I've got Guitar Hero: World Tour. Do you have it? I have it for my Wii. If yes, then you'll know some of the pads (the red pad especially) doesn't always pick up the hits. You have to hit it harder than the rest. I didn't like this.
As I soon began playing most songs in Expert mode (thaaaaat's right), I also found the orange pad (the cymbol) also had to be hit quite hard.
So, I did a bit of research. Google was my friend.
This is a known fault with the drum kit, and as such - a free solution is provided (under warranty anyway)!
http://guitarhero.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/guitarhero.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=21748&p_sid=HCNFwPCj&p_lva=23199
Contact them, stating the problem you're having with the drums. They'll ask you to do a few checks but once you confirm the problem, they'll send you a MIDI-USB cable for the drums to be connected to your PC/Laptop. It can take 4-6 WEEKS they said but I got mine in a matter of days!
I downloaded the software, followed the instructions, adjusted my sensitivity, and voila! Perfect hits every time!
Guitar Hero: World Tour - Great game, great support.
Digiman out
Thursday 10 September 2009
Wednesday 2 September 2009
Extending Wireless Networks - The Finished Result!
After getting my lovely DIR-635 on Tuesday, I spent the day getting it all set up.
Ignore my previous post as I had to change the steps, and didn't configure the DHCP settings on a per-router basis.
1) Power on the new (or old and factory reset) router and connect to it via Ethernet cable. Don't plug anything else in.
2) Access the router's IP address (this will be 192.168.1.1 or similar) and configure any wireless settings - eg SSID and wireless key. These must match your existing router's wireless configuration if you want them to work in tandem and if you want your devices to automatically switch between them. Save and reboot.
3) Change the IP address of the router to an IP used by your existing router - in my case, my Belkin is 192.168.2.x - so I set my new router to 192.168.2.254 and turned OFF the DHCP server. (These steps should be done together as they should be on the same page of your router). Save and reboot.
4) Now, plug a cable from the LAN of your existing router into the LAN (NOT the WAN port if you are using a cable router) of your new router. Your existing router will detect the IP address you set and will route traffic through it accordingly.
Now your wired/wireless devices accessing your new router will have their IPs assigned by the DHCP server on your existing router AND you will still have access to ALL network resources on both routers (eg printers, hard drives, and PCs too).
Digiman out :)
Ignore my previous post as I had to change the steps, and didn't configure the DHCP settings on a per-router basis.
1) Power on the new (or old and factory reset) router and connect to it via Ethernet cable. Don't plug anything else in.
2) Access the router's IP address (this will be 192.168.1.1 or similar) and configure any wireless settings - eg SSID and wireless key. These must match your existing router's wireless configuration if you want them to work in tandem and if you want your devices to automatically switch between them. Save and reboot.
3) Change the IP address of the router to an IP used by your existing router - in my case, my Belkin is 192.168.2.x - so I set my new router to 192.168.2.254 and turned OFF the DHCP server. (These steps should be done together as they should be on the same page of your router). Save and reboot.
4) Now, plug a cable from the LAN of your existing router into the LAN (NOT the WAN port if you are using a cable router) of your new router. Your existing router will detect the IP address you set and will route traffic through it accordingly.
Now your wired/wireless devices accessing your new router will have their IPs assigned by the DHCP server on your existing router AND you will still have access to ALL network resources on both routers (eg printers, hard drives, and PCs too).
Digiman out :)
Friday 21 August 2009
Extending Wireless Networks (my way)
My wireless router is pretty much dead center in the house, but we've got a long house - so the signal doesn't reach either end. It has never bothered me, because my room is directly above the router. It never bothered my brother because his room is right next to mine. It won't bother my sister when she gets her laptop as her room is right beside the study where the router is, and it doesn't bother my dad because he uses a desktop which is wired to the router.
However, it does bother my mum, who also got a laptop - with wireless N. The wireless signal just isn't strong enough to go the places she wants to use her laptop in - her bedroom, the sitting room, or the lounge. I can sympathise.
So I've decided to help. The network topology in my house is pretty awesome, I'm not gonna lie to you.
We've got a Belkin G+ mimo router in the study - the 4 ports are all used up by - my dad's desktop, my sister's desktop, a networked laser printer, and finally, the last port is used by my 16-port switch in the attic. (I may note at this point that my attic is accessable through a door in my room, so it's no big issue).
My 16 port switch has enabled me to have a lot of fun. Not normal fun - geeky fun. I'll explain.
Below: My awesome wall-mounted 16 port switch (with room for expansion!)
However, it does bother my mum, who also got a laptop - with wireless N. The wireless signal just isn't strong enough to go the places she wants to use her laptop in - her bedroom, the sitting room, or the lounge. I can sympathise.
So I've decided to help. The network topology in my house is pretty awesome, I'm not gonna lie to you.
We've got a Belkin G+ mimo router in the study - the 4 ports are all used up by - my dad's desktop, my sister's desktop, a networked laser printer, and finally, the last port is used by my 16-port switch in the attic. (I may note at this point that my attic is accessable through a door in my room, so it's no big issue).
My 16 port switch has enabled me to have a lot of fun. Not normal fun - geeky fun. I'll explain.
Below: My awesome wall-mounted 16 port switch (with room for expansion!)
The first port in my switch accepts the ethernet cable my dad ran up to the attic initially a number of years ago for my PC. Ports two to five run to the corner of my room, where I've installed a 4-port ethernet plate. It gives network access to: My PC, my LAN hard drive, and my Print Server, plus one for spare when I'm working on other desktops)
Below: My awesome 4-port wall mounted ethernet plate (installed vertically so my desk could get closer to the wall) Drilling through walls is fun :D 
Port six runs to the sitting-room, where the media PC was initially, and finally port seven runs to the lounge, where it currently resides. A 40" TV as a monitor is kickin', by the way!
By far, the most fun I had was wiring everything up. Seriously.
So, that now brings me back to the problem at hand - I can have a lot of wired devices, but what about the wireless range?
Well - you can extend your wireless range using standard Cable Routers - ones that accept ethernet connections, not DSL phone line connections - for internet.
My cable router of choice is the D-Link DIR-635 - it's wireless N and sports 3 antennae. Nifty.
The other reason - the removable antennae.
The plan of action is to get two 6m SMA extension cables, and run one cable towards my brother's room (above my parents' room) and one to the right, above the main hall - (near the sitting room and lounge). I can do all this along the attic, so no visible wires! I'll leave the center antenna attached to the router for central-coverage.
It's wireless N, so will support the latest laptop cards etc, but also backwards compatable with b and g options, so will continue to work with mine.
Some configuring will be required.
First of all, I'll change the IP range of my Belkin to 192.168.2.1 - 192.168.2.100
I'll then change the IP range of the D-Link to 192.168.2.101 - 192.168.2.255
Then, I'll need to configure the D-Link to have the same network name (SSID), and security - the same key and encryption method.
Once complete, the D-Link will offer complete wireless access around my house.
Depending on how well the Dlink performs, I may actually disable the wireless option on the Belkin, and see if that improves things again. The last thing I need is some kind of interference issue!
I've done this all before at my church, so it's my tried-and-tested way of doing it! (I've heard mixed things from wireless Access Points so decided on this way)
Digiman out
Monday 10 August 2009
RAM. It's damn important.
RAM - Random Access Memory. Never underestimate its importance.
Here is my little guide to Operating Systems vs. RAM requirements for Microsoft Operating Systems. Please note that the advertised RAM requirements are 32MB for ME, 128MB for XP, and 512MB for Vista. That may run the O/S, yes, but for actual use of the PC, you're gonna need a lot more than that!
ME/2000 - Advertised as 32MB RAM minimum. I recommend 512MB minimum for acceptable performance. 768MB is plenty, and 1GB maxes out most systems with those Operating Systems. Bear in mind your system probably uses SD-RAM which ain't cheap, plus some motherboards from that era may not support more than 256MB per slot! If you've got 256MB of RAM, your PC will struggle when opening more than 3 or so applications together, so it may be worth upgrading by another 256MB at least.
You may also want to look into buying a new PC...
XP - Advertised as 64MB absolute minimum and 128MB RAM recommended minimum. Nowadays, 512MB just about cuts it. My recommendation would be 1GB minimum for acceptable performance coupled with running multiple applications. XP machines were initially shipped with DDR RAM, which can be found for roughly £25 per Gig. I've seen it as low as £17. If you bought an XP machine post-2005, it will most likely be DDR2 RAM installed, in which case, max out your system. It's dirt cheap to do it - roughly £8 per gig. Install 4GB max if you run the 32-bit version - it will come up as 3.2GB but the remaining space can be used by the system for address allocation. You can max out your system with no hesitation with the 64-bit version.
VISTA - A whole new kettle of fish. Advertised as 512MB minimum (Home Basic) and 1GB (Home Premium/Business/Ultimate). Yes, this amount of RAM will run your installation of Vista, but if you want to start running multiple applications, forget about it. My recommendation - 2GB of RAM minimum for Home Basic, and install as much as you can for the other versions. 2GB will usually run Premium quite well, but to get the most out of your system when you've got multiple applications/games going, it would be worth installing more. The good news is that you'll most definitely have DDR2 RAM in your machine, and you can cheaply install heaps of it.
If you've got 3GB (2GB + 1GB) on a 32-bit system then that would also be ample.
For 32-bit, don't install more than 4GB - it will come up as 3.2GB but the remaining space can be used by the system for address allocation, and for 64-bit, you may max out your system if you desire.
Finally, a note on Windows 7. This version has a 32-bit edition and 64-bit just like XP and Vista, though the 32-bit will be rarely used. This is great news as manufacturers now have no reason not to install 4GB (or more) of RAM. In which case, you'll not need to worry about RAM requirements as Windows 7 isn't as heavy on system resources as Vista.
You can of course install as much RAM as your system can handle with 7.
Also, expect to see DDR3 becoming the standard over the next few years. Currently, there is not enough demand, so the prices remain high. But as manufacturers start using DDR3 modules, expect to see the prices fall.
RAM is awesome.
Digiman out.
Here is my little guide to Operating Systems vs. RAM requirements for Microsoft Operating Systems. Please note that the advertised RAM requirements are 32MB for ME, 128MB for XP, and 512MB for Vista. That may run the O/S, yes, but for actual use of the PC, you're gonna need a lot more than that!
ME/2000 - Advertised as 32MB RAM minimum. I recommend 512MB minimum for acceptable performance. 768MB is plenty, and 1GB maxes out most systems with those Operating Systems. Bear in mind your system probably uses SD-RAM which ain't cheap, plus some motherboards from that era may not support more than 256MB per slot! If you've got 256MB of RAM, your PC will struggle when opening more than 3 or so applications together, so it may be worth upgrading by another 256MB at least.
You may also want to look into buying a new PC...
XP - Advertised as 64MB absolute minimum and 128MB RAM recommended minimum. Nowadays, 512MB just about cuts it. My recommendation would be 1GB minimum for acceptable performance coupled with running multiple applications. XP machines were initially shipped with DDR RAM, which can be found for roughly £25 per Gig. I've seen it as low as £17. If you bought an XP machine post-2005, it will most likely be DDR2 RAM installed, in which case, max out your system. It's dirt cheap to do it - roughly £8 per gig. Install 4GB max if you run the 32-bit version - it will come up as 3.2GB but the remaining space can be used by the system for address allocation. You can max out your system with no hesitation with the 64-bit version.
VISTA - A whole new kettle of fish. Advertised as 512MB minimum (Home Basic) and 1GB (Home Premium/Business/Ultimate). Yes, this amount of RAM will run your installation of Vista, but if you want to start running multiple applications, forget about it. My recommendation - 2GB of RAM minimum for Home Basic, and install as much as you can for the other versions. 2GB will usually run Premium quite well, but to get the most out of your system when you've got multiple applications/games going, it would be worth installing more. The good news is that you'll most definitely have DDR2 RAM in your machine, and you can cheaply install heaps of it.
If you've got 3GB (2GB + 1GB) on a 32-bit system then that would also be ample.
For 32-bit, don't install more than 4GB - it will come up as 3.2GB but the remaining space can be used by the system for address allocation, and for 64-bit, you may max out your system if you desire.
Finally, a note on Windows 7. This version has a 32-bit edition and 64-bit just like XP and Vista, though the 32-bit will be rarely used. This is great news as manufacturers now have no reason not to install 4GB (or more) of RAM. In which case, you'll not need to worry about RAM requirements as Windows 7 isn't as heavy on system resources as Vista.
You can of course install as much RAM as your system can handle with 7.
Also, expect to see DDR3 becoming the standard over the next few years. Currently, there is not enough demand, so the prices remain high. But as manufacturers start using DDR3 modules, expect to see the prices fall.
RAM is awesome.
Digiman out.
Tuesday 4 August 2009
Epson printers - advantages/disadvantages, and cleaning the print head
We got an Epson printer with our first computer back in '98. It was an Epson Colour Stylus 600, to be exact.
10 years on, I'm still using it.
Why? Because it still works, and ink is dirt cheap - I'm talking roughly 80 pence (that's right) per cartridge, and they last a long time, too.
Don't get me wrong, we've another Epson and a new Lexmark in the house (my dad uses them), but it's far too economical to NOT use it!
So, happily it sits in my room, and I would like to think it's glad, and proud that I still use it. Awk - wee printer.
I have a parallel-to-USB adaptor, which plugs into a USB print server, which connects to my router, which effectively makes it a wireless printer! Not bad for a 10 year old machine!
It's not been an easy journey though. So here, I'm going to outline the advantages and disadvantages I've come across for my printer (and Epsons similar to it)
Advantages
1) Cheap ink - Epson ink cartridges don't contain the print head on them. The inks slot into the print head assembly, meaning cheaper original inks, and dirt-cheap high-quality compatibles. I've used compatibles for years with no problems (not re-manufactured - stay away from them)!
2) Good build quality - In my printer's case, four years constant use, four years of storage in my attic, and then two years of use again results in two thumbs up from me!
*Edit - 10th August 09*
3) Epson cleaning cartridges can be bought for as little as 99p from most sites that sell compatible Epson cartridges. I recently put a colour cleaning cartridge in, did a couple of cleans, and did a nozzle check (the cleaner has a little bit of ink in it so that you can still see the results - which were perfect, by the way). I then inserted my colour cartridge, did a couple of cleans to prime it, and hey presto. So take it from me - they work! On top of that, put a bit of tape over the cleaning cartridge and they can be re-used again and again!
*End Edit*
Disadvantages
1) Permanent print head - This results in the advantage of cheaper ink, but... if the ink dries on that print head, it's a nightmare to clean. With other makes of printer, it's a matter of wiping the print-head on the cartridge, and re-insterting it. With Epson, it's a bit more complicated.
As printers with higher-resolutions come out, there is more chance the nozzles will get clogged... great.
*From above edit*
If doing a couple of cleans doesn't fix your problem, get a cheap cleaning cartridge to do the job for you!
*end edit*
Hmm. That seems to be all I can think of at the moment. Can you think of any?
If you do have an Epson, prevention is better than the cure. Turn your printer off when not using it, and when you're at your PC, turn it on to enable a quick clean-cycle. This wipes off any ink that may be close to drying and blocking the print-head.
If that doesn't work, perform a clean cycle through your printer's properties in the Control Panel, but never do more than three cycles in a row!
If that still doesn't work, look here for some more info - http://www.inkmagic.com/epson_clogged_printhead.htm
It's a very informative and useful page to bookmark if you have an Epson printer. As it says , there will come a day when for whatever reason, your Epson just doesn't print.
Digiman Out.
10 years on, I'm still using it.
Why? Because it still works, and ink is dirt cheap - I'm talking roughly 80 pence (that's right) per cartridge, and they last a long time, too.
Don't get me wrong, we've another Epson and a new Lexmark in the house (my dad uses them), but it's far too economical to NOT use it!
So, happily it sits in my room, and I would like to think it's glad, and proud that I still use it. Awk - wee printer.
I have a parallel-to-USB adaptor, which plugs into a USB print server, which connects to my router, which effectively makes it a wireless printer! Not bad for a 10 year old machine!
It's not been an easy journey though. So here, I'm going to outline the advantages and disadvantages I've come across for my printer (and Epsons similar to it)
Advantages
1) Cheap ink - Epson ink cartridges don't contain the print head on them. The inks slot into the print head assembly, meaning cheaper original inks, and dirt-cheap high-quality compatibles. I've used compatibles for years with no problems (not re-manufactured - stay away from them)!
2) Good build quality - In my printer's case, four years constant use, four years of storage in my attic, and then two years of use again results in two thumbs up from me!
*Edit - 10th August 09*
3) Epson cleaning cartridges can be bought for as little as 99p from most sites that sell compatible Epson cartridges. I recently put a colour cleaning cartridge in, did a couple of cleans, and did a nozzle check (the cleaner has a little bit of ink in it so that you can still see the results - which were perfect, by the way). I then inserted my colour cartridge, did a couple of cleans to prime it, and hey presto. So take it from me - they work! On top of that, put a bit of tape over the cleaning cartridge and they can be re-used again and again!
*End Edit*
Disadvantages
1) Permanent print head - This results in the advantage of cheaper ink, but... if the ink dries on that print head, it's a nightmare to clean. With other makes of printer, it's a matter of wiping the print-head on the cartridge, and re-insterting it. With Epson, it's a bit more complicated.
As printers with higher-resolutions come out, there is more chance the nozzles will get clogged... great.
*From above edit*
If doing a couple of cleans doesn't fix your problem, get a cheap cleaning cartridge to do the job for you!
*end edit*
Hmm. That seems to be all I can think of at the moment. Can you think of any?
If you do have an Epson, prevention is better than the cure. Turn your printer off when not using it, and when you're at your PC, turn it on to enable a quick clean-cycle. This wipes off any ink that may be close to drying and blocking the print-head.
If that doesn't work, perform a clean cycle through your printer's properties in the Control Panel, but never do more than three cycles in a row!
If that still doesn't work, look here for some more info - http://www.inkmagic.com/epson_clogged_printhead.htm
It's a very informative and useful page to bookmark if you have an Epson printer. As it says , there will come a day when for whatever reason, your Epson just doesn't print.
Digiman Out.
Monday 3 August 2009
Where in the world? Not PC World!!
Speaking of Apple adverts...
I recently saw a PC World advert advertising a Dell laptop with, and I quote, "a 3 gig memory".
Puh-lease!
Another reason to dislike/make fun/get annoyed by PC World.
Of course, it was spoken from the perspective of a woman more excited about the colour of the laptop, as opposed to what was actually in it hardware wise. "Ohhh that'll go well with my new dress!" she exclaims.
What's that? It's pink? Well, what are the specs? It has a 3 gig memory? Don't you mean "it has 3 Gigabytes OF memory?" What about the processor? Hard drive? Graphics? What? You didn't think about mentioning that, and they don't matter, because it's pink?
Who writes these adverts anyway? Would it be too much to ask that the ads get checked over by someone competent enough to actually understand and use the correct terminology?
I had no idea what kind of processor was in it, until the "Intel Celeron Inside" logo was displayed.
Hah - Celerons. You think PC World are finally offering a decent laptop for £359. I wondered why they didn't mention the processor. I like Intel, they are my main preference, but of the Pentium variety. Celerons are improving, but they will suffer as software becomes more demanding than it already is.
Never, ever, ever choose a Celeron if you can help it. We always say "oh, I'll just get a laptop for using Word and sending emails on the go - but it never works that way - we will use it for everything. Just pay the extra £30 or £40 (if that) and upgrade to a Pentium, seriously. You won't regret it.
PC World have some good points too of course. Here's one, anyway. A few years ago I picked up a 5.1 Sound Card for under £8, which worked well with Vista. Got it for cheaper than anywhere else too. I even made a point of positively reviewing my local brance on the net when I got home. I may have been the only one...
Anyway, if you're buying a Dell, just go to www.dell.co.uk - it's usually cheaper and you can customise it exactly how you want. You cut out the (unneccessary) middle man.
I love ranting. Try it.
Digiman out.
I recently saw a PC World advert advertising a Dell laptop with, and I quote, "a 3 gig memory".
Puh-lease!
Another reason to dislike/make fun/get annoyed by PC World.
Of course, it was spoken from the perspective of a woman more excited about the colour of the laptop, as opposed to what was actually in it hardware wise. "Ohhh that'll go well with my new dress!" she exclaims.
What's that? It's pink? Well, what are the specs? It has a 3 gig memory? Don't you mean "it has 3 Gigabytes OF memory?" What about the processor? Hard drive? Graphics? What? You didn't think about mentioning that, and they don't matter, because it's pink?
Who writes these adverts anyway? Would it be too much to ask that the ads get checked over by someone competent enough to actually understand and use the correct terminology?
I had no idea what kind of processor was in it, until the "Intel Celeron Inside" logo was displayed.
Hah - Celerons. You think PC World are finally offering a decent laptop for £359. I wondered why they didn't mention the processor. I like Intel, they are my main preference, but of the Pentium variety. Celerons are improving, but they will suffer as software becomes more demanding than it already is.
Never, ever, ever choose a Celeron if you can help it. We always say "oh, I'll just get a laptop for using Word and sending emails on the go - but it never works that way - we will use it for everything. Just pay the extra £30 or £40 (if that) and upgrade to a Pentium, seriously. You won't regret it.
PC World have some good points too of course. Here's one, anyway. A few years ago I picked up a 5.1 Sound Card for under £8, which worked well with Vista. Got it for cheaper than anywhere else too. I even made a point of positively reviewing my local brance on the net when I got home. I may have been the only one...
Anyway, if you're buying a Dell, just go to www.dell.co.uk - it's usually cheaper and you can customise it exactly how you want. You cut out the (unneccessary) middle man.
I love ranting. Try it.
Digiman out.
Wednesday 29 July 2009
Mac Attack
I'm fed up with Mac Fanboys and their arrogance. But it's easy to see why they feel they can feel that way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgzbhEc6VVo
This is a collection of 15 short Mac vs PC ads that Apple created.
Quite frankly, they are annoying, and untruthful. According to these ads, PCs are used for no more than spreadsheets and documents - ie "boring work things". Apparently Macs are better than PCs "life stuff" like pictures, videos, or music.
It's true that Macs aren't as susceptible to viruses as Windows based PCs are, but why would a virus writer create a virus for Macs when they take up less than 10% of all the computers in the world? Wouldn't it make more sense to write viruses for Windows OSs because there is more chance for infection? Sounds logical.
If Macs become more popular, they will contract viruses. I assure you.
Compatability. When was the last time you heard a PC user ask "is this PC compatable?"
Let's not also forget gaming. PC gamers just go pick a game they want, and as long as they have the minimum specs, they install it, and they play it. Can the same be said for Mac users? No.
Macs are also seriously overpriced. Seriously.
If Mac users want to get anything done in the business world, what do they buy? That's right - Microsoft Office. Mind-boggling.
This blog post stems from annoyance at Apple's arrogance and slander.
Microsoft did indeed make some adverts comparing Windows and Mac and Apple got their lawyers on the phone right away. Give me a break, Apple. You're giving yourself far too much bad publicity. Nobody likes this.
I found an interesting comment to a Windows Ad with someone stating how Apple blantantly lie in their adverts:
LIE: - Macs have embedded webcams, PCs don't.
FACT: PCs had embedded webcams way before Macs had any.
LIE: - Macs don't have security vulnerabilities, PCs do.
FACT: Just look at Apple's OS updates and you will find dozens of security holes fixed in each update. The most ironic thing about that ad was that the same month the ad started appearing, a new OSX update was released that had 5x (I think it was 54) security vulnerability fixes in it.
LIE: - Macs have all-in-ones, PCs don't.
FACT: Both PCs and Macs have all-in-one versions. There were many all-in-one PCs (very nice models from Sony, HP and Dell).
LIE: - Macs make better home movies, PCs can't.
FACT: There are far more superior video editing solutions for PCs, let alone the question of "if" they can.
LIE: - Macs have better device support than PCs. (the japanese woman with camera ad)
FACT: This is by far the biggest lie of all. _ALL_ devices have Windows support, only some of them have Mac support. Macs are a closed hardware system, PC world is completely open to new hardware.
LIE: - Macs have automatic backup, PCs don't.
FACT: Windows had automatic backup (in XP) way before Mac had any.
Case closed.
Rant over.
Digiman out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgzbhEc6VVo
This is a collection of 15 short Mac vs PC ads that Apple created.
Quite frankly, they are annoying, and untruthful. According to these ads, PCs are used for no more than spreadsheets and documents - ie "boring work things". Apparently Macs are better than PCs "life stuff" like pictures, videos, or music.
It's true that Macs aren't as susceptible to viruses as Windows based PCs are, but why would a virus writer create a virus for Macs when they take up less than 10% of all the computers in the world? Wouldn't it make more sense to write viruses for Windows OSs because there is more chance for infection? Sounds logical.
If Macs become more popular, they will contract viruses. I assure you.
Compatability. When was the last time you heard a PC user ask "is this PC compatable?"
Let's not also forget gaming. PC gamers just go pick a game they want, and as long as they have the minimum specs, they install it, and they play it. Can the same be said for Mac users? No.
Macs are also seriously overpriced. Seriously.
If Mac users want to get anything done in the business world, what do they buy? That's right - Microsoft Office. Mind-boggling.
This blog post stems from annoyance at Apple's arrogance and slander.
Microsoft did indeed make some adverts comparing Windows and Mac and Apple got their lawyers on the phone right away. Give me a break, Apple. You're giving yourself far too much bad publicity. Nobody likes this.
I found an interesting comment to a Windows Ad with someone stating how Apple blantantly lie in their adverts:
LIE: - Macs have embedded webcams, PCs don't.
FACT: PCs had embedded webcams way before Macs had any.
LIE: - Macs don't have security vulnerabilities, PCs do.
FACT: Just look at Apple's OS updates and you will find dozens of security holes fixed in each update. The most ironic thing about that ad was that the same month the ad started appearing, a new OSX update was released that had 5x (I think it was 54) security vulnerability fixes in it.
LIE: - Macs have all-in-ones, PCs don't.
FACT: Both PCs and Macs have all-in-one versions. There were many all-in-one PCs (very nice models from Sony, HP and Dell).
LIE: - Macs make better home movies, PCs can't.
FACT: There are far more superior video editing solutions for PCs, let alone the question of "if" they can.
LIE: - Macs have better device support than PCs. (the japanese woman with camera ad)
FACT: This is by far the biggest lie of all. _ALL_ devices have Windows support, only some of them have Mac support. Macs are a closed hardware system, PC world is completely open to new hardware.
LIE: - Macs have automatic backup, PCs don't.
FACT: Windows had automatic backup (in XP) way before Mac had any.
Case closed.
Rant over.
Digiman out.
Tuesday 28 July 2009
Windows 7 and Chrome OS... and a flashback to Vista...
2009/2010 will be interesting years for Operating System releases. As most people know, Windows 7 is Microsoft's latest OS, available to the public come 22nd October 2009.
As well as that, Google have announced that they are creating their own OS, namely "Chrome OS".
Personally, I'm a little bit excited about both.
I'm excited about the Windows 7 release because when I get a new laptop, it will have Windows 7 on it. Simple as that. I'm in no rush for a new laptop though, I'll probably get it next year, and it would be no bad thing as by then, a Service Pack may have been released.
It's funny when I look back at my initial thoughts about Vista. XP did everything I needed it to do - in fact, present tense... does - as I use it on my laptop every day! I know the ins and outs of XP, so much so that I don't need to be at my laptop when people call asking for advice or how to do something on it.
When people asked me about Vista when it was first released, I was somewhat sceptical - I think we all were a little bit. The BIGGEST annoyance for me, was how places like PC World sold "Vista Capable" laptops with absolutely pathetic hardware capabilites. Celeron processors and 1GB of RAM?! Or less in some cases! Please(!!)
It doesn't take a computer buff to know that if you've 512MB of RAM on XP, 1GB makes a big difference. In fact, on all my XP machines I have at least 2GBs.
So imagine how RAM affects Vista. Vista "capable" meant that it could run Vista... barely. Forget about running Aero on a "capable" machine, by the way - Home Basic only!
On those types of machine, Vista performed just about as well as a rowing boat on a dried-up river.
Working in the IT industry and having 3-month-old laptops brought in for servicing because they were "too slow to use" became very, very irritating. I once even saw a laptop with Vista with 512MB...
However, once the hardware managed to catch up with the requirements of Vista (and became affordable), I started to become more impressed with Vista.
Working with a few Vista machines in the office, I decided to get a copy. By then, SP1 had come out of course!
I got a 64-bit version and installed it on my custom built machine (quad-core, 8gigs, blah blah blah), and with SP2, yes, it runs like a charm. I couldn't be happier.
Vista surpasses XP in every way. I feel daft that I ever resented Vista!
Installing Windows 7 RC1, I can see that it's going to be better than Vista again. Quicker, smoother, easier. I like how it looks like Vista, so it's not as big a jump as XP > Vista, but it's been re-defined, like a well tuned car.
Those "vista capable" laptops could run Windows 7 Home better than they could ever have run Vista.
So, in my world, Windows 7 is a very welcome release.
Now... what about Chrome OS? Well, the reason I'm excited about that, is because it's free.
I'm also a little bit excited, because it's Google, and Google are very innovative. Who knows what they could potentially create?
Once I get my hands on it, I'll be installing it on a Pentium 3 machine, 768MBs RAM, just to see how it runs.
Of course, Google will most likely release minimum specs of say a 1.4Ghz processor, 1GB RAM (or possibly more, depending on how graphically intensive it is), but I wouldn't mind trying it out, even on an older machine.
I have my doubts of course, of whether Chrome OS can provide the same functionality that XP offers.
I've also read that it's to be based on the Linux kernel.
If it IS going to be based on Linux, I hope it's nothing LIKE Linux. If ever I have used a user-friendly OS, Linux was NOT it.
I could barely install the damn thing on my computer without having to resort to support forums and the like!
The Linux mentality appears to be a superior one. This annoys me. No, Linux, I am not a super-geek, I just want to install a functional OS on my PC that will allow me to use the internet, type documents, do my emails, and print things. I know your OS is free, but that's no reason to not make it simple.
This is why I dislike all open-source software. Including Joomla.
I'm not a Windows "fan boy", but I do know a good thing when I use it. It's functional, it's accessable, it's easy to use. It supports nearly every hardware device/software program ever created. My grandparents use XP - they send emails, scan documents, create labels, the works. This is the ultimate test for any piece of sofware - if your grandparents can understand it, anyone can.
Tried to find a driver for *anything* on Linux? In some cases, they actually expect you to write your own driver.
...
My rant is over. I apologise for it, sometimes it's easy for me to get carried away. To summarise, Windows 7 will be what it needs to be, and Google's Chrome OS has a lot to achieve if it wants success.
When it does come out, I'll definitely be installing it for a play. I have high-hopes for Chrome, and I'm sure I won't be disappointed.
Digiman out.
As well as that, Google have announced that they are creating their own OS, namely "Chrome OS".
Personally, I'm a little bit excited about both.
I'm excited about the Windows 7 release because when I get a new laptop, it will have Windows 7 on it. Simple as that. I'm in no rush for a new laptop though, I'll probably get it next year, and it would be no bad thing as by then, a Service Pack may have been released.
It's funny when I look back at my initial thoughts about Vista. XP did everything I needed it to do - in fact, present tense... does - as I use it on my laptop every day! I know the ins and outs of XP, so much so that I don't need to be at my laptop when people call asking for advice or how to do something on it.
When people asked me about Vista when it was first released, I was somewhat sceptical - I think we all were a little bit. The BIGGEST annoyance for me, was how places like PC World sold "Vista Capable" laptops with absolutely pathetic hardware capabilites. Celeron processors and 1GB of RAM?! Or less in some cases! Please(!!)
It doesn't take a computer buff to know that if you've 512MB of RAM on XP, 1GB makes a big difference. In fact, on all my XP machines I have at least 2GBs.
So imagine how RAM affects Vista. Vista "capable" meant that it could run Vista... barely. Forget about running Aero on a "capable" machine, by the way - Home Basic only!
On those types of machine, Vista performed just about as well as a rowing boat on a dried-up river.
Working in the IT industry and having 3-month-old laptops brought in for servicing because they were "too slow to use" became very, very irritating. I once even saw a laptop with Vista with 512MB...
However, once the hardware managed to catch up with the requirements of Vista (and became affordable), I started to become more impressed with Vista.
Working with a few Vista machines in the office, I decided to get a copy. By then, SP1 had come out of course!
I got a 64-bit version and installed it on my custom built machine (quad-core, 8gigs, blah blah blah), and with SP2, yes, it runs like a charm. I couldn't be happier.
Vista surpasses XP in every way. I feel daft that I ever resented Vista!
Installing Windows 7 RC1, I can see that it's going to be better than Vista again. Quicker, smoother, easier. I like how it looks like Vista, so it's not as big a jump as XP > Vista, but it's been re-defined, like a well tuned car.
Those "vista capable" laptops could run Windows 7 Home better than they could ever have run Vista.
So, in my world, Windows 7 is a very welcome release.
Now... what about Chrome OS? Well, the reason I'm excited about that, is because it's free.
I'm also a little bit excited, because it's Google, and Google are very innovative. Who knows what they could potentially create?
Once I get my hands on it, I'll be installing it on a Pentium 3 machine, 768MBs RAM, just to see how it runs.
Of course, Google will most likely release minimum specs of say a 1.4Ghz processor, 1GB RAM (or possibly more, depending on how graphically intensive it is), but I wouldn't mind trying it out, even on an older machine.
I have my doubts of course, of whether Chrome OS can provide the same functionality that XP offers.
I've also read that it's to be based on the Linux kernel.
If it IS going to be based on Linux, I hope it's nothing LIKE Linux. If ever I have used a user-friendly OS, Linux was NOT it.
I could barely install the damn thing on my computer without having to resort to support forums and the like!
The Linux mentality appears to be a superior one. This annoys me. No, Linux, I am not a super-geek, I just want to install a functional OS on my PC that will allow me to use the internet, type documents, do my emails, and print things. I know your OS is free, but that's no reason to not make it simple.
This is why I dislike all open-source software. Including Joomla.
I'm not a Windows "fan boy", but I do know a good thing when I use it. It's functional, it's accessable, it's easy to use. It supports nearly every hardware device/software program ever created. My grandparents use XP - they send emails, scan documents, create labels, the works. This is the ultimate test for any piece of sofware - if your grandparents can understand it, anyone can.
Tried to find a driver for *anything* on Linux? In some cases, they actually expect you to write your own driver.
...
My rant is over. I apologise for it, sometimes it's easy for me to get carried away. To summarise, Windows 7 will be what it needs to be, and Google's Chrome OS has a lot to achieve if it wants success.
When it does come out, I'll definitely be installing it for a play. I have high-hopes for Chrome, and I'm sure I won't be disappointed.
Digiman out.
Saturday 25 July 2009
Overclocking and my fan love affair
Fans. I'm not talking about people who adore you - I'm talking PC fans.
I've never been a huge over-clocker - sorry, let me re-phrase that - I've never been an over-clocker. For those who don't know, over-clocking is pretty much "making your PC work harder than recommended". I always wanted to toy with it, but previously having Athlon processors in my systems, they were already technically over-clocked by AMD, caused the high temperatures that my boards didn't like (except Asus, whose motherboards dealt with it).
I custom-built a quad-core setup just after Christmas, so now, with my Q8200 (2.33GHz per core as stock) I managed to oc it by 5% bringing it to 2.45GHz per core. I'm pretty happy with that - any more than that would be greedy in my opinion. If I knew what I was doing, I might continue (My current board is an Asus P5W). I had it at 2.52GHz per core, but feel slightly uncomfortable with more than 5% at this time...
Using SpeedFan, the temperatures at the moment are ranging from 45 to 55 degrees celcius. My heatsink is an "OCZ tecnology Gladiator" which quite frankly, I think is pretty awesome.
Other fans in my case included a fan at the front bringing air in, a fan on the side of the case, also in, and two fans at the back, blowing out.
What I've recently decided to do, is move the 3 fans on the side/back to join the one at the front. Now I've four fans at the bottom-front, which is great, as they blow nice cool air over my three hard drives.
I am just waiting on my three new fans (blue and red LED - just for fun - as my side panel has a see-through section) which I shall place on the side and back.
I know this is weird, but I'm really excited about having them all in my case!
I've always loved putting in fans in my cases, and I don't know why. I know you can have fan overkill, doing more damage than less fans, but I'm going to thoroughly make sure the air-flow is good before I keep it that way.
My system will be nicely refreshed on a hot summer day now :)
Digiman out.
I've never been a huge over-clocker - sorry, let me re-phrase that - I've never been an over-clocker. For those who don't know, over-clocking is pretty much "making your PC work harder than recommended". I always wanted to toy with it, but previously having Athlon processors in my systems, they were already technically over-clocked by AMD, caused the high temperatures that my boards didn't like (except Asus, whose motherboards dealt with it).
I custom-built a quad-core setup just after Christmas, so now, with my Q8200 (2.33GHz per core as stock) I managed to oc it by 5% bringing it to 2.45GHz per core. I'm pretty happy with that - any more than that would be greedy in my opinion. If I knew what I was doing, I might continue (My current board is an Asus P5W). I had it at 2.52GHz per core, but feel slightly uncomfortable with more than 5% at this time...
Using SpeedFan, the temperatures at the moment are ranging from 45 to 55 degrees celcius. My heatsink is an "OCZ tecnology Gladiator" which quite frankly, I think is pretty awesome.
Other fans in my case included a fan at the front bringing air in, a fan on the side of the case, also in, and two fans at the back, blowing out.
What I've recently decided to do, is move the 3 fans on the side/back to join the one at the front. Now I've four fans at the bottom-front, which is great, as they blow nice cool air over my three hard drives.
I am just waiting on my three new fans (blue and red LED - just for fun - as my side panel has a see-through section) which I shall place on the side and back.
I know this is weird, but I'm really excited about having them all in my case!
I've always loved putting in fans in my cases, and I don't know why. I know you can have fan overkill, doing more damage than less fans, but I'm going to thoroughly make sure the air-flow is good before I keep it that way.
My system will be nicely refreshed on a hot summer day now :)
Digiman out.
Friday 17 July 2009
32" hi-def pc gaming? Yes please!
The main advantage console gamers have, in my humble opinion, is the ability to plug in to a TV.
Giant hi-definition TVs at that.
PC games are limited to your 17" desktop monitor, or your 15.4" laptop screen. You may have a larger widescreen monitor, but nothing compared to the average size of a hi-def TV in living rooms these days.
I've never really been a "gamer" in the true sense of the word, but I always enjoyed playing PC games. In 1998, I got hooked on Command and Conquer - Red Alert, and Tomb Raider II, and in 2002, the same with Roller Coaster Tycoon II.
Since custom-building my own PC, it's been able to effortlessly play awesome games such as GTA IV, FIFA 09, and Street Fighter IV. Great quality, DirectX 10 games on Vista. A lot of the latest games now have better graphics on the PC as opposed to the PS3 thanks to the latest hardware :)
Until recently, larger PC monitors haven't really been made available. A shame really, when you consider the sheer technological advances in the gaming side of things. You'd be hard-pressed to find anything more than a 22" widescreen sitting on someone's desk.
Console gamers meanwhile, sit and play happily on their 42" screens with HDMI inputs...
PC gamers may have to put up with a smaller screen, stuck in their study, but luckily my gaming-rig is nice and snugg in my bedroom.
My PC is a custom-built Quad-Core 2.33Ghz, 8GB RAM, and a 1GB ATI Radeon HD 4670. I'm tempted to get another card for the Crossfire capabilities you know.
The plan? Well, I'd like to get two things actually. I've currently got a 17" TFT monitor (VGA connection to the PC), and a 32" CRT TV in my room as well.
I'm going to upgrade my monitor to a 22" widescreen, and replace my CRT TV with an LCD 32" (possibly 37" if the funds are there).
My TV is just over 5m away from my PC, so I'm buying a 7.5m DVI-HDMI cable to connect it.
Once set-up, the TV and monitor will show the same signal - happy days. I've already got a powered 4-port USB hub under the TV to connect my Xbox-for-Windows controllers.
It's easy - anybody can transform their TV into a PC monitor. You can of course use VGA connectors (most TVs come with a PC input via VGA). All you need is a spare output on your graphics card, and a TV with either a VGA or HDMI input (you can get the appropriate cables and lengths on ebay).
Remember, though - the software for your graphics card needs to support a "clone" configuration, not just "extended desktop" that Windows provides if you want both screens to show the same display.
Sorted. Roll on, my birthday!!
Digiman out.
Giant hi-definition TVs at that.
PC games are limited to your 17" desktop monitor, or your 15.4" laptop screen. You may have a larger widescreen monitor, but nothing compared to the average size of a hi-def TV in living rooms these days.
I've never really been a "gamer" in the true sense of the word, but I always enjoyed playing PC games. In 1998, I got hooked on Command and Conquer - Red Alert, and Tomb Raider II, and in 2002, the same with Roller Coaster Tycoon II.
Since custom-building my own PC, it's been able to effortlessly play awesome games such as GTA IV, FIFA 09, and Street Fighter IV. Great quality, DirectX 10 games on Vista. A lot of the latest games now have better graphics on the PC as opposed to the PS3 thanks to the latest hardware :)
Until recently, larger PC monitors haven't really been made available. A shame really, when you consider the sheer technological advances in the gaming side of things. You'd be hard-pressed to find anything more than a 22" widescreen sitting on someone's desk.
Console gamers meanwhile, sit and play happily on their 42" screens with HDMI inputs...
PC gamers may have to put up with a smaller screen, stuck in their study, but luckily my gaming-rig is nice and snugg in my bedroom.
My PC is a custom-built Quad-Core 2.33Ghz, 8GB RAM, and a 1GB ATI Radeon HD 4670. I'm tempted to get another card for the Crossfire capabilities you know.
The plan? Well, I'd like to get two things actually. I've currently got a 17" TFT monitor (VGA connection to the PC), and a 32" CRT TV in my room as well.
I'm going to upgrade my monitor to a 22" widescreen, and replace my CRT TV with an LCD 32" (possibly 37" if the funds are there).
My TV is just over 5m away from my PC, so I'm buying a 7.5m DVI-HDMI cable to connect it.
Once set-up, the TV and monitor will show the same signal - happy days. I've already got a powered 4-port USB hub under the TV to connect my Xbox-for-Windows controllers.
It's easy - anybody can transform their TV into a PC monitor. You can of course use VGA connectors (most TVs come with a PC input via VGA). All you need is a spare output on your graphics card, and a TV with either a VGA or HDMI input (you can get the appropriate cables and lengths on ebay).
Remember, though - the software for your graphics card needs to support a "clone" configuration, not just "extended desktop" that Windows provides if you want both screens to show the same display.
Sorted. Roll on, my birthday!!
Digiman out.
Wednesday 24 June 2009
Allow me to branch out my horizons...
I've come to the decision that I want to write more, well...random things on my blog. I'll still write about computers no doubt, but let's face it, who really wants to know about all that!
No time like the present.
I must ask myself - what could I possibly write or share here that would interest other people? Do I expect anybody to read it? Is it even intended for an audience? Are these questions rhetorical? The answer to all four...I don't know.
Some people have an incredible gift - they can write their own daily experiences and allow you to immersify yourself in their stories without even having to try.
I have no stories.
However, what I've discovered is that Blogs allow people to vent. They allow people to express their inner anguishes and let the world know about it at the same time. Hoping, maybe, that someone will read their words of anger, resentment, sorrow, and sadness. Hoping, maybe, that someone will notice and offer to help us through, because really, we are too proud to ask.
Pride. The epitome of our gradual downfall, where we could so easily overcome that which oppresses us. Admitting to ourselves, let alone others, that we are fragile and breakable, is no mean feat. Admitting that we need friends, that we need family, and most importantly, that we need God, to stop us feeling desolate and separated, is not easy.
Some people, admitting these things fear they may display weakness. They fear they may allow themselves to be vulnerable. Of these things...they are scared.
We will never have our childhood back. So some people assume that everything associated with childhood must go. But they're wrong. Some things must go - tantrums, selfishness, and attention seeking, amongst other childish behaviour. But others must stay.
Don't be afraid if you have a childlike faith. It's the faith we're supposed to have (Mark 10:13 -16).
Open up your heart, share your feelings, allow yourself to be vulnerable. If you aren't, you run the risk of a cold, hard heart. If you are, you may have more chances of getting hurt, but trust me on this one... *you will get over it*.
You'll be built up stronger than before.
No time like the present.
I must ask myself - what could I possibly write or share here that would interest other people? Do I expect anybody to read it? Is it even intended for an audience? Are these questions rhetorical? The answer to all four...I don't know.
Some people have an incredible gift - they can write their own daily experiences and allow you to immersify yourself in their stories without even having to try.
I have no stories.
However, what I've discovered is that Blogs allow people to vent. They allow people to express their inner anguishes and let the world know about it at the same time. Hoping, maybe, that someone will read their words of anger, resentment, sorrow, and sadness. Hoping, maybe, that someone will notice and offer to help us through, because really, we are too proud to ask.
Pride. The epitome of our gradual downfall, where we could so easily overcome that which oppresses us. Admitting to ourselves, let alone others, that we are fragile and breakable, is no mean feat. Admitting that we need friends, that we need family, and most importantly, that we need God, to stop us feeling desolate and separated, is not easy.
Some people, admitting these things fear they may display weakness. They fear they may allow themselves to be vulnerable. Of these things...they are scared.
We will never have our childhood back. So some people assume that everything associated with childhood must go. But they're wrong. Some things must go - tantrums, selfishness, and attention seeking, amongst other childish behaviour. But others must stay.
Don't be afraid if you have a childlike faith. It's the faith we're supposed to have (Mark 10:13 -16).
Open up your heart, share your feelings, allow yourself to be vulnerable. If you aren't, you run the risk of a cold, hard heart. If you are, you may have more chances of getting hurt, but trust me on this one... *you will get over it*.
You'll be built up stronger than before.
Monday 15 June 2009
Websites - Back them up, too!
Experience. You learn from it.
Personally, I enjoy learning from other people's experience so I don't have to make the mistake myself. We all know we should back up our data. Especially documents. Who cares if Windows corrupts. After all, a fresh install is just the trick sometimes or after a year or so of running a build. But it would be nice to know that your documents are nice and safe, on another partition, drive, or even on a RAID config.
My experience has led me to realise that websites also should be backed up. At least, the important files and those that are edited regularly should be.
Recently I took it upon myself to edit my Church Youth's website - http://www.youth.firstlisburn.org/
The website was good, but it was too busy and complicated navigation wise. So I got rid of all the clutter and banners and pictures which were actually links.... and made a nice menu type thing.
However, upon completing the Contact page, I may have accidently overwritten the MAIN website's contact page. Well, let me tell you, the file was gone. There's no recycle bin via FTP and if there is, I need to know about it.
Do you ever get the feeling where you think, "holy crap..." and no words can describe how you feel? Not to mention you break into a nervous sweat when you realise you've just done something incredibly stupid? Well, that was me.
Fortunately, before moving to Microsoft's Expression Web 2, I had used Adobe Contribute, which, thankfully, creates backups in the _baks folder on the web server. Also thankfully, I remembered this within 2 minutes of completely erasing the contacts page. Had I not found the backup, the contacts page would have taken days...yes, days... to re-create.
So the lesson for today?
If you're regularly playing about with website editing, or FTP, make a backup of the important files! Don't learn the hard way (and I was lucky!)
Digiman out.
Personally, I enjoy learning from other people's experience so I don't have to make the mistake myself. We all know we should back up our data. Especially documents. Who cares if Windows corrupts. After all, a fresh install is just the trick sometimes or after a year or so of running a build. But it would be nice to know that your documents are nice and safe, on another partition, drive, or even on a RAID config.
My experience has led me to realise that websites also should be backed up. At least, the important files and those that are edited regularly should be.
Recently I took it upon myself to edit my Church Youth's website - http://www.youth.firstlisburn.org/
The website was good, but it was too busy and complicated navigation wise. So I got rid of all the clutter and banners and pictures which were actually links.... and made a nice menu type thing.
However, upon completing the Contact page, I may have accidently overwritten the MAIN website's contact page. Well, let me tell you, the file was gone. There's no recycle bin via FTP and if there is, I need to know about it.
Do you ever get the feeling where you think, "holy crap..." and no words can describe how you feel? Not to mention you break into a nervous sweat when you realise you've just done something incredibly stupid? Well, that was me.
Fortunately, before moving to Microsoft's Expression Web 2, I had used Adobe Contribute, which, thankfully, creates backups in the _baks folder on the web server. Also thankfully, I remembered this within 2 minutes of completely erasing the contacts page. Had I not found the backup, the contacts page would have taken days...yes, days... to re-create.
So the lesson for today?
If you're regularly playing about with website editing, or FTP, make a backup of the important files! Don't learn the hard way (and I was lucky!)
Digiman out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)