[H] Memory Effects
My main box has a P45 Gigbyte UDP MB which currently has 4GB of OCZ memory. I have another 4GB of generic memory that would be nice to add to the system (I'm on Win7 64bit). Just wondering what the effects will be of two sets of 4GB memory from different manufacturers. I suppose the memory would all operate at the speed of the slowest pair, but are there any other weird effects that may occur. Or basically: Good idea or bad idea? Opinions? Thanks...Steve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
[H] Win7 and Hard Drives
I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
[H] Free video editing software which will rotate the frames?
I'm looking for a free program that will read an MOV file and then allow you to rotate the frames of the image by both 90 degrees and 180 degrees. Anyone know of anything? This is a two shot deal, so I don't plan to have this need for long. I have one video that I shot with the camera on its side, so it needs a 90 degree rotation...I'm about to do another with the camera upside down, so it will need 180 degree rotate so that one can view it in a way that it appears normal. Thanks.
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
Yes. It is annoying. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Steve Tomporowski didym...@gmail.com Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 08:25:22 To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
[H] w7 key
annoying, the key is so small I need a magnifying glass to properly read it, may just be my age :-D just got in w7 64 ultimate to play with on my server, not ready to loose my older programs on my work box :-| -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- Seniors are years ahead.
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
Thanks. I was really fishing around to find out if it was my system or universal. Steve amar...@charter.net wrote: Yes. It is annoying. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -Original Message- From: Steve Tomporowski didym...@gmail.com Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 08:25:22 To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4538 (20091024) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Memory Effects
Are you using Photoshop or other serious memory use program? If not, you might want to use that 4 GB's generic for something else. 8 Gigs is cool but definitely overkill for normal PC's. Steve Tomporowski wrote: My main box has a P45 Gigbyte UDP MB which currently has 4GB of OCZ memory. I have another 4GB of generic memory that would be nice to add to the system (I'm on Win7 64bit). Just wondering what the effects will be of two sets of 4GB memory from different manufacturers. I suppose the memory would all operate at the speed of the slowest pair, but are there any other weird effects that may occur. Or basically: Good idea or bad idea? Opinions? Thanks...Steve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
Yep, Vista and Win7 are both very hardrive intensive compared to XP. Better pony up the dough and get a solid state drive with the barefoot controller. LOL Steve Tomporowski wrote: I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
Hard drives have been the major system bottleneck for most computer users for years now. I'm surprised that it's taken this long for that fact to settle in AND for companies to realize that's the future growth area. Video cards? Eh...unless you are a freak you can get by. I play most new games and get by just fine spending $200 every couple of years. Processor? The quad core intel I bought 2 years ago was dirt cheap and I have yet to saturate all 4 processors. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: Yep, Vista and Win7 are both very hardrive intensive compared to XP. Better pony up the dough and get a solid state drive with the barefoot controller. LOL Steve Tomporowski wrote: I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
With gaming it depends on the resolution you play at. With a 30 monitor you're going to need some decent horsepower and even with my 24 there are times I wish for something better than my 4850 (5850 coming up as soon as price takes the 1st drop). I'm confused, you speak of an Intel quad core processor you bought 2 years ago being dirt cheap? Did you get it used because new and cheap don't equate to Intel processors. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: Hard drives have been the major system bottleneck for most computer users for years now. I'm surprised that it's taken this long for that fact to settle in AND for companies to realize that's the future growth area. Video cards? Eh...unless you are a freak you can get by. I play most new games and get by just fine spending $200 every couple of years. Processor? The quad core intel I bought 2 years ago was dirt cheap and I have yet to saturate all 4 processors. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: Yep, Vista and Win7 are both very hardrive intensive compared to XP. Better pony up the dough and get a solid state drive with the barefoot controller. LOL Steve Tomporowski wrote: I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
I bought a Q6600 for $250 in March 2008. I consider that to be a dirt cheap price to get a processor that will meet my foreseeable needs for 3-4 years. I bought a Radeon 4850 for $180 in Oct 2008 and it has suited me just fine. The last game I played - Batman Arkham Asylum - ran very smooth. And yes, I am running a 24 LCD. I've considered getting another 4850 and doing SLI, but I don't really see a need at this point and I'm not sure Im going to get much value as opposed to waiting another 6 months and getting a whole new card. The next major game I will be playing a lot - Dragon Age:Origins - will probably run just fine on my current setup. However, I am still running a pair of Seagate SATA drives that I've had for years (250 GB boot, 80 GB data). So my upgrade this winter will be Windows 7 64-bit, another 4 GB of RAM (because I multitask a lot and run VMs), and a SSD boot drive. But I have no incentive to change my CPU. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: With gaming it depends on the resolution you play at. With a 30 monitor you're going to need some decent horsepower and even with my 24 there are times I wish for something better than my 4850 (5850 coming up as soon as price takes the 1st drop). I'm confused, you speak of an Intel quad core processor you bought 2 years ago being dirt cheap? Did you get it used because new and cheap don't equate to Intel processors. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: Hard drives have been the major system bottleneck for most computer users for years now. I'm surprised that it's taken this long for that fact to settle in AND for companies to realize that's the future growth area. Video cards? Eh...unless you are a freak you can get by. I play most new games and get by just fine spending $200 every couple of years. Processor? The quad core intel I bought 2 years ago was dirt cheap and I have yet to saturate all 4 processors. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: Yep, Vista and Win7 are both very hardrive intensive compared to XP. Better pony up the dough and get a solid state drive with the barefoot controller. LOL Steve Tomporowski wrote: I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
I have something you might be interested in Brian: Dungeons and Dragons Online: behold the power of free http://bit.ly/8dUTM Brian Weeden wrote: I bought a Q6600 for $250 in March 2008. I consider that to be a dirt cheap price to get a processor that will meet my foreseeable needs for 3-4 years. I bought a Radeon 4850 for $180 in Oct 2008 and it has suited me just fine. The last game I played - Batman Arkham Asylum - ran very smooth. And yes, I am running a 24 LCD. I've considered getting another 4850 and doing SLI, but I don't really see a need at this point and I'm not sure Im going to get much value as opposed to waiting another 6 months and getting a whole new card. The next major game I will be playing a lot - Dragon Age:Origins - will probably run just fine on my current setup. However, I am still running a pair of Seagate SATA drives that I've had for years (250 GB boot, 80 GB data). So my upgrade this winter will be Windows 7 64-bit, another 4 GB of RAM (because I multitask a lot and run VMs), and a SSD boot drive. But I have no incentive to change my CPU. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: With gaming it depends on the resolution you play at. With a 30 monitor you're going to need some decent horsepower and even with my 24 there are times I wish for something better than my 4850 (5850 coming up as soon as price takes the 1st drop). I'm confused, you speak of an Intel quad core processor you bought 2 years ago being dirt cheap? Did you get it used because new and cheap don't equate to Intel processors. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: Hard drives have been the major system bottleneck for most computer users for years now. I'm surprised that it's taken this long for that fact to settle in AND for companies to realize that's the future growth area. Video cards? Eh...unless you are a freak you can get by. I play most new games and get by just fine spending $200 every couple of years. Processor? The quad core intel I bought 2 years ago was dirt cheap and I have yet to saturate all 4 processors. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: Yep, Vista and Win7 are both very hardrive intensive compared to XP. Better pony up the dough and get a solid state drive with the barefoot controller. LOL Steve Tomporowski wrote: I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
I'm sure it's great but I went cold turkey on MMOs. With a toddler in the house and another on the way I am strictly a single player, pause any time sort of gamer now (not that I didn't enjoy my time with MUDs, DAOC, and WoW). Oblivion, Fallout 3, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Civ 4 (still going strong), Dead Space, the Witcher - those are my type of games now. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: I have something you might be interested in Brian: Dungeons and Dragons Online: behold the power of free http://bit.ly/8dUTM Brian Weeden wrote: I bought a Q6600 for $250 in March 2008. I consider that to be a dirt cheap price to get a processor that will meet my foreseeable needs for 3-4 years. I bought a Radeon 4850 for $180 in Oct 2008 and it has suited me just fine. The last game I played - Batman Arkham Asylum - ran very smooth. And yes, I am running a 24 LCD. I've considered getting another 4850 and doing SLI, but I don't really see a need at this point and I'm not sure Im going to get much value as opposed to waiting another 6 months and getting a whole new card. The next major game I will be playing a lot - Dragon Age:Origins - will probably run just fine on my current setup. However, I am still running a pair of Seagate SATA drives that I've had for years (250 GB boot, 80 GB data). So my upgrade this winter will be Windows 7 64-bit, another 4 GB of RAM (because I multitask a lot and run VMs), and a SSD boot drive. But I have no incentive to change my CPU. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: With gaming it depends on the resolution you play at. With a 30 monitor you're going to need some decent horsepower and even with my 24 there are times I wish for something better than my 4850 (5850 coming up as soon as price takes the 1st drop). I'm confused, you speak of an Intel quad core processor you bought 2 years ago being dirt cheap? Did you get it used because new and cheap don't equate to Intel processors. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: Hard drives have been the major system bottleneck for most computer users for years now. I'm surprised that it's taken this long for that fact to settle in AND for companies to realize that's the future growth area. Video cards? Eh...unless you are a freak you can get by. I play most new games and get by just fine spending $200 every couple of years. Processor? The quad core intel I bought 2 years ago was dirt cheap and I have yet to saturate all 4 processors. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: Yep, Vista and Win7 are both very hardrive intensive compared to XP. Better pony up the dough and get a solid state drive with the barefoot controller. LOL Steve Tomporowski wrote: I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
Brian, Thanks for the excellent report of your choices and use. I agree that you do need the power you chose. For, me, I have had perfect service from my trio of E8400 C2D's (now 1yr old) that run 24/7. Once I got all the user-caused glitches worked out, these three procs now simply own me! I am seriously thinking of adding a 4th identical platform to my LAN just because they run so well. I have yet to find anything they will NOT do quickly and easily. My gaming is limited to FlightSim 2K and the last three Tomb Raider episodes. I use nVidia 9600 GT's (2) and one ATI4750. All three PC's have 2GB of DDR3 RAM; and, use 160GB SATA drives from Seagate. May not be a Power-Ranger any longer, but these 3 units just really run so sweet. I am very very happy. (Thanks List for suggestions). Best, Duncan Brian Weeden wrote: I bought a Q6600 for $250 in March 2008. I consider that to be a dirt cheap price to get a processor that will meet my foreseeable needs for 3-4 years. I bought a Radeon 4850 for $180 in Oct 2008 and it has suited me just fine. The last game I played - Batman Arkham Asylum - ran very smooth. And yes, I am running a 24 LCD. I've considered getting another 4850 and doing SLI, but I don't really see a need at this point and I'm not sure Im going to get much value as opposed to waiting another 6 months and getting a whole new card. The next major game I will be playing a lot - Dragon Age:Origins - will probably run just fine on my current setup. However, I am still running a pair of Seagate SATA drives that I've had for years (250 GB boot, 80 GB data). So my upgrade this winter will be Windows 7 64-bit, another 4 GB of RAM (because I multitask a lot and run VMs), and a SSD boot drive. But I have no incentive to change my CPU. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: With gaming it depends on the resolution you play at. With a 30 monitor you're going to need some decent horsepower and even with my 24 there are times I wish for something better than my 4850 (5850 coming up as soon as price takes the 1st drop). I'm confused, you speak of an Intel quad core processor you bought 2 years ago being dirt cheap? Did you get it used because new and cheap don't equate to Intel processors. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: Hard drives have been the major system bottleneck for most computer users for years now. I'm surprised that it's taken this long for that fact to settle in AND for companies to realize that's the future growth area. Video cards? Eh...unless you are a freak you can get by. I play most new games and get by just fine spending $200 every couple of years. Processor? The quad core intel I bought 2 years ago was dirt cheap and I have yet to saturate all 4 processors. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: Yep, Vista and Win7 are both very hardrive intensive compared to XP. Better pony up the dough and get a solid state drive with the barefoot controller. LOL Steve Tomporowski wrote: I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
The recent Tomb Raider games (esp Legend) have been pretty darn good. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 2:57 PM, DSinc dx7...@bellsouth.net wrote: Brian, Thanks for the excellent report of your choices and use. I agree that you do need the power you chose. For, me, I have had perfect service from my trio of E8400 C2D's (now 1yr old) that run 24/7. Once I got all the user-caused glitches worked out, these three procs now simply own me! I am seriously thinking of adding a 4th identical platform to my LAN just because they run so well. I have yet to find anything they will NOT do quickly and easily. My gaming is limited to FlightSim 2K and the last three Tomb Raider episodes. I use nVidia 9600 GT's (2) and one ATI4750. All three PC's have 2GB of DDR3 RAM; and, use 160GB SATA drives from Seagate. May not be a Power-Ranger any longer, but these 3 units just really run so sweet. I am very very happy. (Thanks List for suggestions). Best, Duncan Brian Weeden wrote: I bought a Q6600 for $250 in March 2008. I consider that to be a dirt cheap price to get a processor that will meet my foreseeable needs for 3-4 years. I bought a Radeon 4850 for $180 in Oct 2008 and it has suited me just fine. The last game I played - Batman Arkham Asylum - ran very smooth. And yes, I am running a 24 LCD. I've considered getting another 4850 and doing SLI, but I don't really see a need at this point and I'm not sure Im going to get much value as opposed to waiting another 6 months and getting a whole new card. The next major game I will be playing a lot - Dragon Age:Origins - will probably run just fine on my current setup. However, I am still running a pair of Seagate SATA drives that I've had for years (250 GB boot, 80 GB data). So my upgrade this winter will be Windows 7 64-bit, another 4 GB of RAM (because I multitask a lot and run VMs), and a SSD boot drive. But I have no incentive to change my CPU. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: With gaming it depends on the resolution you play at. With a 30 monitor you're going to need some decent horsepower and even with my 24 there are times I wish for something better than my 4850 (5850 coming up as soon as price takes the 1st drop). I'm confused, you speak of an Intel quad core processor you bought 2 years ago being dirt cheap? Did you get it used because new and cheap don't equate to Intel processors. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: Hard drives have been the major system bottleneck for most computer users for years now. I'm surprised that it's taken this long for that fact to settle in AND for companies to realize that's the future growth area. Video cards? Eh...unless you are a freak you can get by. I play most new games and get by just fine spending $200 every couple of years. Processor? The quad core intel I bought 2 years ago was dirt cheap and I have yet to saturate all 4 processors. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: Yep, Vista and Win7 are both very hardrive intensive compared to XP. Better pony up the dough and get a solid state drive with the barefoot controller. LOL Steve Tomporowski wrote: I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
It's my first MMO. After all these years of playing games it took the words Dungeons and Dragons and free to get me to try it. I still play it in single player mode however. Someday I'll take the plunge and join a social group. Probably get eaten alive by the kids in there. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: I'm sure it's great but I went cold turkey on MMOs. With a toddler in the house and another on the way I am strictly a single player, pause any time sort of gamer now (not that I didn't enjoy my time with MUDs, DAOC, and WoW). Oblivion, Fallout 3, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Civ 4 (still going strong), Dead Space, the Witcher - those are my type of games now. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: I have something you might be interested in Brian: Dungeons and Dragons Online: behold the power of free http://bit.ly/8dUTM Brian Weeden wrote: I bought a Q6600 for $250 in March 2008. I consider that to be a dirt cheap price to get a processor that will meet my foreseeable needs for 3-4 years. I bought a Radeon 4850 for $180 in Oct 2008 and it has suited me just fine. The last game I played - Batman Arkham Asylum - ran very smooth. And yes, I am running a 24 LCD. I've considered getting another 4850 and doing SLI, but I don't really see a need at this point and I'm not sure Im going to get much value as opposed to waiting another 6 months and getting a whole new card. The next major game I will be playing a lot - Dragon Age:Origins - will probably run just fine on my current setup. However, I am still running a pair of Seagate SATA drives that I've had for years (250 GB boot, 80 GB data). So my upgrade this winter will be Windows 7 64-bit, another 4 GB of RAM (because I multitask a lot and run VMs), and a SSD boot drive. But I have no incentive to change my CPU. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: With gaming it depends on the resolution you play at. With a 30 monitor you're going to need some decent horsepower and even with my 24 there are times I wish for something better than my 4850 (5850 coming up as soon as price takes the 1st drop). I'm confused, you speak of an Intel quad core processor you bought 2 years ago being dirt cheap? Did you get it used because new and cheap don't equate to Intel processors. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: Hard drives have been the major system bottleneck for most computer users for years now. I'm surprised that it's taken this long for that fact to settle in AND for companies to realize that's the future growth area. Video cards? Eh...unless you are a freak you can get by. I play most new games and get by just fine spending $200 every couple of years. Processor? The quad core intel I bought 2 years ago was dirt cheap and I have yet to saturate all 4 processors. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: Yep, Vista and Win7 are both very hardrive intensive compared to XP. Better pony up the dough and get a solid state drive with the barefoot controller. LOL Steve Tomporowski wrote: I've noticed this 'problem' on both Vista and Win7. It seems like the system puts it's file manager to sleep, so that if you try to do a disk action, you get a substantial delay. For instance, I'll be playing a game, then I jump to email, when I try to drag and drop, there is a delay, I get the circle, then finally it moves the message. Of course, the next message goes quickly. The same with getting disk directories. I'll click on a drive, get the 1st half of folders, then the circle and then the moving bar, then it finally gives me all the folders. Of course, after that point, everything works quickly. My power settings are for always on, so it's not a power down. Anyone else seen this? ThanksSteve __ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4537 (20091023) __ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
I didn't playing MMOs because they sucked, quite the opposite. I liked them a bit TOO much, and I just don't have room in my current life for the time commitment they require. i still have some very fond memories. Running a guild in a MUD in college (Dragons, Legends and Lore) and spending days working through the hardest area. It was this massive tower with a Royal family, and there were somewhere around 15 secret doors you had to find by reading room clues to get all the way to the top and find out what's really going on. Being part of an all-night 100-person raiding part in DAOC and taking the last treasure fort. Tanking in Darkness Falls and seeing a party run by followed closely by thatT huge Prince dude with the wings and his entourage in hot pursuit. Sitting on a hill overlooking a 700-person battle for a bridge and an island in Planetside, with tanks and bombers and mechs everywhere. Could almost smell the napalm. Llama hunting with a bunch of friends and disc shooters in Tribes 2, and hitting that perfect cap run where everything from flag grab to the escape is one long glide. Taking our time to work through the entire Temple of Atal'hakkar in WoW with some close friends in one sitting and appreciating the little details the designers put in. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: It's my first MMO. After all these years of playing games it took the words Dungeons and Dragons and free to get me to try it. I still play it in single player mode however. Someday I'll take the plunge and join a social group. Probably get eaten alive by the kids in there. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: I'm sure it's great but I went cold turkey on MMOs. With a toddler in the house and another on the way I am strictly a single player, pause any time sort of gamer now (not that I didn't enjoy my time with MUDs, DAOC, and WoW). Oblivion, Fallout 3, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Civ 4 (still going strong), Dead Space, the Witcher - those are my type of games now. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: I have something you might be interested in Brian: Dungeons and Dragons Online: behold the power of free http://bit.ly/8dUTM Brian Weeden wrote: I bought a Q6600 for $250 in March 2008. I consider that to be a dirt cheap price to get a processor that will meet my foreseeable needs for 3-4 years. I bought a Radeon 4850 for $180 in Oct 2008 and it has suited me just fine. The last game I played - Batman Arkham Asylum - ran very smooth. And yes, I am running a 24 LCD. I've considered getting another 4850 and doing SLI, but I don't really see a need at this point and I'm not sure Im going to get much value as opposed to waiting another 6 months and getting a whole new card. The next major game I will be playing a lot - Dragon Age:Origins - will probably run just fine on my current setup. However, I am still running a pair of Seagate SATA drives that I've had for years (250 GB boot, 80 GB data). So my upgrade this winter will be Windows 7 64-bit, another 4 GB of RAM (because I multitask a lot and run VMs), and a SSD boot drive. But I have no incentive to change my CPU. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: With gaming it depends on the resolution you play at. With a 30 monitor you're going to need some decent horsepower and even with my 24 there are times I wish for something better than my 4850 (5850 coming up as soon as price takes the 1st drop). I'm confused, you speak of an Intel quad core processor you bought 2 years ago being dirt cheap? Did you get it used because new and cheap don't equate to Intel processors. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: Hard drives have been the major system bottleneck for most computer users for years now. I'm surprised that it's taken this long for that fact to settle in AND for companies to realize that's the future growth area. Video cards? Eh...unless you are a freak you can get by. I play most new games and get by just fine spending $200 every couple of years. Processor? The quad core intel I bought 2 years ago was dirt cheap and I have yet to saturate all 4 processors. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On
Re: [H] Win7 and Hard Drives
You're one of those kids that would probably eat me alive and I didn't say that MMO's suck and heard that you're a new daddy. Congratulations by the way. Child gets a little older: think of the MMO possibilities. You know, after school and sports of course. :-) Brian Weeden wrote: I didn't playing MMOs because they sucked, quite the opposite. I liked them a bit TOO much, and I just don't have room in my current life for the time commitment they require. i still have some very fond memories. Running a guild in a MUD in college (Dragons, Legends and Lore) and spending days working through the hardest area. It was this massive tower with a Royal family, and there were somewhere around 15 secret doors you had to find by reading room clues to get all the way to the top and find out what's really going on. Being part of an all-night 100-person raiding part in DAOC and taking the last treasure fort. Tanking in Darkness Falls and seeing a party run by followed closely by thatT huge Prince dude with the wings and his entourage in hot pursuit. Sitting on a hill overlooking a 700-person battle for a bridge and an island in Planetside, with tanks and bombers and mechs everywhere. Could almost smell the napalm. Llama hunting with a bunch of friends and disc shooters in Tribes 2, and hitting that perfect cap run where everything from flag grab to the escape is one long glide. Taking our time to work through the entire Temple of Atal'hakkar in WoW with some close friends in one sitting and appreciating the little details the designers put in. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: It's my first MMO. After all these years of playing games it took the words Dungeons and Dragons and free to get me to try it. I still play it in single player mode however. Someday I'll take the plunge and join a social group. Probably get eaten alive by the kids in there. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: I'm sure it's great but I went cold turkey on MMOs. With a toddler in the house and another on the way I am strictly a single player, pause any time sort of gamer now (not that I didn't enjoy my time with MUDs, DAOC, and WoW). Oblivion, Fallout 3, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Civ 4 (still going strong), Dead Space, the Witcher - those are my type of games now. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: I have something you might be interested in Brian: Dungeons and Dragons Online: behold the power of free http://bit.ly/8dUTM Brian Weeden wrote: I bought a Q6600 for $250 in March 2008. I consider that to be a dirt cheap price to get a processor that will meet my foreseeable needs for 3-4 years. I bought a Radeon 4850 for $180 in Oct 2008 and it has suited me just fine. The last game I played - Batman Arkham Asylum - ran very smooth. And yes, I am running a 24 LCD. I've considered getting another 4850 and doing SLI, but I don't really see a need at this point and I'm not sure Im going to get much value as opposed to waiting another 6 months and getting a whole new card. The next major game I will be playing a lot - Dragon Age:Origins - will probably run just fine on my current setup. However, I am still running a pair of Seagate SATA drives that I've had for years (250 GB boot, 80 GB data). So my upgrade this winter will be Windows 7 64-bit, another 4 GB of RAM (because I multitask a lot and run VMs), and a SSD boot drive. But I have no incentive to change my CPU. --- Brian Weeden Technical Advisor Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundation.org Montreal Office +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Stan Zaske swza...@yahoo.com wrote: With gaming it depends on the resolution you play at. With a 30 monitor you're going to need some decent horsepower and even with my 24 there are times I wish for something better than my 4850 (5850 coming up as soon as price takes the 1st drop). I'm confused, you speak of an Intel quad core processor you bought 2 years ago being dirt cheap? Did you get it used because new and cheap don't equate to Intel processors. LOL Brian Weeden wrote: Hard drives have been the major system bottleneck for most computer users for years now. I'm surprised that it's taken this long for that fact to settle in AND for companies to realize that's the future growth area. Video cards? Eh...unless you are a freak you can get by. I play most new games and get by just fine spending $200 every couple of years. Processor? The quad core intel I bought 2 years
