Now, there is one big factor to consider besides the drive spin speed: The newer 700GB drives are more than twice as big as my older 300GB drives, which means their data is about twice as dense. Therefore, they should be able to read data about twice as quickly, if the RPMs were equal.

First, the older, 15k drives:

The average read speed of 174 MB/sec is very respectable, but not astounding given the cost. It’s a RAID 0 array, which means my computer is reading from two disks simultaneously and in parallel, so it’s probably about twice the rate of an individual drive. My stand-alone and much less expensive ST31500341AS 1.5TB 7500RPM drive averages about 100 MB/sec.

Next, here’s the performance of two 7500RPM drives in a RAID 0 array:

They’re about 15% faster than the 15k drives, averaging almost 200 MB/sec. The slower rotational speed decreases their performance, but the higher density increases it.

They lose in Access Time, however. If the Transfer Rate (in MB/sec) is how long it takes you to read a book, the Access Time is how long it takes you to find the book on the shelf. If you were racing someone with a faster Transfer Rate and a slower Access Time, you would win any time you had to read a small book, and lose any time you had to read a big book. Therefore, the bigger, lower RPM drives are better at reading large blocks of data, while the smaller, higher RPM drives are better at reading small, random blocks of data.

As you can see from the HD Tune screenshots, the 15k array has an Access Time more than twice as fast as the 7500RPM array. This makes sense, because, access time is determined by how long it takes the drive to spin around to the requested section of the disk (disks always spin in one direction, and don’t stop while they’re in use). On average, it’s going to have to spin about half-way around to find the next random piece of data. That should only take 2ms on the 15k RPM drives, or 4ms on the 7500RPM drives. However, the drive head also has to move in toward the center of the disk or out towards the outer edge of the edge, and then wait for the disk to spin to the right spot, which can take longer.

Individual disks not in a RAID 0 array would have a Transfer Rate of about half the speed. However, individual disks not in a RAID 0 array would have about the same Access Time.

So, I made the 15k RPM array my system drive, because system files tend to be a lot of random access. I’m also using it for my temporary/scratch files, virtual machines, and Lightroom Catalog, because they are limited mostly by access time. I use the 7500 RPM array to store my photos, because they’re large, contiguous files that will benefit from a higher Transfer Rate more than a higher Access Time.

The Burst Rate is just the maximum speed of the interface. Basically, that’s how fast the drive could transfer something to the computer if it were already cached on the drive itself. Clearly the newer RAID array has better caching built-in, but that probably won’t make a huge impact on my performance, because Windows will be doing higher-level caching–I have plenty of RAM.

Here is more information about understanding hard drive performance.

Hello,
I hate to bother you but I have been reading on the internet about the multi-screen topics you write about. If you have time to answer my question – I would greatly appreciate it.
I have been assigned what seems to be an impossible project – and given almost nothing as a budget.
My company want me to create a 3 TV set visual in our business.
I see where you write about similar set-ups – I had hoped you can give me some direction.
This is ULTIMATELY what I would like to make happen.
We have a computer that sits there and has little other purpose.
I would like to use this computer to drive 3 modern TV sets (which have perhaps VGA inputs). I see some links you provide to companies that make video splitting devices – but we would need the model that costs almost 2 thousand – which is my entire budget – so this won’t work. Anyway – I am looking for a cheap way to connect 3 TV sets to a computer AND have the computer to run 3 separate programs which will feed these 3 separate TV sets. I may be able to get this down to 2 TV’s – but 3 is the ultimate goal.
What have you seen or read about that is cheap that may be able to do what I need? I really would appreciate any advice you have on the subject.

And my answer:

Hiya, Scott.
For hardware, just get a video adapter that supports three screens. Here are several:

http://www.multi-monitors.com/SUPER_PC_Dual_Monitor_Video_Cards_Multi_Screen_Graphics_s/1914.htm

You have lots of options, but this seems to be the cheapest at $250: ATI FirePro 2450 Multi-View 512 MB PCI-Express Video Card

So, swap out your existing video card with that one (assuming you have PCI-Express), and use whatever adapter cables you might need to connect to your TVs. Then, just configure Windows for use with multiple monitors.

Are you playing independent video on all three monitors? If so, did you find software to do that, or do you need a hand?

Hi Tony, This is totally random, but I stumbled onto an article you wrote for a Microsoft blog like six years ago about how to run multiple monitors off of a laptop. Are you aware of any easier solutions available since that article came out? I bought this thing below, but it only allows for two monitors to display the same thing, rather than spreading the desktop across three screens (which is what I’d like to do.)

http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=3521446

And my reply:

At the time I wrote my article, USB video cards only supported resolutions up to 1280×1024, which was too low for a decently-sized external monitor. They’ve gotten better since:

http://www.coolgear.com/usbgear/USB-Video-Card.html

Here’s a well reviewed adapter that supports 1600×1200, which is good for most non-widescreen monitors up to 21″:

http://www.amazon.com/EVGA-100-U2-UV16-A1-Supporting-1600×1200-Resolution/dp/B00191GZ8U/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1279567417&sr=8-8

If you need a widescreen resolution, this might work better for you:

http://www.amazon.com/Plugable-Adapter-Multiple-Displays-2048×1152/dp/B0038P1TP4/ref=sr_1_4?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1279567600&sr=1-4

Well, check the resolution of your monitors, then shop around for “usb video adapter”, “usb video card”, or “usb display adapter” and let me know what you find. Good luck!

A reader dropped a comment onto another page with a question that I’ve asked myself many times…

I wonder if you can help with this perhaps related problem. Running Windows Vista, it reports the hard drive has only 58 MB of free space. Adding up the folder sizes as shown in the properties window for each folder in Windows Explorer (including hidden folders), indicates that there are hundreds of GB of unused space.
When the limit is reached and there is no space left, by Windows reporting, no files can be saved.
It seems obvious that Windows’ reporting is faulty, but as it stops the saving of files, it cannot be ignored.
Any solution / suggestions?

Unfortunately, it’s not likely that Windows is simply lieing to you. More likely is that your technique of evaluating the disk space used by each folder is flawed. However, just to make sure Windows isn’t lieing, you can run a checkdisk at an administrative command prompt by following these steps (after the jump):

1. Click Start and type cmd.
2. Right-click cmd.exe and then click Run As Administrator.
3. Type chkdsk C: /f /r and then press Enter. I’m assuming the free disk space problem is on your C:\ drive, but you can check any disk this way.
4. When prompted, type Y and press Enter.
5. Restart your computer and be patient while Windows scans your disk.

After you restart your computer, check your free disk space again. If your free disk space still isn’t where you expect it, then it really is being used by something. First, use the Windows Disk Cleanup Wizard to remove unnecessary files.

The trick is finding the files and folders that are using the space. Windows isn’t especially good at this, but there are many free tools that are good at it. My favorite is the free and tiny Scanner disk space usage analysis tool. Download and run the .exe file–no install necessary–and then examine the radial chart to find the folders using the most space. Hover your cursor over the bigger sections of the diagram to find the folders using up lots of space. If you don’t expect that folder to use that space, right-click the section and then click Open. Scanner opens an Explorer window to show you the contents. As you can see from this screenshot, my Shared Virtual Machines folder is using 17 GB–a surprise to me, since I don’t use that folder to store virtual machines anymore.

I managed to clear up about 40GB of unneeded files, postponing the purchase of more hard disks by another couple of months…

I bought a $700 64GB WiFi iPad, and it arrived a bit more than a week ago. Yet, I still feel like I’m waiting for my iPad to arrive.

I was promised an iPad that would revolutionize how I read magazines and books. It would bring the amazing Apple App Store experience to a bigger screen. It would serve my Web browsing needs at home and be my portable media player/game system on the road.

The iPad doesn’t do any of these things well, at least right now. Some examples:

• I needed directions to the Bronx Zoo from my house. I Googled Bronx Zoo, found the address, and pressed Google Maps to open it in Google Maps. With another press, the iPad routed from my current location to the zoo. Perfect. Now, I needed to print the directions. My $700 iPad can’t print. So, I had to repeat the process from a real computer.
• I know everyone complains about it, but the iPad doesn’t support Flash. Two of my websites use Flash extensively (northrupphotography.com and northrup.org). Flash is everywhere, and while I can get by without it when I need to look up something quick, you definitely need Flash if you want to casually browse and enjoy the Web.
• At least there are the apps, right? I immediately opened the App Store to download the dozens of Apps I have on my iPhone. They’re just not there. Very few designed-for-iPad apps are available now, and they cost far too much. Plants vs. Zombies for the iPhone is fun and costs $3. It’s exactly the same on the iPad (but bigger) and it costs $10. Turns out, I’m willing to blow $3 on a dumb game, but $10 seems like way too much. Plus, when I’m stuck waiting in line, I can grab my iPhone and keep myself occupied, or toss it to the kid to keep her busy. The iPad is too big to carry everywhere, and why would I play a game on it at home when I have a real computer and an XBox, attached to much better screens?
• eBooks and magazines just aren’t ready yet. The formatting is terrible (in one book, literally unreadable because spaces and linebreaks were lost). Where are the gorgeous interactive magazines I saw in the previews? Zinio seems to be the only real option now, and all they do is show you scans of magazines, which means no searching, formatting not designed for the iPad (you have to pinch and drag individual pages around to see them full-size), and very little interactivity. USA Today and the Wall Street Journal have apps designed for the iPad, but they’re less functional and dynamic than their websites.
• The tablet format is clumsy. If I try and hold it like a book to read, my arms get tired after a few minutes because it’s too heavy. I can’t rest it on my lap like a laptop because the screen lays flat. If I want to use it as a media player on an airplane, I’d have to bring a stand to hold it up, which brings me to my next point…
• Media is a pain to copy over, because the iPad supports a very limited number of formats. So, I can’t simply copy them over. I tried converting some videos to a supported format, and it took a long time–and then iTunes refused to copy them to the iPad, because I guess I got the format wrong. iTunes could help out here by doing the conversion for me, but I suspect they want me to buy from their limited number of content suppliers.
• I use Google Reader to keep up with about a dozen different websites. Open the page on the iPad, though, and I get the mobile version of the page which doesn’t show any pictures until you click the individual items. Many of the sites I read are photography related, so this ruins them.

I really didn’t approach the iPad as a cynic–I bought into their vision of the future of publishing. The future just isn’t here, yet. I’ll check back with you in six months, but right now, I urge you not to buy an iPad. Instead, grab a Windows-based netbook, or hold out for one of the upcoming Windows-based touchscreen tablets. At least you’ll be able to use Flash.

In the interest of full disclosure, I’ve published many books for Microsoft Press, and I’m quite sure that Microsoft wants to compete with the iPad. I’m not being compensated in any way for slamming the iPad, though. I laid out $700 because I believed in it.

BTW, a few positive points:

• The battery life on the iPad really is great.
• The screen is awesome. I don’t buy into the idea that only eInk is suitable for reading. After all, so many of us stare at LCD screens all day, anyway. I have a Kindle, too, and I’d rather read something on the color iPad.
• My kid loves the iPad, even though she can’t play her games at the PBS Kids or Nickelodeon websites because they need Flash. I did download a couple of games for her, and they kept her occupied during a road trip. BTW, she’s six, and the first thing she said when she saw it was, “It’s a big iPod!” She’s right, too–it’s a big, heavy, non-portable iPod.

Today my friend Jeff hit me up with an interesting question. His quad-core HP DL585 is supposed to operate at 3.4 GHz, but Performance Monitor was showing it running at 82% of the maximum frequency–2.8 GHz.

My first thought was that the difference was the metric AMD uses to make it easier to compare their processors to Intels higher-frequency chips–and I was really wrong. When I investigated the Performance Monitor counters Jeff was looking at, I discovered a counter I hadn’t used before: Processor Performance\% of Maximum Frequency, as shown above.

This counter shows the current frequency of the processor. Modern processors can slow themselves down a bit to save power when they’re not doing anything high-priority. A few years back, it was just mobile processors that did this. Today, it’s pervasive–mobile computers, desktops, and servers scale back frequency when they’re not busy.

As shown here, you can configure the minimum and maximum processor states from the Power Options dialog box (Control Panel\Hardware And Sound\Power Options\Change Plan Settings):

You might also be able to configure settings from your computer’s BIOS/CMOS.

hello, i recently purchased windows 7 for my father because of all the problems he has had with vista, everything is fine with the package only windows media player now doesnt recognise that we have a cd/dvd burner drive built in to our laptop. it simply says connect a burner and restart, please could you offer some advice or help please

I fielded a question like this recently for a desktop computer. Her problem could have been either hardware- or driver-related, but in your case, since you just upgraded, I’m certain it’s driver related.

Windows 7 includes drivers for most computer hardware. However, I’ve upgraded many computers from Vista to 7, and most of them are missing at least one driver. However, your computer manufacturer has probably created drivers for you.

So, go to your computer manufacturer’s website (hp.com for HP, dell.com for Dell, etc) and find the Support or Downloads section. Look up your specific model of computer, and download and install any Windows 7 drivers. Try to access the CD/DVD after you restart your computer.

If you’re still having problems, open Device Manager:

Click Start, type devmgmt.msc, and press Enter.

Do any devices show with a yellow exclamation icon? That means those drivers have a problem. Without more information I can’t point you to the specific drivers. Instead, try Googling your computer model and the device, such as “Dell T3400 DVD driver”.

Let me know how it turns out. Good luck!

Some of the most common questions I get from readers involve the differences between 32-bit and 64-bit Windows Vista or Windows 7. Here are some articles I wrote in the past on this topic:

• Should I install 32-bit or 64-bit Windows Vista?

• Maximum Memory in 32-bit Windows Vista

• 32-Bit Vista Memory Limits

• Can I run 32-bit programs in 64-bit Windows Vista

In a nutshell, 32-bit Windows can only address 4GB (or less) memory. In the past, I recommended using 32-bit Windows even though 64-bit Windows 7 can address 8GB (in Home Basic), 16GB (in Home Premium), or 192GB (in Enterprise, Business, or Ultimate). The reason: you couldn’t always get drivers for 64-bit Windows.

Good news–in the years since Windows Vista was released, Microsoft has convinced hardware vendors to produce 64-bit drivers for everything. So, unless you have some really old hardware that you’re not willing to upgrade, you shouldn’t have a problem finding 64-bit drivers.

So, I now officially recommend using 64-bit Windows Vista or Windows 7 if you have 2GB or more RAM in your computer.

Unfortunately, you can’t just upgrade. You’ll need to backup all your files, install 64-bit Windows, and then restore all your files. Then, you’ll need to re-install all your applications.

Hi, Sandy. Does the CD drive appear in Explorer? For example, if you open My Computer from the Start menu, do you see it there?

Yes, it says : local disk c. You know, this is weird, but today it worked for long enough to burn one disk, then it did the same thing again. when i go to the media player, and set up a burn list, above my playlist where it should say “insert a blank disk”, it says “please plug in a burner, then restart the player to continue.” I have had many problems before, but i have never seen this.I tried going to the microsoft help sites, but they don’t seem to know what i am talking about.Thank you for your response.–sandy

Sandy, it sounds like your CD drive is flaky. That’s a technical term that means there’s probably a loose cable or a short circuit. Do this:

1. If it’s a laptop, remove and re-insert the CD drive (assuming you can). If it’s a desktop, shut down Windows, unplug it, and open the case. Remove the cables from the back of the CD/DVD drive, and then reconnect them. Follow those cables to the motherboard, unplug them, and then plug them back in.

2. Start Windows up. Is your CD/DVD drive visible from My Computer? If so, keep your fingers crossed that it stays that way. Problem solved.

3. If your CD/DVD drive isn’t visible, or if it disappears again, it might be a driver problem. Presumably your CD/DVD drive worked in the past, so maybe we can go back to an earlier version of your driver. Click Start, type devmgmt.msc, and then press Enter.

Device Manager appears.

4. Expand DVD/CD-ROM drives. Right-click your drive and then click Properties (as shown below).

5. On the Driver tab, click Roll Back Driver (as shown below, if it’s available).

6. Follow the prompts that appear, and restart your computer if required.

If your CD works now, great. If not, you probably have failed hardware. Don’t worry, they’re cheap. You can get them any most computer electronic stores, or order one on Amazon–like this USB drive for $20. You won’t even have to re-open your computer case to install it.

Let me know how it goes!

…and Sandi did let me know:

i just wanted to let you know that the actions you prefered me to take, worked. and i also wanted to tell thank you!!! you were a real big help. i wrote down the web addy that you gave me, just in case it happens again. again, thank you!!!

If your computer seems slow and you’ve already upgraded your memory (say, to 2GB or higher), your next step might be to upgrade the hard disk. First, check out your current hard disk’s performance using HD Tune. Write down the average transfer rate and access times so you’ll know how much better your new disk is. If you’re running Windows Vista or Windows 7, you can use the Windows Experience Index to get a rough estimate of your disk speed.

Now, figure out what type of disk you want to buy. Write down your choices as you go:

• Internal or external. If you want to improve system performance, you’ll need to replace your system disk, which means you’ll want to buy an internal drive. They’re more work to install, but they’re cheaper and faster. If you just want to add a second disk for backup or more capacity, go external.
• Physical size. If you have a laptop, you probably need a 2.5 inch drive. If you have a desktop, you’ll want a 3.5 inch drive.
• Interface. Nowadays, most computers use Serial ATA (SATA). If you want an external drive (which will save you from having to open your computer’s case), use external Serial ATA (eSATA) if your computer has it. If not, use Firewire (if you have it). As a last resort, you can use the USB interface. Your disk will be slow, though. If you choose Firewire (IEEE 1394) or USB, buy a disk with low RPMs, because you’ll save money and electricity, and the performance difference won’t much matter. This picture shows internal SATA (in red) and external SATA (in black):

Now that you’ve written down your choices, do a search at Amazon.com or TigerDirect.com. For example, you could search for “3.5 inch external serial ata” or “2.5 inch internal serial ata”. You’ll see many different models, with varying speeds and capacities. Consider these points:

• Speed. For conventional drives, the most important metric is revolutions per minute (RPM). Typically disks come in 4500, 5400, 7200, and 10000 RPMs. Faster is better, but uses more power.
• Capacity. Bigger is better because you can store more stuff, of course. For conventional drives, bigger drives also improve performance–usually. For example, if you compare two 7200 RPM drives at 500GB and 1.5TB, the larger drive will probably be faster. You always need more disk space, so buy the biggest drive you can.
• Solid-state or conventional. Super-expensive solid-state drives use flash memory instead of rotating magnetic media like a conventional disk. As I described here, they’re each fast in their own way. Conventional disks are still the best value for most people. Get a solid-state disk only if you’re a mobile user and you want to improve battery life or need durability (and you don’t mind Windows being a bit slower).

Here are some factors to ignore:

• Brand. For home users, this doesn’t much matter. You’ll find people with horror stories about every brand of disk. So, disregard it.
• Throughput. Drive manufacturers always list the maximum theoretical throughput of the disk, but it has no bearing on the drive’s actual performance. So, just disregard it.

Hard disks sometimes attempt to distinguish themselves based on power usage, noise level, reliability, and warranty. If power usage and noise level are important to you, find a disk that specializes in those areas. I generally dismiss reliability claims, because for home use, it doesn’t make much of a difference. Hard disk manufacturers have definitely cranked out some unreliable drives, but there’s no good way to know if a current model is going to be reliable. Nowadays, most drives are plenty reliable, but regardless, you’ll need an extra disk to make backups. I dismiss warranty, too, because by the time the hard disk dies, newer, better disks will be available for less, anyway.

Checklist

Wait, don’t click buy yet! Double-check these things:

• Does your computer support the interface?
• Do you have a cable to connect the hard disk?
• If the hard disk is internal, does your computer have an extra power connector? If not, buy a Y-adapter/power splitter.
• If the hard disk is internal, do you have room in your computer to store it? if the storage big is bigger than 3.5″, be sure your disk includes mounting rails. OK, I admit it–my computer has a non-mounted hard disk floating free inside the case, but that’s a bad idea.
• How are you going to back it up? If it’s worth saving, it’s worth backing up. Consider buying two drives so you know you have enough space for backups.

That’s a screenshot from my favorite free tool for testing hard disk performance–HD Tune (there’s a pro version you can buy, too). That’s from my Seagate Barracuda 7200 RPM 1.5 TB SATA drive backup drive.

The Blue Line–Transfer Rate

First, the blue line is the transfer rate. That’s the speed which the hard disk sends data to the computer when a big file is lined up nicely–defragmented, in other words. Notice that the line starts high (at 126 MB/sec) and drops (to about 57 MB/sec). That’s because the test moves from the outside of the drive to the inside. Disk drives are round, like a record, and so the outside spins faster (in inches/sec) from the inside.

Windows starts storing data on the outside of your disk, and works its way towards the center. That way, your files will be as fast as possible. The fact that the performance drops by 65% from the outside to the inside of the disk helps illustrate that disk performance is WAY better for files stored on the outside of the disk. It also shows one big reason why, as your disk fills up, it also slows down.

The Yellow Dots–Access Time

The yellow dots show random access time. That’s the time it takes for the disk to jump from one part of the drive to the next. In other words, that’s how long it takes to jump from the end of one file to the beginning of the next, or to jump between two segments of a fragmented file. The average access time for this disk is 13.5 ms–but lower would be better.

USB Flash Drive Performance

The previous graph shows typical performance from a hard disk, but USB flash drives behave very differently. They don’t have spinning platters–data is read by sending electrical signals. If you think they’ll be faster, you’re right. If you think they’ll be slower, you’re right.

As you can see, the transfer rate is WAY slower. My Seagate had an average transfer rate of 100 MB/sec, but my USB flash drive was at 16 MB/sec–about 6X slower. The access time is 0.8 ms, though–about 17X faster. So, USB flash drives are faster at random access and slower at sequential reads.

ReadyBoost uses this to improve the performance of Windows by caching files from the hard disk to a flash drive. If it would be faster to read it from the flash drive (like, if it’s a small segment of data that would need to be randomly accessed), it reads it from the flash drive. Otherwise, it takes advantage of the hard disks high sequential read performance.

Many new mobile computers ship with flash drives instead of conventional disk drives. In some ways, performance is better, and in other ways, performance is worse. The transfer rates of flash drives will increase over time, however, and Windows 7 includes some major improvements that speed up flash drives.

How to Get the Best Performance

I do a great deal of photo and video editing with my Canon EOS 5D Mark II–that’s 21 megapixel pictures and 1080P video–and a really fast disk makes things much more efficient. When I bought a new computer, I set it up with a very fast disk subsystem. Not the fastest in the world, mind, you, but a good bang for the buck. I chose two EXPENSIVE 15,000 RPM disks and put them in a RAID 0 array, which reads and writes to both disks at the same time. Here’s the performance I got:

Overall, that’s about twice as fast as my 1.5 TB drive (though I might have expected better…)

On Laptop Performance

So far, I’ve been discussing the disk performance of my desktop computer (a Dell Precision T3400). The main reason I bought a desktop was to get better disk performance–laptops tend to be really bad, owing to the use of small disks. Remember my lecture about how disks perform best at the outside edge of the platter? Well, smaller disks have smaller outside edges, so performance drops. Laptop disks also tend to be optimized to reduce power usage, so they spin at a slower RPM. Here’s the disk that shipped with my Dell D820:

Abysmal, right? The average transfer rate is 3X slower than the cheap Seagate drive I began this discussion with. All hope is not lost, however. It’s not too hard to upgrade a laptop hard disk–just backup to an external disk, swap drives, and then do restore to the new disk. I upgraded to a newer, faster, 500GB drive and got this performance:

The new disk doubled the average transfer rate (though the access time actually dropped a bit). It sped up the computer noticeably. So, if our laptop seems slow, upgrading the disk might be the right choice.

Got a fast or slow disk? Need some advice about hard disk performance? Tell me about it in the comments.

i have an old windows xp limited gb 60 or so. should i learn on this or get a different pc.so as to transfer from her camera
or how does she send them to walgreens for making copies etc. seems like an easier way and i would like to help her.ps what kind of camera for her would be best. middle beginer?

thanx for your time.

dave

do i need a pc with memory reader card?
Hiya, Dave. Good news–you don’t need a new computer. Your current computer should be fine for digital photography (though I do love the newest version of Windows, Windows 7).

I don’t know what type of camera you have, but most cameras can be connected to your computer using a standard USB cable. Check your camera for a USB port, as shown in the picture above.

Or, you can buy a USB memory card reader for your computer if it doesn’t have one built-in, like this one. But like I said, you probably just need to plug a USB cable into a camera and your computer–I bet you already have one.

For a middle-beginner camera recommendation, I’d recommend going to a Target/Wal-mart and finding cameras that are small enough to carry with you everywhere and that feel good in your hand. Write down several cameras’ model names, and then go to Amazon to search for reviews and find better prices. I’d push you towards either a Canon or a Nikon, because their accessories are so widely available and can be transferred to new cameras. There are just so many good models available that I can’t recommend a particular one.

Good luck!

I have a 1998 jaguar with a Harmon Karman (sp) stereo system with cassette and CD player.  I want to use my ipod so I purchased a cassette adapter.  It works great but my question is…my Ipod id digital music, is it still digital playing through my speakers with the cassette adapter?

(answer after the jump)

Hi, Kurtis. Anything played through the headphone jack is analog. To keep it digital, you’d have to play through the dock connector. Regardless, tapes are analog, so your cassette adapter would necessarily be analog.

Oh well, it’s always analog when it comes out of the speakers! If you’re happy with the sound, that’s good enough. :)

Our school is looking for a flip type video camera to be used in the classroom then downloaded onto a computer into Windows Movie Maker.  The cameras we have found so far have files that have to be converted to a .wmv file.  Do you know if there are any that produce a .wmv file so a conversion does not have to be done?  We are just trying to eliminate a step and make it easy to use in the classroom by students.

I did some research for you, and it confirmed my initial impression–right now there is not a video camera that records in WMV format. To record in WMV format, you’d have to connect a camera (such as a webcam) directly to a computer, and then record with the computer.

I know transcoding/converting to another video format is time-consuming–wish there was another way! You could consider using different video editing software, such as Adobe Premiere Elements, that can handle your recorded files in their native format.

When I plug the headphones into my iPhone, there’s no background noise–just perfect silence.

So, I went searching for a solution to the problem. Turns out, it’s not a software update or a configuration problem. I just have a cheap sound card. All sound cards introduce some level of noise (though my iPhone doesn’t seem to) and cheaper sound cards introduce more noise than better-quality sound cards.  Being a laptop, my computer has the sound card built into the motherboard, which makes it prone to this type of background noise.

If this were a desktop, I could simply add a better-quality sound card and plug my headphones or speakers into it. With a laptop/notebook/mobile computer, I need to add an external sound card or USB headphones (as described later). Check the reviews–some are better quality than others.

This problem also extended to recording. I regularly record voice-overs for instructional videos, and I had a seemingly incurable problem with background noise. When I bought a digital microphone (which uses a USB connection rather than the mic-in port), the background noise disappeared. Because I wasn’t using the analog microphone port on my laptop anymore, it wasn’t subject to the motherboard-induced background noise. The headset I bought also had headphones, and those headphones were immune to the background noise, too.

Moral of the story: if you hear noise when you plug a mic, headphones, or speakers into your computer, use a USB connection instead of the built-in analog connection.

The Tablet PC Input Panel didn’t go away, though. It’s the panel that slides out from the left side of the screen to allow you to use handwriting to enter text.

To disable it, follow these steps:

1. Click Start, and then click Control Panel.

2. Click Uninstall Programs.
3. In the left pane, click Turn Windows Features On Or Off.

4. Clear the Tablet PC Optional Components check box.

5. Click OK.

6. When prompted, click Restart Now and let your computer restart.

 I have been having problems using multiple monitors recently.  I hook
up to a projector as my second monitor.  It used to work just fine,
but suddenly not.  Now, when I connect my laptop, the monitor on my
laptop shows a blank desktop (as I would expect on monitor 2).  No
toolbars, no icons, nothing.  It is basically a paperweight.  The
second screen says “Computer 3″ in the upper right-hand corner
and “No signal.”  There apparently is no computer 2.  

I have tried to change the display settings on my computer.  It shows
monitor 1 as a generic PnP monitor and shows 2 as default monitor on
mobile intel …  It seems to me that the PnP would be the secondary
device that I plug in and not the primary.  I’m very confused.  I
don’t know if I should disable the driver and if so for which one?

I have a Gateway.  Can you help me?

Answer:

Hi, Beth. Try this:

1. Click Start, and then click Control Panel.

2. Under Appearance and Personalization, click Adjust screen resolution.

3. Click the monitor that you want to be the primary one (the monitor where your Start menu is), and then select the This is my main monitor checkbox.

4. Click Apply, make sure the settings are OK, and then click OK.

That’ll move your Start menu to the right display, but it’s still confusing to have a completely empty monitor. Ultramon can help with that–read this post for more information.

Hello Tony.

I came across your site looking for an answer to a question I have and you seem to be the man to ask. I am running Vista Ultimate 32-bit on my machine. All things being equal, when I run only 2GB of RAM I have a Windows Experience Base score of 5.0. Adding 2 more gigs of identical Ram dropped my WEI to 4.5. It seems adding the extra 2GB of RAM made my memory operations per second drop a half point. I read your article on Maximum Memory in 32-bit Windows (http://www.vistaclues.com/reader-question-maximum-memory-in-32-bit-windows-vista/) and the follow-ups but it doesn’t quite answer my question which is this; how come adding more RAM slows my PC rather than speed it up? Thank you for taking the time to read this.

Sincerely,

Jonathan H.

Answer:

I thought about this for a couple of days, and I don’t have an answer for you. I’ve had memory upgrades that increased the heat and power consumption of a laptop, which makes sense, because it needs to send electricity to an additional chip.

Some mother boards will actually increase your operations per second by distributing operations between the various memory chips. My guess is that the reduced operations/sec is a factor of your chipset.

I’ll put this question out to the readers–any idea what’s causing this problem? Please add a comment below.

I have docking station for my new Dell Latitude and I plugged in one monitor via VGA and the other DVI.  However, the VGA monitor remains blank, and I don’t see a third monitor in display settings.  Do I need to do something on my PC to make this additional monitor work?

Thanks!

Answer:

I saw this question as a comment to another post on using multiple monitors with a laptop. The answer is that the Dell laptops, like my Latitude D500, D600, and D820s, only support two displays at once. So, you can connect one external monitor and use it side-by-side with the laptop’s built-in LCD display. Or, you can use two external monitors and close your laptop’s lid. But you can’t keep your laptop open and use the built-in LCD display along with two external monitors.

If you want two external displays alongside the internal display, you’ll need to use a USB video adapter as this post described. The downside to that is that the resolution is pretty limited, and if you’re already using multiple monitors, you probably don’t want the low resolution. Otherwise, you can use a second computer, and run MaxiVista.

Hi

    I have just bought a laptop with Vista Home Premium installed.I asked my ISP Orang if they were happy with this and their Broadband Wireless package,they asked if it was 32megs.I couldn,t tell them,is it anf if it is maybe I am OK fot the net.Their full softwear comes int effect in June,I imagine that is for Vistas above 32megs

                                 Thanks

                                            Tom

Answer:

First, for readers who might not know, Orange is a broadband wireless ISP in the UK. Here are their current (as of the time of this writing) system requirements and comments on Vista:

A computer with:

• CD-Rom drive
• ethernet port
• Windows 98/98SE, 2000 or XP

not sure what you’ve got? Click here for help

Attention Windows Vistaâ„¢ customers
Your Orange broadband service can be used with Windows Vista however not all of our connection software is currently supported by Windows Vista. Don’t worry, we’re working on that and in the meantime we can still help you get connected. Just check out our online help (www.orange.co.uk/vista) section for all the information you’ll need to get started.

Here’s a summary of our current connectivity:

• Broadband Unlimited wired connection – Windows Vista compatible
• Broadband Unlimited wireless connection through the wireless card – installation CD not currently compatible but online help available
• Broadband Starter – installation CD not currently compatible but online help available
• Broadband Unlimited wireless connection through a 121g wireless adapter – installation CD not currently compatible but online help available.

Basically, you’re fine. I think they’re asking if you have 32 MB of RAM available, which seems to be their minimum for the stupid software that they want to install on your computer. If you’re running Vista, you have at least 512 MB. But it sounds like their software won’t run anyway, but you don’t need it.

Every ISP wants you to install some dumb software that adds toolbars to your Web browser, changes your home page, and sets up your e-mail. Maybe it makes life a little easier for people who don’t know how to setup their e-mail, but I hate that software. just read through their online help to setup your e-mail. You absolutely don’t need to install the ISP’s software to connect to their network; a network connection is just like any other network connection and Windows Vista supports wired and wireless networks by default (assuming your computer came with a network adapter). Just plug it in, reboot, follow their instructions to setup your e-mail, and you’re all set.