CoffeeFiend

It was already there

Alright. Tried tugzip too: -nice GUI and decent shell integration (have to manually select an option to make it into a sub-menu though) -creating a new archive: lots of options, but all hidden under the "options" tab -progress bar is linear when creating archives, unlike IZArc (long enough too) -- actually it has 2 progress bars if zip'ing (current file and overall progress), still no times though -7zip ultra test, same thunderbird profile: 4m14s!!! That's even SLOWER than IZArc!!! Is this even possible? Pretty much same size as 7zip's 7z archive. -zip test, max compression, ...: 35s. Twice as slow as winrar's (but better than 7zip/IZArc still), and same file size as the winrar generated archive (1kb diff) -rar test, max, ...: couldn't get it to work (selected "enable RAR compression" or whatever during install). I pick rar for compression, and regardless of other settings, nothing happens when I click OK. It closes down, and that's it... No files created, no other processes, nothing! Buggy? No idea how fast (or not) it could be, or file sizes... Looks like it's not ready to replace winrar there just yet. So in short, it looks nice too, format support is much like 7zip and IZArc, but the speed isn't stellar (slower than even IZArc for 7zip archives).

They've been around for quite a while. You can find them at most major stores, ebay and all. I don't know any stores in the UK, so I can't make any recommendations there unfortunately. But don't just think about USB or PS/2 issues. AFAIK the mac mini has a DVI output. Not sure what your current setup uses, but the KVM is one type or the other (although one can use DVI -> HD15 adapters). Buying KVMs can be a PITA... I'm dreaming of a 4 port dual DVI KVM, but it's not cheap at all (especially with all the cable sets). SilverBulletUK: £59.94 Delivered plus 2 cable sets so an extra 20 to 25 £. And that switch has VGA/HD15 plugs, not DVI BTW.

My 2 cents worth: -obviously winrar loses on the price tag (even though it's affordable at 29$) -IZArc supports more formats than both obviously (not that I would have a use for them...) -7zip/IZArc shell integration is very similar (IZArc also has icons), although I find IZArc's options a little bit better (but not by much). winrar's is better than both. -IZArc has a much nicer looking GUI than 7zip (although 7zip has some of the worst looking buttons I've ever seen, so it's not saying much - looks like a WFW 3.11 app almost; besides the icons ). I prefer the pull down menus in IZArc too. IZArc wins hands down on this one. -7zip has more options on the "creating archive" screen (like dictionary size and such) than IZArc (not much options at all really) -IZArc opens the full blown screen real-estate eating GUI for all operations: if you create a new archive, you see the create archive window, with the full GUI in the background (no big deal though, but still works/looks/feels different than most other compression apps). -The progress bar when compressing is about 3x longer or so in 7zip (far nicer), and very linear. On my compression tests (using a thunderbird profile), 7zip seemed to use % of what to compress for the progress bar or such, whereas IZArc seemingly uses a set % per file to compress or such. It immediately jumped to 63% (well, in about one second) after compressing a few bytes of mostly empty files, then sat there for a while while it processed a several-MB file, and the percentage didn't increase as it was processing the file (i.e. o to 63% in 1sec, and sat @ 63% for more than 1 minute). That combined with a short progress bar wasn't nice. And there's no "time left" estimation showed or anything like that either... 7zip *TOTALLY* has the edge there. -just noticed (right before posting) that IZArc doesn't have an option to create split archives. That's a VERY significant drawback. File compression tests: -using 7zip using max available compression settings in both: IZArc is slow, so very, very SLOW! I got 1m48s with 7zip compressing my thunderbird profile, and that same thing took 3m32s using IZArc! It was so much slower I thought I had done something wrong, so I tried it again, and again, and again. Time after time, I got the same results: it's about twice as slow! The compressed result is mostly the same (a 13kb difference over a several MB archive -- nothing worth making it twice as slow for sure). -using rar: winrar took 32s for that same thunderbird profile (you have no idea how fast this feels after trying IZArc w/ 7zip!) -- more than 6x faster! Resulting file is 10% bigger than the 7zip archive created by both in previous test (small enough, and very fast -- I like!). Oh -- that's right! 7zip and IZArc can't create rar archives AT ALL! That's a VERY big problem IMO (which is why I stick to winrar mostly and I'm unlikely to switch anytime soon). -using zip, best compression available again, same thunderbird profile: 7zip took 1m46s (more than it took to create a 7zip archive), zip file is 30% bigger than the 7zip archive. using winrar: 17 seconds wow! But zip file is even bigger - it's now 45% bigger than the 7zip archive, very fast, bug large files (sucks, but only an big issue if you use zip primarily, and for big files, I never use it, so I don't really care). IZArc: 35s - finally a format that doesn't take eternity to use with IZArc! Nicer than 7zip for times, but still twice as slow as winrar. File size is much like winrar's. Last 2 zip files are ~20% bigger than the rar archive from previous test, and all took longer to create (sucks overall). So in short: IZArc: better looking GUI and menus but SO VERY SLOW and can't make split archives, more format support than 7zip, if you happen to use obscure formats such as YZ1 7zip: main GUI is fugly (and did I say the icons are fugly yet?), MUCH faster than IZArc, and makes smaller files too. More advanced options when creating archives and such, FAR nicer progress bars (for it's not tiny, and it's actually linear). Better than IZArc on everything, save for the main GUI appearance which is god ugly IMO (just put some nice icons on it and change the menus a bit, and it would be better all-around) winrar: very different. Very nice GUIs, menus, options and all (at least as good as IZArc), no support for 7zip though (use another app for this if you must), but it's the only of the 3 that can create rar archives (something I wouldn't live without), creates rar archives much faster than any of the other apps using any format, and at very reasonable file sizes (beats anything zip, not much bigger than 7zip in most cases). 29$ though. So I stick to winrar and rar archives, except for the times where I absolutely have to create 7zip archives (for very very large files that happen to compress better with it, and must absolutely be the tiniest possible at the expense of MUCH more time to compress), where 7zip seems to be best. < end of highly-unscientific, opinionated and heavily-biased pseudo-review />

From what other posts seem to suggest: [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\Advanced] "Start_ShowControlPanel"=dword:00000002 "CascadeControlPanel"="Yes" Haven't tried it though. Try the google search box at the top of the page, using quotes (e.g. control panel "as a menu"). Works great

Perhaps you mean cracked as in "people used it to dump ISOs of Blu-Ray discs" which is NOT the same thing AT ALL. The DRM (used by movies i.e. AACS) for Blu-Ray wasn't broken before. This is new. Besides, I'd doubt most people would want to buy a very expensive gaming console just to backup movies. And like the article DigeratiPrime quoted, they worked from a raw data file, so no idea where you get that 200$ figure from (AFAIK Blu-Ray drives are FAR more expensive than that! A BWU100A drive is like 700$+!)

*Some* stores still carry that 4600+ model (I had mentionned before that newegg still has it too). But it's just a matter of time before none are available like all the other models. Likely, he'd have to do an international mail order to get one (annoying, sucks if you ever have to RMA it, pricey shipping, slow because of customs clearance and all). And it's 10$ more expensive than a E6300 which is WAY faster anyways (well, before shipping, your credit card company taking its cut on the un-optimistic exchange rate and all, so in the end likely 50$ more at least). The point is he *DOESN'T* need a motherboard to use it so it's irrelevant (again, unless you want to ditch the AGP card right away). And AM2 combo means a new motherboard, new RAM, likely a new video card, and a new CPU (the X2s being faster than the 8xx/9xx series, but not being much cheaper than a much faster Core 2 Duo). If you're going to build the absolute cheapest system AMD might win by a few $, but if you look at the performance/price ratio of what you're getting, it doesn't really look that attractive right now. Either AMD X2 or Core 2 Duo means a much more significant expense than 130$ regardless.

Yep. First time I try this thing too... I'll be reformating pretty soon, so I'm not too worried about it (hopefully it'll work then), and it's not like I absolutely need it either (just trying it for fun, not big on the IM thing at all).

Didn't want to, just wanted to know if I really had missed something. Well, the P4 820 is a 130$ upgrade (decent performance boost for the money). Anything better than that and he's better off with a Core 2 Duo (hence new motherboard too, and new RAM), plus a new video card as well. That's not exactly cheap... and it's not like the a 6800XT is a weak card anyways (likely better than everything I have), AGP or not. If he really wants a new video card too, then he's pretty much due for a whole new system, and that surely won't be cheap (doubt he wants to spend that much 3 months after upgrading to this system). Nobody would buy a AGP system anymore, but if the card's fast enough for him, then why not stick with it? I'm perfectly happy with onboard video myself (I'd get by with a pre-radeon PCI ATI Rage XL 8MB no problem)

Just wanted to try WLM, but first thing after logging in I get a "invalid name" error or such. After 5 minutes of looking around (why did they have to hide options under a button we can't even see???), only to find out I can't even change it - just see the screenshot: Any ideas?

I know, that's why I mentioned the name too (for user friendlyness mainly). My issues aren't with encryption, but I'm not going over this again. Seemingly lots of people prefer something user friendly over something more... "full featured" I guess, and there's nothing wrong with that. Preferences/needs/whatever change from one person to another.

Different info than what? 3 different S754 models (not much of an upgrade at all) The S939 CPUs (No X2 models at all - not one!) 4600+ is 260$, E6300 is 220$ and much faster too. For 8$ more than the 4600+, you get a E6400 (here -- or it's actually CHEAPER than a 4600+ if you bundle it!) I'm from Canada, and ncix is my usual store indeed. The cheapest upgrade he can probably do is get a P4 that fits his board, like perhaps a Pentium D 820 for 132$ total investment (well, plus tax). It's dual core, much faster, and overall is rather cheap. A slower S754 setup would cost more (just because of the price of the new motherboard) and not be much faster than what he has. And anything more than a P4 CPU alone will cost a lot (more than he's willing to spend likely). Zxian: how dare you reply before me? Not sure I'd pick those exact parts for an upgrade, but I agree mostly.

Well, swapping his 3.2GHz Celeron for any of the Socket 754 offerings available here won't give much of a boost - not much for the money IMO. The only socket 754 CPUs left we can buy here are the 2800+, 3000+ and 3400+, none of which would be much of an upgrade (not enough to spend a couple hundred $ onto - as you gotta buy a motherboard a well). As for the X2, here you can only get them in AM2 socket, not in Socket 939 anymore (even newegg has only one left: the 4600+ at 200$, and I don't think it'll be there for much longer) And if you're going the AM2 way... Not only a nice CPU will cost almost as much as a Core 2 duo (the 4600+ sells for more than a E6300), but in both cases you're due to buy a new motherboard and new RAM anyways (both expensive overall), so why not pick the faster one? Picking a slower X2 might save 50$, but it'll be much slower than the Core 2 Duo. I had a couple GB of DDR PC3200 leftover, and I didn't find any way to use it (didn't want to buy an "older" slow-ish single core S939 system)

Haven't bought a Maxtor in a few months, so can't say for sure. As for Seagate, I haven't noticed any changes. Bought many Seagate HDs since then and no problems whatsoever.

Stop with the ignorant BS, or backup those claims, would you? There were NEVER ANY 2TB HDs EVER PRODUCED NOR CAN BE FOUND A YARD SALES LIKE THAT ANYWHERE, and they won't be available for quite a while either. So stop it already. It defies logic in so many ways, and physics (i.e. platter density) too. If we've had TB HDs for years, they wouldn't have 'em at CES and all over the web as big news, don't you think? Perhaps we're all idiots and didn't notice we could buy these things for like 10 years already, and paid several thousands for many generations tiny HDs instead for no reason? No idea what you're trying to say about "100 full screen" or something either. There's nothing dumb about a nice 108" 1080p TV. And it's widescreen -- the way all new TVs should be. Burying news about Blu-Ray DRM being hacked for this absolute nonsense?

With basically any VPN, you'll be able to do anything the way you do usually, just like if you were plugged in your home network locally. There's lots of good VPNs out there. Not that I care much for it, but lots of people seemingly like Hamachi for its simplicity. Just connect, and everything will work as usual, even if you're working remotely/over the internet.

This one's been cracked too, but the same guy who brought us HDDVDBackup a couple weeks ago. Beta code available too. Thread @ Doom9 forums Not that I'd ever buy Beta-Ray junk though... but still newsworthy.

VPN in. You DON'T want to expose file/printer sharing directly to the internet.

Well, I though have thought they would have used a @ instead of a "a" ("L33T speak" heh), and forgot the shift (purposedly?) so they ended up with a 2 instead of a @ or something like that. But from the main page: Could be a typo...

This one has been on the front page for like 5 days already, no point in re-posting it here a week late... Besides, it's just yet another CTP (there was one in December, and many before that too). Not much of a news flash either (not interesting for the vast majority of people, and those who actually have a need for it most likely already saw the news in some RSS feed or msdn blog or such anyways), especially if you look at all the issues. Even for a CTP/beta, it's not exactly up to snuff (not really worth the 6GB download + 20GB disk space IMO). KRYOGENIUS: they say the password is "P2ssw0rd" (no @). Haven't tried it yet though. Going to reformat soon (the twice yearly reformat thing) and try it after... But I gotta update the old unattended install first I guess (or perhaps I could even try Vista)

As of WinXP, the preferred way is using SPTI (instead of ASPI). And if a program (cd burning or whatever) needs it, it will usually install its own too. So I wouldn't worry about it at all (I've actually removed the Adaptec ASPI installer from my unattended installs a good while ago)

I would say it's also it's biggest downside: simpler than other virtualization solutions also means "missing advanced features" in this case. It seems like a pretty good alternative to the overpriced vmware workstation though: 200$ for what everybody else gives away (this, VPC and others) or sells quite cheap (e.g. Parallels). Maybe soon enough VMWare will have to live off its ESX sales. They're only going to manage to sell their workstation product for so long at that price. Not much of a server virtualization product though. VMWare Server (and Virtual Server 2005 R2) is still king there for many, many reasons: VirtualBox doesn't start as service which is absolutely essential, simpler networking, no image conversion tool to use all the existing vhd & vmdk images (nor the upcoming ones being released by various vendors as virtual appliances or as MS are doing right now for evals in vhd format), no migration products like VMWare has (P2V et al), no iSCSI support, no remote admin tools/console, doesn't have any of the scripting stuff vmware has, no upgrade path to something like ESX (with clustering, failover and all that), likely not quite the same level of support available (no major vendor behind it), etc. By the way, VMWare has a new product: VMware Lab Manager (still beta), and it looks VERY nice and useful for programmers (for doing testing including deployment). Just too bad it'll cost an arm and a leg.

Look into C:\DOCUME~1\~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\NDP20-KB922770-X86\NDP20-KB922770-X86-msi.0.log to see why it failed. Edit: Cluberti replied faster...

It gets to 75C inside the case? Wow. You definitely have bad airflow then. Either the fans don't move enough air (not enough CFMs, perhaps they're blocked by dust, grills made of tiny holes in case blocking most airflow, etc), aren't moving air around properly (fans working against each other, not placed in the right places and such), too many ribbon cables blocking airflow, etc. I'd consider searching for some guides or FAQs about case airflow, getting decent fans (quiet but with enough CFMs), and perhaps even replacing the case altogether (depending - some case just don't have great airflow). I like to cut out those silly "grills" in cases made of a bunch of tiny holes that don't really let any air though and use real grills instead - no matter how good the fans are, those little dinky holes just don't let much air through (kills airflow). There's also ducts, blowers and all that, but even without anything fancy it shouldn't get this hot.

There you go. Your BIOS doesn't support LBA48. Check if there's a BIOS upgrade available for it, or consider using a PCI IDE controller (HighPoint, Promise, Silicon Image, etc) instead or such.