battletrax

I blame the haxxorz! But seriously, have you tried a modern skin just for the heck of it?

You can do that pretty easily, but I don't think that's a good solution for safeguarding against drive failure. Also, partitioning a drive is taking one harddrive and splitting it up into pieces so that your computer sees it as multiple harddrives. If you want to have a backup copy of your data, you can always try a raid array.... I'm not sure what you're trying ot do exactly though...

What's illegal? And what do zonealarm and ez security have to do with each other? From what I can se, they're too separate programs...

Bittorrent is the one p2p standard that can claim to have legit uses without bending the truth at all. You should really know this... quite popular way for sites with very little bandwidth to host files...

I'm planning on getting an ipod myself. As much as I like iriver and dislike apple, the ipod's controlls are incredible. I've tried lots of mp3 players and it's just ummatched. (And if you want to get a new one, they're $370 w/ free shipping from apple's educational site :) )

IF you don't have a windows xp disk then you cannot reinstall windows xp. Most computers come with an xp disk (actually I thought they had to these days) so you proabbly have it somewhere.

You should really read the readme the comes up lol. All ati drivers whether direct from ati or from omega CANNOT be installed over other ati drivers. You usually have to uninstall the old ones, reboot and install the new ones, but from what you're saying, it seems like they fixed the process. Just install the omega drivers rather than installing OLD ati drivers.

It appears to me that the game is fine, but the selection bar at the top is way too big. What's you screen resolution? What browser are you using?

For burning, I've never had any problem with Nero. For ripping, I use easy cd-da extractor. It's just a nice graphical front-end for lame, and since it's using lame, the quality is amazing!

Sounds like some obscure software problem. Do what ape suggested, but also make sure you have the newest version of java.

If it isn't compressed and it's .rar then it's mislabeled. Just fire that cheat up and hop on a vac server. Trust me, it's SOOO much more fun cheating there!!!!!

Yea. They don't bother geting their drivers certified by windows. I've noticed that a lot of major companies don't bother with that rubbish either.

I'm tired of seeing this security argument when it comes to MS. When are people going to realize that Windows being more unsecure than other OS'es is only a perception created by the larger coverage it gets ? Other OS'es have just as many security holes, but nowhere near as famous as the Windows ones. As to whoever said MS doens't patch holes quickly, that's nonsense. In the past 2 years, it's improved a lot: MS rationalized their ratings of vulnerabilities and came out with a monthly cycle of regular updates, with critical updates being rolled out ASAP. Here's an example that affects a lot of us here: the latest vulnerability with the Java VM was fixed 1 day after it was discovered and was rolled out through Windows Update 5 days later. If you absolutely want the patches before they even hit Windows Update, then download Microsoft Baseline Security Anaylzer. Just because it's fashionable to call MS more unsecure than others doesn't mean it's the truth. If that were the case, you wouldn't have companies running critical servers on Windows. And yes they do. And yes they'd switch in a heartbeat if MS was way more unsecure than others. Money isn't an objection when it comes to critical applications. I really don't think coverage has anything to do with it. I have to concede that a big reason for windows's security problems is the larger number of people trying to find security holes, but that's not the most important problem. MS is still slow at making patches. Just becasue they roll out patches every month doesn't mean that it only takes a month for vulns to be patched... They may be improving, but they started at bad and are moving toward, but still far from, goood. Ever hear of slammer? That HUGE vulnerability was out how many months before it was patched? Microsoft didn't fix it until it was used to take down most of the internet... And as for companies using windows for mission-critical apps... That's slowly changing. HP recently started using linux for it's NonStop servers, the most important and expensive servers that they produce... And that's just one example that I remembered from the news recently http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?si ... 6&from=rss I agree that it's kind of popular to bash ms's security, but you can't say they don't deserve a lot of it. I emphasized a sentence in your post. The reason ? Because I never said that. What I was trying to say was that the one-month cycle guarantees you some patching as opposed to a "when-we-fee-like-it" approach. Of course, some vulnerabilities may take more than a month. I can't say I check anymore. But when I did (and that was months ago), it took them less than a month to patch. Far from a month even. Anyway, slammer was a long time ago. I believe that's part of what pushed them into doing things better too. Some companied switch to Unix/Linux. Some switch to Windows. It's also fashionable to report on Microsoft's losses, rather than the other way around. ;) Perhaps sales would be more meaningful. Regardless, it seems MS reputation on the subject is going up rather than down. It's well known they used to run their own website off a Linux server. :P Obviously they switched when people found out, but anyway, they advertize Windows 2k3 server with emphasis on security, and you don't make these kind of claims lightly for a product aimed at IT specialists and business use. They'd be laughed at all the way out the door of companies if it turned out to be as full of holes as swiss cheese. :) EDIT: almost forgot. EugenyG, MS "domination" started before Windows 95. I have to agree that it's getting better and that the once-a-month updates are helping. It's really hard to even figure out what's more secure, because, as you said, it's much more popular to report ms's problems rather than some sort of linux flaw. And I think it was after slammer that ms started using linux. I think that they had a linux server just redirecting to their IIS servers to filter out things like slammer vulns and guard against ddosses hurting their main servers. I know that they made it public early on, but I didn't know that they ever stopped lol.

I'm tired of seeing this security argument when it comes to MS. When are people going to realize that Windows being more unsecure than other OS'es is only a perception created by the larger coverage it gets ? Other OS'es have just as many security holes, but nowhere near as famous as the Windows ones. As to whoever said MS doens't patch holes quickly, that's nonsense. In the past 2 years, it's improved a lot: MS rationalized their ratings of vulnerabilities and came out with a monthly cycle of regular updates, with critical updates being rolled out ASAP. Here's an example that affects a lot of us here: the latest vulnerability with the Java VM was fixed 1 day after it was discovered and was rolled out through Windows Update 5 days later. If you absolutely want the patches before they even hit Windows Update, then download Microsoft Baseline Security Anaylzer. Just because it's fashionable to call MS more unsecure than others doesn't mean it's the truth. If that were the case, you wouldn't have companies running critical servers on Windows. And yes they do. And yes they'd switch in a heartbeat if MS was way more unsecure than others. Money isn't an objection when it comes to critical applications. I really don't think coverage has anything to do with it. I have to concede that a big reason for windows's security problems is the larger number of people trying to find security holes, but that's not the most important problem. MS is still slow at making patches. Just becasue they roll out patches every month doesn't mean that it only takes a month for vulns to be patched... They may be improving, but they started at bad and are moving toward, but still far from, goood. Ever hear of slammer? That HUGE vulnerability was out how many months before it was patched? Microsoft didn't fix it until it was used to take down most of the internet... And as for companies using windows for mission-critical apps... That's slowly changing. HP recently started using linux for it's NonStop servers, the most important and expensive servers that they produce... And that's just one example that I remembered from the news recently http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?si ... 6&from=rss I agree that it's kind of popular to bash ms's security, but you can't say they don't deserve a lot of it. I emphasized a sentence in your post. The reason ? Because I never said that. What I was trying to say was that the one-month cycle guarantees you some patching as opposed to a "when-we-fee-like-it" approach. Of course, some vulnerabilities may take more than a month. I can't say I check anymore. But when I did (and that was months ago), it took them less than a month to patch. Far from a month even. Anyway, slammer was a long time ago. I believe that's part of what pushed them into doing things better too. Some companied switch to Unix/Linux. Some switch to Windows. It's also fashionable to report on Microsoft's losses, rather than the other way around. ;) Perhaps sales would be more meaningful. Regardless, it seems MS reputation on the subject is going up rather than down. It's well known they used to run their own website off a Linux server. :P Obviously they switched when people found out, but anyway, they advertize Windows 2k3 server with emphasis on security, and you don't make these kind of claims lightly for a product aimed at IT specialists and business use. They'd be laughed at all the way out the door of companies if it turned out to be as full of holes as swiss cheese. :) EDIT: almost forgot. EugenyG, MS "domination" started before Windows 95. I have to agree that it's getting better and that the once-a-month updates are helping. It's really hard to even figure out what's more secure, because, as you said, it's much more popular to report ms's problems rather than some sort of linux flaw. And I think it was after slammer that ms started using linux. I think that they had a linux server just redirecting to their IIS servers to filter out things like slammer vulns and guard against ddosses hurting their main servers. I know that they made it public early on, but I didn't know that they ever stopped lol.

Maybe you could give him details about your internet connection.... or you could just tell us about the weather, that'll help...

I'm tired of seeing this security argument when it comes to MS. When are people going to realize that Windows being more unsecure than other OS'es is only a perception created by the larger coverage it gets ? Other OS'es have just as many security holes, but nowhere near as famous as the Windows ones. As to whoever said MS doens't patch holes quickly, that's nonsense. In the past 2 years, it's improved a lot: MS rationalized their ratings of vulnerabilities and came out with a monthly cycle of regular updates, with critical updates being rolled out ASAP. Here's an example that affects a lot of us here: the latest vulnerability with the Java VM was fixed 1 day after it was discovered and was rolled out through Windows Update 5 days later. If you absolutely want the patches before they even hit Windows Update, then download Microsoft Baseline Security Anaylzer. Just because it's fashionable to call MS more unsecure than others doesn't mean it's the truth. If that were the case, you wouldn't have companies running critical servers on Windows. And yes they do. And yes they'd switch in a heartbeat if MS was way more unsecure than others. Money isn't an objection when it comes to critical applications. I really don't think coverage has anything to do with it. I have to concede that a big reason for windows's security problems is the larger number of people trying to find security holes, but that's not the most important problem. MS is still slow at making patches. Just becasue they roll out patches every month doesn't mean that it only takes a month for vulns to be patched... They may be improving, but they started at bad and are moving toward, but still far from, goood. Ever hear of slammer? That HUGE vulnerability was out how many months before it was patched? Microsoft didn't fix it until it was used to take down most of the internet... And as for companies using windows for mission-critical apps... That's slowly changing. HP recently started using linux for it's NonStop servers, the most important and expensive servers that they produce... And that's just one example that I remembered from the news recently http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?si ... 6&from=rss I agree that it's kind of popular to bash ms's security, but you can't say they don't deserve a lot of it.

Actually, there's a much simpler solution. The ati drivers all work with mobility cards, but ati doesn't allow the installer to install on machines with mobility cards b/c they don't provide any support for them. I have a 9600mobile and of course the only ATI driver that I ca get is the couple year old one from gateway. Here's the solution. Get modified drivers! I use omega drivers which are, according to many benchmarks, more powerful than the regular ati drivers. And of course they work with all mobility cards :) go to omegadrivers.net to get them ATI officially recognized omegadrivers as the best of the ati driver modding community a while ago and I've been using them on two of my machines for a few years, so they're pretty reliable.

Microsoft says lots of things, but I really doubt IE7 will be much different from IE6. The real security problem isn't with the browser. It's with their security team who patches flaws months after they're found. And on a sidenote, it may not be called windows vista :) Stupid ms forgetting to check with the copyright office lol

I'm from AZ also. When it was getting into the 110s, I actually tried to go running at 10am... It was in the high 90s already that day according to my thermometer in the shade... And then when it got humid... Any amount of humidity+100 F or higher=terrible!

:lol: I dont know what to belive but i think thats fake. How can someone mod a book? Its the "hot coffee" mod for harry potter :o Lol, it's clearly a joke. If that story didn't gve it away look at the links at the bottom: Hermoine dies due to getting hit by a truck, Potter arrested in Meth Lab, etc :wink: greatest attack on take2 ever! But as for the book. I like the Snape not being evil theories... After reading the book, I thought Dumbledore would never pleade with Snape. Also, at the time, Dumbledore also had total trust for Snape. Snape didn't do anything drastic enough to break that complete trust in a matter of seconds. I was thinking that Snape and Dumbledore planned it to get Snape more trust from voldy so he can find the locations of the horocruxes. When dumbledore said that, it just sounded liek he was acting... Also, why didn't snape do something with harry. He just hexed him, bu he could have easily paralized him and picked him up with some spell and taken him to the dark lord. And if JK wants to bring Dumbledore back, she can always play with the fact that Snape was so good at doign spells in his mind that he shielded dumbledore before he killd him, so that the spell merely threw him back far. Then dumbledore could have made a fake body (polyjuce on a dead guy or something?) and run off. That way everyone thinks he's dead, including voldemort. I don't really know, but the good thing is that jk left herself a lot of room to play with the plot and also now she can write more than 7 books!!! She freed herself from the 1 book per grade concept which I think we can all appreciate. On a side note, who else felt like they were watching the ending of spiderman when harry dumped ginny?

noia and pixelzilla!

He's running java 5 update 2. It's time to upgrade to update 4. Also, get some sort of antispyware program and get rid of viewpoint. The other thing that I thinhk would be helpful is info on your video card. My friend has a similar system and as much as jagex denies it, you're going to have problems with onboard gfx.

Well. Assuming you want to give it away wwith windows on it, xp will allow you to format your drive during the install. If you just want to wipe it, you can use a bootdisk, but I'm not sure how to make a bootdisk that can make ntfs partitions.

It's no problem to just format a paartition. There's no law that says you have to format an entire physical drive at a time. Just pop in the xp cd. Go to install windows. When it asks where to install, pick the drive you want. It'll see stuff there and eventually ask you if you want to format that partition before installing. Also, there are much easier ways to get your ms serials than using a bootdisk. http://www.magicaljellybean.com/keyfinder.shtml

It appears that your quicklaunch bar is taking up the whole taskbar. Take the little thing that I've boxed and move it (as illustrated) to the empty box.