Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Rob

Real Name Rob   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname rkone
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ 3152338
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Jul 17, 2003, 04:39
Total Comments 317 (Amateur)
User ID 17763
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Older >


News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
20. Re: MS Support in Win98SE Jan 13, 2004, 19:48 rkone
 
At least half of our machines on the network with XP have to be rebooted daily because they slow down to a crawl "like clicking on the start tab only to have it pop up 3-5 minutes later" after being on for 24 hours

Sorry, that just sounds like the XP machines are running a program with a memory leak. That in turn is usually malware, a virus, or a poorly written driver but since you're not actually the guy in the office who knows more than the other 5 guys (as I first thought), I'm sure you already know this.

Strange thing that the Home machines are working fine, the difference (on single CPU machines) between the two versions is miniscule at most...

This comment was edited on Jan 13, 19:57.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
15. Re: MS Support in Win98SE Jan 13, 2004, 10:10 rkone
 
NT was intended a business OS yes, but that still didn't mean that most businesses actually ran it on the average workstation. In my experience, most business computers ran 98 at the time.

The real reason why Joe off the street hasn't upgraded is that they don't care enough to spend the time or money to upgrade. Those who want to upgrade but haven't, have held back because of compatibility.

I agree 98 should be put to rest, and most people like XP, it certainly doesn't have the bad name ME has - most people praise it, sugarman is in the vast minority.

As for sugarman, if half your machines can't run XP properly, you should either
a) stop buying those $299 machines or
b) pay someone who knows how to do a virus scan/spyware cleaning/driver update.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
10. Re: MS Support in Win98SE Jan 12, 2004, 21:54 rkone
 
Win2k is more than a replacement for NT. Not only does it support plug and play and any new versions of DirectX, but it gives home users a much more stable disk system in NTFS which is miles ahead of FAT32, IMHO.

Agreed that NTFS is much nicer than FAT32, but it was used in Windows NT

Also, Windows NT supports DirectX up to 6.0 (what win2k shipped with IIRC), Direct3D was the major addition Win2k offered (Win2k and even Win2003 Server still do not support it)

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
9. Re: MS Support in Win98SE (Marketing!) Jan 12, 2004, 21:46 rkone
 
I don't see much support needed for win98. The only thing MS really patches is IE holes. Win95 only supports up to IE 5.5, when was the last patch released for that? As for virus protection, you need antivirus software. It's always been like that. The only major virus outbreak outside IE/Outlook is from the RPC vulnerability, and that was on win2k/xp only anyway...

I don't see the similarities between Windows XP and the new coke myself...

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Tech Bits
8. Re: MS Support in Win98SE Jan 12, 2004, 21:34 rkone
 
Looks like the e-mails worked. I mean, Win2K was brought in as a replacement for NT, which is really a server OS. And that's why people didn't switch

No, Win2K was a replacement for all business OS's which primarily was Win98. The reason most home users didn't switch was because of software compatibility. That's still the main reason reason for people to hold off on Windows XP today, they have a Norton 2001 or Easy CD 3.5 and don't want to spend $150+ to upgrade their OS.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
65. Re: Oh no Jan 9, 2004, 20:51 rkone
 
Well, it's kinda hard to keep everything ground into one location if your main characters ARE all over Middle Earth, right? I fail to see how else you'd do it?

I think it could have been done much better. If done properly, you should feel dissapointment that the story is stopping to move onto the next section. There were parts of the film that did this, but not enough, and none early on.

A) Because that's the way he is in the book too. (Always my most hated character).
B) Sure they make sense, you just have to think about it a little bit. Boromir is the favorite son, Faramir is always the disappointment.


I treat book and the movie as two different entities. In the book his motives and actions were believable. In the movie they were not. If they found a way to cut out the Steward and have a better movie I would be happy. I'm perfectly fine with Bombadil being left out. Instead they cut out some of the Steward's most important scenes, and left in/made up some overly dramatic ones. It just doesn't work for me. As you said, opinions vary.

My biggest beef with the last two films is with the content that was added or changed. The first film had content from the book removed, but the only thing added was the scene with Arwen and Aragorn on the bridge (I consider the scene weak, and I would have preferred it cut out). The second and third had a number of changes and additions that weren't in the book, I can't think of any that made the movie better - mostly they made it worse. It's not that I'm a purist and want to see the film explain everything exactly as it is in the book, I just want an enjoyable film that can stand on its own.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
57. Re: Oh no Jan 8, 2004, 23:16 rkone
 
First of all, not going to see Return of the King means missing out on what's probably going to be the best film of this DECADE.

I'm sorry, RotK was ok, but it felt like a rehash of The Two Towers to me. In TTT, the beginning of the film was all over the place. It's obvious the entire film was just a setup for the final battle at helm's deep. In RotK, the beginning was all over the place again. It also felt like it was just a setup for the big battle (Gondor this time). Yes the battles were great, but not worth sitting through the entire movie.

FotR however, had great character development, and a boatload of amazing scenes peppered throughout the entire movie. I can't think of one thing to cut out of it, this is after watching it 15+ times now.

I can pick out a number of pointless scenes in the next two films though. What's up with Aragorn's "death" after the wolf riders? Aren't there enough fake deaths in the trilogy without it? In fact, the entire wolf rider attack subplot was useless, they weren't properly built up, they never seemed like any major threat. And what they were thinking to have Frodo brought back to the city, did they all go back through the dead marshes? If not, why did they go through all that to get to Mordor in the first place?

In RotK, what was the point of having the Stewart of Gondor act so contrary to everyone, without any explanation at all? His actions make no sense in the movie. The best explanation we get is that "he's crazy". Argh! The path of the dead was underwhelming to say the least. In the book it was built up quite a bit, but in the movie there's nothing interesting about it at all. All we get is restless horses and the rehashed "I'm a ghost because I'm translucent and green" undead. I was half expecting Bill Murray to jump in and cry out "He slimed me!". So much time was spent creating interesting, unique and realistic races. I guess when it was time to do the undead, they had run out of ideas.

The more I think about the last two films, the less I like them

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Tech Bits
21. No thanks Dec 28, 2003, 00:56 rkone
 
In Ontario, I believe our highway speed limits are low simply to increase ticket fees. The police got photo radar vans a couple of years back, instantly the average speed of the highways dropped from 120km/h to the posted 100km/h limit. The public didn't like this, there was talk of raising the speed limit to 120 (apparantly the highways were designed to safely handle this), but in the end, the government simply got rid of the photo radar vans. The limit remains 100km/h, everyone returned to driving at 120+.

On average, I'd say I see one cop car with someone pulled over in 10 hours of driving. Actually, I probably don't even see that many. In the same amount of time, I see 4-5 drivers doing 150+. It's extremely rare to see someone doing less than 120 unless there's heavy traffic.


My winamp 5.0 loads the first time in just over 1 second, and under half a second following attempts...

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Combat Over Universal Combat
18. Re: No subject Dec 22, 2003, 13:12 rkone
 
No the game is obviously not like HL2. However some of you Derek bashing idiots may want to finally get the picture that there is a pretty large group of people out there that really like these games. Furthermore UC will push that even further because its such a more complete package.

Maybe you should get a clue, the reason why Derek is not liked has nothing to do with how good or bad BMG is.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Combat Over Universal Combat
14. Re: and so it begins...... Dec 22, 2003, 12:49 rkone
 
dsmart's game plan:

1. Claim all rights to the IP for this game
2. Sue EA, claiming they make games as well, all of which borrow parts of the source code from this game.
3. Send out letters to all gameplayers claiming their games are using Derek's propietary technology, and if they don't pay a $300/game license fee, they will be liable for a lawsuit as well.
4. Succesfully defend against SCO's "'IP lawsuit' business IP infringement" lawsuit.
5. Try to take over the world.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
35. Re: I Robot Dec 20, 2003, 10:18 rkone
 
Don't you need a little bit more information about his network setup before providing this kind of info?

I'm fairly certain the IP address you gave him would cause my box to fail to connect to my router. Most routers default to the 192.168.1.X range.

Anyone using a router that did what I suggested would likely no longer have working internet.

The secret is that if waxthirteen had a router, he wouldn't be needing this info. Having no DHCP server (ie a router) is what causes WinXP to wait on startup. Manually assigning an IP address fixes that problem.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
28. Re: I Robot Dec 19, 2003, 18:24 rkone
 
Let me clarify that: In control panel, choose Network Connections. Then you'll need to right click the Local Area Connection and choose properties. Then click TCP/IP and click Properties. Choose "Use the following IP Address:" and then type in the info there.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
27. Re: I Robot Dec 19, 2003, 18:21 rkone
 
anyway, back to winXP and networking type issues. anyone know why when i start up my machine, windows loads and it sits there doing nothing? a while back someone fixed it for me... it had something to do with changing the ip address in my local area connection, but i don't remember what and i've since reformatted. any help here would be swell. you guys are like smart and stuff.

You'll want to assign an IP address. 192.168.0.250 would probably be fine, with a subnet mask 255.255.255.0

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ghost Master Scenario
1. No subject Dec 17, 2003, 11:05 rkone
 
"Now in colour, with a happier ending!"

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
27. Re: Doomworld's down Dec 15, 2003, 14:59 rkone
 
Well it's back up now. Since the downing was so short, I'd say it was just a Blueper.

The comic is drivel anyway, not worth the time to read.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
66. Re: New computer installing woes Dec 15, 2003, 12:50 rkone
 
I will probably have to break down and buy a modern version of XP with sp1a on it already.

If you download the 'net install' version of SP1, you can use it to create a new XP Home SP1 CD.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
35. Re: No subject Dec 14, 2003, 16:43 rkone
 
$99 for an Athlon64 board? You've seen the quality of those ALI chipset boards, right?

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
23. Re: No subject Dec 14, 2003, 15:35 rkone
 
That A64 3000+ needs a new motherboard, Bunko, which would probably cost around another $175 or so...

Also the newegg webpage is wrong, the 2.0 Ghz Athlon64 with 1MB L2 cache is the (much) more expensive 3200+. This chip is the 2.0 Ghz Athlon64 with 512KB L2 cache - (check the picture and look up the markings here: http://homepage3.nifty.com/aona/opn/opn_amdk8.html )


 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
70. Re: No subject Dec 14, 2003, 15:19 rkone
 
Enahs is right, updating the bios is well worth a try - simple with the Asus Update program.

As for the SATA drive performance, there's no noticeable difference with most drives out there currently. If you go with the expensive WD Raptor (10000 rpm) series, performance is measureably better, but IMHO not noticeably (at least with the 36GB drive, the just-released 73GB version adds TAG support I believe, which should make a difference). I recommend waiting at least another 6 months on SATA, hard drive manufacturers seem to be dragging their heels to maximize profit.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
15. Re: Blue advice.. Dec 14, 2003, 14:52 rkone
 
Glad it's working (there is no performance diff between 4x and 8x anyway, even on a 9800).

Only tip that needs to be mentioned is that the motherboard AGP drivers should be installed if they haven't been. As ALI's website doesn't even list the chipset yet, and ASRock's download site is down, the only place you can get these drivers are off the motherboard CD at the moment.

If you've done it already, then you'll probably have to wait until ATi and ALI sort things out, a new catalyst, and/or a new mainboard driver will surely let you go back to 8x.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
317 Comments. 16 pages. Viewing page 13.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo