43 (talk) 21:53, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * And it's just overly complicated for the situation. I don't think the task here is to shower the OP with every technical hack they could use to get this done when there's an incredibly straightforward and standard way to do this that they just don't happen to know about, because they're a new programmer. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:40, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay using the URL and $_GET method from above is sort of what I was thinking of. I do know about $_POST and $_GET it's just that I've only ever learned to used them in HTML forms where you explicitly use post or get and compared to that typing in the URL with the variable myself seems like a bit of a hack --TuringMachine17 (talk) 14:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * It's not a hack; it's completely standard. Nearly every site on the web uses something like this, including Wikipedia, Google, you name it. Aside from being the de facto way to send data to other pages without using forms, it also means you can create linkable database queries like this. Note that in that URL, everything after the question mark is parsed as GET data by the server. (The syntax is ?var1=val1&var2=val2 and so on — the first one uses a question mark, every one afterwards uses ampersands.) --Mr.98 (talk) 14:34, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * As Mr.98 says it's fairly common to do it this way. (For one it doesn't rely on cookies that might have been turned off in the browser.)  One thing to note however.  If there should actually be any employees that "unwanted" people should not be able to see information about, you would have to take this into account in the EmployeePage.php.  Reason is of course, (which is much more visible when doing it this way) is that anyone can modify the URL variable in their browser (or script or whatever) and enter/type in an employeeid you never gave a direct link to on your original page.  But (simple) security issues like this might be out of scope for your original question :)  -Laniala (talk) 14:47, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Though, technically one can spoof POST requests too, without too much difficulty. So the security issue is a general one, not specific to GET requests, though they are exceptionally easy to modify. --Mr.98 (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2012 (UTC)