Posts by Jacob Foster11

He wasn't penalized for insulting the company, he was penalized because he broke the subforum rules.

If anyone has an issue with the regulations, there is a thread for rule suggestions. And let me say this again: there have been multiple instances of this. The moderators aren't all-powerful. Here is the list of admins, so feel free to complain if you want. If a reason is actually legitimate, I don't see why an admin wouldn't grant an appeal.

granitefox16 said:Besides, who actually gets to decide what falls within the boundaries of culture?

Moderators.

granitefox16 said:What's with these useless subforum rules?

Each subforum has the right to establish its own set of additional rules. By posting in a specific section, you are agreeing to abide by those rules. This also means you accept any penalties resulting from violating them.

People can talk all the trash they want on the other subforums, but that kind of disrespect isn't welcome here in the Internet section.

blueridge32 said:He didn't even break any of the PDF rules, yet he still got a penalty. ☕

The moderator made their call. If anyone has an issue with it, take it up with management. If. If they decide to go a different way, that card is getting pulled.

granitefox16 said:Why on earth are insults against internet service providers banned? Why does this forum grant them such ridiculous protection from criticism?

We want to maintain a certain level of decency and decorum on this subforum. You have every right to comment and you certainly have the right to be critical, but you don't have the right to be abusive.

Probably not. I'm assuming both the old and new units have built-in modems. If that's the case, you can't just daisy-chain them together.

However, you could try swapping the new one out for the old one. It might work, or it might not. Give it a shot...

If that fails, you can always pick up an extra access point or a wireless router (one without a modem!!!) and hook it up to this Comcast router...

Since you're already looking for a solution, you might find this useful:
http://ninite.com/
It allows you to install a massive stack of your favorite software on a fresh Windows installation quickly and easily via a single setup. Just pick what you want, run one installer, and everything is ready to go...

Are you planning on putting a Windows installer on that USB drive, or is it already loaded with a fully functional OS? Your post is a bit vague on that point.

It might work, but there's no guarantee. It all comes down to whether your BIOS actually supports booting from a USB drive. Most modern systems handle it fine, but if you're messing with older hardware, you might need to flash the BIOS first. Honestly, it might just be impossible on some old rigs.

A few years back when I last looked into this, there was a strict limit on USB capacity. You couldn't go over 2 GB because it had to be formatted using the FAT-16 file system. I have no idea if that's still a thing today. Maybe someone here has tried it recently and can clarify...

Whatever. Just found out... I need a DVI switch (in case anyone else is looking). There's zero stock here in the States, and even on eBay—once you factor in shipping—they aren't cheap. Total cost is at least 200-$100... 😢

I have a monitor with a DVI input. Right now, it's hooked up to my PC via a DVI cable. I’m looking to buy a digital TV tuner and plug that into the same DVI port too.

Is this even possible? Does a DVI 2-in-1 adapter exist, maybe something with a switch to toggle between inputs?

Thomas Martin4 said:That test is five years old. Maybe the efficiency threshold was lower back then, but nowadays, you expect at least 80% from any decent power supply.

Could be... I haven't really kept up with power supplies lately, but I didn't realize things could change that much in just a few years. Like keyboards or cases, for instance. I mean... there are updates, sure, but I didn't think there were this many... And I definitely bought this PSU at least 3 or 4 years ago...

Thomas Martin4 said:From what I can gather based on that review, the efficiency never actually hits above 80%. That’s one of the main benchmarks for calling a power supply high-quality. Of course, you also have to factor in other specs, like the voltage stability that Shelby was bragging about regarding his new favorite toy a few posts back. 😉 😍

But honestly, from what I see, none of them ever topped 80% efficiency. Only one single unit managed to cross that 80% threshold in one out of the three tests, and even then, it was barely scraping by. 🤷

I've scoured all these forums, and there’s only one single mention of a review for this power supply, but the link just hits me with a 404 Not Found error...

Do you have an actual, legitimate review where I can see those results? From what I can tell, there are basically zero reviews on these sites for any power supplies under 600W.

Look, I get it—price doesn't always equal quality. But it makes no sense to me why a 420W unit priced at $233 can't be classified as a high-quality component. That's exactly why I need to see a real review.

wiredmarlin5 said:Yeah, maybe to you. 🙂

That review is five years old, and Thomas Martin4 isn't exactly an authority here. Your Logan gear just isn't high enough quality to make the cut.

Then who is? What criteria are you even using to judge power supply quality?

wiredmarlin5 said:I don't think so. 😁

Is this an answer meant for me or what...? If it is, could I get some clarification?

Adding one more to the list above. My power supply:
Logan i-Xeye 420W
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ng,987-18.html
Picked this up at Amazon a few years back...

So, did you finally figure out how to get the hot water working too... 🙄

Dana Morales64 said:Yeah, you know how YouTube links work? I'm seeing stuff where instead of the actual URL, it just shows some random word, but it's still a link—you click it and it takes you straight to YouTube. It's just renamed. I have no clue how people do that.

Like this (without spaces in the tags):

[ URL="http://www.link.com"; ]THIS IS A LINK[ /URL ]

Result:
THIS IS A LINK

Quote my post and check the difference in the editor.

silvergardener93 said:For instance, I handle music production on Cubase SX, and I have a massive library of VST plugins that just won't run on 7. I’d basically be using 7 as my main OS for web browsing and gaming via DirectX 11.

So, running a virtual XP instance on 7 is just easier than setting up a dual boot with Windows 7 and XP.

I won't even get into the other advantages of 7; they've already been covered.

Easier isn't the same thing as better. Sure, spinning up a virtual machine might be simpler, but dual-booting is the superior way to go.

Since you've been working on XP until now, you might as well stick with it. You can migrate over to 7 in six months or a year once you don't need XP as a fallback anymore. Plus, that'll give time for the security holes that are bound to be discovered in the coming months to actually get patched.

driftingnomad68 said:No, you can't display a virtual machine like that. It's more like having a (free?) trailer you can hitch to your car whenever you need to...

The whole point is that you don't have "more cars," you just have more car capacity within one 🙂

Depends on which analogy you use (see below).

But it could also be phrased like what you said, or something similar. One car (old, Windows XP) is towing another car (new, Windows 7). That’s why the old car doesn't perform as well as it would without the tow. After all, a virtual machine requires resources for both Windows 7 and Windows XP simultaneously.

Thomas Hernandez21 said:What he described would actually be a dual boot.😁

No, dual-boot would be like having a garage with two cars and picking whichever one you want.

This is more like a rental car service. Just like you pay to use a rental, here you "pay" with extra system resources on Windows 7 while running Windows XP.😉

darkviper7 said:Look, if some game won't run on Windows 7, you just fire up a virtual Windows XP machine and play it there.

What is even the point of installing Windows 7 then? It’s like selling an old car—one that actually worked fine and did its job—just to buy a new one. But then, the new car has a tiny trunk, so you can't haul the same stuff you could with the old one. So, what do you do? You go rent the old car from a rental agency. I mean... why bother?

It’s entirely possible the burn just failed. Happens all the time with standard DVDs or CDs... 🤷
Did you try it again yet?

Daniel Vaughn3 said:The difference is that 32-bit operating systems only support up to 4 GB of RAM.64-bit operating systems support up to 128 GB of RAM.

What do you mean, 128 GB? 🙄 Let's go back to elementary school:

On a 64-bit machine, memory addresses are represented by a 64-bit number. Since a 64-bit number consists of 64 binary digits, it can represent 2^64 different values. This means that, theoretically, you could address up to 2^64 distinct memory locations.

What is 2^64? Math:
2^64 equals 18,446,744,073,709,551,616. That's basically 16 times 1024 to the sixth power, or 16 Ei.

So, here's the deal. Sixteen binary exabytes. It’s practically non-existent, let alone anything close to 128 gigabytes.

Similarly, the same logic applies to 32-bit computers:
2^32 equals 4,294,967,296. That works out to 4 * 1024^3, which is 4 GB—or 4 GiB if you're talking binary gigabytes.

EDIT:
That depends on whether you’re talking about the operating systems currently on the market. It’s possible their limit is capped at 128 GiB, since there isn't really any practical need for more right now. But theoretically? The limit is 16 EiB.