Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2024 April 8

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

April 8

Why Windows 8 no start button

No start screen move right screen on corner it's hard to use Windows 7 users skip Windows 8 and upgrade Windows 8.1 because hard use
that's it reply here ⬇️ 2001:44C8:4286:21D8:C94A:392E:B1E3:E94E (talk) 09:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

In Windows 7, Microsoft's consumer experience improvement program stated that users were using the start button less, preferring the new taskbar instead. Feeling that the taskbar had more functionality, they opted to drop the start button in Windows 8 with tutorials demonstrating use of the taskbar. Shortly afterward, they made the start button optional and, later, put it back in the corner of the screen for users who still want to use it. 75.136.148.8 (talk) 11:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

A large question that I’ve been thinking of for a while.

Hello. This is a question that I’ve been thinking of for a while. Why do Google Maps satellite images of cities in Asia (such as India) and Africa (such as Nigeria and Egypt) have buildings that appear to be bizarrely looking flat when I zoom in? What satellite company is to blame? Why was that? What do the areas of such images that have bizarrely flat buildings cover, and when was the first time that happened? I’ve seen that in many African and Asian satellite pictures when I zoom in Google Maps. In European countries (the UK), Australia, and the United States and Canada have buildings that are perfectly fine. While in many parts of the world, the buildings in their cities are bizarrely flat when I zoom in for a close up in Google Maps. What satellite companies are to blame for this? Why does this happen? When did this first happen? Have you ever found this in Google Maps? I’ll check back in a day or two and any answers are highly appreciated. Thank you. —2.103.231.248 (talk) 11:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

When viewing satellite images on Google Maps, the source of the images is shown at the bottom of the map. For example, I zoomed onto Korhogo and the bottom of the screen states "Imagery (C)2024 Airbus Imagery (C) Airbus, CNES / Airbus, Maxar Technologies, MAP data (C)2024." That means that the images come from Airbus imagery. It doesn't come from Google. If you don't like the images or want to blame someone for bad images, Google is making it obvious who the images come from. 75.136.148.8 (talk) 11:43, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Most of the roofs wil be flat or only gently sloping. They don't have snow. And white reflects the sun better. NadVolum (talk) 16:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

But why are the roofs often flat or gently sloping? 2.103.231.248 (talk) 18:40, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Because that's cheaper if you just have rain and don't have to cope with snow. NadVolum (talk) 19:57, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

What companies are to blame for the Indian satellite images? Try use Mumbai or Delhi, or New Delhi as examples 2.103.231.248 (talk) 20:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

If you follow what was said above you'll see Airbus at the bottom of the map. What do you see as wrong with the images? NadVolum (talk) 22:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

I zoomed onto São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro and the buildings are weirdly flat for no reason. Also I zoomed into Benghazi and Tripoli and the buildings appear what I call “poor quality images” with the buildings flat, even their roofs are flat. Are rapidly moving objects such as airplanes and other satellites to blame for this? Or any other reason? 2.103.231.248 (talk) 10:00, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Do you maybe mean the 3D-version of buildings that have been modelled for large parts of Europe? because with a quick look between Mumbai and Birmingham, the resolution of the photos are very similar. Tripoli is also of comparable resolution.Rmvandijk (talk) 11:31, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

No. When you go into 3D, the buildings are still flat. Where do such companies that imaged them launched their satellites from and what are the satellites’ names? What companies were to blame for this? Where are the companies from Where are these satellites that made the images launched and when?2.103.231.248 (talk) 12:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I read through the replies. The answer to "what companies are to blame" has been answered, yet you continue asking. It inhibits any interest in continuing to answer questions if you are not responding to the answers given. 12.116.29.106 (talk) 14:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I will not do this again! 2.103.231.248 (talk) 17:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

But where do the companies which made these flat building images launch their imaging satellites from? 2.103.231.248 (talk) 17:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I typed into Google "Who launched Airbus imaging satellites" and it responded:

Airbus has launched many Earth observation satellites, including:

THEOS-2

Launched in 2023 on a Vega rocket from Kourou, Europe's spaceport in French Guiana, this satellite provides 50cm imagery to Thailand

THEOS-1

Launched in 2008, this satellite continues to provide imagery beyond its 10-year operational lifetime

MetOp-SG

Built by Airbus in Friedrichshafen and Toulouse for the European Space Agency (ESA) and EUMETSAT, these satellites provide more accurate data for climate monitoring and numerical models used in forecasting

HOTBIRD 13G

Launched by the Airbus BelugaST (A300-600ST) to Eutelsat at the Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral in Florida

Pléiades Neo

Two identical satellites with 30cm resolution that provide insights for institutional and commercial customers for the next 12 years

Aeolus

A wind sensing satellite built in Stevenage for the European Space Agency (ESA)

That is just one imaging satellite company. There are many others. You need to look at the bottom of the map when you want to know which company provided the image you are looking at. But, in the end, who launched the satellite is not important. If it was laucnhed from the U.S. or Europe or India, the satellite itself doesn't change. It still takes the same images. It appears that all of this is based on a complete misunderstanding that the satellite image does not have 3-D data to produce 3-D building images. It is a flat image. Google employs people and computer programs to add a 3-D effect to the flat images in specific locations - not everywhere. 12.116.29.106 (talk) 17:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Where do you see buildings that are weirdly flat? Can you give a URL? My screen is flat, and so are all images displayed on it, but for very many roofs in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro it is obvious from the Airbus/Maxar images that they are not flat roofs. Some other roofs look curved, and indeed some look flat – presumably because they are flat. It would be weird if these did not look flat.

Hmmm. Ahhhh! I have an idea! Try comparing the two cities to New York. This may help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.103.231.248 (talk) 11:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Maybe you're thinking of the air conditioning units on the top of the skyscrapers in New York? Some of its buildings also have water towers. Others have oter things like gardens.NadVolum (talk) 12:06, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

When you look at a place in Google Maps, you are not zooming in and out of a single extremely-high definition satellite image. You are swapping between a variety of images taken by various satellites, aircraft and (I presume) drones from various altitudes and angles – it's only the sophisticated software that makes it all seem seamless.

The lower-altitude images taken by aircraft and drones are not infinite in number because of cost. They form a mosaic with images of buildings at the edge of each 'tile' being seen obliquely. The software cannot always convert these to perfect 3-D simulations, so sometimes, particularly in less-finely photographed areas, images appear distorted.

If perfect fidelity was required in every place on Earth, Google Maps would cost much more to create and maintain, and you would have to pay for it instead of accessing it essentially for free. 151.227.145.123 (talk) 14:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

What aircraft are used for the low altitude images? From Airbus? Boeing? Or any other aircraft manufacturers? 2.103.231.248 (talk) 10:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Any answers? 2.103.231.248 (talk) 11:40, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Programme to create videos

I am searching for a programme that allows me to easily produce video presentations for my youtube channel. Some of my main themes are linguistics and philology, so the programme should be able to deal with letters, ligatures and symbols of all kinds. I previously made a few such videos using powerpoint, but that was very tedious, and the results remained mediocre. Has anyone some suggestions? 80.218.144.56 (talk) 16:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Does this help? 10 Go-To Tools To Create Videos On Your Own.  --Lambiam 10:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Good online reverse video search tool

Could someone recommend the best or at least powerful reverse video search tool either by still frame image or by video file itself? Brandmeister^talk 20:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Here are instructions for running a reverse video search on Google.  --Lambiam 10:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Screencast editing - removing "aahs" and "uhhhms" and other pauses from a single clip

I'm looking for a specific kind of video editing editing software, that can be used to remove a lot of unwanted pauses (hundreds) in a single video clip - something similar to Audacity but for video. A program called Activepresenter seems to do this the best, but unfortunately it records only in 20 fps (OBS Studio records in 60fps on my computer) and is very buggy. Most video editing software seems to use quite a convoluted way of removing small parts of a video clip, like setting cursors and splitting clips in multiple parts. What I'm looking for is just simply mark a small part of the single clip I recorded with the mouse and press delete (as in Audacity when you want to cut a part of your sound) - as quickly as possible. What would you recommend? 83.252.182.138 (talk) 22:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

I saw Cary Huang make something similar to this on YouTube a few years ago. Here is the GitHub repository. —Panamitsu (talk) 23:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

DaVinci Resolve is probably the best free video editing software you can get. It's very powerful and easy to use. Of course, if you're willing to take a risk, you could always sail the seven seas for better software, but do so at your own risk knowing the legal implications of such behaviour. Félix An (talk) 08:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)