|
raezr posted:Netflix authentication problems. I am experiencing the same error. Something must be wrong on their end.
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2010 10:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 23:26 |
|
|
I've got a couple questions about freeing up space on my hdd. I've got a 28gb ssd, and I figured in reality that should be big enough to house Windows, and any programs (not games) I wanted to install. Unfortunately, I was wrong, and my drive has been filling up quit a bit. I rarely have over 2.5gb free. I've already taken steps to move my user account, which was the heaviest folder, to my other drive, thus freeing up quite a bit of space, but now it has filled up again. I'm trying to fix this problem without uninstalling all my programs, and reinstalling them on my other drive. It seems my biggest folder is now the ProgramData folder, and inside that, it is the Microsoft folder. Delving deeper however is a folder called "XLive." I can't for the life of me figure out what it is other then something that has to do with GFWL. Uninstalling the GFWL stuff doesn't clear it up. I was wondering if anyone here could give some insight into it. I did some googling but couldn't find anything relevent. If this is the wrong thread to post in let me know. I didn't want to make a new thread, and couldn't find a better megathread. And it just doesn't feel like a tech support question because it isn't something that stops the machine from any of it's functionality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2010 16:44
|
|
|
Eh, backup your data and delete away. If you don't use GFWL or Xbox Live on your PC, I say nuke it. Normally I wouldn't, but with an SSD how long does it take to re-install Windows 7, like 3 minutes? The most damage you could do deleting stuff seems to be fixable in a smoke break. You could try something like Scanner or Sequoia View to get a good look at your disks. 28gigs is pretty tight, Windows 7 will want anywhere from 7-15 with various hibernate and swap files enabled. You could try disabling some of those with varying performance affects others might warn against.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2010 19:07
|
|
|
I am a little confused about a couple of Group Policy items for Power Management:Turn on the Ability for Applications to Prevent Sleep Transitions (Plugged In) posted:
Allow Applications to Prevent Automatic Sleep (Plugged In) posted:
As far as I can see, they do exactly the same thing, just that one version is backwards compatible with Vista? Am I missing something else (I am not very familar with Group Policy)
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2010 06:39
|
|
|
Well, I'm not at all familiar with group policy, but the first one does not include the word "automatic". Reading the description literally would indicate that it outright prevents the user from initiating a sleep command without first terminating the offending process.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2010 22:33
|
|
|
If I may channel the UAC bickery into an actual question for a minute, I have a quick question about some notifications. When launching a program, I usually ignore the Start Menu and go to my Links toolbar, which has some categorized folders with shortcuts to my most-often used programs. (I got the idea from an old XP trick) It's really handy, but now Windows 7 keeps notifying me that I am, in fact, opening a dreaded .lnk file. Kinda like this:  Click here for the full 1024x575 image. So, is there any way to disable these shortcuts without completely turning off my security? Can I put those specific files on some kind of whitelist or is this just a kinda thing I'll have to live with?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2010 04:10
|
|
|
Thats not UAC, its windows not recognizing where the file is from. I think theres an option in the *.lnk files' properties box to fix that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2010 07:12
|
|
|
kapinga posted:Well, I'm not at all familiar with group policy, but the first one does not include the word "automatic". Reading the description literally would indicate that it outright prevents the user from initiating a sleep command without first terminating the offending process. I guess that makes sense. So, (depending on this policy) you can have an app that prevents you from manually putting the system into standby. Seems a bit odd. spog fucked around with this message at 10:45 on Dec 11, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2010 10:42
|
|
|
Xenomorph posted:The ONLY thing that works 100% for me to make Starcraft play correctly is to kill Explorer.EXE and then run the game. I have success with opening the Change Resolution screen and then running the game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2010 15:35
|
|
|
The only way I can get the original Starcraft to run is use a 3rd party launcher. It started getting flaky years ago, every once in awhile it'd start up with all the colors screwed up. That got more and more frequent, until it just wouldn't start normally at all. (This was also over several hardware iterations.) Now I can't play it except with a third party launcher that makes it run in a window, where it acts perfectly normally.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2010 17:16
|
|
|
I'm looking at installing Windows 7 alongside Linux just for the purposes of iTunes and some games. I have a legit copy of XP that I bought years ago, and am trying to figure out what to buy. If I get an upgrade copy, do I have to fully install XP on the drive then do an upgrade (which itself is a clean install), or does the installer support a CD check and clean install on an empty drive? My only concern is that apparently if I do upgrade, I have to upgrade to 32-bit Windows 7, and I don't know if that will cause me any trouble (I have 2GB of memory currently, but might add more in the future, though I doubt I'll go over 4GB for a few years.) EDIT: Solved. Seems a clean install is legally/ethically possible, just hidden out-of-view. Craptacular! fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Dec 12, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2010 20:48
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Thats not UAC, its windows not recognizing where the file is from. e: Figured it out myself...it involved enabling the "Launching applications and unsafe files (not secure)" option in Internet Options. Windows keeps bitching at me about how this isn't secure, but should I worry about it? SpecialAgentCooper fucked around with this message at 00:39 on Dec 13, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2010 00:27
|
|
|
Odd issue. I have a Windows 7 box on the network. I can access the C share via \\192.168.0.5\c$ but it doesn't work when I try \\win7box\c$ I can ping win7box and it resolves to 192.168.0.5. I'm stumped. Any ideas?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2010 21:56
|
|
|
GreenNight posted:Odd issue. I have a Windows 7 box on the network. Hey! Same thing with me. I have my "MediaBox" at 192.168.1.150. \\MediaBox\ fails, \\192.168.1.150\ works every time. This only started happening a few weeks back (it worked fine in the summer). I don't know if I installed something that broke it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2010 23:40
|
|
|
SpecialAgentCooper posted:It's really handy, but now Windows 7 keeps notifying me that I am, in fact, opening a dreaded .lnk file. Kinda like this: Find the target of the link, and right-click it to go into Properties. Near the bottom of the General tab will be a message along the lines of "This file came from another computer and might be blocked to help protect you" and there will be an "Unblock" button. Click the Unblock button. That removes the hidden piece of metadata that marks the file as being potentially dangerous that most/all web browsers automatically attach to downloads. Then go back into Internet Options and reenable the overall protection.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 03:26
|
|
|
biznatchio posted:Find the target of the link, and right-click it to go into Properties. Near the bottom of the General tab will be a message along the lines of "This file came from another computer and might be blocked to help protect you" and there will be an "Unblock" button. Click the Unblock button. That removes the hidden piece of metadata that marks the file as being potentially dangerous that most/all web browsers automatically attach to downloads. My guess is that won't work. It would work for a file prompting because it was downloaded from the Internet. His problem is that he is basically using the IE links toolbar to launch applications. It's not meant for that purpose, and I would assume it's prompting because it recognizes either .lnk or .exe as a potentially dangerous filetype.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 03:35
|
|
|
tk posted:My guess is that won't work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 03:46
|
|
|
Yeah, I just tried that out. It's because .exe is a high risk file types (obviously). It is possible, but really really not recommended, to remove the prompt in this situation by forcing .exe as a low risk file type. Then you won't get prompted some time when you click something that executes SuperVirus.exe on your machine and nobody wants that. Do not do this.ilkhan posted:Hmm. Good point. Best option would be jumplist launcher or actually using win7 the way it was designed to be used. Other options would either be separate shortcut toolbars for every category (Right Click -> Toolbars -> New Toolbar --- Select folder containing shorcuts), or a single shortcut toolbar with folders for all the categories. This would leave text in the taskbar instead of pretty icons. A standard folder toolbar will cascade contained subfolders as long as they appear in the "more" (>>). If the folders are visible directly on the toolbar, clicking them will launch a new Explorer window (though there may be a way around that as well). There may also be some other 3rd party toolbar or utility out there that does what you want it to do. tk fucked around with this message at 04:07 on Dec 14, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 03:57
|
|
|
I'm having a weird case of a missing user. Is there any way to restore a user from their user file? The folder still exists in C:\Users\ but the login for that user is no longer showing up... Nevermind, I ended up running "control userpasswords2" and then added the account to the administrative group (which for some reason it wasn't) and it reappeared. Very strange. TheChipmunk fucked around with this message at 07:45 on Dec 14, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 06:50
|
|
|
I was reading tech articles on Wikipedia last night, and I came across Hyper Threading. I was vaguely familiar with what it was, but there was one thing that stuck out in the article:quote:Hyper-threading requires not only that the operating system support multiple processors, but also that it be specifically optimized for HTT, and Intel recommends disabling HTT when using operating systems that have not been optimized for this chip feature. The first line says that the OS needs to be optimized for multiple processors (not cores). My question is what versions of Windows 7 is optimized for Hyper Threading? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-threading
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 23:22
|
|
|
Donkey Kunt posted:I was reading tech articles on Wikipedia last night, and I came across Hyper Threading. I was vaguely familiar with what it was, but there was one thing that stuck out in the article: All versions of Win7 support multiple CPU cores. I'm pretty sure they've drawn a distinction between cores on a single package and multiple physically separate processors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 23:26
|
|
|
Donkey Kunt posted:I was reading tech articles on Wikipedia last night, and I came across Hyper Threading. I was vaguely familiar with what it was, but there was one thing that stuck out in the article: All versions of Windows since Windows XP SP2 have optimizations for hyperthreading by default.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 23:29
|
|
|
Donkey Kunt posted:The first line says that the OS needs to be optimized for multiple processors (not cores). My question is what versions of Windows 7 is optimized for Hyper Threading? Read the rest of the article where it mentions that Windows 2000 was not optimized for hyper-threading. All iterations after that have been fine. As for applications, anything recent (last five years) typically works fine. If you notice some abhorrent performance you may want to turn it off, but typically more cores is better for overall system performance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 23:34
|
|
|
Is there a way to ensure that HT is enabled without going through the BIOS? I remember buying a P4 with HT before XP Service Pack 2 was released. Now I'm using an i3 with Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. It'd just be nice to see if everything is running correctly.
Donkey Kunt fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Dec 14, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 23:48
|
|
|
Donkey Kunt posted:Is there a way to ensure that HT is enabled without going through the BIOS? I remember buying a P4 with HT before XP Service Pack 2 was released. Now I'm using an i3 with Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. It'd just be nice to see if everything is running correctly. This might be a dumb answer, but the performance tab in task manager? I know for me on my i5 I can see four monitors, 2x2 HT. And they all start lighting up if I have enough programs going.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2010 23:59
|
|
|
Donkey Kunt posted:Is there a way to ensure that HT is enabled without going through the BIOS? I remember buying a P4 with HT before XP Service Pack 2 was released. Now I'm using an i3 with Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. It'd just be nice to see if everything is running correctly. CPU-Z should let you know how many logical / physical cores the CPU has. Task Manager is what I load up though to see how many "CPUs" the system sees.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2010 00:08
|
|
|
I downloaded CPU-Z. That's a really neat program. Has everything clearly labeled and organized. Thanks to everyone for the assistance.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2010 00:17
|
|
|
Balls... I just found out the hard way that network backup was removed in Windows 7 Home Premium. Is there a good-enough imaging tool for Windows/GPT disks, preferably one which can run without shutting down the computer? I tried DriveImage XML, but it only gave me the option to backup my ReadyBoost flash drive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2010 10:39
|
|
|
GreenNight posted:Odd issue. I have a Windows 7 box on the network. BTW I figured this poo poo out. My win7 box had the incorrect time. Of all things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2010 14:36
|
|
|
I'm trying to clean up my music collection, meaning I am trying to rename and move a bunch of files. I keep getting the following error: The action can't be completed because the folder or a file in it is open in another program I don't have any programs open that would be trying to use these files. What's going on?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 03:44
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:I'm trying to clean up my music collection, meaning I am trying to rename and move a bunch of files. I keep getting the following error:
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 03:55
|
|
|
gibbed posted:AV or Explorer, usually. So how do you fix it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 04:00
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:So how do you fix it? Try booting in safe mode.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 04:06
|
|
|
Cross posting from the Windows thread: If I buy a copy of Win7 home 64-bit for system builders, I understand that it will be locked to a specific computer, however, would I buy able to install it twice on the same hard drive but on different partitions? I'm building a computer for my little brothers and one of them doesn't understand that you can't install whatever you like from fishy websites, so having two different Windows installs seems like the most logical thing to do, unless you have something else to suggest? (Teaching him what not to do is out of the question - he simply doesn't understand.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 04:26
|
|
|
Mr. Clark2 posted:Try booting in safe mode. Does this disable some annoying windows 7 feature? Other than this weird quirk, the computer seems very stable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 04:36
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:Does this disable some annoying windows 7 feature? Other than this weird quirk, the computer seems very stable. Try Unlocker before going to safe mode.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 04:52
|
|
|
Leave the error open and keep working on other folders, go back and hit retry a few minutes later, usually whatever had the thing locked is done with it by then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 05:22
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:Does this disable some annoying windows 7 feature? Other than this weird quirk, the computer seems very stable. No. What happens is that some application is trying to use the files that you want to delete. As they are marked as 'in use' by windows (and all versions of windows do this), you cannot delete them - as it would be a Bad Thing to delete them while they are in use. Booting into Safe Mode prevents many apps/services from starting up - hopefully including the one that is locking the files you want to delete. In fact, often, just rebooting normally is enough to unlock the files. Have you tried this yet?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 05:24
|
|
|
I did try rebooting and that didn't do anything. I'm familiar with that feature in older versions of Windows, and with them it's pretty obvious what program is using them. Here not so much. I pretty much am fighting my way through like ilkhan suggested, and figured out that if you double click on another folder, then drag the one I want to move, whatever it was that locked on the first folder lets go and binds the second one. I'm making it work, its just annoying.  Here is a screen print of it doing it with files that were legally acquired. Zeta Taskforce fucked around with this message at 06:11 on Dec 16, 2010 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 06:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 23:26 |
|
|
Guerrand posted:Try Unlocker before going to safe mode. This is the answer to locked files. There are multiple free programs that offer unlocking ability; I use LockHunter, because it works in Win7 x64.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2010 06:36
|
|
