Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2012 December 5

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.

December 5

Bluetooth bust

For a few months now, my laptop bluetooth's not been working properly. I can switch it on, and detect the presence of other devices (my cell, for example), but I can't exchange stuff (cell to laptop or vice-versa). Everytime I try to do so, it says something like "Service not supported by other device"... When I go to the Devices and printers section in the control Panel, (I use Windows 7) there's a small notification icon at the bottom corner of my laptop's icon, which tells me to troubleshoot the bluetooth connection. When I do so, it says "Driver not detected".. I tried reinstalling the driver, but during installation, the installer notified me that the required driver is already installed. Any idea what's wrong with my lappy? 117.211.6.139 (talk) 10:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Assuming you have the driver installation program available, why not delete the old bluetooth drivers first and then reinstall it again. Astronaut (talk) 17:03, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Tried that too. Now the driver installer tells me that the driver is already installed. Weird. Control Panel doesn't list any bluetooth driver installed, but it still refuses to work... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.190.191.191 (talk) 18:28, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Uninstalling might be a two stage process and might be distributed across a few places (low level driver, a service,and the higher level stuff that appears in the control panel). Assuming you rebooted after uninstalling you might still have some of it left around. You can't just delete the driver files either, so have another go - maybe checking the laptop's BIOS screen to make sure the hardware is off. Astronaut (talk) 18:40, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Automating file resource replacement..

I want to edit some executable file (EXE) resources on windows 7, I've tried resource hacker and other resource editors, but none of them provides an "API" or something that lets me automatize the replacement since it's very tedious to do it manually.. Is there any program that allows automated replacement? Or, how could programatically edit an executable resources? I have not been able to find any usefull information. Thanks. _{PS:Should work on 64bit} 190.60.93.218 (talk) 17:27, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I guess when you're says "EXE" you mean a Portable Executable (PE32 and PE64) format file, and not an old 16 bit New Executable or a .NET process assembly. So what you need is a library for whatever language you're intended to write your automation in, that can manipulate PE headers. There are libraries for Python and C++, for example. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 19:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

A discussion on doing this in C# is here -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 19:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

An alternative might be to took through the sources for Mono, which contains sources for its implementation of pedump and monodis, and for Mono's own resource compiler. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 21:15, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Windows 7 settings

Two settings I find annoying and want to change:

1) It seems to make the window title bars somewhat transparent, showing whatever is underneath them as a fuzzy image. This is both ugly and a silly way to waste resources. How do I make them either completely opaque, or, failing that, transparent without fuzziness ?

2) In Control Panel, it seems to sort in an annoying order, like this:

  1                    2                    3                    4
  5                    6                    7                    8

I want to change it between row-major order and column-major order, like this:

  1                    3                    5                    7
  2                    4                    6                    8

How do I do that ? Thanks for your help. StuRat (talk) 18:35, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Window and title-bar transparency settings are controlled in Window Color personalization options. Nimur (talk) 18:46, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

(ec) :Under "Personalization", there is "Window color" along the bottom icons. That one leads to a screen with "Enable transparency" ticked. There are more extensive options under "Advanced appearance settings..."

As for the control panel's sort order, you can't change that at all easily. From my experience with XP, I know things like the control panel are likely stored somewhere as a directory of shortcuts, and you might be able to introduce something to override the way it is presented on screen. Astronaut (talk) 19:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. They admit that transparency may adversely affect performance, yet make it the default option. I turned off the "Aero" themes entirely, and went back to Windows Classic, as I'm not too concerned about poking myself on the pointy corners. :-) StuRat (talk) 19:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

The transparency is silly, I had the bar at the opaque extreme… but man, give the aero a chance and you will never want to go back, this thing is really comfortable and practical Iskánder Vigoa Pérez (talk) 23:09, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

What does it give you besides rounded corners ? StuRat (talk) 02:17, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

A royal headache. - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 09:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually Aero has a number of features, as unsurprisingly discussed at our article Windows Aero. This includes Taskbar thumbnails, and in Windows 7 Aero peek, Aero shake, Aero snap. However it's unclear to me if we're talking about Aero glass, Aero glass and Aero basic, UI changes in Windows 7 in general or what. Certain features like Aero snap are available in Windows 7 in general, even in classic (non Aero) mode. Certain features like Aero shake are available in Aero basic and not just Aero glass but not (by default) available in basic. And certain features beyond transparency are available in Aero Glass only (like Aero peek, Taskbar thumbnails). Nil Einne (talk) 04:57, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Wow, I'm really glad I turned it off then. I found both Aero Shake and Aero Snap highly annoying. For example, I don't want the O/S trying to figure our when I want to maximize the screen. I will tell it explicitly. Aero Peek would be OK, if I could just turn that on, but I take it that's not possible. StuRat (talk) 04:52, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

The transparency probably isn't using up much of any resources. Aero is a composited desktop, meaning that the windows are each rendered in their own private buffer, then the video card takes care of drawing them in the right places, compositing them into a desktop. The transparency is achieved through a simple shader routine that takes place entirely in the GPU. Unless you're running intensive 3D applications in windowed mode with Aero enabled, you aren't likely to take any sort of performance hit. The compositing can also take load off your CPU because it allows the GPU to do almost all of the work related to placing and overlapping windows. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 12:42, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

209.131, I wouldn't be too sure about that.

When moving a window, Windows could tell the GPU to move a rectangular region from "here" to "there", which reduces to an ability called BitBlt (bit block transfer). Virtually all post-VGA hardware can do that without using CPU cycles or touching its RAM.

Redrawing is, however, a very different beast. Rather than writing to a region of graphics RAM, the computer has to write to a separate region of graphics RAM first, and then copy that region to one which will be part of the display. The second part is very CPU-inexpensive, but what if the processes have to stand in line to access graphics RAM? It'll be slower, not faster then. On top of that, it uses graphics RAM like there's no tomorrow (which is a non-issue with a reasonable number of threads and a modern gfx card, though). The round corners only add to the complication.

On top of that, it takes a quite new gfx chip to do convolution (blurring) with transparency. Even if it happens within the GPU, that'd still deplete my battery without any added usability. - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 09:57, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

But you also save on a lot of WM_PAINT messages not flying around all the time... The windows never actually overlap, so the hidden regions don't get invalidated. Dragging a window around over another one on a non-Aero desktop will keep invalidating regions on the buried window, triggering paint events and using up CPU cycles. Alt-tabbing between windows (even minimized applications) is pretty much free. It helps speed performance on a lot of those transistional states where people tend to notice if things are acting slow. I'm not saying it is necessarily better in all cases, but if it isn't causing problems for you (StuRat doesn't mention performance issues, although he does think it is ugly), then it is silly to turn it off just in case it is using resources. I would be interested to see benchmark comparisions between systems with Aero on and off for various types of tasks - CPU intensive, GPU intensive, and window operation intensive. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 12:46, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

I tend to run my PC right to the limit, so would like to eliminate any unneeded frills which take up resources. I can't say I've noticed any diff when I turned off "aero", but at least I don't have to look at those hideous blurry bits any more. StuRat (talk) 23:20, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Note that by 'new gfx', you mean a card with Pixel Shader 2.0 support and 128MB RAM or 64MB shared for integrated cards, which even crappy Intel graphics have supported since the 910G (although I don't know if they ever got Aero working properly on that or didn't release WDDM drivers, perhaps because their implementation was so utterly shite, but definitely the 945G supported Aero Glass in theory). Nil Einne (talk) 04:57, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Nil Einne: wow, I would have thought that the reqs on hardware convolution were higher. PS2,0 is - I have to admit - quite mild.

"But you also save on a lot of WM_PAINT messages": Only if you keep shuffling windows back and forth like a madman. When scrolling through this ref desk, or clicking back and forth on links, the load will only come from the browser displaying that stuff. Yes, there could be some savings if the whole RD/C can be kept in gfx mem, but only if I scroll back and forth. Otherwise, the whole page will be rendered exactly once, either in one piece or in 15 screen-sized pieces. - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 17:39, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

vb express xml comments

Using vb express 2010, is there a way to compile the xml comments into a file. I know there is a /doc option somewhere, but i can't fine that option in the express version.

Thanks, 86.42.161.253 (talk) 19:08, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Just a caution that the results might not be as useful as you hope. For example: "Add these two values together to get X:" is rather meaningless without the code showing which two values they are talking about. StuRat (talk) 19:33, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

StuRat, the XML comments are used for building MSDN-style documentation, when used properly. Each function and class gets documented, describing the use and purpose, and all parameters. Everything gets cross-referenced with links. It is a lot like doxygen, if you're familiar with that sort of documentation system. They also are integrated into the IDE, so as you type arguments to a function, a tool top describes what each one does. I've never tried building the documentation on express edition, so unfortunately I can't help the OP. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 17:10, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

New RAM, corrupted RAM? [memtest86+]

Just bought two new RAM modules a few days ago, however, after testing with Memtest86+ (Ubuntu Live CD) it appears I get a few errors:

http://bayimg.com/GaGEOaAeN

http://bayimg.com/haGeAAaEn

I'm not 100% familiar with the program, so can anyone confirm those are in fact errors? Assuming they are errors, is it "normal" to get these kinds of errors? Thanks. - David Candoso — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.80.244.207 (talk) 19:43, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, the summary above says that 0 cases pass, so that does sound bad. Either the memory is bad, or the scanning program is. StuRat (talk) 19:53, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Memtest86+ is a well-known program that is distributed with both Debian and Ubuntu, probably other distros as well. As the OP will know, you boot into Memtest86+ instead of booting into the OS (Memtest86+ appears on the GRUB boot menu). There is no reason to believe that the problem is with Memtest86+. I once had a dual boot PC in which CPU-intensive tasks crashed in Linux, which showed no symptoms of any kind when booting windows Xp. I initially thought the fault was with Linux. I checked with memtest86+, and immediately got screens like the ones you posted pictures of. Replacing the RAM it fixed the problem. I have no idea how Xp was able to run stably with defective RAM. There is a (remote?) possibility that your RAM is not mounted properly, but if the PC boots OK, I doubt that that would be the problem. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 21:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Pull the ram modules out, clean the contacts with a pencil eraser, then jam them back into the sockets rather forcefully and run memtest again. If you still get errors, you have bad ram. You should not get ANY errors. If you're suspicious of your ram and don't see errors right away, run the test for at least a week nonstop. That will often find errors that a 24-hour test misses. 66.127.54.40 (talk) 01:45, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

To clean contacts better use close to 100% isopropyl alcohol (available at your drugstore quite cheaply).TMCk (talk) 01:59, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Actually, "DDR3-798, 6-6-6-15" shown in the screen shot is a pretty weird configuration. Maybe your bios settings are messed up? I thought modern motherboards and chipsets took care of this stuff automatically, but it's been a while since I've messed with a desktop PC. 66.127.54.40 (talk) 02:01, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Facebook's How can we reach you?

Facebook still shows that in case you don't have an access to your e-mail for password recovery there is an option "How can we reach you?" available after clicking on "No longer have access to these". However presently that option isn't shown when you click on "No longer have access to these?" - there is another screen instead, which isn't helpful. Is there something wrong or they removed "How can we reach you?" and forgot to update the troubleshooting video? 93.174.25.12 (talk) 22:02, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Facebook actually has its own help forums/threads available… although I wouldn't count on them responding in any fashion at all. ¦ Reisio (talk) 01:20, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

CRITICAL! error in win8

Super Windows eight just gave me this error… some clue what could it be?

• [ Name] volmgr
• EventID 46
• [ Qualifiers] 49156
• Level 2
• Task 0
• Keywords 0x80000000000000

• EventData
• \Device\HarddiskVolume1

0000000001000000000000002E0004C0091000000F0000C000000000000000000000000000000000

( Crash dump initialization failed!)

thanks Iskánder Vigoa Pérez (talk) 22:57, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

It looks like a hard disk error, but we need more details: What were you doing at the time ? Is anything not working properly ? If so, what ? StuRat (talk) 02:15, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

That's not enough information to be sure, but some people online report that error on systems without a pagefile, so if you have disabled that for some reason try re-enabling it. If it is an upgraded installation I would try (at least temporarily) removing any software made by the vendor of your PC. A coworker had all sorts of Windows 8 crashing issues that went away after removing a few tools from Lenovo. He checked Lenovo's website, and Windows 8 versions of those tools didn't exist. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 12:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Update - I just realized the pagefile thing I mentioned happened on someone's Windows 7 PC... no idea if it affects 8, but if yours is disabled it is probably still worth trying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.131.76.183 (talk) 12:37, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Why is UDP hardly used for multicast applications?

Maybe I'm just looking at a bad sample, but it seems like whenever I look at netstat while running Internet applications that are seemingly a perfectly fit for UDP's multicast functionality, they're all implemented with TCP connections. From what I've seen, online radio broadcasts, Ustream, live sports video, and similar applications all show up as using TCP connections. Couldn't overloading and limited-bandwidth issues on the server side be avoided by using a UDP multicast? It just seems to me that UDP multicast was designed for these applications, yet I can't find a significant number of them that use it. Why?--el Aprel (^facta-_facienda) 23:14, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

There was something called the Mbone that attempted what you're describing, but it languished because you usually can't get multicast through routers. These days content delivery networks handle a lot of that wide streaming stuff, so there's still not a bottleneck at the originating server. 66.127.54.40 (talk) 01:42, 6 December 2012 (UTC)