Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2008 May 19#IE7 bug

{{#ifeq:{{PAGENAME}}|Special:Undelete| |{{#if:|

}} {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Wikipedia|{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|= |
}}|{{error:not substituted|Archive header}}
}}}} {{#if:|
}}
width = "100%"
colspan="3" align="center" | Computing desk
width="20%" align="left" | < May 18

! width="25%" align="center"|<< Apr | May | Jun >>

! width="20%" align="right" |{{#ifexist:Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2008 May 20|May 20|Current desk}} >

align=center width=95% style="background: #FFFFFF; border: 1px solid #003EBA;" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0"
style="background: #5D7CBA; text-align: center; font-family:Arial; color:#FFFFFF;" | Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is {{#ifexist:Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2008 May 29|an archive page|a transcluded archive page}}. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

__TOC__

= May 19 =

for speed, put XP or Windows 2000 on an old PC?? (pentium 3, 667 MHZ, 256 MB RAM)

so I have this old computer running windows 98, but 98 isn't stable enough for me, I normally would put windows 2000 on it, but I read that htis is SLOWER than windows xp:

http://home.comcast.net/~SupportCD/XPMyths.html

{{cquote|

Myth - "Using Windows 2000 over Windows XP will improve performance"

Reality - Windows XP offers better performance than Windows 2000 so long as the recommended Windows XP requirements are met regardless of the age of the computer. With 128 MB of RAM Windows XP is superior to Windows 2000 and all older versions of Windows. This includes dramatically faster boot and resume times and highly responsive applications. Performance only gets better with additional resources, particularly when you run memory-intensive multimedia applications.}}

But if you look at their source, you see it's Microsoft! So, of course they're going to say that (at the time).... according to independent people, would Windows XP or Windows 2000 be faster on my ancient hardware? Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beaterofapc (talkcontribs) 00:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

:If you adjust Windows XP for best performance (System Properties > Advanced > Performance Settings) it will be very similar in performance to Windows 2000. If the computer is going to be connected to the internet, I strongly recommend Windows XP, as it is more secure. Your system is adequate for XP. --67.170.53.118 (talk) 01:08, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

:With the above change they would be imperceptibly different; even with the default settings it probably would be fine. XP's theoretical performance improvements are in booting, and application launching (since it prefetches things and whatnot). However, the kernels and most of the underlying stuff is very similar between the two OSs, with XP adding various small things and making the GUI friendlier. I don't see any reason not to go for it. XP is newer as well, so its support end date is further out. 206.126.163.20 (talk) 03:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

::Here is your complimentary nudge to use Linux, especially Ubuntu or its derivative, Xubuntu. Thank you for using the Reference Desk service, and have a good day. --antilivedT | C | G 04:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

:You'd be amazed what an extra 256M will do for your XP performance. For such an old machine, people are virtually throwing away or selling RAM for VERY cheap. Good luck finding some, though. Graphics card performance matters to a lesser extent, and here again you'd be able to pick up an upgrade virtually from a junk yard. Old PC's are becoming a major landfill problem worldwide. Sandman30s (talk) 14:04, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Maximum dimensions for image files

Hi, what are the maximum height and width for various image file formats? Are there any formats without restrictions? I'd like to know about PNG, JPEG and TIFF. Thanks. --Kjoonlee 00:53, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

:The PNM format doesn't have any (defined) size limits, although software processing such files of course may be more limited. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 01:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

  • PNG [http://www.w3.org/TR/PNG/] uses 4 bytes to store width, and 4 bytes to store height (4.3 million pixels square)
  • TIFF [http://www.alternatiff.com/resources/TIFF6.pdf] uses up to 4 bytes to store width, and up to 4 bytes to store height (4.3 million pixels square) (2 bytes each is more common)
  • I don't know about JPEG, but I've seen dubious websites that claim 32Kx32K. I think JPEG treats dimensions more weirdly than PNG or TIFF.

: You may be more likely to encounter operating system limitations [http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.php/msg/b03498f96bdd4400] at very large sizes. I am not an authority on this. :-) --67.170.53.118 (talk) 01:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

:(edit conflict) As for PNG, JPEG and TIFF, if I'm reading the specs right, JPEG seems to be limited to 65,535 by 65,535 pixels, while PNG and TIFF seem to allow up to 4,294,967,295 by 4,294,967,295 pixels. Good luck finding an image viewer able to display that 16-exbipixel image, though. Or a hard disk to store it, for that matter. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 01:55, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

::And it's hard to imagine an instance in which it wouldn't be more sensible to split it into multiple pieces and just have it pieced together on the fly. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 01:01, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Can Windows Media Center record/pause RTSP streams?

Can Windows Media Center (in Windows XP Media Center Edition or Windows Vista Home Premium) record/pause videos streamed from the internet (specifically WMA/WMV streams over RTSP)? Thanks. --67.170.53.118 (talk) 01:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC) (Edit: I meant RTSP streams.)

How does the Chinese Wikipedia interconvert between different flavors of Chinese?

The Chinese Wikipedia allows articles to be rendered in several flavors of Chinese, including, among others, Taiwanese Chinese (in traditional Chinese characters) and Mainland Chinese (in simplified Chinese characters). The conversion involves more than just a one-for-one substitution of characters, because of the following complications:

:1. The mapping from simplified Chinese characters to traditional Chinese characters is NOT one-to-one. The same simplified Chinese character may correspond to several traditional Chinese characters, depending on the context.

:2. There are terminological differences among the different flavors of Chinese. Something called by one name in one flavor of Chinese may be called by a different name in another.

:3. Contributors add to the same article using both simplified and traditional Chinese characters.

How does the Chinese Wikipedia do it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.237.18 (talk) 15:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

:See Chinese_Wikipedia#Automatic_conversion_between_Traditional_and_Simplified_Chinese for a quick overview, and meta:Automatic_conversion_between_simplified_and_traditional_Chinese for the more detailed one, as well as various appropriate links to the actual conversion tables and such. 206.126.163.20 (talk) 00:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Cartoon Animation in Adobe/Macromedia Flash

Does anyone know any good websites (or books, if no known good sites exist) for learning the optimal way to create animation in Flash? (By animation, I mean character-based cartoon animation, not tweening.) I've done several searches, but the sites I've found are extremely basic. In particular, I am interested in three main aspects of Flash animation:

  1. Effective but efficient lip-synching (e.g. how many mouth shapes are necessary for convincing but not overly time-consuming speech animation)
  2. Optimal workflow techniques (e.g. to what degree should objects/characters being animation be broken into symbols, what's the best way to handle all the different symbols, etc)
  3. Recommended drawing techniques (this is less important than the other two; I'm just curious if people recommend anything other than a graphics pad).

Any advice on good resources for learning about these things would be most appreciated. Thanks! H. J. Hackenbacker (talk) 16:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

IE7 bug

I just found a nice little bug in Internet Explorer 7. If you have a dropdown list (