Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2009 June 13

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 13

What can I do...

Block quote

I think I deleted something that I shouldn't have...and ow my mouse goes crazy...making it hard to click on anything...what can I do???

Not sure what you are on about specifically - but a crazy mouse can be a sign of either:

Damaged cable in a wired mouse - probably need to replace mouse or mend the cable

Electromagnetic interference in a wireless mouse - one solution is a wired mouse.77.86.10.194 (talk) 08:51, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Low battery is more likely to cause a wireless mouse to go "haywire." Nimur (talk) 16:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

The OP said that he/she had deleted something - so I'm guessing some file. My suggestion would be to reinstall (uninstall, then reinstall, heck, it's windoze) mouse drivers and see what happens. G'night. --Ouro (blah blah) 21:04, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

You might have set the sensitivity really high (so the mouse goes really fast across the screen). You can change that by changing the mouse settings in the control panel. But if you want us to help you, can you give us more than "crazy". What mouse, what causes it to move, at what speed, and what does the cursor look like? --h2g2bob (talk) 14:16, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

You say "mouse" but if you were actually using a trackpad and have a Sony Vaio, there is a known problem with those laptops that you can read about here. I experienced both the reversed cursor (pointer goes opposite way to what you want) and the crazy cursor problems. Reversed cursor can be amusing, for the first minute anyway. TresÁrboles (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

What's the problem

I have a strange problem. The thing is, all of my Video players sometimes just don't play the video! I get the sound but just a big black screen. This happens to players like VLC, EM Total Media Player, ALL PLAYER, etc. whatever the file i play, be it avi, mkv or anything. This happens even to files which have been played by the same player just a couple of days back very well. So it can't be a codec problem. All the players face the same problem, except Real Player, which always plays well. Whatever i do - shut down, restart, reinstall, the problem persists. I have found merely by trial and error that if i abruptly switch off the power and Windows Disk check launches, it says it has made corrections, and then everything is back to normal again. Now all files are played properly by all players. Why is it so? What is the cause of this problem? And how can i launch Disk Checking without abruptly turning off my computer? Rkr1991 (talk) 08:02, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

On the video part, have you tried updating your video drivers? It sounds like your hardware acceleration is not working correctly (see hardware overlay, which sounds like the black boxes you are seeing), which is probably fixable by drivers or could be a sign that there is some sort of video card problem. You could try turning down hardware acceleration and see if they suddenly work—it's not a long-term fix (hardware acceleration is a good thing!) but it could help you diagnose what the exact problem is. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 12:54, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I have only an Intel(R) Extreme Graphics card (my computer is over 5 years old). I haven't got any option to turn down hardware acceleration. Can you tell me how ? Rkr1991 (talk) 12:59, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Can't anybody help me with this problem? Rkr1991 (talk) 08:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that is a weird problem. You say the Disk check fixes it which are changes to files on your computer. You say it's any file, so it can't be a corrupted codec. Must be something in your system files. You can try using System Restore under System Tools to restore your computer to a point BEFORE the problem occurred - this will restore any changes to system files etc. but be careful, it will undo other changes made since. If you're really struggling, you can try posting at techsupportforum.com - they've helped me with weird problems in the past. Sandman30s (talk) 20:39, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, thank you for the link, I'll try it now. But I must say, I'm amazed - this is the first time that a reference desk hasn't been able to answer my question... Rkr1991 (talk) 05:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

If you're using ffmepg, it may be worth checking where the video output is set to. You could try changing that the OpenGL/DirectX renderer in case it's set to something funny. I havent used that codec pack in a while but I had a similar problem a while ago. aszymanik speak! 00:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Another Strange Problem

My computer has another strange problem, in addition to the one above. It just doesn't read pirated dvds. If i insert one into my computer, it acts as though nothing has been done. At the same time, it plays original dvds perfectly well, be it games or be it movies. How the heck does the computer know if the dvd is pirated or original? What is the cause for this problem, and is there anyway to rectify it ? Rkr1991 (talk) 13:02, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Depending on who you ask, this is not a problem at all... Andreas Rejbrand (talk) 14:37, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok if you don't consider it a problem (it is for me - heck i'm paying money), consider it as a query.... Rkr1991 (talk) 15:13, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

You're paying money for what? Not the extra DVD. Anyway, most commercially produced DVDs have copy protection that indeed prevents copied DVDs from working, whether it's in a DVD player or in a computer's DVD drive. Tempshill (talk) 18:18, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

All depends on how the DVD was created. DVDs store title ID information and key information in an otherwise unwritable sector (except with specialized equipment) which is why you can't straight copy a DVD.

To others, please don't provide a smart ass response to every copy-protection related question. Shadowjams (talk) 03:10, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I would hazard that the optical drive in your machine is sufficiently old that it will not read all modern types of DVD media. Some older drives will not read DVD+R, many will not read DVD-RAM, and some will not read rewritable media (DVD-RW or DVD+RW). Older standalone DVD players also sometimes have problems with unfinalised disks, although I don't know if that affects PCs much. 87.112.85.111 (talk) 14:49, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Copy protection will sometimes prevent simple disc cloning. What program did you use to copy the DVDs? If, of course, you simply bought the pirated DVD, it matters what they used to clone the DVDs. Either way, get a DVD ripper and a DVD burner, and do it that way - and I feel obliged to point out, of course you should only do this if you have already bought the DVD and are making a backup etc. Ale_Jrb^talk 15:00, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Downhill Jam

What do the green and later red jewels on the crowns mean? I know they must be for better-than-gold performances, but I can't find anywhere what they actually mean. I'm on Wii. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 14:40, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Embedding Applets Online

Hello. Can someone explain in simple terms how I should embed my Java applet into my webpage http://sites.google.com/site/superaec? Thanks in advance. --Mayfare (talk) 15:07, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

This official tutorial from Sun (the creators of Java), is called Deploying Applets - "This section explains to HTML authors how and when to use the applet, object, and embed tags to add Java applets to Web pages, and provides guidelines for deploying applets on the Internet and Intranets, and for use with different browsers." This should be your reference for Applet and other Java-related information.

To briefly summarize the process, there are a few steps. First, you need to design and write your Java code and make sure it compiles as an applet (in other words, its main Class must extend Applet or JApplet). Next, you must place all of the needed .class files somewhere accessible on the web (presumably, on your web server, via FTP or some other file upload method). Last, you need to create or edit an HTML page, and add some code to load your applet from the webpage:

<applet code="YourAppletMainProgram.class" width="200" height="200"></applet>

Then, you can test it by loading the web page. If you are not familiar with editing HTML documents, you might want to brush up on that as well. If you want to package your applet in a JAR file, there is a tutorial for that on the Java website I linked above. Nimur (talk) 15:46, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I attached the .class files to my site and tried to add the applet tag. Google Sites says "Your HTML either contains unsafe tags (iframe, embed, styles, script) or extra attributes. They will be removed when the page is viewed." If I try Webs.com, where can I upload my .class files and how can I make my Webs.com homepage access the bytecode? --Mayfare (talk) 02:01, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

That is unfortunate - apparently, Google's stance on security is to completely deny you the ability to run program code of any type on their hosts. Actually, applets, scripts, and embed tags generally run the code on the client, not the host. Anyway...Google doesn't want you doing it via their website! Since this is exactly what you want to do, you will need to find a different web host which does not have such draconian limitations. It is my opinion that Java Applets are not a serious security risk ("unsafe", as Google's message put it); but they are probably being extra-cautious as their corporate brand-name shows up in the web host and they don't want to take any risks. I'm not familiar with Webs.com, but you might consider checking the terms of service and the technical help sections of that or any other web host. Nimur (talk) 14:58, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

libticables2-2.dll

Hello, I am trying to install TiLP2 on my computer, but I am missing some DLLs. I have located most of them, but I cannot find where to download libticables2-2.dll. Please help me find it!!! I've searched Google for it and my hard drive as well, but it is nowhere to be found. Any help searching for it would be greatly appreciated. --72.69.235.79 (talk) 19:26, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

What or where are you trying to install this from? Any DLLs that are a part of TiLP2 should have come with it. Downloading individual DLLs from the internet is a very dangerous practice, as you don't know where they came from or, indeed, if they are the real ones. Download TiLP2 again, from a reliable and current site, and what you need should be on it. Make sure to get the one for your operating system.This seems to be the official TiLP2 site - KoolerStill (talk) 01:58, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I've downloaded it from that site several times (for the appropriate operating system), as I thought perhaps my original download was corrupted. No difference, I am still somehow missing a bunch of DLLs. (And oh crap...gotta do an anti-virus scan now). Anyone else have any luck locating it? --71.171.163.124 (talk) 02:30, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Solution: Download and install TIEmu (google it) program will install missing files good luck from me and the ip shown (will change after post)

Can I use a new flat TFT monitor screen with an old computer?

I have a computer that is a few years old, although it has been upgraded to XP. It currently has a CRT monitor. If I unplug the CRT monitor and plug in a flat TFT monitor, should I have any problems? In other words are they compatible please? I assume the plugs that attach to the rear of the computer are the same. 78.147.243.144 (talk) 19:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Most flat-panel monitors still come with a VGA connector, which your old computer will (almost certainly) have. Many flat-panel monitors will also have a Digital Visual Interface connector, but they're smart enough to figure out which one to use for themselves. I'm not aware of any that only feature the DVI connector and not VGA. I say "almost certainly", because there's a vanishingly small number of old, high-end machines (used for CAD and video, in particular) that had Component video output instead, but I really really doubt that's what you'll have. 87.112.85.111 (talk) 20:04, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

There is a second question that you should answer before purchasing a flat-panel monitor: Can your old computer output video in the native resolution of the monitor? Unlike CRT monitors, flat-panel monitors' output looks pixellated, blocky, and overall really bad, particularly when displaying text, if the computer is outputting video whose screen resolution differs from the flat-panel's native resolution. Tempshill (talk) 20:35, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

You can, incidentally, usually look up the possible resolutions that a given card supports. It's a good thing to do before getting a new monitor -- make sure it is supported. Often updating old video card drivers, if possible, opens up a lot of possibilities. --98.217.14.211 (talk) 22:38, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

The resolution of the LCD screen I was thinking of buying is 1400x900 (1.555 aspect ratio), whereas the resolutions my computer can put out are 1280x1024 (1.25) and 1024x768 (1.333). I suppose this means I would have large blank areas on the screen? 78.151.102.179 (talk) 12:02, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

No - the resolution you output will scale to fit the entire screen, but as it's previously been said scaled output on an LCD monitor looks horrible. Two options :- One, upgrade your graphics card at the same time to one that can output 1400x900. Two, buy a cheaper LCD 1280x1024 screen. Exxolon (talk) 13:16, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The 1400x900 screen is the cheapest available to me. The other ones have a higher resolution. Just how easy would it be to get a cheap video card capable of 1400x900 please? 78.147.147.146 (talk) 16:42, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

• Your IP address suggests you are in the UK. Try Novatech - a card from them that looks like it supports that resolution and more is at [1] for £23.23 - check with their sales/tech support if you're not sure. Exxolon (talk) 16:51, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Perhaps if I supply all the details, a kind expert(s) could advise what to do? The monitor I'm currently using is a CRT, a Compaq Presario V400, made in march 1997. I sit in front of it for several hours a day, with my eyes about 16 inches from the small screen. I'm concerned that I'm getting a dose of X-rays over the years, as I've been told that my eyes show radiation damage - the radiation could be UV or X-rays. Its 12 years old - it may not be as safe as modern ones.

Details of my current computer: Motherboard ID 06/22/2000-693-596-W977E-P6BAT-APC-00 Motherboard name: ECS P6BAT-A+ CPU Type: Intel Pentium IIIE, 733 MHz (5.5 x 133) Memmory: 255MB. Running XP Sp3.

The current video card is disabled, as otherwise the computer will not start - I believe the hardware was damaged by a voltage spike. The greatest resolution my computer can do is 1280x1024 - I'm surprised it still functions with the video card turned off (the CRT is still plugged into it, and there is no other video output).

I have another old video card I could use. It says Matrox 7003-0301 rev_a on it, and its specs are - Model: G450 Slot: PCI Mark: G45FMDVP32DBF MB: 32 Ramdac: 360/230 Serie: 7003-0301 Display: DVI + RGB Comment: DVI-RGB adapter. I have found a driver for it here: http://download.cnet.com/Windows-XP-Device-Driver-for-Matrox-G-450/3000-2108_4-106278.html

So I'm wondering if a) the Matrox card would work with my computer, and b) it could do the screen resolution of 1440x900 (I think the 1400 was probably a misprint). I only use the computer for word-processing and the internet, not for games. Thanks 78.147.147.146 (talk) 19:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, your CRT is not beaming X-rays into your eyes. (The article Cathode ray tube talks about the leading shielding you from them.) Secondly, who has told you your eyes show radiation damage? Was it a doctor, and what was the doctor's advice? Thirdly, your video card must be on, or else you wouldn't be getting a video signal. Could you explain how you know it is "disabled"? OK, moving on. A large flat-panel monitor will probably lessen your eye strain and increase your Computer Enjoyment. This page says your Matrox alternative is a G450, and this page says the maximum resolution of a G450 is 1280x1024, just like with the video card that's currently in your computer. A different video card could be purchased that would drive the larger monitor at its native resolution. Tempshill (talk) 21:03, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. My current video card is diabled in Divice Monitor. If it is enabled, the computer will only start in Safe Mode. I've tried updating the driver - no effect. Your second link says - "Maximum resolutions (per display) Digital: 1280 x 1024 Analog, main display: 2048 x 1536 Analog, secondary display: 1600 x 1200". The LCD monitor in question has an analogue input, so perhaps it can do 1440x900? And maybe if the input to the monitor is analogue and not digital, perhaps its not so important to match the native resolution????? Contributions/78.146.180.151 (talk) 10:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Aren't we missing the obvious? I also just bought a new monitor, happens to be 1440x900 -- and IT CAME WITH A DRIVER DISK! So, no handwringing about whether or not the graphics card would support it; I plugged it in, it looked silly for the three minutes it took to install the driver from the CD; end of story.

I then had a fun time playing with the multiple monitor options :-)

--DaHorsesMouth (talk) 22:21, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Having a driver disk won't help if your graphics card is not powerful enough to support the screens resolution. Exxolon (talk) 23:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

As I mention above, is that still so critical if the LCD monitor is taking an analogue signal, not a digital one? Contributions/78.146.180.151 (talk) 10:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Your motherboard appears to have an AGP port (and BOTH slot 1 and socket 370, for some reason) so your G450 should work once you've installed it. However the motherboard has a VIA chipset which are quite temperamental and you should always update the chipset drivers to the latest. You may have some trouble getting widescreen resolutions but this thread might help. --antilived^{T | C | G} 01:06, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, how do I do a chipset driver update, or check if my chipset already has the latest available driver, which I think may be the case? I think I looked into this in the past, and the old motherboard I have has not been attended to by the manufactuer for years I think. And another point - if I buy the 1440x900 LCD monitor now, is that resolution likely to be supported when I eventually buy a new desktop pc in the future? Contributions/78.146.180.151 (talk) 10:14, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

This seems to be right place, you might want to get the "Retro Chipset" one for your motherboard. And yes, 1440×900 is a commonly-supported resolution. --antilived^{T | C | G} 10:28, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, done that with the retro chipset package, although I think I remember doing the same thing previously. How do I install the Matrox video card? Do I just replace the card, turn the computer back on, then run the driver package? I'm wondering if I'm going to get any display prior to running the driver. 78.149.138.140 (talk) 10:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes you plug in the card into one of the white slots (your card is PCI I believe) and connect your monitor to that. You should also pull out your old card to avoid problems. Don't worry, you will at least get VGA display even without drivers, and after that hopefully you can use your new screen to its full potential! --antilived^{T | C | G} 12:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, have nowe replaced the old video card with the Matrox card. Windows Update supplied the driver. But, although it can do much larger screen resolutions, it cannot do 1440x900. Unless its only showing what it will do with a default CRT monitor. 78.147.130.36 (talk) 19:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Solution: Download and install TIEmu (google it) program will install missing files good luck from me and the ip shown (will change after post)

Screen resolution of LCD - follow-up question

Quick question inspired by the above: machine runs Zenwalk Linux, is a P3/850 MHz with _some_ Nvidia with 32 megs (a little younger than the machine itself). User (self) recently bought new flat panel LCD just because. Now, he read somewhere that he may just simply add the native resolution of the LCD to some conf file or other (I can't really remember which one), and that it will run. User did that, and everything ran, and had been running nicely for half a year now just as user wanted. Now, which of the following had happened:

• graphics card is able to run at native resolution of LCD (1440x900) and thus forms a nice pair with the LCD, or
• graphics card was effectively forced to accept what it had been told to do (i. e. the screen resolution).

I think the first one, but just to make sure. If anyone wants, I'll have a follow-up question to this one later. Thanks in advance and cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 21:02, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

If the graphics card was not able to run at the resolution settings you specified in your Xorg.conf file, then it would fail to switch the video mode when X is initialized (a few moments after the system "boots" but before you log in). Then, you would have either seen nothing (black screen, error message, etc), or a "failsafe" text-only console mode at a default resolution like 640x480 @ 60 Hz. Because you added a standard resolution setting which (modern) graphics hardware is able to generate and the (modern) monitor is able to understand, there were no problems. Most graphics cards are able to generate the correct clock signals for many standard resolutions and refresh rates. Nimur (talk) 21:37, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

xorg.conf, right! Oh, and thank you for the (logical) answer. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 05:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Checklists

Recently I noticed that each of the medical clinics I visit now use checklists exclusively before doing anything.

There is even a hand washing checklist with entires posted in the bathroom that covers the use of water, soap, motion of hands, duration, drying, etc.

What I am wondering is if the checklists have been made public not only so they can be scrutinized by the public but in the event of major overwhelming disaster a lay person could have a checklist to follow, barring extra ordinary circumstances which one checklist might have to defer to another checklist. After all were are storing seeds in the event of such a disaster so why not practical procedural knowledge to include the legal system in addition to surgical procedures?

-- Taxa (talk) 22:28, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

You do get this is a reference desk? Not a "let me propose a random idea and watch people debate it and hopefully say I'm smart because I pointed something out". If you believe this is a valid idea, tell people who can do stuff. It's like all your questions on the physics desk; they aren't questions- they are you trying to prove some half-baked idea that you get from reading a Wikipedia article. As has been said there- get a book and research stuff.24.171.145.63 (talk) 23:02, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

So basically then you are saying I need an entry in my checklist that asks if I know this is a reference desk and another one to ask if this is a random idea and another one to ask if I want to watch people debate a random idea and another to ask if I can point something out and one to ask if anyone here can do stuff and another one to read the Wikipedia or a book to prove a half-baked idea from researching stuff. Okay. -- Taxa (talk) 23:47, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

(e/c.)

I don't like to answer a question with a question, But why would such emergency stores of knowledge be in checklist form? That doesn't seem practical. I know that I could not teach a lay person to do my job (computer programming) entirely from checklists, but some well written textbooks can and have taught many people the profession.

Incidentally, what makes this a Reference question? Are you looking for copies of these checklists? APL (talk) 23:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

It is quite common in developing countries I believe to have people with only a little training handle straightforward medical conditions using a big book of checklists. The main problem is teaching them to refer the problem when it says refer rather than treating more complex problems. I suppose we could all follow checklists like that when the apocalypse comes. And by the way I rather like answering questions with another question but I won't in this instance. Dmcq (talk) 23:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

edit conflict...Flight checklists have been around ever since the first airplane crashes in which the flaps were locked or something like that so basically whenever you get in an airplane your life is in the hands of a checklist. Same with surgery. You might have a heart attack during surgery which a surgical checklist would hopefully catch. Since they are already used to protect life its a good bet they have some value. -- Taxa (talk) 23:28, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Some value ... to surgeons, that is, the people they're designed for. It does not automatically follow that they would be useful to people with no training.

Besides, you seem like you've already made up your mind on this issue. What's your reference question? APL (talk) 02:00, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

The essense of the OPs question is: have medical checklists been made public? Probably, if you look at the appropriate textbooks. Checklists are also used by aircraft pilots and in business. This reminds me of Mycin, and you could consider expert systems to be a kind of smart checklist. The Checklist article led me to Medical guideline.78.151.102.179 (talk) 10:49, 14 June 2009 (UTC)