When I downloaded it it says I need java but then I go to the java website and their check said that I do have java on my computer. Can anyone please tell me how to get it to work?75.185.122.137 (talk) 01:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Java Virtual Machine and J2SE are different things. Are you sure you are looking at the right thing? Kushal^t 01:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I’m trying to set up a personal website using Nvu. I’ve rented the domain from 1&1[1]. Because I only needed one domain I opted for their “Beginner MS/Linux” package which is supposed to give you one FTP account. Problem is I can’t find my “Publishing address” (which is what Nvu needs to transfer the files so I assume that’s synonymous with ftp). I just called customer service and had a really hard time understanding the strong accent of the tech support person. Unless I misunderstand he told me I would have to upgrade to another package in order be able to use Nvu. Is this true? If so what package do I need and once I have it how do I find the site’s FTP? Thanks, --S.dedalus (talk) 04:30, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are simple instructions in 1&1's extensive collection of FAQ's, but basically your ftp address is yoursite.com. 81.77.236.43 (talk) 04:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know, but the FAQ’s give me charming examples of incompetence; directing me to click on an icon that doesn’t exist in my control panel for instance. So the FTP for my site is my HTTP address? Or is it the abbreviated form? Now I’m getting an error message with Nvu that says “530 login incorrect.” --S.dedalus (talk) 05:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If your host is anything like GoDaddy, then your FTP username and password are probably not the same as your account username and password. --LarryMac | Talk 17:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From what I remember when I had a 1&1 account, I had a separate login name and a separate password for FTP. Have you tried FTP direct to your site (ftp://yoursite.com) if you have an operating system with FTP built in (since Windows 2000?) (or a stand-alone FTP program.) 1&1 will ask for your login, then you should be able to create, delete and rename files in your folders on your site (try renaming). If this works, then you can transfer your files without using NVU (though it will be more convenient to set up your FTP login name and password in NVU). If this doesn't work then you have a problem with your FTP account at 1&1.dbfirs 15:08, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am hopefully going to buy the [2] HP Pavilion Elite soon, and I noticed that it came with Vista Ultimate 64bit OS. I've heard that some programmes don't work with a 64bit Operating System, yet you would need the 64bit to take full advantage of the RAM and CPUCore. So, my question is as follows; would the 64bit OS be a problem for programmes/drivers? I use an Epson printer, a NETGEAR wireless router, a Wacom Intuos A5 Wide Tablet, and my main software is Photoshop and Microsoft Office. Would most games be compatable? And secondly; I have heard a number of bad things about Vista. Taking into consideration that it's SP isn't out yet, but I still would be greatful for any opinions. I've taken a look at the Criticism section of the Wiki article, but nothing there seems to effect me. Any con's of Vista that you've ever experienced from user-experience? Thanks in advance. --Boggy1 (talk) 12:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't answer your whole question, but I used Vista Ultimate 64 bit at home and most programs can be run in Compatibility Mode (which must be run as Administrator). This allows you to run older programs as if you were using Windows XP or earlier. As far as hardware is concerned, most developers offer updated drivers for the 64 bit systems to allow them to run properly. If these drivers are not offered by the developers other providers have been known to offer alternatives, but this requires a little bit of Internet research. --Julia (talk) 19:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You should check to make sure the drivers you need are available before you install/use the 64-bit OS. You also need to get a 64bit version of Photoshop and MS Office otherwise you will not gain any advantage. You must get 64-bit graphics driver otherwise any graphics heavy apps/games are likly to not work or work slowly. Remember if you using applications designed for 32-bit, you will not get to use the extra memory space just because you run it on a 64-bit OS. In fact 32-bit apps run on WOW (Windows On Windows) in Vista 64. It's sort of like an OS emulator. NYCDA (talk) 21:05, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where can I find some up-to-date ones that won't take years to download? Do they even exist?

And just out of curiosity, why hasn't Wizards KILLED THEM WITH LAWYERS yet? Vitriol (talk) 14:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

can anyone suggest or recommend some free keylogging software? I would prefer it not to be a demo or limited edition.

it does not need to be too fancy - just record all keystrokes (for PC, windows XP)

thanks 83.104.131.135 (talk) 15:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Try Google. There are many such programs available. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 15:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for your response Admiral. However, many of these seem to be 'free' in the sense that you can either download a demo for free, or that they will work for a short period of time for free. What I'm looking for is something like freeware. thanks 83.104.131.135 (talk) 15:45, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some real freeware keyloggers. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 16:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, I shall give them a try later. 83.104.131.135 (talk) 16:53, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi wikipedian world! Am I the only one who thinks the term wireless is really dumb? In my opinion, it's not a word that describes what it is, it's a word that describes what it is not! Isn't it like calling the Internet 'paperless', an optical disc 'tapeless', a (modern) calculator 'abacusless', an mp3 player 'discless', or even a photograph 'paintless', etc. etc. etc.? If the term originated from a need to differentiate EM radio transmission from telegraphic wire communications, why would one need to use that same differentiation again today? Is it that no one found a better way to describe it? Or did they simply seize the name again out of laziness? What do you think? Kreachure (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The suffix "-less" implies that the thing is lacking but a real possibility. So "abacus-less" doesn't work so well because abacuses are not at all widely used (in the Western world). However, a mouse with a wire is widely used—it is, in fact, the norm—and so noting how the product without a wire differs, it makes perfect sense to call it "wireless" (though if I were a marketer, I'd have probably gone with "wire-free", which sounds even more positive). This it not at all unique; automobiles were, in the days when horses were the norm, known as "horse-less", in the earlier days of digitized files, the term "paper-less" was not uncommon (e.g. paperless office), etc. The adoption of such terms is a bit more than "laziness"—it's not only convenient, but it does have real meaning, and it is quite common to describe things by their absence. I bet the folks at the Language Desk could provide more information on this, but I remember learning about the usage/development of -less and -free and all of those types of words when I took a linguistics class in college. --24.147.69.31 (talk) 16:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll be asking on the language desk about the usage of -less to see what they say about it. Kreachure (talk) 19:53, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A wireless mouse is a rather accurate description. It is a mouse without a wire. Chances are, your mouse has a wire because most do. The minority that do not are defined by what makes them part of the minority. If, on the other hand, most computer mice did not have wires, one with a wire would likely be called a "wired" mouse or a "cabled" mouse or a "crappy wired cable thingy" mouse. Referring to minority objects by what makes them the minority is not unusual. I can think of many right off the top of my head. In fact, you named one: a "paperless" office is a common term for an office that uses electronic documents instead of paper ones. Then, there's "lactose-free" milk, "hairless" cats, and "unleaded" gas. That last one is good for showing how language adapts over time. If you say "gas" now, you mean "unleaded". You have to say "leaded" gas for what used to be plain gas. -- kainaw™ 22:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think Kreature's point was, not that a mouse wouldn't actually lack wires, but that it would be defined by it's opposing counterpart, a mouse with wires. The concern is that the mouse is conceived entirely by opposition to a wired mouse, which is why he was referred to the linguistics desk. —Akrabbim^talk 03:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The latest mobile phones from Sony Ericsson, and Nokia have the same four hard keys (I mean the two pairs of keys just below the soft keys). The keys are Call Accept, Call Reject, Menu, and Clear. This was never the case till now. Have the two companies reached some agreement? Compare Sony Ericsson W890i and Nokia N82 --Masatran (talk) 18:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because they both use Symbian OS? --antilived^{T | C | G} 02:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both have been using Symbian for years now, but their hard keys were never the same till now. --Masatran (talk) 06:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd bet that it is because it is a pretty good layout to use, and not any sort of agreement. Compare it to say... computer mice. You have 2 buttons and a scrollwheel, and it goes button scrollwheel button. This isn't due to any agreement, just because it is easiest to use. I remember when scrollwheels first started cropping up a few mice had their scrollwheels to the left or right of the buttons, and as you can see there are no longer any mice like this. Not due to any agreement or anything but just for familiarity and ease of use TheGreatZorko (talk) 12:50, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I want to clone an existing hard drive that boots to XP to a larger one, (the smaller one is going to die soon, I am sure of it) but if possible leave some or all of the leftover space for another partition to use for linux to dual boot into. I've reviewed the Disk_cloning article, and quite a bit of the external links it has to various software packages. I'm interested in people's experiences and suggestions. Some parameters: I'd prefer to use freeware or open source, the drives will end up in a Thinkpad T30, both the drives are AT, and I want to do it from one PC if possible... The source drive is the current boot drive of the T30. I have both a second drive tray (but that means not using the CD) as well as an external USB connected enclosure I can mount the target drive into... I also have other machines with compatible hardware if I have to go network. I'm fine with booting from CD into a linux based thing to do it... Trinity Resource Kit was what seemed to me to be a good candidate for software for this based on my research so far... I do have a CD rw drive that works in the T-30 which the TRK material suggests is useful to have. ++Lar: t/c 22:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just use dd (unix) (Usage: # dd -if /dev/hda -of /dev/hdb, depending on your drive names). You will get an exact copy of your current drive, and then you can use gparted to expand the last partition or something. --antilived^{T | C | G} 02:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DANGER: dd can quickly destroy a drive! Triple-check your arguments before you run it. In the example given above, your second hard drive will be totally overwritten with a copy of your first hard drive. This might not be what you want. If it IS what you want, then DD is very effective. --Mdwyer (talk) 18:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not so keen on using dd, I'd like something with a bit more functionality and handholding :) My current drive has only one partition. I want to end up with two partitions on the newer drive, one that has what the current drive has in it (but bigger, I am going from 30G to 80G) and maybe 10G left at the end for a dualbootable second partition. ++Lar: t/c 01:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can change the partitions later using gparted easily. --antilived^{T | C | G} 00:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]