[Josh Dagreat]

In Firefox, tabs open by default right after the active tab. I prefer it to open at the far right hand side. How do I get it to open up the way I like it, again? I asked about this once before, but I can't remember how I did it (I believe it was DEFRON who told me how to).

[helliehexx]

In Firefox, tabs open by default right after the active tab. I prefer it to open at the far right hand side. How do I get it to open up the way I like it, again? I asked about this once before, but I can't remember how I did it (I believe it was DEFRON who told me how to).

Indeed, it was me.

About:config

browser.tabs.insertRelatedAfterCurrent -- set to false

[Chloe Mayo]

Indeed, it was me.

About:config

browser.tabs.insertRelatedAfterCurrent -- set to false

Haha thanks again!

[Louise Andrew]

Could I get a knee-jerk reaction on processors from some of you techies-more-experienced-than-I? I want some opinions on the prospect of building a new system around a i5 650 or 670 for the purpose of gaming with TES V: Skyrim and beyond. What say you about the upgrade-ability (or lack thereof) and future-proof-eyness of those chips. What short of limitations would I be under for RAM, Northbridge, and video card selection? (as a side note, I would be getting the chip for free)

Thanks all!

[Emily Jones]

So I think I am going to reinstall Windows 7 on my laptop before I head to school, however HP provides Vista drivers which I know work, but at years old now. I was curious if anyone could help me find the newest versions of all the drivers NOT from HP. I understand they are tailored to the laptop model or what have you but I would prefer direct from the component manufacturer if possible. The laptop is model dv6871us. I can provide a dxdiag to better helpout if I need to since I will probably wipe it this evening.

[Joe Alvarado]

I'd go for the Q9550 in your shoes. You'd see a bigger difference going that way instead of the Q8400. Intel CPUs love more cache and the Q9550 has triple the size of cache compared to the Q8400. Even in gaming, it makes a respectable difference:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/89?vs=50

Take a look at these benches done by Xbitlabs recently..

Mainstream (Q8400):
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/cpu-benchmark-mainstream.html

High-end (Q9550):
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/cpu-benchmark-highend.html

Does it justify the price though? If I can save $100 and go with the Q8400, I'd prefer that.

Those benchmarks don't look too far apart, but they don't compare gaming performance so I can't judge.

[Stat Wrecker]

Does it justify the price though? If I can save $100 and go with the Q8400, I'd prefer that.

Those benchmarks don't look too far apart, but they don't compare gaming performance so I can't judge.

The benchmarks do show gaming benches too. Just gotta look a little harder.

If this was a few weeks ago, I would have said yes for the price difference. However, in light of all this Sandybridge madness and reviews…I’ve officially decided to move on. If you’re planning to buy the Q9550 retail price ($270+), I’d say no…it’s not worth it at this point. The Core i5 2500K pretty much performs the same as the Core i7 980X Extreme for only $220 give or take a little, which is ? the cost of the 980X. The 2500K is a mad overclocker as well just on air…achieving 4.4GHz rather easily using just the motherboard auto-overclocking alone. And it can still may achieve more with the right cooling…possibly up to 5GHz!!

I have a Microcenter nearby and rumors going around that I can get it for $180 in-store only though. Pick up some DDR3 RAM for $50 and a board ($125-$150) eslwhere. Planning to sell off my Core 2 E6750, DDR2 RAM (pricier these days), motherboard, and 1GB Radeon 4870 to make up for the extra spent. It just makes more sense to me and I’d get a huge performance bump. I have a 2GB Radeon 6950 and it needs something nicer than an LGA775 setup. I’m sold on Sandybridge at this point.

In your case, I find the Q8400 to be overpriced now due to the socket being obsolete and in light of the Sandybridge prices and performance. I can certainly understand you trying to spend as little as possible on upgrading, but it’s really hard for me at this point to suggest the LGA 775 chips at their current price. Intel likes to push consumers to their new platform and raise the prices on older obsolete hardware. If you are inclined to stay with LGA 775, I’d say get a used processor. You can probably find somebody over at overlcock.net in their For Sale forums that will sell whatever you want for a much lesser price and there’s very low chance of failure rates or duds. You can also post in their Wanted section. I could have gotten a Q9550 for $170 shipped, but backed out last minute. The Q8400 will be cheaper.

But my personal suggestion, I feel it’s time to move away from LGA775 if you don’t already have a quad-core chip to begin with. With Sandybridge, that leaves you two socket generations behind :tongue:


Microcenter prices official now :ahhh: :
http://www.microcenter.com/storefronts/powerspec/index.html

[Aliish Sheldonn]

Hi all. I've recently been having problems with my computer and was hoping you could help me. Last night, while bringing my computer out of sleep mode, my display wouldn't start. It would turn on, say 'No Signal', and then put itself to sleep. Since then I've tried everything I could think of, including unplugging and replugging the cables, ram, and graphics card, and switching out the cables and the graphics card. I'm pretty sure it isn't the monitor thats not working, because I put in some old vga cables and easily hooked it up to my laptop, and it worked. I also don't think its the graphics card, because I switched that out too and neither worked. At this point I just kind of gave up on figuring it out myself.
My system is an i5 750, a bfg 9800 gt w/ 1gb, and 4gb ddr3 ram on a gigabyte GA-P55-USB3. My monitor is a 22 inch Acer.

EDIT: Nevermind, I got it working myself again.

[Margarita Diaz]

So a few days back, my PC wouldn't turn on. When I switched the power switch behind the PC off, then on, it would run for a couple seconds, then shut down again. Took my PC to Frys and it's going to take five days to diagnose the problem. They said it's possible the problem is the motherboard.

Has anyone had a similar experience with their PC? Is it possible that my entire computer could be broken, including video card, processor, and memory?

[Trevor Bostwick]

I have a question regarding Windows Media Center (vs. Windows Media Player):
I frequently watch DVDs on my Windows 7 desktop PC. Normally, I like to use Windows Media Center for that (which I understand plays the dvd using WMP). The nice thing about WMC is that it remembers where I was on the DVD when I close it, so when I start it up again, I can just watch it from where I left off. However, I can't seem to set up my pc to automatically use WMC as my default for dvds, so unless I explicitly launch WMC, WMP launches instead, and it starts playing the DVD from the beginning instead of my saved position.

Note that WMC is not listed as an option for autoplay on my PC -- just WMP and a couple of third-party players which I don't care for. Is there anything I can do to force WMC to launch when I load a DVD or double-click it in My Computer? I don't even care if it automatically starts playing the DVD or not, since it's only one more step to click on the DVD icon.

Alternatively, I'd like for WMP and WMC to start playing from where it left off last time I used either one, although that seems less likely to be feasible.

[Bitter End]

Note that WMC is not listed as an option for autoplay on my PC -- just WMP and a couple of third-party players which I don't care for. Is there anything I can do to force WMC to launch when I load a DVD or double-click it in My Computer? I don't even care if it automatically starts playing the DVD or not, since it's only one more step to click on the DVD icon.

Try:

Start>Control Panel>Default Programs>Set Default Programs>Windows Media Center>choose one of the 2 options

[Michael Russ]

I would like to upgrade my computer's monitor for my birthday, as I've never used anything that wasn't cheap or higher resolution than 1440x900. I don't know what to look for in a good monitor though. I would prefer 16:10 aspect ratio, and would also rather it not be HDMI because I have my TV hooked up to my PC through my HDMI port. I notice then playing games from my PC to my TV (a 720p Vizio) that everything looks like it animates much more smoothly as compared to my monitor. I don't know how else to explain it, but I would like that same experience on a monitor. What do I need to look for?

[ZANEY82]

I would like to upgrade my computer's monitor for my birthday, as I've never used anything that wasn't cheap or higher resolution than 1440x900. I don't know what to look for in a good monitor though. I would prefer 16:10 aspect ratio, and would also rather it not be HDMI because I have my TV hooked up to my PC through my HDMI port. I notice then playing games from my PC to my TV (a 720p Vizio) that everything looks like it animates much more smoothly as compared to my monitor. I don't know how else to explain it, but I would like that same experience on a monitor. What do I need to look for?

For a decent 16:10 monitor your probably going to want at least 1900x1200 resolution. What you want to be looking for is low response times e.g 5ms> high contrast ratio, etc...

If you have the money to spend you should look at LED backlit LCD with local dimming.

Edit: and you definitely want it to be an IPS panel as well.

[Austin England]

Is it being an IPS panel really important? A search on Newegg only came up with 1 result, and http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824176176&Tpk=IPS%20panel

[Emma]

Is it being an IPS panel really important? A search on Newegg only came up with 1 result, and http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824176176&Tpk=IPS%20panel

No that is a bad IPS panel. I'm pretty sure Dell have a good series of them and they had a sale recently, not sure if it's still on though.

[Johanna Van Drunick]

I have WD passport drive (320GB) but it only shows only 298GB when connected to computer. Is there some sort of fix that exists so that it does show 320GB free?

[Juanita Hernandez]

I have WD passport drive (320GB) but it only shows only 298GB when connected to computer. Is there some sort of fix that exists so that it does show 320GB free?

There are already 7 and a half GB you don't have just because of marketing terminology (a GB is 1024 MB in reality, but when it's advertised they figure it as 1000 MB so you lose space). I'm not sure where the rest of the space you're missing is, possibly a hidden partition that they use for their backup software. I can't imagine it taking up 10+ GB though. You might try looking at it in windows' disk manager.

[Dawn Farrell]

I would like to upgrade my computer's monitor for my birthday, as I've never used anything that wasn't cheap or higher resolution than 1440x900. I don't know what to look for in a good monitor though. I would prefer 16:10 aspect ratio, and would also rather it not be HDMI because I have my TV hooked up to my PC through my HDMI port. I notice then playing games from my PC to my TV (a 720p Vizio) that everything looks like it animates much more smoothly as compared to my monitor. I don't know how else to explain it, but I would like that same experience on a monitor. What do I need to look for?

Budget?

[ezra]

There are already 7 and a half GB you don't have just because of marketing terminology (a GB is 1024 MB in reality, but when it's advertised they figure it as 1000 MB so you lose space). I'm not sure where the rest of the space you're missing is, possibly a hidden partition that they use for their backup software. I can't imagine it taking up 10+ GB though. You might try looking at it in windows' disk manager.

Math fail . 320 x 1000 x 1000 x 1000 / (1024 x 1024 x 1024) = 298.

It also isn't marketing terminology, it is correct terminology. Windows (and windows software) is all alone in using the incorrect definition of a "gigabyte"

[Sasha Brown]

Is it being an IPS panel really important? A search on Newegg only came up with 1 result, and http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824176176&Tpk=IPS%20panel

While an IPS is nice with the viewing angle, color saturation, and contrast ratios...they're not very common in 16:10 resolution ratio and will cost a pretty penny usually. This panel is still available and is pretty decent:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236047

[Rachel Cafferty]

Math fail . 320 x 1000 x 1000 x 1000 / (1024 x 1024 x 1024) = 298.

It also isn't marketing terminology, it is correct terminology. Windows (and windows software) is all alone in using the incorrect definition of a "gigabyte"

I thought Windows recognised 1024MB as a GB? if not, thats terrible and why would you not want to name it correctly? I'm kinda surprised that the WD isn't charged for false advertising.

[butterfly]

Math fail . 320 x 1000 x 1000 x 1000 / (1024 x 1024 x 1024) = 298.

It also isn't marketing terminology, it is correct terminology. Windows (and windows software) is all alone in using the incorrect definition of a "gigabyte"

:facepalm: IT's like hours/minutes/seconds/milliseconds, forgot to to every level. As far as I'm concerned though, what's available to the average consumer is less than advertised.

Budget?

Less than $300, ideally.

[Suzy Santana]

:facepalm: IT's like hours/minutes/seconds/milliseconds, forgot to to every level. As far as I'm concerned though, what's available to the average consumer is less than advertised.

If you notice, they print the definition of a "gigabyte" on hard drives now because Windows has ingrained the wrong definition into its users for so long.

Oh, and Mac users laugh at us for all this confusion since Mac changed to expressing disk size in base-10 (which is what a gigabyte is) -- may just be one of the few things I consider Apple having done right (though ideally a switch to GiB would be preferred to Apple's implementation)

I thought Windows recognised 1024MB as a GB? if not, thats terrible and why would you not want to name it correctly? I'm kinda surprised that the WD isn't charged for false advertising.

Windows does recognize 1024MB as a GB, but that is incorrect. A Gigabyte is 1000 MB, which in turn is 1000 KB, in turn 1000 B. A Gibibyte is 1024 Mebibytes, in turn 1024 Kibibytes, in turn 1024 B

[Elizabeth Falvey]

:huh:

Less than $300, ideally.

Just posted an option a couple posts ago


What the heck is with the traffic in here tonight? :huh:

[Madeleine Rose Walsh]

If you notice, they print the definition of a "gigabyte" on hard drives now because Windows has ingrained the wrong definition into its users for so long.

Oh, and Mac users laugh at us for all this confusion since Mac changed to expressing disk size in base-10 (which is what a gigabyte is) -- may just be one of the few things I consider Apple having done right (though ideally a switch to GiB would be preferred to Apple's implementation)


Windows does recognize 1024MB as a GB, but that is incorrect. A Gigabyte is 1000 MB, which in turn is 1000 KB, in turn 1000 B. A Gibibyte is 1024 Mebibytes, in turn 1024 Kibibytes, in turn 1024 B

Well really, it's all relative as to what you define it as. A minute is only a minute because at one point, we decided to refer to that length of time as such. So, I choose to go with Microsoft's definition of a gigabyte because functionally that's what a gigabyte is to me as a windows user.

While an IPS is nice with the viewing angle, color saturation, and contrast ratios...they're not very common in 16:10 resolution ratio and will cost a pretty penny usually. This panel is still available and is pretty decent:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824236047

Sorry, I missed it while replying to DEFRON. If I already have better quality speakers, I can disable the audio through DVI, right?