Tech Talk!

-----------------

Send questions, comments, and even reviews: review submissions are accepted!

------------------

------------------------------------------------------

Page Updated: January 19th 2007

So continues Techtite's latest "Departmental" page: Tech Talk! Got an entertainment or multimedia related question, send it to Tech Talk via Techtite.com's Letters Page. Every "technical" question sent to us is answered here.

Here's the latest questions we've answered... 

-----------------------------------------

I'm wondering about your opinions on Windows Vista. I noticed you haven't reviewed it in your PC or Hardware sections. Should that be considered a "review" in itself? Many people have talked about glitches that forced them to go back to Windows XP until a "fix" is found. Then there's the three versions (four?) to choose from. I guess I'm just asking for a whole review of Vista!

John, Arizona

It's hard to deny that Vista had problems upon release. Yet that was earlier this year and by November this same year, Vista is a pretty impressive operating system. However; it's not for everyone. If someone was only interested in logging onto the internet and typing a spreadsheet, I would probably compare buying Vista to opening a walnut with a sledgehammer. Sure it's a powerhouse though do you really need that "power"? That's what computer owners need to ask themselves.

Gamers in particular need to look at Vista. It's a pretty foregone conclusion that someone who wants to play new games like Bioshock or Crysis already has the "super computer" rig they always dreamed of...so why not make the super computer complete by installing Vista? These games work much better with the newest operating system behind them.

I personally have Windows Vista "Ultimate" installed on my PC, and I'm happy with it. There's a feature called "Dream Scene" where any short video can be used as your desktop wallpaper. Multiple windows can be "shuffled" through, like 3D cards on the screen. Even small features are intriguing. When moving the mouse over a window at the bottom of the screen, you're given a thumbnail image of that window. It makes managing multiple windows much easier. Then there is the "gadget" window at the right of the screen, which can include whatever you want as a small program running at all times; the daily weather, the latest news headlines, or a calendar, for example. Yet what I really like about Vista so far is how a glitchy program does not lead to a "blue screen" like it used to under XP. You're simply asked if you'd like to close the program, plain and simple.

Now for the problems, with all honesty intended. There's this feature called "User Account Control" which is sort of like a party club bouncer with a bad hangover. Just about every single application that isn't a Microsoft application gets a prompt if you wish to "deny or allow" its use.  How totally worthless is a "security feature" that asks you if you wish to "allow" the programs you want to use? This was a feature that became so annoying I wound up deactivating "User Account Control" completely. Now all I get is a reminder upon startup that I deactivated User Account Control...and with reason. It's easy to deactivate, though, so it's not a major peeve of mine anymore.

Worst news kept for last: I must admit upon first installation of the system last April, barely any of my hardware installed right. On the one hand I could easily detect and install "basic" functionality with my wireless-network printer. Having Vista identify this printer was just point-and-click. Yet the printer itself is an "all in one" sort of scanner/fax/photo-card-reader sort of deal, and none of that additional functionality worked at first. It does now though, so I guess it's a moot point. It explains why so many people backtracked to XP, though. All I can tell them is: try installing Vista again. You'll be happy you did!

-----------------------------------------

Do you speak Klingon? That's what I feel like asking when getting a message on my computer upon startup. It basically boils down to a program called "Data Execution Prevention" saying there's something wrong with "generic host process for Win32 Services" and needed to close the program. In fact; this message appears several times now on startup. Before you think this is some virus problem I assure you I only went to the same big name sites I always do, and downloaded nothing for weeks by now. The only thing out of the ordinary was a HP printer I added to my network the other week. What's happening? Help!

David, Arkansas

You're a better detective than you realize, David; you nearly solved this mystery all by yourself! While it's nice for us "users" to think that installing a printer is as worry free as it sounds, it sadly isn't. In fact; I would dare say that HP products out-of-the-box have the worst reputation for Windows bugs that resemble dangerous "viruses," which turn out to be nothing more than "free software" included with the printer, that wasn't beta tested worth a darn. I don't mean to bad mouth HP products themselves; just the software. I've had many "false alarms" where Windows suspects a virus, and the real problem turns out to be shoddy free-with-printer software.

The good news is that the solution is as simple as a patch downloaded from the internet. The better news: the patch that solves this sort of problem shouldn't be over 3 megabytes in size, so you should be back to normal on your PC as quickly as it took you to read this (admittedly long winded) solution!

The bad news? You'll have to be your own detective yet again, because I am not sure which printer you own. Some printer software allows you to upgrade "automatically" from a menu, and some do not. Go to the official HP site and type your printer's model number in the search box. It will list all the product models with that same model number; click the name that matches your own printer (example: the psc 2510). When that product page loads, click on "Drivers/Software." You should be led to a whole list of drivers, software, and most importantly, patches for the software you already installed. I'd recommend installing all the patches listed, though if you just want to install the patch that solves your specific problem, just look at the descriptions for each patch.

-----------------------------------------

I know this has been asked many times before but given the Playstation 3 and Wii and 360 do you think that the days of PC gaming are coming to a close?

George, NYC

While this is a question asked many times through the years (3DO, anyone?), I'd have to say that PC games will be running low for awhile, at least until the next "breakthrough" game for the PC is released. The newest systems have both pros and cons. Game designers can make a game for a game system and not worry about multiple system types to make the game compatible for (like the PC). In addition: they don't have to lower graphics quality to appease the "base level" PC system. Suffice to say a $1000 PC owner would be better off buying a game for their $600 Playstation 3, or their $400 X-Box 360.  Now for the "cons." The PC still is the most owned "game system" out there. Second: the PC still has control schemes that no game system has easily, like a keyboard and mouse (although the PS3 does have compatibility with any standard USB keyboard). What's more: nearly all modern game system companies request a sort of "authorization" over all games made for their systems. That is to say they have to "accept" your game for their system, before you can officially sell your game. Last though not least: the price for any game development kit for new game systems is through the roof. All you really need for a PC is an idea; PC programming kits are available for free.

-----------------------------------------

What was the first game ever made in the video world and the second?

Gamer Gurl, Alabama

This more or less depends on any gamer's opinion of "first" video game. While one guy made the first actual game he never sold it. While another made the first game for sale, it wasn't released until another guy made something similar, and sold it first. The best explanation of all this was given by Game Show Network's TV special, "Video Game Invasion: The History of a Global Obsession." Here's a brief rundown:

• In 1958, Willy Higinbotham first attempted to put a game-type of image on a video screen. The result was shown as a novelty exhibit at Brookhaven National Lab. Unfortunately it wasn't a playable game, with a small dot bouncing back and forth on a small oscilloscope screen, so it didn't get much interest back then.

• In 1961, Steve Russell spent six months on a MIT supercomputer to create a video game called "Space War." Steve's achievement is all the more impressive when computers in 1961 needed all their programs installed via numbered punch cards (!). Space War consisted of two rockets shooting at each other with a large twinkling star in the middle of the screen. As an added challenge; if the star's gravity sucked you in, your ship was instantly destroyed. The bad news: Russell didn't see how a game made for a $120,000 computer would sell. So he never patented it. Oops!

• In 1966, Ralph Bayer created the first attempt at a play-at-home video game system. Essentially the game it played consisted of three squares, with two squares as the "player" squares, and the third square as the "ball." By 1971 the idea was patented and sold to Magnavox, which would eventually sell the system as the "Odyssey." The bad news: the Odyssey didn't reach store shelves until after "Pong" came around (see two paragraphs down), so even though Ralph technically created the first video game, his video game wasn't the first actually played.

• Interestingly, also in 1971: Nolan "Atari" Bushnell would release his first attempt at a video game product...with sad results. "Computer Space" hit pinball arcades but sadly, it is often referred to as one of arcade history's biggest flops. To hear Nolan himself explain it; Computer Space was a game popular only to college-level engineers, and too complicated for the more younger gamer. Yet it was the first attempt to put an video-game-style game in the arcades.

• In 1972, Nolan would take $500 and with a friend create what would eventually become legendary video game giant Atari. Their first release was "Pong," which was basically two paddles on opposite sides of the screen bouncing a ball back and forth; if your opponent missed the ball you got a point. This, by most people's accounts, was the first "real" video game, or at least the first one that was worth talking about.

• Soon after, Atari would create what would initially be called the Atari VCS, which due to the Odyssey wasn't the first game system "invented" per se, but then again was the first time anyone could choose the games they bought, which were each sold on individual cartridges.

...Hope this helps!

-----------------------------------------

What's your take on all the High Definition TV talk? Is it something that I should consider or is it a waste of $dough? I'm even hearing gossip that "everything" is going HDTV. Does that mean I need a new television?

Bob from PA

The best part of High Definition TV is what it sounds like it is. The video picture is crystal clear and with no graininess at all. What's more; as screen-grabs of such high definition TV signals will show you online, the picture is much more detailed, for either zooming in to a specific part of the video, or just for a more detailed picture. However, if none of this sounds interesting to the reader then yeah, maybe it's not for everyone.

As for HDTV becoming the "norm"; I've heard that too, but if you ask me there are too many hurdles. For one thing there are too many homes out there with perfectly good televisions (some just a few years old), and asking these people to suddenly get a new TV is ludicrous. Consider how seamless the transition was back in the day, from B&W televisions to color. The transition was seamless, because even owners of a B&W TV could still view a color broadcast.  The only way they're going to make HDTV seamlessly become the "norm" is if they give every household a cable box that can receive HDTV (however lower quality) on any standard television set. People would then upgrade to a new TV when they need a new TV. They need to appeal to the needs of all viewers; not just people who can afford (or are even willing to buy) a $2000 television set. After all; many people are beginning to turn to the internet for their television needs, with regular TV looking less and less "necessary." Is this really the best time to try to irk the TV public by "demanding" they buy an HD-compatible TV set?

-----------------------------------------

I noticed your X-Box page has been updated for the 360. I have a question: what happened to downward compatibility? Here's what I don't understand. The X-Box was one system. All games were made for one system. Yet they claim that the 360 has only been tested for a few games. The others do not yet run on the system. Why is that? I mean, if one X-Box game runs I don't see why they can't all run.

Tom from Arizona

I sense there's a bigger problem to contend with than internal hardware. There's also the new controller. While it's identical in most respects --right down to the colored XYAB buttons-- there are no white/black buttons. In a game that used these buttons, a major workaround would have to be done. For example; the new 360 controllers have two additional right and left "shift" keys above the triggers. These could simulate the "black" and "white" keys in older games. Unfortunately, little is known about the progress of the emulation software, with the list of compatible titles left unchanged since December. We'll keep you posted though.

-----------------------------------------

This next question we received was quite literally the first question received, since it was a Letter sent to the letters page. It's letters like this where we felt it best for opening a Q&A page...

I have a question regarding the first new Surface episode of the year. I thought this show was doing well when I heard it was picked up for a full season. Then the finale of this episode says that there are only four episodes left. Well four episodes as of January doesn't sound like a full season to me. Could you try and find out what is happening here?

Greg from Wyoming

All puns aside, this situation with Surface seems fishy. I could've sworn too, that the series was given a full season order, but now, the best answer is that online news sources misspoke themselves. A "full" order in this case meant only four more episodes. Curious.

The situation is complicated. This show isn't a sitcom with the same set every week. Every shot of "Nimrod" the pet whatever-it-is costs a lotta cash for NBC. If the series isn't doing well then they can only afford the episodes they can afford. In this case, that number isn't as high as, say, The Office...and that's cool.

Does this mean the series is cancelled? This is never determined until the end of the season, and anyone who says otherwise is jumping to conclusions. However, I would call it a fair assessment that if this series is canned by NBC, Sci-Fi Channel may show an interest. They've been repeating episodes of the series, every Monday at 7. That sounds like a network that wants this Surface to stay afloat! But whether the series comes back on NBC or Sci-Fi, it will most likely have to make serious budget cuts, if it wants to ever have a "full" season at all. Science Fiction is pretty costly!

------------------------------------------------

Sorry, but due to time and workloads, we cannot answer every question “personally,” but keep looking on this page for the latest questions answered. Your question may be next.

How...? Simple! Click here to send one, via the letters page. All questions sent to our letters mailbox are answered here. Send one now...!