Casey Long2 said:Look, totally unrelated to the main topic, but you can pick up an EVGA SuperNOVA for about $45. It isn't exactly a powerhouse, but it carries an 80 Plus Bronze rating, comes with a three-year warranty, and the reviews are solid. To me, it looks like a killer deal for anyone building an entry-level rig.
You might be better off biting the bullet and grabbing a more expensive 400W Corsair model 😁
How do you say "snatched up like free donuts at the office"? When good stuff hits the market at a low price, it disappears before you can even blink.😁 😉
driftingfalcon39 said:I know I’m digging up a pretty old thread here, but I was just wondering if anyone is actually still using this. Is it still considered a solid alternative to Google Chrome? 🍿
It isn't just a decent alternative to the original "spyware-ridden" Chrome; honestly, it’s actually better because it doesn't come with all that built-in baggage. It’s essentially a cleaned-up, streamlined version.😁 Here, take this portable version and give it a spin; I’ve already dialed in all the settings exactly how they should be. It even comes with WOT pre-installed, and since I’ve already loaded in all the major, high-traffic sites, you won't have to worry about a thing.🍿😁
I can't see the image you're referring to. If you want me to take a look at something, you'll need to provide the actual content or describe what's in the link.
Benjamin King2 said:Core utilization is really about the application itself rather than the operating system; XP handles multi-core processors just fine, but if an application is single-threaded, it’s always going to sit on a single core regardless of what OS you're running. For any software to actually tap into multiple cores, you need hardware support, OS support, and the application itself has to be designed for multi-threading. You need all three pieces of the puzzle to fall into place.
The real distinction between XP and Vista or Windows 7 is that Vista and 7 utilize a different thread-pool system that distributes the load across all available cores, whereas XP tends to max out one core before bothering to utilize the others as needed.
That said, Vista used to run into issues where a massive pileup of threads would wait for a specific system resource, and once that resource finally cleared, a single thread failing could cause the entire thread pool to stall—what they call a "lock convoy." It would result in the whole computer freezing for a few seconds before everything smoothed out again. I assume they patched those issues with the Microsoft updates, because I never ran into that kind of behavior on Windows 7.
That’s essentially my point regarding how XP fills up one core first and only touches the others when forced, which is a significant drawback by today's standards. Of course, whether an app uses multiple cores depends on its design; you could have 12 cores at your disposal, but if the program only knows how to work with four, the rest are just sitting there doing nothing most of the time. If you have extra cores that just idle away while you're trying to get things done, it's inefficient. Windows 7 manages its processes properly by spreading the workload across all cores, which leads me back to the same conclusion: XP's handling of cores is fundamentally flawed, though given how old it is, I suppose that isn't entirely surprising.🍿😉
Matthew Young35 said:Does he actually know how to manage memory effectively? 😲
After a clean install, it’s pulling more than a gigabyte just sitting there at idle.
Look, Windows 7 is definitely better than XP—by quite a bit—but let's not get carried away.
I wasn't talking about the sheer volume of RAM being consumed; you misunderstood me. It’s common knowledge that 7 requires more memory than XP simply because it’s running more background processes, so that's a given. But honestly, that's irrelevant these days; when people talk about memory management, they're referring to something much more significant than just total consumption.😁😉
Windows XP just doesn't have the slightest clue how to handle multi-core processors, which is a massive disadvantage when you consider that Windows 7 or Windows Vista handles them naturally, not to mention the significantly better memory management found in those newer systems, so there isn't much else to say about it.😁😉
Carl Morales4 said:uh... alright... 🤷 🤣 ... haha thanks, I guess I'm just a bit of a 🙄 no, seriously, everything seems fine on paper, so I grabbed the ISO image, used Nero to burn it onto a CD, and tried to boot from it, but then it starts loading some DLS DIG thing, hangs on a black screen for about thirty seconds, and finally spits out: "Unable to locate the License Agreement file, DGLICE.TXT!!!
Please make sure that the EULA file is located in the same path as installer. " So I boot into macOS instead, open up the CD, and the file is right there. 😕 😕Any chance you can help me out, Andrew Miller102? 👍
I really don't have much to offer you there, so just download that ISO again, or maybe grab the ZIP file containing the ISO, unpack it, and try burning it one more time; the ISO should work perfectly.☕😉
Carl Morales4 said:WD only provides a basic diagnostic tool—honestly, I picked this drive up over in Germany about two and a half years ago, so I really can't be bothered dealing with the hassle of shipping it back there just to find out it's reached the end of its life anyway.😂
Give me a break; if you think their utility can actually fix Bad Sectors, you’ve been listening to some total nonsense.😁 Just download their utility in ISO format and use ImgBurn to put it on a CD-R. Once you boot from that disc, run a Stress Test and make sure you check the box to automatically repair any Bad Sectors it encounters, and that should do the trick.🍿🙂
Windows Media Player on Windows 7 isn't loading certain songs for me lately, specifically everything I've downloaded since a certain point. Sometimes they show up, though even then it's inconsistent, and then they just vanish again. 🤷
Honestly, you shouldn't be using Windows Media Player 12 for your music if you want to avoid headaches,😂 because there are much more capable programs out there, like Jaangle for instance. Once you install it and start importing your tracks through Collections, things just work, and you'll find that once you get used to it, you won't ever want to touch Windows Media Player again.😁😉
Kevin Nelson said:I don't find the look of MPCHC ugly at all.
While Splayer is admittedly similar, it seems to have some actual improvements, not just in the interface, but it also handled certain files for me that this one couldn't, and honestly, it feels like it opens files faster.
How can you think Splayer is reading things differently than MPCHC when they are essentially the same engine under the hood, just wrapped in different skins?😁 If you ran into an issue where a file wouldn't play, it was likely just a corrupted video or some other typical Windows glitch. I’ve used MPCHC to open just about every format imaginable regardless of the resolution, and even those old RealPlayer formats like RMVB worked perfectly fine as long as the files themselves weren't broken.☕😉
Taylor Morales31 said:I actually think the one bundled with the K-Lite codec pack is pretty solid; Home Cinema might be an eyesore, but it gets the job done, though if I want the absolute best picture quality, Windows Media Player 12 usually wins out—assuming it can actually handle the file in the first place.
Windows Media Player 12 handles most formats just fine, but it tends to stumble when you throw high-definition video at it, though honestly, it’s hardly surprising given how much they seem to struggle with anything remotely modern.😂 Now, while MPCHC might not be winning any beauty contests, the kid absolutely crushes the competition in terms of performance, but if you’re looking for something with a bit more polish and a decent UI, you should probably go with Splayer. Under the hood, it’s essentially the same engine but with updated features and a clean look that lets you stop worrying about playback issues, especially since all those extra codec packs are pretty much redundant anyway.😁😉
Richard Wilson4 said:My Adobe Creative Cloud setup bit the dust, so I’m looking for some fresh software recommendations.
I have to wonder why you'd let go of Adobe Creative Cloud, because unless there was some specific glitch or issue, it's hard to find anything better given how much heavy lifting it does.🙂🍿
hollowangler11 said:Hey, sorry if this has already been answered! I have a few movies on my hard drive that I just can't get to play; I used to use GOM player and was pretty happy with it, but now every single movie throws an error message telling me to use Windows Media Player or complaining about codec errors.
I really want to watch these movies, so thanks in advance!
Just grab this lightweight little powerhouse listed below and you'll be able to watch any video file as long as the file itself isn't corrupted. It doesn't need a bunch of extra third-party codecs like those other useless programs such as GOM and its kind; just install it and enjoy.👍😁
velvetgardener25 said:I need some computer speakers under $150, what do you guys recommend?
If you haven't bothered to click through this link to see if things make sense to you, then don't waste your money on the pathetic, useless plastic junk that companies like Logitech and their peers peddle; honestly, it's a joke. 😂 They should just wrap those things in a tarp so nobody can see the truth, which is that wood is wood—it's all just MDF—and everything else about those products is already common knowledge, whereas Genius actually makes decent speakers.😁😉
I switched over to Corel WinZip a long time ago, and since they offer an Open Source version of the software, I don't see any reason to complain regardless of how you look at it. As for this latest release of Nero Burning ROM, if the developers want to go ahead and hang themselves by the tail, they’re more than welcome to spend their days tinkering with it; honestly, Corel WinZip is the absolute killer of Nero, and there really isn't much else worth saying about the matter.😁😉
If you're looking for an alternative to Nero, even a bird on a roof knows about Ashampoo Burning Studio 9; it's actually decent, unlike Nero, which is just this massive, clumsy elephant of a program. Once you try Ashampoo, there is zero desire to ever go back to that messy, disorganized Nero disaster. I saw someone mention they never had issues with failed burns on Nero while everything goes wrong with Ashampoo, but let’s be real—media burn failures happen with pretty much any software you throw at them, and usually, it's just a bad disc. Given how expensive media is these days, you really have to watch out regardless of the program you pick.🙏 Honestly, Nero is a total wreck, like a junker with a door falling off a Ford, whereas I have nothing but praise for Ashampoo Burning Studio 9. Anyone actually using Ashampoo will tell you the same thing, and it’s been common knowledge for a long time now; I wouldn't touch Nero again even if someone paid me, there is absolutely no way.😁😉
If you're looking at picking up an internal 3.5-inch drive, Western Digital is a perfectly fine route to take, and honestly, there’s no reason not to go with them. You can find their Black series at places like Best Buy or Micro Center, and it's a solid choice by any measure. As for Seagate, I'd suggest hunting down models from that newer 7.200.12 series starting at 1TB—specifically the ones marked in the photo below, since that represents their latest lineup.☕😁 http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=488 http://www.bestbuy.com/site/search/...
Music critics are basically just niche hustlers peddling nothing but hot air; anyone with an ounce of actual taste can tell what’s good and what isn't without all the unnecessary overthinking, so there's really no point in bothering with them. Honestly, I'd value a sanitation worker from Waste Management twice as much as any critic, since they actually contribute something useful to society while these guys just sit around playing intellectual. It's all just empty noise.😂🤣😁
It’s pretty obvious we're talking about an AGP card like the GeForce FX 5600 here, so there is absolutely no point in trying to hunt down something brand new. Buying a new card for an AGP slot just doesn't make sense because they are overpriced, whereas you can find used ones everywhere if you look. Your best bet is to just browse the used market, find one that looks decent, and negotiate a fair price with the seller; it's the smartest and most cost-effective way to go. Just keep searching since there are plenty of options out there, but remember that you specifically need an AGP card—nothing else is going to work with your motherboard.☕😁 http://www.ebay.com/b/Graphics-Cards/9345/bn_714791
Honestly, what am I even supposed to think of him? He’s just some mediocre hack and a total poser who clearly hasn't grasped his own limitations, yet he still has the audacity to call himself a musician. It's frankly laughable, though it’s a shame we have so many people like him cluttering up the scene here in the States; they really ought to just disappear.😂🤣😁
It seems most people are rushing to grab Logitech gear, while Creative Technology is being completely overlooked. Take these speakers in the photo, for instance; they’re fantastic, and since they feature a dedicated two-way design with separate drivers for the mids and highs, you're getting much better performance than any single or dual Full Range setup could ever provide—that's just basic audio physics.☕😁
