Been rather frustrating around here past while and I just gotta vent for a bit.
So the company my Woman works for has a contract with Dell for hardware. Employee discount, payroll deduction, and all that jazz. Since her computer was has been dying for over a year, figure use all that to get her a new machine. What kicked it off was that our hub died and we were in serious need of a router. So she's making up this list and checking things.
How much RAM do I need? How fast? blah blah blah
I tell her two things: make sure it has a DVD burner and make sure that the router is not wireless. Everything else can be bottom of the barrel and suit her just fine.
She gets the new machine and is all happy and stuff. Brand new whizzer computer compared to her junky old glorified calculator.
But it has Vista. She keeps asking me about where's this and where's that. I don't do Vista. Shut up and figure it out. It's supposed to be easy for users like you to figure out. She eventually figures out the basics and is up and running in a day or two. Yippie.
The router... ugh. Yes, it is direct connect. However, it has wireless capabilities. She tells me this and I'm just shaking my head. We had the damnedest time getting it working. She eventually installs the software on her machine and she is the admin for the router. One less thing for me to worrying about. Good.
A few days later she's all, "OMG, people keep trying to connect to our router and I'm getting sick of denying access!"
I'm all like, "Dude, that's exactly why I didn't want wireless."
She's all like, "You didn't tell me that!"
I'm all like, "I told you no wireless."
"Well...."
Whatever.
Eventually she suggests getting a laptop. We have zero use for a laptop like we have zero use for a wireless router. I suggest that I get a new computer instead of a laptop that we'll never use. She concedes and I get a new machine. Yippie.
Being that it's factory, I know that I won't get as much bang for the buck. But I figure her discount will make up for it. And I very specifically asked for XP.
Get it up and running and everybody is connected and all that jazz. I even set it up so I could move my junk over the LAN instead of burning every last little thing to DVD. That was nice.
OMG I love my new monitor. Absolutely huge with plenty of room to move. And the HD has plenty of space for all of my resources and archives. Yippie.
But I couldn't do any sensitive work with the monitor because the highs were getting seriously blown out. I mean really bad.
Mess with the monitor settings. Mess with Adobe Gamma. Still getting way blown out. Just couldn't get the monitor and Adobe Gamma to play nice.
I eventually found an extra control layer for Display buried in the OS. I found the dialog and the setting were just plain unGodly. GTFO! I doubled check the old machines and no such display settings layer was present. Isnt' that nice?
Highs are still a bit high, but acceptable. Will take a bit of getting used to or maybe I'll try to tweak a bit further. Even if I don't completely nail it, at least I can get some work done.
One thing I don't like about Adobe Gamma is that the little box thing is a little box thing. I opened up Photoshop, made my own pattern, filled the work space, and then opened Adobe Gamma. It was very nice being able to tweak with the monitor filled with checkered b&w with some 50% tossed in. If you've never tried this, definitely give it a go. OMG it made a big difference. I kicked that gamma in da nutz in no time at all.
Bunch of other little things. The stock mouse that came with this machine blows chunks. OpenGL crashes hard. Pre-loaded software that I'm hesitant to unload because I'm not sure what it does or if it's integrated or needed or something. What happened to the good ol' days of Twain and a simple dialog to dump? Sometimes I really hate Kodak... or maybe it's the mundane users they cater to that I don't like. Much like the fighting with Vista on Woman's machine to get simple things done. It took me forever to open up one of her directories so I could dump her archives to it from across the LAN. Vista insisted on sandboxing her junk to Public and I was all like WTF?
But I got a new machine on the cheap and the monitor is huge. I even took Filter Meister for a spin to test some calculation heavy ideas and it was far more whizzer than I was expecting.
Just one of those weeks. And it's only going to get worse when she gives our wireless capable router to her dad. I shutter at the thought of him admining anything.
Oh dear - I hope it works out for you. If you live anywhere near London, I'd be more than happy to offer you my professional services - all problems outlined above are pretty much what I deal with on a daily basis. I could probably be done in time for a cup of tea and a chat about the weather.
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 03-14-2008 13:21
You should be able to turn off the Wireless part of the Router, that should take care of that. Then it will function as a normal Hub.
That is what I have done with both my Routers. One is in bridge mode to the other, and both have the wireless function turned off, so that others cannot log on to them per WLAN (or try to).
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
From: there...no..there..... Insane since: May 2001
posted 03-15-2008 15:31
sounds like you've had a time this week. bummer. I like it when people rant about their issues here. Makes me feel so less alone
I could go on all day about the crap that I have to put up with on a day to day basis. But this is warjournal's rant.
So I've seen a lot of reference here that uses "hubs" in place of "router". If I'm not mistaken, there is a big difference between a router and a hub. Hub are just bridges from the router. A router with use NAT and usually have a firewall of sorts built into it as well as hand out IP addresses for the LAN, masking the WAN IP address. A "hub" doesn't do this. It's more of an "expander" of ports for the router (in it's most simplest of ways).
From my experience, a hub is more like "router lite"
Before the days of my wireless router and broadband connections, my hub was the necessary stepping stone between computers. It did more than just allow expansion, it also facilitated the actual network communication between machines and handed out IP addresses...
Wifi won't be my problem soon. Networking and hardware isn't really my bag, but I will learn if I really have to. I'll avoid it, but I'll do it. ~wipes sweat from brow~
Hubs and routers. We got lucky, apparently. Our old hub was working like a router. Flux capacitor and quantum mechanics type stuff. One of the techs that my woman talked to was completely baffled that our hub was working for us the way that it was.
I honestly don't know the exact differences between a hub and a router. I guess a hub is more of a switcher of sorts. "You can have the connection. Okay, I'm giving the connection to someone else for a few minutes." Something like that. Or is a switcher an entirely different piece of hardware?
Turns out that my old machine decided to die. Went to wax and restore it and the HD just died. It's like it knew that I wouldn't be taking care of it anymore and decided that it wasn't worth working for anybody else. More than a few good years of mutual, loving service. Brings a tear to my eye.
Back in the day at the one office that Woman worked in, I used to chat with the CSRs and TSRs. I've heard some gnarly ones. I have enough dealing with family - I can't imagine dealing with strangers over the phone for a living. The funny thing is that some of the CSRs weren't exactly the brightest.
Me: What is the FTP server address? You guys changed it again.
CSR: Are you using Outlook?
Me: Huh?
CSR: What?
Me: What's the FTP?
CSR: Are you using Outlook Express?
Me: F T P -- what's the FTP address?!
CSR: Do you need the smtp or the pop3?
Me: OMGNO! FTfreakingP!
I'm gonna go get some sunshine. Fresh air suddenly sounds good.
EDIT: answering DL-44. A bit of info on technical terms (though I'm a bit rusty, and would welcome clarification). Seems the info. might be pertinent to WJ's post too, though.
There's quite a difference between them. There are passive hubs, switching hubs, and manageable hubs. There are also routers. The difference between a passive hub and a switching hub is as great as the difference between a switching hub and a router.
A passive hub is basically a component of a network allowing the dumb duplication of packets from one network port to its other ports. A passive hub simply allows network traffic to flow through it; effectively a bunch of network ports wired to each other. A powered hub is like a passive hub that 'amplifies' packets over longer distances; a powered hub can be used when cable runs are just too long for reliable connection between computers or network devices (which is about 100m for Cat5 cables). It is still, essentially, a passive hub.
A switching hub keeps the term 'hub' despite being a more advanced hybrid device with internal 'lookup tables'; it keeps tabs on the MAC address of attached devices, and selectively forwards data packets to intended recipients. Whereas passive/powered Hubs divide bandwidth regardless of throughput (ten machines will experience one tenth of overall bandwidth even if demands on the network are minimal), passively duplicating all received data to all other network ports, a switch forwards data to the most appropriate port so that each machine may communicate up to the maximum bandwidth of the network (or at the bandwidth of the slowest computer's interface).
A manageable hub allows basic routing of packets between specific ports, and includes traffic monitoring and filtering facilities. Technically, it is a switching hub with configurable rules.
A router is like a manageable hub with knobs on, but the term 'router' stems from its function as a connectivity medium between different networks. High-end routers (multiprotocal routers) are highly specialised computers (usually with multiple processors) used in high-end networks to filter and route data between various networks and protocols. They connect more than one type of network to another at a specific protocol layer and facilitate communication between them.
At home, or in the office, the item you call a router is more technically termed a 'residential gateway', allowing the interconnectivity of your LAN (local area network) to the internet (WAN; wide-area network) on the Internet Protocol (IP). It is more like a manageable hub built for specific networks than an actual router, but the term is not entirely incorrect. A residential gateway uses NAT (network address translation) rather than truly 'routing', but utilises routing tables to determine where traffic should be sent on the LAN.
At home I have a cable 'modem' (as it does no MOdulation or DEModulation, this term is technically incorrect) that simply allows IP connectivity between the WAN (ie- internet) and a network device. It doesn't distribute IP addresses, so I use a residential gateway (ie- wireless router) between the cable modem and my home computers. The residential gateway acts as my DHCP server, home firewall, and router (between wireless and wired LAN, and the internet). I have a switching hub in my room (different floor) so that I can connect more than one computer in my room (ie- my PC, and an old laptop I use for network-access storage and as a media server).
Without my residential gateway, the cable modem would only be any good for connecting one computer. That computer would have to provide some sort of internet connection sharing service (essentially, routing software) before any other computer could also connect to the internet. It would be slow and inefficient because all network traffic would have to pass through the computer, which would have to be powered all the time.
Without this, and with the cable modem connected directly to a switch, only one machine would have access to the internet at any time - the first connected. My wireless router is a very essential part of my network, and is a very effective firewall between my wireless/wired LAN and the internet.
With this in mind, technically, a residential gateway or manageable hub is more like a 'router lite' - a residential gateway has basic routing functionality, incorporating a switching hub and inter-network connectivity.
Addendum: the closest to a 'true' router in home or office network today would be a gateway that supports both IPv4 and IPv6 protocols.
I would love to think that was interesting information, but I make that mistake a lot...
From: Happy Hunting Grounds... Insane since: Mar 2001
posted 03-16-2008 22:47
Yes, there is a big difference between a Hub and a Router (as WH as eloquently described).
My use of the word "hub" here was meant generically - that is, to describe a cable connected Router with the WLAN turned off (Wireless Local Area Network).
I normally turn off the WLAN function of my WLAN Routers (and yes, there are Routers that do not incorporate the WLAN function into them, and they are full-functioning Routers as well). As I do not have any Wireless connecting devices, it is a mostly unneeded function. Occasionally it gets turned on for my daughter's Nintendo DS - she likes to connect online with Animal Crossing.
I then normally make sure the MAC filter is active (to keep out unwanted "visitors" from using my WLAN).
WebShaman | The keenest sorrow (and greatest truth) is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.
- Sophocles
Hyperbole: basically, with a manageable hub, I can use management software to configure specific ports, monitor network traffic, and diagnose problems - in a way, I have control of the traffic lights at each managed junction. A switching hub is autonomous.
I would always follow Webshaman's advice^. I use a laptop and PSPs wirelessly, as well as my (VoIP) smartphone, so I have them all registered with the MAC address filter. Even with all the right keys and network information, nobody can access the wireless network unless they manage to determine and clone one of my MAC addresses too, and they're about as likely to have all of that as a copy of my front door key. It's one more critical step in security.
Looks like we got a Network Hub by Linksys. 10/100 5-port or something. I don't think we can both be using the connection at the same time, but I haven't really checked. Woman did say the other day that she wasn't connected, but I haven't really paid much attention to it just yet.
Roxio's Drag-to-Disc... omg...
New machine with stuff pre-loaded. Boot and tons of stuff in the little icon tray thing running in the background. Turn this off, turn that off, blah blah blah. One of those things is Drag-to-Disc by Roxio.
So I finally get around to burning some files to DVD. Guess what? Blank DVDs are not being recognized. Fine. Boot and let Roxio stay on. Blanks still not being recognized. WTF?
After a few minutes, I find Enable Drag-to-Disc for this Drive. Turn that on. Blanks still not being recognized. After more looking around, I find Enable Drag-to-Disc in the Roxio software. Fine, turn that on, too.
So, hardware and software both have to be enabled. Whatever. But the blanks are being recognized and files are being prepared for burning. Finally.
Get the files copied/cached... and I'm stuck again. Where's the 'Write these files to DVD' button? Non-existant. Nothing found anywhere at all. Not in the running software or in the Help files. Burn pls? Denied!
Ugh.
Alright, time to take a break. Eject the DVD and go do something else for a bit. Like laundry. Chase the cats around. Something.
Huh? When I ejected the blank DVD, another dialog popped up. 'How would you like to eject this DVD?' Options for keeping the DVD open or closing it. Why not? I choose Close the DVD for giggles and it starts to burn.
'Preparing to eject the DVD. This may from 1 to 15 minutes.'
WTF? Seriously - WTF?!
In order to burn the files, you have to eject the DVD.
: kick : stomp : punch : bite : gnash :
Who was the brainiac behind this decision?! OMGNOGTFO my base!!
The little one got a set of alphabet magnets last Christmas. The other day I noticed that someone spelled BUT WHY? on the 'frig with said magnets.
edit:
Figured it out. When you use Drag-to-Disc, it burns the files as they are copied. When you eject, it does the lead-out if you want to close the disc. Wow.
Okay, this is ridiculous. It has been a bit, but this is really getting on my nerves.
But first, we did get the router thing sorted out. We did get another router with wireless capabilities. When Woman installed it, she turned off wireless in the software. Taken care of. However, it took her 3 hours to un-install the previous router. How hard can it be to find and un-install a piece of hardware? In a word: Vista.
I seriously hate having to use her machine for anything. S l o w a s s l o w c a n b e. The other day I hit the thing and found out that she has 60+ processes running on a cold boot. I don't know how much longer I can resist waxing her machine.
I have been using her machine lately. Why? Mine brand spanking new one likes to crash. BSOD. I get two different flavors and they both point to hardware incompatibility. FFS! On a new, factory machine?! WTF? Seriously...
So the other day I wiggled her mouse to bring it out of Stand By. Guess what? BSOD with iTunes. It was one of the hardware incompatibility BSODs that I was familiar with.
Aaargh!
At times like these I can't wait for No Pants Day.
In stark contrast, I have XP and Vista dual-booting on both my laptop and my desktop; the laptop is an early Toshiba P100, and the desktop is my own Frankensteinian hodge-podge. I haven't had any problems with either at any time. Sure, my DVB-T dongle didn't have decent Vista drivers the last time I checked (I should dust that off and have another go, methinks), and gaming performance is a good 20-30% down in Vista, but they've both been as good as gold since Vista was installed.
The most bizarre issue I've had relating to Vista was in fact while I was downgrading a Sony Vaio to XP. Unbelievably, most of the laptop's hardware didn't have XP drivers because the laptop was designed for Vista. I had to shoe-horn various hacked drivers into place.
Beyond that, I've had a remarkably easy time with Vista.
Of course, I'm like you WJ, in that I hate having anything but the most crucial services and processes on boot. In my case, it's all about frames-per-second!
Things have been going kind of smooth lately. For example, shut everything down when I use OpenGl just in case it crashes. Kind of sucks because I usually have my machine doing some number crunching of some sort in the background.
Today I learned a big lesson in burning DVDs. Nothing I didn't already know, but today seriously confirmed it.
Roxio's Drag-to-Disc. Figured I would give it a shot and maybe learn to live with it. Someone who shall remain nameless bought me a bundle of cheap blank DVDs. Fine. Try a few out and they work.
Then I start having problems with the cheap DVDs. Taking forever to spin up, other computers can't read them, and even some crashing. I got locked up damn hard in some sort of a loop. Just a mouse, no icons, and 0% CPU usage. WTF?
Warm boot, cold boot, try again. More of the same. Matter of fact, suddenly I can't even lead-out.
Buy some non-cheap Memorex DVDs and try again. Same. I even tossed some files across the LAN to Woman's machine and burned using Vista's drag-n-drop method. More bad. No idea why this didn't work, but I might have to do some more test burning on her machine. If Vista on her machine is choking on burning DVDs, this could be bad.
I start thinking bad thoughts about violent ways of putting in my old Sony DVD RW. Never had a single problem with it.
Wait... my old Sony came with Nero OEM StartSmart.
Install Nero StartSmart, warm boot, and burn a test DVD.
OMG it worked in spades. Burned a DVD on my machine in 1/2 the time as Roxio and no problems reading the DVD on either machine. Not only can both machines read Nero burned DVDs, but they read a ton faster than the Roxio burned DVDs - figure that one out.
Nero seriously rocks, but we knew that already, right?
Heeeellllooo, Neroooo! <-- Yakko and Wakko reference
Good bye, Roxio. You are so GTFO.
I'm currently in an extended battle with PC-cillian. I keep telling it not to do things, and it insists on doing them anyways. Loading a huge project into Photoshop? Oh, PC-cillian decided to check for updates and start a scan. I don't know enough about PC-cillian to uninstall it just yet. It could take a few things with it that I might want to keep.
As bad as it sounds, threads like this make me smile
I'm reminded that I'm not the only one. I haven't had to battle with Vista yet (avoiding it like the plague to be honest), but new machines take learning and they are all unique and have their own personalities. At work I have four nearly identical machines (actually three are identical), and they each have their own unique quirks. At home I think I have my newest machine (about 18 months old) finally beat into submission.
Computer science is still awfully far from being "science."
--
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
posted 03-14-2008 11:50
