Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2010 March 4

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

March 4

Janes combat simulation WWII fighters game

Question moved from Talk:Microsoft Windows Help and Support Center. Astronaut (talk) 00:27, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

i have janes combat simulation ww11 fighters game for windows 95/98 and use to play when i had windows 98 now i have windows xp but can not seem to open the game. i have a geforce video card ,directx installed and other flight simulator game that work what should i do next. thanks john c — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.172.65.72 (talk) 02:42, 2 March 2010

Other people have had problems [1] - but - have you tried Windows compatability wizard - you can find it by typing that into the search box, and following the instructions. see [2] 87.102.67.84 (talk) 01:48, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Computer names?

What do you name your computers? Boring names (LAPTOP, DESKTOP1, PENTIUM), human names (JOHN, MARY), or something more interesting? 121.72.174.66 (talk) 09:00, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I've named my computers after renaissance artists ever since is switched to Apple. It seems fitting. In university, I got servers in one cluster named after crime authors, and clients after their characters (Doyle serving Holmes and Watson, Sayers serving Wimsey and Vane, Christie serving Marple and Poirot, Hammett serving Spade and Archer...). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 10:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I always name my computers "Windows" so that when I'm using other peoples wireless connections they will be less suspicious of seeing "Windows" in the connection dialog than "MyComputer557" or whatever. I give my hard drives boring names like "750GB-TVSHOWS" or "1TBFILMES" etc —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ditreaium (talk • contribs) 10:53, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I think mine's called "ADAMS LAPTOP", it rips me up inside every time I see the missing apostrophe, but them's the rules. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:43, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Mine have been named after fictional computers that went insane: wopr, hal-9000, and m5 so far. Next up is probably vger. I have a virtual machine that's called dax because it runs inside a host. In college, we had a cluster of workstations that were named after local drinking establishments. That annoyed some administrator, who insisted we rename them. I suggested giving them names like dot, dash, dash-dot, dot-dash, dash-dash, etc., for "clarity" when reading hostnames out loud. My proposal failed, and they were renamed after Simpsons characters instead. -- Coneslayer (talk) 12:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I name my computers after sitcom-characters. I have a PC which is "Frasier" and a Mac that's "Niles" (Niles seems more like a Mac than Fraiser), and an older computer I use as a media center hooked up to my TV named "Martin" (because he's old and likes TV). And my router is (surprise!) "Daphne", because she helps Frasier, Niles and Martin work together. She's the glue, so to speak. Belisarius (talk) 12:58, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Generally use my name plus some description related to the machine in question. My XPS M1330 is named "<name>1330", the Poweredge server 1600SC is named "<name>1600sc". When I worked on a joint British-French project, I proposed naming the English language machines after English victories over the French (eg. "Agincourt", "Trafalgar", "Waterloo") and the French language machines after French victories over the English (eg. "Hastings", "Bouvines", "Castillion") - the management team and the people actually installing the machines chose their own namimg scheme :-) Astronaut (talk) 13:27, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I used to call my boxes 'Gemini <number>', number being 1-5, increasing after upgrades. My newest machine, however, because Gemini was associated with a past girlfriend whom my current girlfriend loathes, is called Grom, which is Polish for thunder (see also GROM). My girlfriend's new machine, in turn, is Kwiatuszek, which in Polish means little flower (it's actually flower in the diminutive, the stem kwiat with the suffix -uszek denoting little, tiny, cute). Today she had actually changed her desktop wallpaper to an orchid. --Ouro (blah blah) 18:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Like "flowerette"? Belisarius (talk) 18:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

You could say that, although the Polish diminutive carries much more of the nice and cuddly than the suffix -ette, which is (at least to me) mostly used to denote that something is small. --Ouro (blah blah) 12:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm boring, I guess... I called my netbook THE NOTEPAD, (way before the iPad was announced). My non-network desktop has the default name, and my corporation uses the Hebrew Alphabet. Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 23:22, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm a sysadmin, and two jobs ago the machines were named for Simpsons characters; it was quite prophetic as MrBurns turned out to a bit belligerent. In my last job, the machines were named for Greek Gods. In my current job, the previous sysadmin tried to be organised with names like "despatch1", "sales1", etc but machines get moved around so we now have "sales5" being used for picking, et al. I'm naming the new machines with the company initials followed by a three digit number. My own machine has "localhost" as it's host name. 80.176.225.249 (talk) 23:27, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

As long as this is story-time, I can add one -- it seemed humorous 15 years ago. An engineering workgroup downstairs from us had workstations named after their own first names (bill, bob, etc). At some point, when a big network rearchitecture required them to join the rest of the corporate subdomains, they had to change their hostnames. After kicking and moaning and gnashing of teeth, this bunch of old curmudgeons came up with a naming convention that must have been approved only because there were no women on the IT staff in those days. The new names were "always", "today", "kotex", and other brand names of similar products ...

DaHorsesMouth (talk) 23:34, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

There's a huge literature on computer nomenclature. I heard a story once that the CIA named their servers after states, and their users after cities. So there would be elevator conversations where people would think states were collapsing when it was just the server. Shadowjams (talk) 11:45, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Is there also a huge literature on the handles adopted by computer users? —dasher bronto Tamfang (talk) 18:21, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I usually call mine Baby 'cause it's a short word. – One acquaintance had two computers named 'east' and 'west' in Elvish. – If I needed a series I might use Welleran, Soorenard, Mommolek, Rollory, Akanax, Iraine; or the sequence of hull materials mentioned in The Skylark of Space. —Tamfang (talk) 18:15, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

partition

Can I save a single partition to a disk image? How would you do this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kandorko (talk • contribs) 10:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

On what operating system? On Unix-like systems it's easy to do, you just use the dd command (though be careful, if you mix up your letters, it can possibly erase your partition). There's an example in the article. Also see the List of disk cloning software for similar software. Belisarius (talk) 12:47, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Average traffic

What is the average number of page views per person on Wikipedia in a normal day? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Olium jikki (talk • contribs) 11:06, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Go to Alexa and click on "Pageviews/user". It's approximately 4.22. --Brandon5485 00:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Image Privacy/Protection

Hi

I'm quite fond of a unique blend of pictures/photos and any other graphical type of stuff and because of that I like changing my desktop pic from day to day. One day I might have a muscle car the next time might be a nature pic; something abstract; photo of everyday life or even weird or funny signs. The point is I like to draw people's attention to things that they sometimes don't normally see on other pc's and I don't bother e-mailing it to people (except for a one girl... dont get ideas... I mean it!) not that I'm selfish it's just that everybody's got their thing and I like keeping mine, mine and I'll only show you if you're interrested.

Is there a way/are there ways that you can prevent other people from viewing your MY PICTURES folder or any other pics without having to lock your PC? -For fear of folks sending it to their pc's.

Thanks, NirocFX

41.193.16.234 (talk) 11:25, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, put your pics in a truecrypt volume. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Telijelly (talk • contribs) 14:02, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

You could just change the file permissions so that only you can access the directory, although if you have a single shared login this won't help you (and any administrator could override the permissions from either your machine or via the network anyway). ZX81 ^talk 15:00, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks guys

1. Ok then, how do I put my pics in a truecrypt volume?

2. And how do you change the file permissions?

Thanks NirocFX

41.193.16.234 (talk) 15:24, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

1. See our TrueCrypt article, or go directly to truecrypt.org. You'll have to install the TrueCrypt software. Then you can create a volume called an "encrypted file container". You use the TrueCrypt software to mount the encrypted file container as a new drive, so when you look at the "Computer" or "My Computer" window, you'll see a new drive called, perhaps, "E:". The E: drive is accessible just like any other drive is. Its contents are encrypted. If you want, you can tell the TrueCrypt software to unmount the drive if it hasn't been used for X minutes, or if the screen saver is launched. This would prevent people from being able to access the files. If they sat down at your computer while you were logged in, they could e-mail or FTP the encrypted file container anywhere; but nobody will be able to decrypt that file container or get anything out of it unless they guess your password.

However, you haven't been specific enough about your environment. Is this a family computer or a dorm room situation where your concern is that people will sit down at the running computer and access your data? The comprehensive way to fix that isn't to use TrueCrypt; it's just to hold down the Windows key on your keyboard and hit L to "lock" your computer so it goes back to the sign-in screen. If you are in a situation where you have to share a Windows login with someone, like in a family computer situation, then the TrueCrypt container is probably a good option for you.

2. You don't say what version of Windows you are using, but let's say it's Windows XP. You right-click "My Pictures", then choose "Properties", then click the Security tab, and then you can add specific users to the list of people with different rights to access the files; and you would turn off access to the accounts that you don't want to have access. However, this doesn't fix the situation where you're logged in, and you walk away for a minute, and someone else walks over and starts typing. Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:21, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Trajan:WinNT/Omega.D

HI. I'm not a computer wiz. I have what appears to be a new virus on my computer. I have 6 different scanning programs and yet still cannot remover this bug. It appears to freeze me out of screens so that i cannot continue and leaves the images on my screen. Perhaps you can help me learn how to truelly remove it from my computer. User:Schwarzjim Note: this question was originally created as a page in article space. I felt it would be more appropriate here, so have moved it on the questioner's behalf. I will leave a note on his/her talk page to that effect. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:34, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

It's obviously not a virus it's malware. There are many programs that can remove malware, but most "free" antivirus software doesn't because they want you to pay for that feature. Search google for malware removal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Telijelly (talk • contribs) 14:01, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not "obviously" malware, but it might be. Nikkimaria, what version of Windows are you using, and can you give us an example of what applications you're talking about? I see the behavior you are describing under Windows XP when an application has crashed. The application doesn't redraw its contents after you move a window on top of the crashed app's window. Comet Tuttle (talk) 15:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Oops, I noticed the "Trajan:WinNT/Omega.D" section header after writing the above. Could you let us know which virus scanners you used, exactly? And, if you remember, what messages did they report? Comet Tuttle (talk) 17:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Schwarzjim asked the question; Nikkimaria just moved it here from article space. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 17:38, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Computer problem

Over the last two weeks my computer has been freezing and sometimes won't even turn on. it will restart and take forever to turn on. Sometimes i'll be on youtube and the computer will freeze and the sound on whatever video i'm watching will sound similiar to a CD skipping. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gordanginton (talk • contribs) 13:44, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

What kind of computer? Are you running Microsoft Windows? What version? What web browser are you using, and what version number? (The latter is found in the Help menu.) Have you run any antivirus software yet? Comet Tuttle (talk) 15:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

And to cover the bases, are you using more than one form of anti-virus? One virus scanner and one malware scanner is usually okay, but two virus scanners can wreak havoc on a machine as they start scanning each other incessantly. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 15:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Hard drives

Will hard drives ever reach a point where they simply cant make them any bigger? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harodeuam (talk • contribs) 14:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Although you're asking for a prediction (which the reference desks doesn't do), I personally doubt they'll ever run into a limit as the capacity has continued to increase over the last 50 years and there's no sign that it's close to stopping either. Although it's only starting to happen at the moment, the existing "platter" technology is slowly switching over to using solid state drives and with these types of drives capacity increase should be a lot simpler. The costs for SSD drives are coming down all the time, the capactity is increasing too and the technology is constantly improving so it's only a matter of time before they become the norm. ZX81 ^talk 14:57, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Similar the the previous answer, I'd say that each technology will reach a certain limit, then we will move on to a new technology. However, there might actually be an absolute limit, when the size of each bit gets so small that quantum uncertainty makes it unreliable. Of course, you could always increase the total memory by making the device bigger, instead of making each bit smaller, but that has it's limits, too. We've had computers the size of a house before, so I suppose we could do that again, if it was absolutely necessary to perform some critical task. StuRat (talk) 20:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

There's supposed to be a limit on how small an area (or more accurately a volume) can be constructed that will reliably store magnetic information - below a certain size the energy required to unmagnetise is so small that it would happen naturally at room temperature. This limits the storage density or a hard disk.

On the other hand there's the physical size of a hard disk - which I think is not what you meant.?Shortfatlad (talk) 22:15, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

There's also a theoretical limit on the density of information in any medium (at a given temperature, iirc). —Tamfang (talk) 21:27, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Windows and Linux only recognize drives smaller than 2 TB (2,000 GB). That's a software limit. Consequently, the largest hard drives made right now are 2 TB. Hitachi claims that hard drive-capcities will hit 50 TB in the next few years: [3]. The fact that they're fitting more data every year into 2.5" drives (which are used in laptops) is an indication that density is going up, even if overall capacity has hit a software wall.--Chmod 777 (talk) 22:31, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry to nitpick, but (excluding hardware limitations with older machines) the 2Tb limitation only affects disks using [[4]] partitioning tables, but you can still create multiple partitions up to of 2Tb until all your disk space is used (well up to 4 partitions with MBR so you could have a total of 8Tb of your total disk space/array). However, if the disk partitions are created (or converted) using GPT partition tables (which recent Windows/Linux systems support/boot) then the limit raises to 128 partitions each with a limit of 18 exabytes (18 million terabytes). ZX81 ^talk 23:28, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Right. I was just simplifying my explanation. Windows supports a 256 TB "dynamic disk" if you organize the array of disks (or partitions) as one dynamic disk. So, if you had a disk that was larger than 2 TB (even though such disks do not exist currently), you could, theoretically, partition it and then organize the partitions into a dynamic disk. Most people don't partition their disks, though. If they need more than 2 TB of space, even technically-savvy users tend to simply add more disks, either internally or externally. Therefore, most disks are organized as a single partition, each. Eventually, a demand for larger disks will materialize and Microsoft will add support for basic partitions that are larger than 2 TB. Then, manufacturers will begin to make disks that are larger than 2 TB. I can't predict how large they will eventually become, but in the near future, 50 TB seems achievable.--Chmod 777 (talk) 00:13, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Well as ZX81 mentioned, Windows already supports a single partition larger then 2 TB and has since Windows XP x64. You just need to use GPT partitioning. The trouble is Windows can't boot from GPT partitions unless you use EFI instead of bios and although popular among Intel brandedd motherboards and some system vendors, most more normal motherboards still use bios.

It's unclear to me whether MBR will ever support larger then 2TB partitions. There's probably some unstandard way to do it but that would likely to cause numerous problems. However hard drives are moving to a 4096 byte native sector size from the current 512 byte native sector size. If this is properly recognised by the motherboard bios and OS then this would be used in the MBR allowing 16TB partitions in the MBR. However just to emphasise, AFAIK it not solely a Windows issue but a bios (i.e. mobo) and OS issue since the bios needs to be capable of recognising the drive has a 4096 byte sector size. [5] has some info on the complexities although not relating to Windows. Since most vendors clearly see GPT as the future I'm not particularly sure whether there ever really be much movement in the MBR area.

Of course, it's possible, but again probably unlikely that Windows will natively support booting from a GPT partitioned disk with bios. But they've waited this long and not done it, I don't see any reason to think they'll change their mind, most likely they see EFI as the future. And the people with the bigget influence i.e. the big OEMs probably don't care since as I mentioned many of them have started to move to EFI (and many are also including solid state disks). I suspect motherboard makers are going to have no choice but move to EFI and for those of us stuck with legacy bios, they'll either have to partition, use a bootloader (e.g. as done with Mac OS X on non Apple computers) or use a smaller boot disk (e.g. a solid state disk).

Incidentally, I'm not sure how true it is that most technical savvy people don't partition. Many choose to partition for management reasons, e.g. having a data partition and an OS partition. Anyone multi-booting will also partition obviously. And most OEM computers usually have a recovery partition as does Windows 7 by default although these are perhaps too small to consider relevant.

Nil Einne (talk) 07:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Long time later (searching for something else) but wanted to note some of those last things only definitely apply if you don't have multiple HDs. Things may also change with SSDs. Linux also uses partitions for seperation by default IIRC (FreeBSD uses slices) Nil Einne (talk) 04:39, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Superparamagnetism is likely of relevance. The article is perhaps slightly outdated, AFAIK most modern hard drives now use perpendicular recording partially because of this. Incidentally most modern 3.5" hard disks are currently at 500GB/platter which is ~400 Gb/in². 640GB/platter or 750GB/platter may not be far on the horizon [6] [7]. (There's probably been demonstrations of higher densities but these haven't yet been commercialised.)

[8] (from 2000), [9] (from 2003), [10] and [11] may be of interest. In particular, comparing where we're at now to the predicitions in earlier links may be of interest. Also [12] a different but related issue.

Nil Einne (talk) 08:23, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

working copper

what is working copper? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akaash003 (talk • contribs) 17:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any context for this? Where did you hear, in relation to what? It doesn't sound like much of a computing question, so it might be more relevant to the science ref desk, but you'll probably need to give more info in any event. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 18:20, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Trying to put it in a computing context, it could possibly mean running wires/laying cable, with the word "copper" used to mean they aren't laying fiber-optics wires. Alternatively, it could mean that your wires are functional, as in "if your screen goes blank, first check if you have working copper, then check out the graphics card". StuRat (talk) 20:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

It sounds like trade talk for "wires with electricity running in them" - however in english it would just mean "(the act of) working with copper" ie copper metalsmithwork.

Or a policeman in full-time employment. --Phil Holmes (talk) 09:27, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I immediately thought of the polar opposite of dark fiber - that is, copper-wire-based communication lines with active signals being sent, as opposed to copper communication lines which are sitting around unused. -- 174.21.226.184 (talk) 04:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

uTorrent, wireless, Linksys, and RoadRunner

I have RoadRunner cable internet, which I have hooked up to a Linksys wireless router. For some reason, when I put high stress on the network (especially when downloading with uTorrent), something cuts out the entire wireless connection to the internet. The computers stay connected to the network (so they say), but the internet connection drops out (so Network and Sharing Center says there is only "limited access"). You can see this happening in this screenshot: [13]. What is causing this problem? Is there a setting in the wireless router or cable modem that cuts out the connection at certain bandwidth? Is there a way to fix it? Thanks. —Akrabbim^talk 20:09, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Do you control the router? You might want to visit Linksys's website (technically, I think it's Cisco's now) and get updated firmware. Several older versions of the firmware had issues where they would maintain a running log of connections, and while it cleared old entries eventually, if you initiated too many connections in too short a timeframe, the log rollover wouldn't work. Caused the whole router to effectively shutdown and require a hard reset. BitTorrent clients create *way* more connections than just about any other software and were the primary culprit in triggering this issue. The cause was bad code in the router, but BitTorrent was the only reliable way to reveal the problem. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 20:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

See bandwidth throttling User:Curious Cactus 20:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

This isn't bandwidth throttling. Throttling slows the connection; the "limited access" message indicates the router is no longer connected to the internet at all. The ISP could be disconnecting him for some reason (ISPs aren't known for being open about this), but it's far more likely to be an issue on his end. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 20:41, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, I've updated the firmware, but I'm still running into the problem, so I guess I'll have to contact Linksys directly. I'm pretty sure it's not the ISP, since I only really have this problem with wireless. Thanks. —Akrabbim^talk 22:19, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I couldn't be of more help. Good luck. —ShadowRanger ^(talk|stalk) 22:26, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Five networking questions

Consider a windows PC (plain vanilla XP) that is connected to two linux servers A and B. A has a DHCP server assigning IP-addresses in the 10.xx.xx.xx range, and B has a DHCP-server assigning IP-adresses in the 192.168.xx.xx range. Both A and B also run web servers. The windows PC has two network cards, both set up to use DHCP.

• Q1: will the windows PC receive two IP addresses?
• Q2: what will the output of ipconfig look like (on the windows pc)?
• Q3: will the user be able to access both web servers (via their ip addresses) from his browser?
• Q4: with a "default" setup, will A be visible from B, or vice versa?
• Q5: (assuming the answer to Q4 is "no":) can a bridging functionality be set up somehow (say from the control panel)?

Thanks, --NorwegianBlue ^talk 20:13, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

You haven't told us enough to answer this:

• Are all these network ports on all these machine cabled to the same logical LAN, or are the LANs partitioned somehow
• Are both DHCPds configured to accept requests from any MAC, and has either seen the windows machine's MACs before
• Have either of the windows machine's NICs have previously participated in a DHCP session
• You'll have to define what "default" you're referring to.

-- Finlay McWalter • Talk 20:28, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Assuming A and B are on separate LANs (or VLANs) and that no-one knows anything about anyone:

• Q1: yes
• Q2: there will be two entries for two cards with two macs and two IPs and subnet masks
• Q3: yes
• Q4: no
• Q5: use Internet Connection Sharing

-- Finlay McWalter • Talk 20:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Note that Internet Connection Sharing is essentially a limited NAT (M:1), not a proper router (M:N), so if you had multiple things on the A or B port, you don't get full interoperability. I think the server-grade Windows OSes (like 2000) can work as proper routers, but I have no idea how you would do that. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 20:39, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the speedy reply! Mye assumption was indeed, that A and B were on completely separate LANs; that the DHCP daemons were configured to accept all requests; that the network card connected to A was set up beforehand; and knows about the A network; that the network card connected to B is new, and has never previously participated in a DHCP session, and that the PC previously never has seen the B network. By "default" setup I mean a fresh XP home edition default install, patched with the latest available service packs. Were these assumptions compatible with your answers? --NorwegianBlue ^talk 20:55, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes indeed; A will likely get back its old IPaddress. I confess I'm not 100% sure that XP home can have multiple concurrently active NICs; looking at Windows XP editions#Home and Professional suggests there's no restriction. -- Finlay McWalter • Talk 21:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again! --NorwegianBlue ^talk 22:10, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Recurring problem with ExFAT flash drive

I had [this] problem recently. It happened to me again, but this time I was sure to safely remove it. I put a couple of videos on it, safely removed it, and plugged it back in. One file was there, a few files were there but were corrupted, and some were just gone. It should be noted that I reformatted the drive between last time and this time. The drive is brand new. I noticed, also, that it writes far slower than my 8GB Sandisk, my 8GB PNY, and my older model 4GB PNY. The question is, does anyone have experience with this? Is ExFAT unstable? Perhaps this drive is broken. Or maybe Microsoft's update for XP is buggy. Can anyone give me a few ideas to test this? Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 23:33, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

I would probably try formatting it as an NTFS or FAT32 device and try again — but at this point I wouldn't trust that drive with anything, and would return it to the store if that's possible. Comet Tuttle (talk) 23:53, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Got the drive sealed off a friend who's a technophobe. If I told him it was broken he would beleive me, but I need to know for sure. The drive will not format in NTFS or FAT32 (I tried on Windows 7). Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 00:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Won't format? What error is given? Comet Tuttle (talk) 00:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

"Windows could not complete the format." And then the drive is unusable until I reformat in ExFAT. Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 04:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Use GNU Parted to solve the problem. You're welcome. R12IIIeloip (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:53, 5 March 2010 (UTC).

Um... I don't run any of those OS's. Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 13:22, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Use the GParted Live CD.  Buffered Input Output 16:44, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, downloading now... Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 18:14, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I formatted a 4GB thumb drive with exFAT using Vista and then reformatted it with NTFS just to be sure there wasn't some bizarre Windows refusal to change the format of an exFAT volume. I had no problems; my thumb drive is back to NTFS. I think your drive is flaky and you should not depend upon it for anything. Repartitioning it with different software won't fix this if there's a reliability problem. Comet Tuttle (talk) 22:30, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, all. I'm going to try an identical drive now and see if it gives me the same problem. This should conclusively prove anything that needs proving. Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 01:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, dear. A brand new drive is doing the same thing. 8 files: 2 perfectly fine, 1 there but corrupted, and 5 empty folders. It's like roulette. I'm calling Kingston. Mxvxnyxvxn (talk) 22:23, 8 March 2010 (UTC)