topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Thursday March 19, 2026, 9:27 am
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Recent Posts

Pages: prev1 ... 261 262 263 264 265 [266] 267 268 269 270 271 ... 386next
6626
Living Room / Re: Apple instigates Police Raid over lost/stolen iPhone 4G
« Last post by Deozaan on April 28, 2010, 07:55 PM »
If I leave something anywhere, and someone sells it, I would feel violated.

I agree. But I think this is a little bit different.

For instance, if you lost something and the person who found it tried to return it to you--and you refused to take it back--would that change your opinion about them selling it?
6627
Living Room / Re: Apple instigates Police Raid over lost/stolen iPhone 4G
« Last post by Deozaan on April 28, 2010, 02:44 PM »
... the argument I understand is being made against Gizmodo, that the search and seizure wasn't disallowed by journalistic protection laws because it was related to a felony investigation (theft) rather than a simple "give us your source" shakedown.

I don't claim to know the exact details of the law, but I think you're mistaken.

Take for instance, when the New York Daily News stole the Empire State Building. Of course they gave it back (after having it for 24 hours), and nobody got in trouble for the theft.
6628
General Software Discussion / Re: Windows 8 Requests
« Last post by Deozaan on April 27, 2010, 03:03 PM »
Don't require driver signing for 64bit versions!

I second this! My motherboard is a bit old and there is no signed driver for the onboard LAN adapter. So I can't even use my LAN in 64-bit Windows.

It's weird because it gives me the option to install the driver even though it isn't signed, but the hardware won't run because the drivers aren't signed. How stupid is that? My hardware is gimped because Microsoft wants a signature. How about they let me, as an advanced setting for someone who understands the consequences, override the requirement for signed drivers so I can get my LAN to work.

My biggest complaint recently is the dismal file transfer speeds. It takes forever to copy/move files from one place to another! It shouldn't take 2 minutes to copy 50MB!

I may have been exaggerating the slowness a bit. Or I may have been talking about transferring over a LAN, or copying from out of a zipped archive, or from a USB thumbdrive or any combination of things that could cause it to go slow.

It seems that when I copy from drive to drive it goes at about 20MiB/s but when copying to a USB thumb drive, I get about 2-4 MiB/s transfer speeds. Which means copying over 6 GiB worth of data takes almost 20 minutes. :down: I could probably burn three 4.7 GiB DVDs in that same amount of time.

TeraCopy does seem to make a difference. Resulting in about 8-11 Mib/s transfer speeds to USB. :up: Thanks for letting me know about it.
6629
N.A.N.Y. 2010 / Re: NANY 2010 Release: Twigatelle
« Last post by Deozaan on April 27, 2010, 01:48 PM »
It seems like I always get the Pong Mode power up and then the Tracking Mode power up. In that order. But the problem is that either Tracking Mode lasts a shorter length of time than Pong Mode, or when Pong Mode ends it cancels out Tracking Mode.

Whichever the case, it often makes Tracking Mode worthless. )c:
6630
N.A.N.Y. 2010 / Re: NANY 2010 Release: Twigatelle
« Last post by Deozaan on April 27, 2010, 01:42 PM »
Next version will have a difficulty level - that'll keep you rolling.

I hope it has a "no-difficulty" level. :-[
6631
N.A.N.Y. 2010 / Re: NANY 2010 Release: Twigatelle
« Last post by Deozaan on April 27, 2010, 01:37 PM »
I could use a cheat code for more balls. I'm really terrible at this game. :(
6632
Living Room / Apple instigates Police Raid over lost/stolen iPhone 4G
« Last post by Deozaan on April 27, 2010, 10:55 AM »
Anyone hear about this?

Police have seized computers and servers belonging to an editor of Gizmodo in an investigation that appears to stem from the gadget blog's purchase of a lost Apple iPhone prototype.

...

"When I got home, I noticed the garage door was half-open," according to an account by Chen. "And when I tried to open it, officers came out and said they had a warrant to search my house and any vehicles on the property 'in my control.' They then made me place my hands behind my head and searched me to make sure I had no weapons or sharp objects on me."

...

Dalglish said that the San Mateo County search warrant violated the federal Privacy Protection Act, which broadly immunizes news organizations from searches--unless, in some cases, the journalists themselves committed the crime. The 1980 federal law requires police to use subpoenas to obtain information instead of search warrants, she said.

Editors at Gizmodo, part of Gawker Media's blog network, last week said they paid $5,000 for what they believed to be a prototype of a future iPhone 4G. The story said the phone was accidentally left at a bar in Redwood City, Calif., last month by an Apple software engineer and found by someone who contacted Gizmodo, which had previously indicated that it was willing to pay significant sums for unreleased Apple products.
6633
Maybe Microsoft will sue McAfee now. That ought to get their attention!
6634
Screenshot Captor / Re: Capture rounded corners in Vista
« Last post by Deozaan on April 27, 2010, 01:23 AM »
With regard to the latest beta version (2.79.01):

When I do a screen capture (Prnt Scrn) the SCC window will pop up with a rectangle selection that is smaller than the active window, which then disappears before I can do anything with it. But other than that, everything looks fine.

Fixed! :Thmbsup: In fact, when doing a full screen capture, the active window is properly pre-selected, and clicking the crop button properly makes the corners transparent. It also properly captures the transparency (Aero effects) in all my windows.

And when I do an active window capture (Alt-Prnt Scrn) it will properly grab just the active window, but the corners outside the active window are not made transparent like they are when doing the same thing in XP.

Still broken. :( And also SC does not like the Aero transparency stuff. Anything that is transparent due to the Aero theme either is captured as pure blackness or when I'm lucky it just isn't transparent (non-Aero), but the proper colors otherwise.

When capturing the active window of games I make in TGB, the contents are blank/black

Still broken. :(

And when capturing Google Chrome it does really weird stuff.

Still broken. :( I think this is mostly due to Chrome's unique lack of a title bar.

When trying to capture an image of the SCC window, the image is just a white screen (but my mouse cursor is captured properly).

Still broken. :(

When making a full screen capture and then cropping the image and renaming it, the thumbnail image in the sidebar doesn't update. The name updates, but the actual thumbnail itself shows the full desktop capture. Even going into the menu File -> Save Changes Now sometimes doesn't get that thumbnail image to update.

EDIT: This appears to be fixed! :Thmbsup: This is still broken. :( This works when "Auto-save new captures" is enabled, but doesn't update the thumbnails when it is disabled. :-\

I also found a new weird thingy: If you change the settings so that it doesn't automatically save new captures, there is no default text used in the Name field to save it. You have to manually type in a name first to save it.
6635
DC Gamer Club / Re: Sniper Elite for $2 on Steam
« Last post by Deozaan on April 20, 2010, 01:04 PM »
Sniper Elite also has some pretty detailed hitboxes, you can detonate grenades on your opponents belts.

I did this by accident on the first level. :D
6636
Living Room / Re: Pure Boredom Post: The 3 Word Story Game
« Last post by Deozaan on April 20, 2010, 01:01 PM »
prosthetic foreheads, then
6637
Living Room / Re: Bit.ly is Harmful to Your Reputation
« Last post by Deozaan on April 20, 2010, 12:58 PM »
If Twitter was smart they'd implement their own URL shortening service that did two things:

1. If viewed in the browser, it would abbreviate the URL (or not, depending on each user's settings) much like DonationCoder's forums do automatically with long URLs.

2. If sent via text message/SMS to an actual phone, it would send the shortened URL (if the full URL is longer than the shortened one, of course).
6638
General Software Discussion / Re: Any upload hash checking/comparing software?
« Last post by Deozaan on April 14, 2010, 10:39 PM »
A guy I know worked on a custom ftp client years ago that would create checksum files for every file you uploaded, with a hash for each chunk of the file so you would only have to re-download corrupt pieces. Dunno if he ever produced even a proof-of-concept, I've never heard of other people doing this, and it would obviously only work for files that you've uploaded with the custom client. *shrug*.

That sounds basically like BitTorrent.

Globalscape or Rhino software (?) has the feature you want, but you have to be running their software on both ends of the transfer (their FTP server & their FTP client) so I doubt that option would work for you.

It probably won't, unless I can convince my host to switch to that. It would be great to have an FTP server that would perform a checksum server side to compare with a client that was performing the checksums before it uploaded.
6639
General Software Discussion / Any upload hash checking/comparing software?
« Last post by Deozaan on April 14, 2010, 01:17 PM »
Every once in a while I will upload some files to the internet as a backup, and when I restore the files back to my computer, I realize that the file is corrupt because my internet connection freaked out during the FTP upload.

Is there any FTP client/server software that will perform a checksum on the remote files and compare them to the local files? Or perhaps a php/website script that could do something like this?

The reason why I'd prefer FTP is because my host provides a special FTP-only backup account (with no web-access to the files) and that's usually where I upload my backups to.
6640
N.A.N.Y. 2010 / Re: NANY 2010 Final Release: Leap of Faith
« Last post by Deozaan on April 13, 2010, 08:48 PM »
So all in all - not too bad. (Not too bad at all...)  ;) ;D

The question is: are you staring harder at the woman or the electronics behind her?
6641
Finished Programs / Re: ZIP to PHP converter
« Last post by Deozaan on April 13, 2010, 05:11 PM »
I just used this to upgrade a DokuWiki installation. It worked great! Thanks so much to both scancode for making it and icekin for requesting the idea!
6642
Living Room / Re: File Size vs. Size on Disk: Why such a difference?
« Last post by Deozaan on April 09, 2010, 01:41 AM »
32kb is a pretty large cluster size - but I guess it might have been set to the flash erase-block size?

I decided to format it and when I went to do that I found out that the default cluster size for FAT is 32 KiB. So I decided to format it to NTFS with 4096 byte cluster size and now there is a significant decrease in wasted bytes.

It went from just under 400 MB of wasted space to just under 40 MB.

Thanks for the info and help, everyone! :Thmbsup:
6643
I have this silly notion that I'm pretty good at math, but I don't think I even understand what you're requesting in the original post.
6644
DC Gamer Club / Re: TowerDefense Game: Sol Survivor
« Last post by Deozaan on April 08, 2010, 11:59 PM »
I've looked at it a few times. Never quite looked good enough for me to buy.

I guess trying the demo won't hurt. :Thmbsup:
6645
Living Room / Re: File Size vs. Size on Disk: Why such a difference?
« Last post by Deozaan on April 08, 2010, 11:44 PM »
Realize that each file will fill all clusters it uses except the last cluster (which might be full, but generally won't be).  If we assume that each file will use on average only half of the last cluster, we come up with the following guesstimate for 'wasted space'

    32768/2 * 16047 = 262,914,048 wasted bytes

Still not accounting for all the waste that you're apparently seeing, but I'd suspect that the true numbers skew toward more files that use far less than a cluster (I think of the files that use only a single cluster, there are far more that use less than half than those that use more than half).

Also, this doesn't account for the waste used by directories (which if I recall, are allocated clusters similarly to files except for the root directory), which would bring us up to close to about 300MB of wasted space.

This analysis hasn't account for all the waste you're seeing, but we're less than a factor of 2 away...

I had taken this into consideration with my initial calculations (though my math may have been wrong), but failed to explain it properly. I've reworded it in the post to hopefully make that more clear.

Basically with the average file size being about 39,356 bytes, that means that each file will fill one cluster and the remaining 6,587 bytes "spill over" into the next 32 KiB cluster.

Actually, calculating it again as 16,047 * (1024 * 32) - (16,047 * 6,587) gives me 420,126,507 wasted bytes, which is 400.66 MiB, which is pretty close to the 391 MB wasted.

EDIT: It's only by chance that those calculations came out so close, since assuming every file size is 39,356 bytes would by nature not calculate exactly. The real (estimated) math goes something like this:

Since every file size (assuming every file is of the average size) takes up 2 clusters, the total space on disk should be displaying as 1,051,656,192 bytes. We know that at least half of that is actually being used since each file is more than 32 KiB, so cut it in half to get 525,828,096 bytes. Of that, 105,701,589 is also actually used, which means that the remaining 420,126,507 bytes are "wasted." But even so, if this were an accurate calculation then the size on disk would display as approximately 1 GB rather than "only" approx. 900 MB.
6646
Living Room / Re: File Size vs. Size on Disk: Why such a difference?
« Last post by Deozaan on April 08, 2010, 11:25 PM »
32kb is a pretty large cluster size - but I guess it might have been set to the flash erase-block size?

Yeah, you're right. Somehow I had been thinking that the 4096 bytes I've seen for NTFS was actually 4 MiB, so I was thinking that 32 KiB was relatively small.

I may have used some Panasonic SD card formatting software on the thing as I'd heard that using Windows formatter could cause problems with microSD cards.

I honestly don't know much about microSD and flash memory. Do you think it would be wise to reformat the card to FAT32 with a 4096 byte cluster size? Or could that cause problems?
6647
Living Room / Re: File Size vs. Size on Disk: Why such a difference?
« Last post by Deozaan on April 07, 2010, 10:59 PM »
Ok. The drive in question is actually a 2 GiB microSD card in a USB adapter.

It's formatted as FAT with a 32 KiB cluster size (32,768 bytes in each allocation unit).

The particular folder I used in my example contains 16,047 files and 2,009 folders.

So 631,544,356 bytes divided by 16,047 files means the average file size is about 39,356 bytes. Which means a full 32 KiB per file plus 6,587 bytes "spill over" into the next 32 KiB cluster.

But actually it's worse than that, since that would still only add up to approximately 105 MB extra (size on disk) but it's actually almost 400MB extra.

So just doing a quick browse of the contents of the drive, I see lots of files that are only a few hundred bytes or just a couple KiB.
6648
Living Room / Re: File Size vs. Size on Disk: Why such a difference?
« Last post by Deozaan on April 07, 2010, 04:12 PM »
Is this something defragging can help with, or is it that multiple files cannot occupy parts of the same block?

Also of note, though I doubt this makes a difference, the USB drive in question is formatted as FAT32.
6649
Living Room / File Size vs. Size on Disk: Why such a difference?
« Last post by Deozaan on April 07, 2010, 01:26 PM »
Last night I learned something new that the geek in me found interesting. I learned the difference between SI prefix names and IEC prefix names. The details are summarized on Ubuntu's Units Policy but really the only thing that has to do with this post is that it made me curious about the discrepancy I see when viewing a file's (or folder's) properties and it shows the size and size on disk to be sometimes quite different.

For example, I have several PortableApps on a 2GiB USB drive and I wanted to see how much space they took up. So viewing the PortableApps' folder properties, it shows:

Size: 602 MB (631,544,356 bytes)
Size on disk: 993 MB (1,041,301,504 bytes)

So my questions is: Can anyone explain to me why the files take up 40% more space on disk than their actual size? Are they retaining water? Wearing a girdle? Did they have plastic surgery?
6650
N.A.N.Y. 2009 / Re: NANY 2009 Release: Trout (audio player)
« Last post by Deozaan on April 07, 2010, 04:23 AM »
Just a heads up: AVG Free just flagged trout.exe as being a threat (some generic downloader).  It gave me this link for more information:

http://free.avg.com/...IxY2Q5Zjc2Njc1NTAwMA

Is it just me or is this link worthless? It just takes me to the Virus Encyclopedia search page but doesn't actually perform a search or tell me what I should be searching for to get more information.
Pages: prev1 ... 261 262 263 264 265 [266] 267 268 269 270 271 ... 386next