Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2012 September 17

= September 17 =

windows XP serial number and license key
are they the same thing? if not then what is the difference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.116.187.1 (talk) 07:59, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * No, they are not. A serial number is just one in a continuous series.  So, if you are 1234567890 then the next poor sap Microsoft customer is 1234567891.  That's not good enough for a license key, though, as anyone could guess at a valid number from the range in use.  A license key tends to be far longer and randomized, so that you are extremely unlikely to guess one. StuRat (talk) 08:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * However, depending on the context they may be the same thing. A lot of people refer to the license key as a serial number, even though the name isn't accurate. The only time I've seen a true serial number (StuRat's definition) on a Microsoft OS is with volume licensing or embedded OSes, and that comes on a simple small sticker, not the big one with the rainbow coloring, bar code and shiny strip. Odds are that if someone is talking about a Windows serial number they actually mean a license key. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 12:59, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

How to disallow others from adding me in groups in Facebook?
In every three or four days someone adds me in a group, as a result my email and notifications get flooded. How to disallow others from adding me in groups? Best, -- Tito Dutta  ✉  09:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * IIRC the only way you aren't auto-added to a group is if you do not click a single link you get about how one of your friends have joined a group. ¦ Reisio (talk) 16:03, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I do not click ay link, I have also stopped using Facebook, but in every few days someone adds me in their group and I have to visit Facebook to unjoin or turn off notifications. Regards! -- Tito Dutta  ✉  05:39, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Visiting facebook can re-enable an account that you have disabled (and even one you have asked to have deleted). You have to basically log out of facebook and delete your cookies and not log in for 14 days or something like that. ¦ Reisio (talk) 06:13, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Strange problem with MediaWiki's edit toolbar.
Was it just me, or is the edit toolbar on my wiki acting a little too wonky? Loading the edit page after clearing the cache, or perhaps on a newly-installed browser, will end up with the toolbox not being able to initialise, but if you open another article on the wiki and edit it, the toolbox options do show up. My hunch is that it may have something to do with either the MediaWiki software, or perhaps my browsers. The symptoms occur on both Firefox and Chrome, and I'm using the latest stable build of MW as well. Blake Gripling (talk) 10:25, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I do not see any problem with the toolbox in FF. Ruslik_ Zero 12:18, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Apple's Magic Mouse
Pre Lion/Mountain Lion I could awaken my laptop from 'sleep' by just touching the trackpad or simply picking up the Magic Mouse, but now neither of those otions work and I have to push the of/off button. The computer wakes instantly but I much preferred simply to pick up the mouse. Can I this facility back and if so how please.--85.211.199.83 (talk) 15:14, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about the stupid errors above, the last 'can' should read 'get'--85.211.199.83 (talk) 15:20, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I removed your unnecessary use of bold
 * I'm not a Mac user, but a quick search through the 'Apple Support Communities' suggests you are not alone. It seems to depend on how deeply your laptop has gone to sleep, but more than one suggests changing the hibernatemode setting (I would like to provide more links to threads, but for some reason the "next" link on the search page is broken in Chrome).  Astronaut (talk) 17:11, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Folder 'Temp'
I clicked "Run" option present in "Start menu". "Run Window" appeared and I typed "%temp%" in the search box. A window with title "Temp" came on screen. I deleted all files and folders present in that "Temp Folder". I think all files and folders were useless. Is it correct to say that "Temp Folder" contains useless files and folders? Sunny Singh (DAV) (talk) 17:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Not exactly, it's more correct to say that they are (intended to be) only temporarily useful. ¦ Reisio (talk) 17:31, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Programs on your computer will often use that folder as a space for files that they only need temporarily. After the task is done, they are supposed to clean up the files themselves. An example could be a program that downloads a large file. It may decide to download the file to the temp directory, so the user doesn't see a partially-downloaded file in their target directory. Once the download is complete, the downloader program can rename and move the file out of the temp directory and into the target directory. The problem is that not all programs are good about cleaning up after themselves, and occasionally a poorly-written program may even decided to store something important in the directory. It is usually harmless to delete everything in the temp folder if there is nothing else running on the system, but it is possible for it to cause unexpected problems. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 18:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Free Trials
Some pieces of software allow a free trial which ends after a fixed period of time. How does the software know that the time is up, and what does it do to stop you downloading it a second time? There must be some kind of analogue of a cookie. I don't like the idea of having hidden files that I can't find, let alone security scan. How could I find these cookie-like files? — Fly by Night  ( talk )  19:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * The people who set up those things go to great lengths to keep people from being able to defeat them. There must, as you say, be some cookie-like thing, but it is likely to be well hidden, and different programs will hide it in different ways. Looie496 (talk) 19:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Early software sometimes just used the system clock, so could be defeated by setting the clock back. However, they are more sophisticated these days.  With Internet connectivity, for example, they can either find a standard time and date on the web, or could access their own website, with it's own timer. StuRat (talk) 19:40, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the replies chaps, but I was looking for something more informative. Anyone else? — Fly by Night  ( talk )  19:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * You didn't say which program. 146.90.50.247 (talk) 19:52, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * As far as preventing you from reinstalling the trial version, they can store your I/P address or CPU serial number at their site, and refuse to allow a second trial download from that location again. StuRat (talk) 20:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * It's usually a combination of registry keys and checking the system date, AIUI. ¦ Reisio (talk) 19:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, with some current trials you can successfully extend the trial by disconnecting the internet and putting back the system date before running the program, but you've only to make one mistake in running with the current date to be permanently locked out (unless you can find the hidden code that implements the lockout, and it's not as simple as a plain registry key).   D b f i r s   20:14, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Some programs also use files stored somewhere in the Windows directory. Then of course there's Macrovision SafeCast notably used in Adobe programs which hides stuff in absolute sector 32 of your HDD which is normally before the partition start and so won't generally be overwritten even if you delete all partitions and install Windows fresh; without zero filling the beginning of the HD (or intentionally killoing the sector because you know about it). Nil Einne (talk) 05:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Similar to Dbfirs. You can sometimes have success by ensuring that nothing has been left in the registry. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 17:02, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Bad blocks on drive, reducing timeout length; why weren't bad blocks marked as bad at write time
I have a few related questions to the same problem. I have a NTFS formatted drive with some bad blocks that stores a backup file that I now need (Murphy's Law). I should note too that these files reside at the end of the drive, an area I almost never use, so preexisting bad blocks that I only now noticed isn't out of the question. The problem isn't so much the sporadic errors in the files (I can deal with some corrupt files); the problem is that when it hits one of these bad blocks the cpu will retry over and over to read it only timing out after about 2 minutes. This makes reading the drive impractical. I'm trying to recover it with dd noconv=error to another drive, but it's also hanging for too long on these bad sectors/blocks. Is there a way (in Linux) I can modify the timeout length to be shorter?

The other problem is that these blocks should have been recently written to, so why didn't either the drive internally, or NTFS, mark them as bad at write time (only a few days ago)? I find it difficult to believe they all went bad within that short timeframe. Or when I do an NTFS format shouldn't it mark these as bad?

I was able to use hdparm's "very dangerous" write to sector tool to force it to remap a few of these, but I can't quickly get a list of all the bad blocks. Is there a good way to do this too (without it taking 2 minutes at each one)? Shadowjams (talk) 21:04, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * For a disk with read errors, I would use ddrescue rather than dd (whether its timeout control will address your issue specifically I don't know). A bunch of related LBAs all going bad in a short time is suggestive (not not indicative, probably) of local contamination. The drive's own remapper, or NTFS, would indeed have marked the blocks bad and remapped them, had they known, so the fact that neither did means they didn't. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 21:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

duckduckgo not working?
The site duckduckgo provides shortcuts for a faster search. For example [https://duckduckgo.com/?q=something+g! g! means google it], d! means search for it in a dictionary. It doesn't work at my side, but I don't know what's happening. OsmanRF34 (talk) 21:41, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You're putting the exclamation mark on the wrong side of the shortcut; it comes before, not after. Instead of g! and d!, you need to be typing !g and !d. Hope this helps. CalusReyma (talk) 11:12, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * There are called bang keywords and actually have the form !keyword. For example: !g (for google), !w (for wikipedia) and so on. ListCheck (talk) 11:15, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * How odd! I had exactly the same problem yesterday. Paul (Stansifer) 14:41, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Another method of using shortcuts is available in-program with modern browsers like Firefox. E.g., "w Barack Obama" will take you to Barack Obama immediately. -- 143.85.199.242 (talk) 21:30, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * http://www-archive.mozilla.org/docs/end-user/keywords.html ¦ Reisio (talk) 19:13, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Understanding clincher at staple
Today, I have bought Kangaro DS- 23S13 QL heavy duty stapler. It has clinch that has two hole for stapling paper that indicates measurement of 6-13 and 8-15. It can be rotated as per number and thickness of papers. The first hole of clinch has number, 6-13 (leg length of staples) on left side (just above the hole). The whole is not plain. And the second hole has 8-15 (leg length of staples) on right side. This hole is plain. I don't understand which number indicates which hole to be used during stapling paper. Right now, from the user eye side, I can see that 8-15 is positioned "Flip vertical" above the right side hole in clinch and 6-13 is positioned normal state (left side of the hole). It's my first time to use this type of stapler. The loading capacity is 100 pages. Can anyone please help me to recognize the number on clinch's hole ? Thanks--180.234.89.110 (talk) 23:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

P.S. The capacity of 6-13 is 2 to 100 pages and 8-15 is 25 to 100+ pages (though they say that, up to 100 pages can be stapled in their Brochure).


 * Here's a picture of the stapler, for anyone who needs it: . StuRat (talk) 23:46, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm having difficulty in parsing your question, with phrases like "hole of clinch" and "whole is not plain" leaving me confused. However, a stapler is a simple enough device, and staples are cheap enough, that you can just experiment with the various settings until you get the desired result.  I'd use scrap paper to practice with.  BTW, I've always set them so the staples bend inward, as you are less likely to get poked by one that way.  Also note that you can sometimes staple a few more sheets if you staple from both sides, offset slightly (although I'd only do this if I didn't have any binder clips handy).  StuRat (talk) 23:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, I figured it out. One more thing is that, that staple suddenly fell on the floor from my table. I quickly picked it up and checked whether there is any damage. So far I have not found one. Can it be internally damaged if it falls on the floor? Though it's steel made device but what about the durability?--180.234.239.3 (talk) 00:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm guessing you meant to say that the stapler fell on the floor, not a staple. They are pretty durable, although it might have knocked the currently loaded staples out of position, so you may need to open it up and push them back where they belong. StuRat (talk) 00:30, 18 September 2012 (UTC)