CoffeeFiend

PHP/MySQL might be easy, but its totally not suited to the task. A system like this is not about being easy to create - there's TONS of really complicated stuff there, how hard the language might be is mostly irrelevant. And PHP is a totally horrid language! Suggesting PHP here is plain bad advice, it's easy, but definitely the wrong tool for the job. And if you think MySQL can be used for this... Then you're not very knowledgeable about databases either (no offense). MySQL just can't handle anywhere near the amount of data a solution like this would need (in a real world scenario), and even without the amount of data, it would just die a quick death under the usual query complexity, its silent data corruption issues make it unsuited to anything that needs data integrity like this, its clustering options are laughable (it doesn't scale), it has nothing like PL/SQL (rather uses it's own proprietary SQL-like syntax), no query parallelism, no partitioning, primitive memory management/tuning, primitive optimizer, etc. They're barely getting with v5 stuff Oracle had 20 years ago. MySQL is fine for websites, forums, blogs and the like, but not for such enterprise apps. MySQL would be the ABSOLUTE LAST thing I would pick for this. The idea of replacing the huge software suites from the software giants with some PHP scripts along with MySQL is just ludricrous. You're better off starting a oversea carrier business with a 14ft row boat.

Well, I hadn't been posting in this section for a while, but due to a recent change I might try this again... Anyways. My answer? Short version: DON'T! Long answer: I think you have no idea what you're trying to get into - at all. Do you even know what they really need, how they function and all? I'm guessing the answer is a clear NO. Large department stores typically need stuff you're NOT going to be able to deliver: -extremely complex supply chain management stuff - we're talking about things like automatically re-ordering stuff when it hits a certain level (not just ordering, but payment processing and all), handle the demand of seasonal stuff, special orders, B2B integration (with big SOA systems and all kinds of stuff - must be very versatile) -it needs to integrate with their existing (various) point of sale systems -they will need stuff like wireless barcode scanners, price checks, printers, etc (lots of different hardware) -it'll have to handle complex taxation systems that vary across various states/provinces/countries/whatever and the like (complex financial stuff) -it will have to handle rebates, specials, gift cards, frequent buyer cards, and all kinds of things like that -it'll need lots of specialized apps, like for different types of analysts, tons of different reports, and stuff like that -it will have to handle various departments (at every store), cataloging merchandise under various categories and things like that (by item color and what not) -reporting - LOTS of it required -this thing will typically run on a large (and complex) network across various sites spread over the country, with many servers and often some server clusters (some in datacenters), lots of extremely complex data warehousing stuff to do (you know OLAP and all, right?), etc. -it would have hundreds of users, and it would need to be very secure -you will need to handle HUGE amounts of data over a long time (also for purposes like exchanges/returns) -it needs ABSOLUTE and TOTAL reliability/stability. Must NEVER crash. Downtime means profit losses = very bad. So your product must be totally bullet-proof. No one's going to take risks there. -commercial support available (from a large and well known company) - the old "someone to blame" when something breaks (won't lose your job over it) and also to resolve the problems. This is absolutely ESSENTIAL and CRUCIAL for any enterprise software. Doesn't matter if something is amazingly great, if there's no support, no company's going to use it. -lots of this software includes a lot of other features like employee management, payroll, e-commerce website integration, and tons more things like this, which they basically expect by now, so you'd have to provide it too (We're barely getting started here, this list could be like 500 pages or more) Basically, you're looking at replacing monster application suites from software giants like Microsoft, Oracle, SAP, IBM and many, many others that can cost hundreds of thousands of $. This isn't a one man job. Developing something like this would take very large teams of highly skilled software engineers/architects/programmers/DBAs/network specialists/admins/various experts from many fields (finance, retail/sales, B2B, SOA, you name it) and what not, would take years to create, and require VERY significant investment (millions of $). Sorry, but that's just the way it is. Bill Gates has the resources to make this happen, but the average guy... BTW, systems like this could not possibly run on MySQL. It's good for forums, blogs, websites and things like that, but not this type of scenario (many terabytes of data, lots of concurrent users and transactions, etc). PostgreSQL is better, but it's not up to the task either. I can only see 3 possibilities here: Oracle (by far - not that I like Oracle much, but it's suited to this type of job), IBM DB2 (OK), and last MS SQL Server (and even then I'm hesitating a lot here, even though I'm somewhat of a MS SQL fanboy). You would need many databases too, and if you have enough stores/transaction volume and such, you'd need large clusters (well, not just for databases, but app servers too and all). You need something with extreme reliability, data integrity, lots of advanced features, clustering, replication and all. I suggest you try to tackle a smaller project first, and see how that goes. It would be far easier to create your own (simple) OS from scratch than doing this.

There's tons of possible reasons: -one being stated in RMS (the old one), and the new one doing some fancy marketing tricks (could be PMPO or anything) -even if that was 120w RMS, is that in a 8 ohm load? (I'd check the speaker's impedance too) -are you using the same speakers for that test? (different speakers w/ diff sensitivity will give different volumes) -some amps have more headroom than others (and some manufacturers are more optimistic/pessimistic than others too) ... There shouldn't be that much of a difference between both amps regardless (like 1.5db extra or so, 10db being twice as loud). Speaker placement and distance can change volume more than that alone. And to really know for sure, you can't really trust your ears, you'd have to use some measurement device (unless the difference is so large that it's obvious)

There has been many, MANY threads about this already, or x86/x64 discussions and such... (like this particular thread, which has some good infos IMO). Either ways you left out most options I would have picked: no Vista, and no plain old XP SP2 x86. XP x64 can be a good pick if your hardware is all supported (see other thread I linked to for debate on this one). 64 bit software support will improve, but not necessarily because of Vista. It's getting adopted, but not very quickly. Regardless, it's the way of the future, it's really just a matter of time. Well, software made especially for Vista? Yes and no. It depends if they want backwards compatibility or if they go with Vista-only features and such. Most Vista apps will still be 32 bit anyways, and would run under WOW64. Why not buy it anyways? You're also allowed to run an older version of Windows using the license. So buy that, run XP instead for now if you want, and the day you want to upgrade (you can only stick with an old version of windows for so long realistically, lots of new and very good features too - not just eye candy), then you'll have it too.

Well, it's exactly the same as if you had your speakers setup right, but had your back facing them. My guess is, you're still going to enjoy music as much. The only problem I could really see is if you're playing some game, and say, you're getting shot from one side and hearing it coming from the other, then that might be confusing (you turn the wrong way and get fragged). As for the left ear thing, I've never heard of that before. I don't know if that's true (I'd like to see evidence backing that up). But I've designed a few dozens of different amps over the years, and I've repaired many, MANY more (not just audio amps, but amps integrated into other electronics of all types). And I've NEVER, EVER seen one with a different design for both channels or such that would result in sound being louder on one. Volume should be the same on both sides.

Everybody seems to be thread digging, so my turn! I keep it very short too (almost got more hair on my face). So not using anything... yet? I'm almost considering hair coloring or something... Freakin' gray hairs driving me mad lately. I hate looking old (no, I'm not old... not yet at least) Always thought I'd accept having gray hair and that it would be no big deal, but it doesn't seem to simple to accept after all. Perhaps it's just the "refusing to get old" or a self esteem thing? I dunno. I sure hate my gray hairs though. My main solution is keeping it shorter, as they show less that way. I guess I can't complain, at least I'm not going bald.

That's about as specific as anwering "what's the best CPU?" by "x86". Could be MPEG1, MPEG2 at any profile/level and any type of chroma subsampling or whatever, MPEG4 ASP, MPEG4 AVC. Any type of resolution, framerate or anything. It really means nothing at all like that. Pretty much every single option on the poll is based on some type of MPEG: WMV9 and VC1? MPEG4. RealVideo 10? MPEG4. QuickTime? More MPEG4. So in reality it's more like having answered just "video" or such. It's almost a non-answer. Nothing personal/not bashing or anything. Just saying... MPEG is just far too encompassing to be much of an answer.

HD DVD! -It's not from the nice folks who brought us rootkits on audio CDs, millions of exploding batteries and overpriced consoles (vote with your wallet!) -It's not yet another Sony-proprietary format that's bound to die (like BetaMax, MiniDisc, UMD, Memory Stick, ATRAC, PDD, etc) -Blu-Ray has more evil DRM: BD+ (which isn't broken yet) -There are FAR more set top HD DVD players than Blu-Ray ones (120000 vs 25000 last I've heard, about 5:1!) -Blu-Ray uses Java for menus (programs!) vs iHD (simple markup, much like HTML) for HD DVD (alright, call it HDi or Advanced Navigation if you want), which is far simpler (you could make menus using notepad - if you can make web pages you can use this too), is fully documented (even stuff on MSDN) along with simulation tools and all. iHD is also cheaper. Java would require you to learn programming first (and movie studios to hire programmers), or to write some parser/interpreter in Java for some other format (slow) and such. *WAY* more complicated. Bad idea overall. And let's hope things aren't like for cell phones, where every J2ME JVM seems to have differences that makes stuff not work on 2 models, forcing them to release different versions of the same movie for different players (or spending lots of time getting your menus to work on every player). It's a VeryBadIdea™. Oh, wait, there's already problems with BDJ? Colour me surprised -Authoring tools for Blu-Ray were quite late (requiring drastic changes). -HD DVD is WAY cheaper. Set top players are cheaper. In both cases, you can settle for a gaming console (if you want to be stuck with one of those) which still costs more than a set top HD DVD player. That's assuming you already have a nice and expensive HDTV. But what if you'd like to enjoy the HD goodness on your modern PC which already has a nice monitor and great sound? Just buy a drive! A Blu-Ray drive will set you back like 700$ or so, whereas you could have bought the XBOX 360 external drive for like 150$ over the holidays, and plug it using USB to your PC, and you'd already be watching HD DVDs. You're not going to find anything cheaper than that (very little investment to get HDTV goodness). Blu-Ray media is also more expensive. -Early Blu-Ray players had image/quality problems and had pretty bad reviews (not sure they're much better now either) -Not only Blu-Ray had bad player reviews/problems at first, and now BDJ problems, but their initial titles weren't using VC1 or H.264, and the image quality was worse than HD DVD titles released at the same time. -HD DVD already has more than enough space as it is. In H.264 you can already comfortably fit a movie in 720p on a regular DVD (even on the single layer ones). Even in 1080p (still using VC1 or H.264) you still have way more space than one needs on HD DVD. It's already borderline overkill. More than that is just a waste (as far as movies are concerned) -no pr0n on Blu-Ray Why would anyone want to support a very expensive, problematic, overly complicated format that has more DRM - coming from Sony nonetheless (hence will likely be dead a a couple years anyways)? I don't know! Blu-Ray is already dead

No need to double post. Doesn't matter what you use on the server-side. And no, there are no ASP.NET updates or such for this, there's no reason for them to do that. It's just a plain ASP.NET powered site, using standard CSS techniques that have been in use for many years like the site menu to the left (using the hover image replacement, e.g. see #menuTypeA a and #menuTypeA a:hover selectors in the CSS, the first menu anchor having a "menutypeA" id, the second menu anchor having a "menutypeB" id and so on; changing this pic into this one and such), along with some flash made stuff, like this animated logo, and plain old background images. No idea what you're referring to about the 2nd site as being "Vista-like". Plain markup with some images - nothing more. Doesn't look Vista-like at all IMO. Same old standard design stuff that we've been using for ages. Nothing new here at all, much less server-side technology changes. The only hard part is creating the images, the rest is totally trivial.

I'm surprised to see people still answering this poll (but now I'm just as guilty of it I guess). Either ways, this has to be the most confused poll I've ever seen. Especially for the mpeg / avi category. It's far too encompassing (mpeg1, mpeg2 and mpeg4 all in one option?), is missing many very important or even crucial options (where's H.264 / MPEG4 AVC? no mkv container? how about an option for mpeg4 asp in general like DivX or XviD? ...) Instead, we have a bunch of options not really worth picking (VHS? Anything as long as it supports - a real WTF! or I Hate ALL sort of movie or video?) Perhaps a better poll would have been like: -MPEG1 (e.g. VCD) -MPEG2 (e.g. DVD, SVCD, encoders like CCE and TMPEGEnc) -MPEG 4 ASP (e.g. XviD, DivX, 3ivX) -MPEG 4 AVC a.k.a. H.264 (e.g. x264, Ateme) -WMV9 & VC1 (e.g. High Def DVDs like T2 Extreme, HD DVD, Blu-Ray, normal WMV files, streaming stuff...) -RealVideo 10 -QuickTime (.mov, but then again, is that the old Sorenson codec or a crippled H.264 in a proprietary container?) (if one really wants and there's enough options left, one can add entries for physical media perhaps: DVD, VHS, DV, BetaMax, Hi8, LaserDisc, whatever, but I don't think it really fits in a codec poll) I wouldn't even bother to include Theora on that list. Basically nobody uses it, hardly anybody knows about it, much less care about it and for a reason: it's surprisingly low quality compared to any decent codec, it's based off VP3 and is hardly better than crappy old MPEG1 - it just sucks overall. I just can't think of anything worse - I'd take MPEG1, DivX 3 SBC or just about any old thing over it (all those have better software/hardware playback compatibility too). Anyways. I'd like to vote for 2 things, even if it's technically not possible in regular polls: Vote 1: MPEG4 AVC (x264, followed by Ateme). Best video quality of them all. Standard ISO MPEG4. Getting widely adopted by the industry as a whole. Decoding assisted by hardware (using certain video cards) which matters for HD contents. AAC for sound which is a very good codec (both for multichannel, and stereo, and at very good bitrates). The only reason why it's not my only vote is player support: it basically plays on none of the existing "divx players" people have. My XBOX (XBMC) just doesn't have enough power to handle the high quality stuff either (not when you enable the features that makes H.264 worthwhile). Vote 2: MPEG4 ASP (XviD, followed by perhaps DivX). Not as good quality as H.264, but still good enough. Relatively easy to decode (lower CPU requirement than H.264). Basically everybody knows the stuff by now (typically in an avi container, sometimes mkv, with mp3 audio usually, otherwise AC3). Plays on basically everything (divx players, XBMC, pretty much any software like VLC, MPC, etc), easy to convert if one has to, etc. It's one of my choices basically for the same reason people still use mp3 for music, even though there are other codecs with (moderately) better audio quality: good enough, everybody uses it, supported by everything/playback on anything, etc.

I had been fighting the urge to answer that, mostly because it's not because of the design but rather the concept (and perhaps pandoras' jar helps too). I wouldn't use anything else, conventional radio has long been dead IMO.

Yeah, I know it's not directed at me, but I feel like answering anyways I know what you're saying though. Any browser is good enough to just surf the web and check email. And lots of the extensions seem rather useless to me too (I've never bothered to install another theme either). But there are some out there that makes life a lot easier. From blocking nasty scripts or some downright offensive ads, help download videos off sites like youtube, have gestures, and tons of little things. None of it is essential, but it's nice to have. I could do without all those (although it wouldn't be very pleasant), but the web developer tools available for FF are just wicked. Like the web developer toolbar, firebug, live http headers, proxy switchers (to use debugging proxies and such), DOM inspector, JS & CSS tools, etc. They're absolute time savers and make the job easier. Not having those would be a big step back, and that's what's keeping me on FF primarily (along with habit perhaps)

You're right about "depends on your usage", but your usage (much like mine) is really the exception. I need IIS6 to test server middleware I write, as well as a bunch of server components, and sometimes I have to use (interact with and test) software that will only install on servers - stuff like that. XP Pro with its crippled IIS 5.1 just doesn't cut it here. But even for developing most apps (i.e. not load testing server middleware and such), XP Pro is just fine. But for ~99% of the folks out there, there's just no reason. The cost is prohibitive (providing it's legit). It's more complicated. There's tons of server stuff they don't need nor understand (arguably could be called "bloat" in this case, being essentially dead weight). There's basically nothing to gain from using it for the vast majority of people, they're just going to run into software compatibility issues (been there too many times already) As for the "more stable" claims, I very much disagree. Both are very stable, unless you do really bad things to it. Haven't had any more trouble with my XP boxes as the 2003 ones. I've seen some screwed up XP installs, but I've seen many screwed up 2003 installs too (in both cases because of mostly the same things). I just don't see where people get those "reliability" figures like that, because it doesn't appear like that to me at all (well, 2003 if left alone to do its server job, with acceleration disabled, no sound and all is VERY stable, but in a desktop OS scenario, it's quite different). Stability comes mainly from having good hardware and good quality drivers - with that both versions will be very stable (again, unless one starts to mess with things they shouldn't).

Thank you very much! Sorry if I had missed that message.

I have to agree somewhat. I've had to resort to nuking my profile a few times before (never had to reinstall FF though). Extensions seem to have free reign over what they can do with your profile. And not all of them are very high quality or are tested much seemingly, and then end up screwing the profiles. I think they should limit it somewhat (if possible/unpractical/not too restrictive). FF is great and all, it's my primary browser, but there's days where I wish Opera had extensions to do everything like there are for FF...

Hi, been seeing IPS driver errors for most of today, but I'm guessing this will be resolved soon anyways. Problems with an IPS upgrade or something? My main problem seems to be with PMs. I've sent one yesterday, and saw no copy of it in my "sent" folder (no reply since either, so perhaps it was not received or even sent). I just sent another, and the same thing happened. Is something broken, or was there a change in configuration (some setting I didn't notice) that disabled saving sent emails to that folder by default or something? I haven't changed any of my settings recently, and it used to work fine (had no problems like 3 or 4 days ago), and my box is more than half empty, so I can't see that being the problem. Edit: Looks like the PMs are working after all (got a reply to my last), but still no copy of it under "sent items". Thanks in advance to the hard working site admins, we never say thanks enough for all the work.

Looks like you've done your homework too. I had a HTPC for a few years -- until about a year and a half ago. I wouldn't say I was necessarily an early adopter, but I first got into it in a few years ago (around year 2000, don't recall an exact date). HTPCs sounded like a totally cool, must-have thing one couldn't live without, and got suckered into it. But eventually I tired of it (after having tried soooooooo many apps and wasted so much time), and settled for something that's better - for me at least. There's a few advantages to HTPCs, but there's also some bad stuff: -the cost of building a nice HTPC: silent PC parts in general, nice HTPC cases like the D.Vine and all this don't come cheap. It's even more expensive if you take the myhtpc approach with a server with the capture cards and HDs (not in the living room), and a 2nd computer as a player in the living room. -it's basically a computer, so it tends to require a fair amount of maintenance ("babysitting"). The OS needs to be upgraded/patched all the time, the apps should be updated every now and then (the menu app, the DVD player, the PVR software, etc) and all that regular PC stuff, which is time consuming -there is a LOT of software solutions out there to try, and that takes a lot of time -most of the said software are just smaller components of the "big picture", and they're not necessarily made to interoperate/integrate easily. Install a front end/menu app, and then configure it all to do stuff using all the other apps (a LOT of configuring and such to do) -same goes for the remote: most software isn't made to use remotes directly (like most computer apps), and you have to install the remote software (like girder), and manually configure every app (picking the best remote for a decent price was a PITA too, although the MCE remotes are fairly popular by now and cheap too) -everything else is also a "install more software, configure more things" approach, like the EPG and such (more work, more time wasted, more annoyances) -but my main issue with them is the quality of capturing. Analog capturing really SUCKS. I've had many capture cards, including the Hauppauge PVRx50 series, and the capture quality is not very good -- nowhere near digital capturing solutions! CableCard may partially solve this eventually though, for cable users... (But it will only available in pre-built PCs anyways) What I've finally settled with instead? A combination of 2 things: -A XBOX with XBMC to play the already recorded/ripped stuff (usually mpeg4 - over the network; storage is remote so less noise in living room). Small, quiet, quite cheap, looks OK, plays virtually everything you throw at it, no need to install various applications, configure them all to launch/execute one another with the right parameters manually, no need to install remote control software, configure every button for every app manually, etc. Throw XBMC on it, and you're done. Everything pretty much works out of the box, very little work required, and never needs tweaking like HTPC solutions require. -a satellite PVR box. Granted, that's not much help for cable users (although perhaps they have decent PVRs too - haven't had cable in about 10 years, so can't tell for sure). It makes a bit for bit copy of the transportstream from the satellite. A perfect, identical 1:1 copy with no quality loss whatsoever. No decoding -> cheap DACs -> filtering -> wiring and interference -> more filters -> cheap ADCs -> on the fly lossy recompression step, which does make the picture suck. DVD-like picture on most channels - you even keep the Dolby Digital sound! And there's basically no work required. Put it on a shelf, plug it, and watch. With a HTPC, it's research/select/order individual parts, assemble PC, install OS, install every app, spend a month configuring everything, etc. The sat PVR never requires me to visit windows update either, or to download and install newer versions of the apps it uses. The EPG works out of the box. So does the remote (no need to manually setup every button for every app). And there are no monthly fees for those over here (not sure about DirectTV as I'm in Canada), and we can rent them for a few $/month if you don't want to buy it outright. They make 'em with dual tuners too (even the high def models). Takes less power (and creates less heat) than any PC. I find it's totally superior to HTPCs in almost every way you can look at it. The big advantages of HTPCs: -you can burn DVDs (of poor quality, analog-recorded stuff off cable -- not that I'd ever do that, but lots of people seem to like the idea) -it's upgradeable. As long as you got the money, you can throw more HDs at it and such. -not bad for OTA HDTV stuff (using the right cards, although pricey) - if there are such feeds available in your area (not here in Canada unfortunately)

It's really just a matter of preferences. Some like the looks of RunOnceEx, but I prefer scripts.

It's a top Top Star TM-694XT. And the BIOS on it is newer than whatever's avilavle at their site (look here). The rest is avaiable on this page (time to practice your Chinese skills!) Good luck with that. What you really need is a new motherboard and CPU

It was just a matter of time really. Without hardware-based DRM it's pretty much impossible to make something totally secure (and even then...) The system has to have the decryption keys to play it in the first place, so it was pretty much guaranteed to happen. Pretty much all DRM systems end up being hacked anyways (CSS for DVDs, Windows Media DRM was broken too, Apple's FairPlay too, etc). If you're happy with VHS quality... I haven't had a VCR for about 10 years. Of course the format is just to have more space for HD (that's the whole point of it). People are buying HDTVs, and they want HD contents. Ludwig Von Cookie Koopa: No idea what you're talking about here. You mention they wasted 200$ (on something you don't mention), even though the guy worked from files (total of 0$ spent). And then you're talking about something that was released which cost 600$ (PS3 perhaps?), which still doesn't explain how they wasted 200$ in any way. The guy who cracked it didn't have to spend anything at all, how could he have wasted 200$?

Do have any idea how difficult it is to turn accelerometer data into useful information? It's definitely not just an addon for GameCube. It's not like much of the post made much sense... as usual? Complaining that a console is just whatever but with new graphics is like, TOTALLY missing the whole point of new consoles: better graphics. Especially with HDTVs being more common nowadays (those people want to play in HD unsurprisingly). Besides, the gamecube needed better graphics - and who cares if it's not a total hardware change? As long as it delivers. It's not like they absolutely have to change all the guts for it to be a new console. (And I doubt the Wii remote being sold as an accessory for an old game console would have sold too well) No console war? Like they're not fighting for their share of the market (hence profit, viability and all)? I guess the millions of people thinking so are all wrong then. Saying the Wii is a stupidfied (sic) console is overly critical. It must suck badly indeed, after all it's not like it's getting all countless good reviews, is praised by so many for all the innovation, that everybody's talking about it, and that basically everybody wants one... And the Xbox360 a death trap? Yeah, okie. Don't own one, and don't intend to, but this is beyond exaggeration.

Yes, it's always been like that. No news here. Just comparing the various sizes of the archives created regardless, as it still matters. The 7zip files were very much alike for all apps, only one app managed to create a rar archive for me so no real comparisons there, but as for zip file size, it varied quite a bit - even though it doesn't matter all that much to me, as I never use zip (pretty much always rar) anyways. I kinda felt like it was important to include in any kind of review (it's a compressing app, might be good to know how well it compresses after all!) Yeah, that was mostly my conclusion of the "first part". I use winrar (mostly for good speed and adequate archive size), or 7zip when I must squeeze every last byte I can, at the expense of more time (doesn't happen too often though). I might be keener on the other apps if they could create rar archives, which to me provide a better compression than zip, and at very good speeds (unlike 7zip). zip doesn't compress too well, and 7zip just takes too much time, making rar the perfect compromise IMO. I'm not saying any of the apps are perfect or the best or anything like that (and again, I was pretty clear it's a heavily opinionated and biased pseudo-review). As for creating 7z archives, I'll stick to 7zip anyways, as it's basically twice as fast as IZArc and tugzip, and compressing with 7zip already takes far too long IMO. But overall, between compressing in rar in 17s at nearly the same size as a 7zip file, or the same thing in 7zip format using tugzip in 4m14s (basically 15x SLOWER!) the choice is pretty easy... Again, that's mainly why I stick to winrar (and since it now decompresses 7zip archives too, I have little to no need for the other archivers really) There's nothing wrong with someone disagreeing 100% and in totality over all of my opinions though.

Try editing your boot.ini, add /noexecute=AlwaysOff and reboot. That should fix it. If the problems persist, then it's not DEP.

I've seen DEP cause all kinds of problems like that before. The main solution: disable DEP.

2 port KVMs have pretty much always been quite cheap. If you want real cheap, try ebay, lots of things on there usually... If you're lucky, you might get this Aten CS1774 for the inital bid (which is not much more than the other with 2 cable sets), which is MUCH nicer than the Belkin KVM: 4 ports - and comes with the 4 cable sets, is USB like the other, has a USB 2.0 hub built in for sharing other USB devices, a network switch too, has audio as well, etc. If you really want something inexpensive, go for a KVM with the cable sets "built-in", like this one at £21 (dabs.com too) -- same as you'd pay for just the cable sets for the other Belkin. There's similar products from many companies, even on that same website (e.g. D-Link, Startech, etc)