rayzoredge

Now THAT's what I'm talking about! Quality replies! Thanks guys!@shadowx and Sky: Don't those commands basically do the same thing as resetting the router, which basically reboots everything and restarts the IP address assignments by DHCP? I've never changed the mode on the router itself... it's always been working with DHCP, which makes me wonder about the strange behavior of dropping connections and not reassigning the IPs. Like I said, I always thought that hardware either worked or didn't... not this in-between, dying crap, so I looked to other possibilities. The only things I've tweaked with the router were in the past were opening ports, enabling the MAC address filter, and WPA2 encryption and that was a set-it-and-forget-it deal that I set up long before I had these problems.@k_nitin_r: Restarting the client machine may or may not solve the problem in this case, which is strange. I'm assuming that this is the same as a repair, since the machine disconnects, attempts to reconnect and "talks" to the router, receives an IP address by DHCP from the router, and establishes the connection. Then again, I don't know what else Windows does behind the scenes with networks...For those recommending replacement, what do you guys recommend? I'm looking at this new N crap and I know that my computers can take advantage of the better speeds, but I don't think it will matter to us so much since we don't deal with much with network tasking. However, I took a look at CNet (my favorite tech review site) and looked at the Belkin N+, which seems like a pretty sweet deal... and I think that being able to plug a USB HD for central access would be awesome. However, looking at reviews by way of Froogle shows great professional reviews, but some bad user reviews. I know that most of these can be taken with a grain of salt thanks to angry consumers who have no idea why their routers won't work and whatnot, but the issue of dropped connections that kept popping up concerned me, since this is what I'm trying to get away from. (A lot of the good reviews came from people who literally just plugged it in and went with it... something I'm mostly not likely to do. )I need to find a router that's decent in price (but don't let that factor keep you from suggesting a good router), supports WEP/WPA2 encryption, MAC address filtering, and port forwarding. Those were really the only things I messed with on my current router. I did play around with D-Link's GameFuel, but never really got it to work the way I wanted to, but a similar feature would be cool if I could figure out how to do it correctly. Since I was willing to drop $80 for the router, I'd like to ask for sub-$100 ones, but I won't mind dropping $140 or so if the router is going to last me as long as the DGL-4300 did. I like the idea of MIMO and N, and according to Device Manager, both of the laptops that we have include Intel 5100 AGN wireless cards, but I don't know if this is a "generic" driver or if it's that ubiquitous. (If it matters, I have an Asus G50VT-X5 and the wife has a Dell Studio 1737. I know it will be hard with the Dell since building it gives you two choices of cards... and I don't know what's physically in her machine.) Intel says that the 5100 AGN supports MIMO, but then again... see above.

It's funny to think that I completely overlooked Remote Desktop during my excitement of installing and using LogMeIn Free a couple of years ago. Having used both, I think that they are both pretty good ways to remotely-control another PC, but my hats are still off to LogMeIn since I believe that with Remote Desktop, you would have to have a PC on the same domain as the computer that you are accessing. This makes work a lot easier when you have a VPN to dial into, but it doesn't help Joe Snuffy with controlling his personal computers back home from college or wherever he may be. With LogMeIn, you can access any computer connected to the Internet with LogMeIn configured and installed that you register under your account from any computer that has access to Internet. Although this might seem like a less secure scenario, someone would have to figure out your password to your account, and even if he or she phished it out of you, they would have to figure out the access password for each particular computer they would want to control. Performance-wise, I'm not sure if one ousts the other.

It's becoming more evident that it's the router at fault, since this thing is at least four years old.I suppose that although I'm sad that this $100+ router is supposedly dying, it did serve me quite well. Just seems kind of odd that it would decide to die with the move to the new house, which is why I suspected other causes.I don't want to have to replace a perfectly-working piece of equipment. Anything else I can try to clear the cable modem and Windows 7 from blame? Would a presumed clean power supply from a UPS help the router?

There are just way too many variants on this sort of thing, but I'm stumped. I have a D-Link DGL-4300. I am running Windows 7 Ultimate x64. I set up a wireless network with a WPA2 key and DHCP for IP assignment. The issue here is that I can connect to this wireless network with all of my laptops and devices... but at occasional, random points of the day, I lose the connection to just one of the laptops by way of the evil Limited or No Connectivity error. It's like the router drops the connection with the PC, then the PC is not automatically reassigned an IP address, like the router "forgot" about it. Trying to repair the connection doesn't fix it, but resetting the router with a 15-second power cycle does. I've done a factory default reset with the router and set everything back up again: the WPA2 encryption, port opening, etc. The router still does this strange behavior. This never happened before, but we did just recently move. SInce then, the problem persists. I've called the cable company to investigate, but since I can't really be there when the guy shows up, I can't really figure out what he does to try fix the problem. My wife said that he did something with the connection outside, but it hasn't rectified the problem. I've narrowed my troubleshooting down to a few possibilities: - My router may be going "bad." I don't know why it drops connections and doesn't reassign IP addresses via DHCP correctly, so I'm chalking it up to be "bad." (Honestly, I think that hardware either works or doesn't, so it doesn't make sense to me that it works periodically like this.) - Windows 7 is doing it. This was a major change, as I remember that I had one occurrence of this at the apartment when I had Windows 7 installed on this laptop, but I never ran into this case with my XP machines. I don't know what Windows 7 would be doing to cause this, and I haven't done anything spiffy with network settings. (It's funny that Windows 7 is touted to have superior network performance... but then again, they say performance... not reliability. ) - The cable modem is crap. Another major change... which I may try to get it replaced. However, I don't understand how a cable modem would be able to influence my router to do this sort of behavior through a WAN, so maybe I'm stretching conclusions here. I've tried manually assigning static IP addresses to both laptops. This happens on both machines... but both machines are running Windows 7. I have an iPod Touch, but it's hard to tell if this problem is affecting it... and if it isn't, I can clearly point the finger at Windows 7, but I can't. My mother in-law does visit from time to time with her Netbook and to give less flak to Windows 7, her XP machine sometimes can't connect at all to the network for whatever reason, but sometimes it can with no problems, so now the possibility lies moreso with the router. I don't have an old wireless router to test, and the firmware on the router is up to date. The network drivers to all computers are good to go. I've power-cycled the cable modem just in case. Reading this link doesn't give me much hope and makes me think of router shopping, but I just want to make sure if it's not the router. I'm thinking about snagging another wireless router from someone to see if indeed the router is "dying..." but does anyone else have any suggestions as to what else I can do? Keep in mind that I don't want what seems to be bad router behavior from happening... not how to fix it. (I already know how to fix it: power-cycle the router.)

Forgot to mention gaming... It's funny that I've had this HDTV for a while now and only briefly played a bit of Burnout Revenge and Bioshock just to see how it looked, but from what I've seen, I'm pretty satisfied with how it plays. Most of my time with gaming on this beast was dedicated to beating Modern Warfare 2, and I'll tell you... it looks damn good when I'm busy playing the role of an obedient soldier, clinging to Price's every whim. People online on reviews tend to complain about what seems to be stupid little things like how fast movement causes blur and shearing and whatnot, but I didn't notice anything detrimental on this HDTV while I was playing Bioshock, Burnout, or even Modern Warfare. I have the Xbox 360 hooked up with component cable, since I have an older Premium Pro variant, but I'm starting to wonder if I actually have the upper hand as far as gaming goes since I found out that an HDMI 1.3a cable from my laptop to the Samsung doesn't yield 5.1 audio passthrough to the optical digital output... Someone else will have to figure if the HDMI cable from the 360 or even a PS3 will yield 5.1 audio output. (That would suck if it doesn't, since you kind of need the HDMI to provide both video and audio from the source to the HDTV... unless there's such thing as a A/V splitter for HDMI, which defeats the purpose of keeping both components to one cable.) Figure this out or at least a viable solution before you go out and make your purchase. Anyway, everything looked pretty good on the Samsung with no real problems that I could actually point out with the Xbox 360. Keep in mind that the 360 and PS3 most likely puts out 720p instead of the 1080p that most people would swoon over the idea of, since there's only so much you can stream from the hardware before you hit choppy frame rates when in conjunction with the graphic eye candy we've come to love from our gaming consoles. However, I don't think any normal consumer will see the difference between 720p and 1080p anyway when sitting at a normal viewing distance (i.e. couch to TV, 5-8 ft.). PC gaming is great. Just general computing on the Samsung is great. Text is clear and crisp and readable, unlike the days of yore when you connected your computer to the 'ol CRT. Playing Modern Warfare did not result in anything bad visually, or at least nothing that I could actually see. It was like playing on my laptop, but with a 1920 x 1080 resolution on a 46" screen. Web browsing has never been cooler. Something of note with connecting my laptop via HDMI, though, is that the information pop-up that comes up when I connect the PC says that I'm connected at 1920 x 1080 @ 60Hz. I don't know if this means that I'm at a 60Hz mode, or if the graphics card can't output more than 60Hz, or the output is 60Hz. I also don't know that, in any of those cases, if the 120Hz MotionPlus affects what's onscreen. I don't think this matters, however, since I've read conflicting arguments for and against 120Hz for PC output. One side says that the technology introduces artifacts and whatnot since the way MotionPlus works is that it intelligently inserts a median frame between frames to generate the smoothness that causes the "soap opera" look with movies, making it look like the actors are on stage for your own personal performance, but with the linear way that PC video output is, the technology doesn't know what to put into the median frame, generating the artifacts and such. The other side suggests that it does help with fast movement onscreen and that it's a sizeable difference. I don't know who to believe yet, but since I don't even know if the 120Hz is even kicking in, I'm good to go with the default. I'll post some pictures and will try to capture how good PC input looks on the screen later.

Try Wink. It's free and I think it will be an excellent match with what you're trying to do: software demonstration. You can add captions and basically make a very useful video that you can dumb down as much as you want while giving more tech-savvy users the option to fly through by literally building your own training course. Everything can be saved as an EXE, PDF, HTML, or even Flash so that you can put your tutorial online. The files that are made are also small enough to share in comparison to saving a huge video file.

Now that's a mouthful. I figured I'd give a review of this HDTV from a consumer level just because I don't think that most professional reviews actually cover everything you need to know about something before you actually go out and buy it... hence the upcoming gripes I have for something that received 4.5 stars on CNet. (That link leads you to the review for the UN46B7000, but both the 7000 and the 7100 are the same in terms of hardware. The only differences are that the 7100 has a gray ToC - Samsung's Touch of Color - and that it is exclusive to Best Buy.) But first, an excerpt from my HD thread: With all that being said, keep in mind that what I have to say is from a biased point of view, since this is my first HDTV and just about every visual aspect of it will wow me, regardless of what videophiles have to say. Then again, videophiles from CNet gave this thing 4.5 stars and it passed every grueling test thrown at it, so I'm sure that it's still good. I know that spending 30 minutes staring and glancing back and forth at plasmas and LCD HDTVs at Best Buy doesn't make me an expert, but I as Joe Snuffy who relies on his eyes to see the difference can tell you that this particular HDTV kicks butt with visual quality, even in comparison with plasma HDTVs (which are touted to have the best visual quality currently, before and now). Hence, I'm loving the visual quality of this HDTV. Note that this HDTV does not have a glossy screen that will reflect everything under the sun ambient light. The design is very nice with a clean, glossed bezel and falls nicely into the room's decor. (Then again, black goes with everything.) The ToC Gray isn't even noticeable... I actually have yet to notice without scrutiny the Touch of Color, so if you don't like the Samsung Red that the B7000 offers, get this model. The stand is very sturdy and I'm not as afraid as I was of this thing tipping over to crush the kids running around. It IS easy to shake/wobble with something as simple as plugging in a USB stick or an HDMI cable, but it's no big deal. I'm going to get into the gripes now that I've established that this HDTV is awesome. * Do NOT get this TV if you are aiming for DLNA. DLNA stands for Digital Living Network Alliance and is a technology that enables you to stream media from DLNA-enabled devices as well as PCs that are connected to the same network. Although the idea was enticing and it was a deciding factor for me to bump up to the better model, it's not as great in reality and practice. In order for this to work, you have to connect your TV via Ethernet to your existing network, then install software onto your PC that basically allows the Samsung to used shared folders to access your media. It's not as convenient and awesome as one would hope, but just note that this isn't a ground-breaking deal. The interface is quite fugly and primitive too. * The Internet features, like the gadgets from Yahoo, are great in theory, but I don't see this getting any real practical use other than maybe checking the weather and reminding you of eBay auctions nearing their end. "Typing" on the on-screen keyboard is frustrating since the remote doesn't respond to your every press of the directional buttons, and switching between widgets is way too slow. I'd rather whip out my laptop and do it with a real keyboard and mouse... and funny enough, it would probably be faster too, with boot-up time and all. * Playing items off of a USB hard drive or stick using the USB ports on the TV is also rather hokey and primitive. Maybe I'm spoiled with my Xbox 360, but I hate the fact that you can't play a slideshow while playing music, and everything is accessed in a folder hierarchy fashion. There are no visualizations when playing music, and codec support is limited... but future software upgrades will fix that, hopefully. * Speaking of software updates, Samsung decided that it would be a good idea to dim your screen, pop up with a notification, and completely interrupt what you were doing, Vista-UAC-style, to prompt you with a new software update. Since this was rather annoying, plus after reading horror stories with HDTVs being bricked by bad firmware, I asked a Samsung rep if there was a way to turn this off. There isn't. Basically, you're stuck with being notified every couple of hours or so (I don't know the interval, but it's on occasion) or stuck with trusting Samsung not to kill your HDTV... unless you like the idea of a multi-thousand-dollar paperweight in your living room. I've upgraded now after checking to make sure that the current update wouldn't brick my HDTV, but it's an annoying feature to deal with. * Also, during my HD adventures and getting my sound system to work, I found out that this HDTV as well as many others DOES NOT support HDMI 5.1 audio and does NOT pass this through to the optical TOSLINK audio output port. (It only supports HDMI 2.1 audio.) I found this out from a rep after trying to figure out why I was only allowed 2-channel audio (shown under sound properties for my HDMI Audio) regardless of my settings with AC3Filter and whatnot. (If you want true surround sound from your laptop or desktop computer to your surround sound system, make sure that you have a sound card or external USB sound processor that has digital audio output (coaxial or optical TOSLINK) and connect that directly with your surround sound receiver.) * The CEC feature, which allows you to control multiple devices such as a Blu-Ray player as long as it is connected to the HDTV via HDMI AND if it supports CEC itself, is a great idea but sometimes frustrating. I'm guessing that the remote still relies on infrared and line of sight to turn on your HDTV, and if you have CEC enabled, I find myself turning on the HDTV with the remote by hitting TV > Power, then trying to turn on the surround sound receiver with the same remote by hitting BD Receiver > Power, only to turn on the receiver and turning off the HDTV at the same time. Sometimes it works great, but I have to exaggerate where I point the remote; otherwise, I run into the same problem of inadvertently turning off the TV by trying to turn on the receiver. Not sure if universal remote controls have this same problem, but this can definitely get annoying. * This LED HDTV is one of a good handful that doesn't feature local LED dimming, which was actually one of the factors why I bought an LED LCD HDTV. This feature allows for the deepest blacks in the picture as the technology intelligently detects blacks and turns off the LED there to give you the deepest black, but unfortunately this feature isn't present on this particular HDTV. In conclusion, I don't regret snagging this HDTV yet. It's treated me quite well despite the annoyances and I'll recommend it to anyone who can afford the higher price tag for LED technology. The only reason that I can fathom as to why you would opt to pay more for an LED LCD HDTV instead of going for one with a traditional CCFL bulb is that the LED variants run cooler and use less energy... but if you're trying to save money on the electric bill, take into account how much more you'll be spending versus the amount of money you'll be saving and see if you actually save any money with this purchase.

@Tremayne: Apparently someone's been drinking the Kool-Aid.Both Microsoft and Apple are to blame for a lot of crap with their products. And your car analogy is rather poor, since the Zune has been out for a while and Microsoft finally got a clue and played along with aesthetics as well as bolster features to make an actual competitive product against the iPod Touch. How many people have an iPod? Tons, since it was one of the few better media players for the longest time to date, compared to less-spoken brands like Creative (moreso known for Soundblaster, but try uttering the name of that sound card to Joe Blow). Has anyone heard of an Archos? Not really, since they're not as ubiquitous. The Creative Zen Vision M was a pretty damn good media player too, but again, not as ubiquitous. We all know what Apple is. We all compare portable media devices with an iPod. But just because Apple got most people drinking the Kool-Aid with a good handful that are able to actually see WHY the iPod is a good gadget to have doesn't mean that everything else sucks.Ever heard of any horror stories with an iPod? Not likely... because Apple HIDES the bad press. Exploding laptop batteries, iPods spontaneously combusting, yada yada... but no one pays attention to that because they're too busy making out with their cardboard cutout of Steve Jobs and are under that impression that Microsoft is the only evil entity. Apple does have some pretty terrible annoyances that a simple Google search can show you. Same with Microsoft. They both suck... just in different ways.I'll challenge anyone else to show me how the Zune HD really sucks in comparison with the iPod Touch 3G and vice-versa like Xalor did and I'll give you an e-cookie. We already pointed out that the Zune Pass will cost you more in the long run, but what about people that don't care to be nickel-and-dime'd by the Apple App Store until that credit card bill arrives? As it stands right now, I think that Microsoft finally has something competitive here for the iPod-saturated PMP crowd, although the online content has quite a bit of catching up to do.But maybe I'm just a Microsoft fanboy that owns an Apple iPod Touch 2G. Or just a guy who tries to see what's available before making the most-educated guess at what to buy and why. Who knows? @Ash-Bash and k_nitin_r: As useful as the iPod Touch shows itself to be, I wouldn't advise getting an iPhone. The cost of ownership is just too great for less-than-great cellular performance with AT&T, unless Apple finally breaks it off and makes it available to other carriers. Carriers have to upgrade their networks to support 3G coverage and future-proof themselves for an easy upgrade to 4G, so it's not worth getting an iPhone for at least a while now. YMMV, obviously, but there are just too many people unhappy with their iPhones right now thanks to dropped calls and poor cellular coverage as well as feature limitations that shouldn't have been. You might as well get an iPod Touch and use Skype on it.

DRM and Steam are among the contributing factors as to why people pirate games. I agree with galexcd as to how it's a good thing, but it seems that everyone is trying to do a good thing and it's screwing legitimate customers. Just look at how people that bought Spore reacted to the DRM.I find it ironic that it's easier to torrent a game, wait a week or so, install it, apply a crack, and play it than it is to go out to the store, buy it, install it, register it with a server, and play it. No one wants to go out and pay $20-$60 for a game that they can't play or have issues before they even start.

Thanks for all who put me up on the board for Tech Geek, and congrats to the people that won awards.

* There is an aftermarket backup solution for the 360 for $40. I'm going to assume that the PS3 has its backup feature built-in, so a plus goes to the PS3 for that. (Also, you can remove the hard drive from the 360 and even the hard drive within the proprietary attachment, although accessing its contents requires a bit of hack work to retain - or add if you're swapping - compatibility.) * I don't know if the PS3 actually officially gives you that option between Yellow Dog or Red Hat, but I'm going to assume that it's built-in too. The 360 has a project working for it. Plus to the PS3 (if it's built-in) for ease of doing, since hacking is almost always a chore. * I LOL'd at the power brick. Yes, it's huge. I don't really care what size it is myself, but if you're trying to move your console from house to house for LAN parties and such, it can be a pain. It can also be a pain if you're OCD like me and try to make sure there's the least amount of cable clutter in a confined space (like under the entertainment center) and when that damn brick is a third of the size of the damn console. PS3 props. * With the PS3 controllers and charging them, doesn't that mean that you're out of commission if it dies in the middle of a game... unless you have another spare, charged controller? Also, apparently the PS3 controller sucks when it comes to being charge-friendly. If my 360 controller dies, I take out the batteries, swap them with another set, and keep going. I buy rechargeables, and if you go cheap, you can get Rayovac rechargeable 4xAAs for less than $7 at Wally World. (Energizer 4xAAs are $11.) If the allegations for PS3 are true, the 360 wins by a long shot. If you want to talk about the cost of ownership... depending on what you do, I suppose it can be better or worse. Let's try a scenario here. I bought my 360 back when the Arcade and Premium Pro variants were out... I believe I got it in 2006. For $250 MSRP, I got the console, wireless controller, Ethernet cable, headset, and hybrid video cable (for component and composite). If I were to have bought a PS3 in 2006, I would have snagged up a first-gen for $500 or $600, respectfully for the 20GB or 60GB variants. For some reason, I can't find any official information concerning what comes bundled in the first-gen PS3, but I'm sure it comes with a controller and the necessary cables for at least composite... probably a hybrid composite/component like the 360 did. If you want to factor in the Blu-Ray drive, at the time it was a steal since BR was still relatively new and stand-alone players were expensive. But as a gaming console, the 360 seemed moreso the best bang for my buck... and I didn't need to get a headset or another Ethernet cable to hook XBL up. Nowadays, things have gotten cheaper and the PS3 looks more appealing with a decent drop in price. However, everyone else dropped their prices and the PS3 is still the most expensive, but for good reason. For Microsoft now, it would run $200 for the Arcade, which comes with a wireless controller, composite AV cable, 512MB onboard memory, and 5 arcade games. For $100 more, you can get the 120GB hard drive, headset, and Ethernet cable, but no crappy arcade games. For a whopping $400, you get an additional controller and a 250GB hard drive, but that's just ridiculous. If you get rechargeable batteries @ $10 for 4xAA for an Elite 120GB, it'll cost $310. Yay. Let's go to Sony now. For $300, you can get the 120GB Slim model which comes with a newer DualShock controller, USB cable, and an A/V cable. This is pretty damn slick for a cheap Blu-Ray player combined with a gaming console, since the 360's Elite only includes a headset to ice the cake. To match the 360 with accessories, you would have to snag a headset and an Ethernet cable... which probably would add $50 or so onto that existing price tag. We're looking at $350 now. $40 more... big whoop. For actual features, both support HDMI 1.3a. The PS3 has internal WiFi whereas the 360 does not (+$100 upgrade). The PS3 also has Bluetooth, although I'm not sure how well it works with other devices since I don't own a PS3. You can't charge the PS3 controllers unless they're connected to the PS3 via USB, and you have to keep the console on since they don't charge during stand-by mode, not to mention that the batteries aren't removable, and to contend with that you can get rechargeable batteries for the 360 for an additional $7. If you want to get a Blu-tooth headset for the PS3, that's an additional $40 or so, whereas the 360 Elite, albeit wired, comes with one. The PS3 Slim supports 7.1 channel sound whereas the 360 is stuck with 5.1 (or at least my Premium Pro is... I don't see any info saying that the Elite bumped it up). Both support HD video and optical audio. Microsoft has XBL @ $50/year whereas Sony has the PSN for free, but apparently you really do get what you pay for, since people apparently don't like how the PSN handles certain features like chat and friend invites as well as the lack of content updates on the PSN. The 360 has more games available for it, but apparently the "good" titles available for both consoles are about the same (subjective to heavy debate, of course, as far as what's "good"). You can stream media to both consoles, and from what I can see, both consoles have similar codec support and limitations. Apparently you can store media files on to the PS3, which is awesome, whereas the 360 has that clunky rip-a-CD, rinse-lather-repeat deal to get music to play locally on the console (unless you opt for a FAT32 hard drive, in which you then can play media files "locally"). The PS3 Slim supports CEC, which enables you to control it as well as any other CEC-compatible device hooked up to it with just one remote control. The 360 has backwards compatibility, whereas the PS3 dropped it. Gaming graphics are always debatable, but it's been said that the graphics hardware of the 360 is actually superior to the PS3, which is funny since PS3 fanboys always point out the exact opposite. This is pointed out by a handful of game developers having to tone down graphical options to allow for good frame rates for the PS3, although the differences are very minor and not very noticeable. On paper, Microsoft wins here... but most gamers won't even see an actual difference between the two (except for some titles like Bioshock, which lags a slight bit on the PS3 even after having textures toned down, and Fallout 3 and Devil May Cry 4, which lacks anti-aliasing compared to the 360 port). Head-to-head in the case of the Elite 120GB and the Slim 120GB, the utility of the PS3 probably wins by a good bit (thanks to the Blu-Ray drive and 7.1 channel support), and if you really want to be a power user and play with Linux on your gaming console, that's fine and dandy. It's nice and sleek and apparently quiet. However, the 360 still reigns with gaming and online content if that's your thing, and it serves very well as an entertainment center, if you don't mind the large, warm, less-refined 360 console. It's all a matter of personal preference, really, and what you plan on using it for. Back in the day when I bought the 360, it was an obvious choice. Nowadays, it just boils down to what you're looking for in a gaming console.

I think that once Microsoft catches up on their little app library, the Zune HD will be a pretty good alternative to the iPod Touch. (Heck... as it is as a product, it is better if not just on par with the iPod Touch.) Right now, since I jailbroke my iPod Touch, it's not exactly the fairest comparison when I can do just about everything the Zune can and more... minus the HD radio, of course.

Very true, but at the same time, we were comparing consoles and as a gaming console, I don't think there's much to argue against getting either one. It makes sense to go out and get a PS3 for the Blu-Ray, but the gaming library is apparently lacking. Why get a Wii when it only plays games, outputs 480p, and... what else is there? Because that's what it's for... and a lot of people agree with that philosophy when they settle for 480p, no DVD player, etc. when they go out and buy a Wii. (Either that or they got sucked into the novelty.) I snagged my 360 back when there was the Arcade and the Premium variants and back then, I wasn't willing to pay double what I paid for it for a PS3. (Today, it's more of a competitive argument.) I suffered one RRoD, returned it for service, and it's been serving my family as an entertainment powerhouse since. I can play my games on it, stream or play movies for us all off of an external hard drive, use it to listen to music, watch slideshows in conjunction to music, blah blah blah. It's been a hassle for me to figure out how to do the more intricate things, like learning about its codec support and whatnot, but it works now that I know. I initially didn't get a PS3 because of its high cost. I won't be getting a PS3 Slim anytime soon now because I can't afford one, plus I don't see the return on investment or utility of it now that I have a Blu-Ray player. Yes, I would love to play Killzone 2, Metal Gear Solid 4, Resistance, Uncharted, and the other cool games that actually caught my eye for PS3 exclusives. However, they are not enough for me to drop a few hundred more for another gaming console. I agree with you that there is a bit more versatility with the PS3 thanks to Blu-Ray. However, unless I have the extra cash to burn now, my situation doesn't warrant snagging one up. If your argument was for versatility, we might as well have thrown in the possibility of a pseudo-HTPC so that you can play games, watch movies, and whatnot on hardware that doesn't have a limited upgrade path.

I can't say much about either device, but I know that CNet actually gave high marks to the Zune HD and that the iPod Touch 3G isn't much different than the 2G, depending on what size you get.There is NO difference or improvement with the 3G 8GB. However, the 32GB and 64GB variants feature faster performance due to better hardware (800MHz from 533MHz ARM processors, 256MB of RAM from 128MB). The larger variants also feature 802.1n connectivity (although this isn't announced as a feature), voice control, and "VoiceOver" (where the iPod will read text for you).According to CNet's review, the only notable addition to the Zune HD over the iPod touch would have to be HD Radio. What's interesting to note is that if you do decide to purchase the Zune Pass to allow additional downloadable content, the Zune costs more than the iPod as far as the cost of ownership goes.

Guess I'll have to do a separate thread on this... Stay tuned.

Wait, what? You might have to explain your point a bit... How is PlayStation a more established brand? Everyone knows both systems and the common associations with each. The PS3 Slim should garner more of an audience now that it's at a realistic price point for most consumers, but PS3 is associated with the utility of a Blu-Ray Player and its relatively-high cost. The 360 is plagued by its Red-Ring-of-Death history, but the newer hardware should keep new consumers interested (i.e. the Elite variants, the new motherboards, the new heat sinks, etc.). As far as multi-platform games goes, Microsoft wins over Sony in terms of ease of development. That's why Playstation 3 owners will be screwed over... because Sony screwed YOU over by making the PS3 advanced enough to thwart developers from creating a PS3 version of their games. It's more advanced hardware-wise, but it doesn't yield a heck of a lot of difference with visual and audio quality. Look at some comparison screenshots and tell me if there's a dramatic difference or not. In my opinion, it's not worth getting either system over the other based on audio or video quality... or even performance. The only arguable features to compare would include what YOU want to do with your console. @Mead: Versatility is your argument? The only features I can think off the top of my head that differentiate the two systems is that you have to pay for Xbox Live vs. free Internet play on the PS3, the built-in Blu-Ray with the PS3 and the dead HD-DVD attachment for the 360, and whatever both offer for things for online content which really is moot since a software update can keep both consoles on each other's toes. If you want a gaming console, the only difference to factor is whether you want to pay for XBL or play online for free. (If you want to throw in the SIXAXIS motion control as a factor, go for it.) Codec support, I found out, is actually rather similar. The Xbox 360 does support AVI and MP4 containers... the problem lies with the codecs. My huge beef now that I have a 5.1 surround sound system is that the 360 does NOT support 5.1 audio codecs... it has to be converted to 2-channel stereo or else it won't play. I'm reading that the PS3 doesn't support any 5.1 audio codecs either. (For those reading, please note that this is only for streamed video or video played off of a USB device... both consoles support 5.1 audio from a DVD. Obviously, it doesn't through a composite connection... it would have to be an optical/HDMI output.)

I did some more investigating and talked to Samsung reps to see if they could help me out. Surprisingly, I actually learned something. My HDTV as well as most HDTVs ONLY support 2.1 sound via HDMI. Makes sense, since the HDTV only has two speakers, but it doesn't pass a 5.1 signal THROUGH the TV TO a receiver as I, as well as most people, would assume. Very stupid, so I strongly suggest that you guys do EXTENSIVE homework before you purchase something this expensive. Of course, we can't catch them all... With that being said, I dug up my old SoundBlaster Live! 24-bit external sound processor (USB) and used the digital optical output there to connect it straight into the receiver. This gave me 5.1 sound. The problem here is that the sound system seems to either work intermittently with true 5.1 output, or that I don't have "true" 5.1 sound from my movies or audio files.

Your Internet speed cannot be doubled... there are too many factors considered when it comes to transfer rates. 1.) First off, you start with your ISP. If you elect to subscribe at 1.5Mbps, you're stuck at 1.5Mbps (192KBps). Effectively, 7Mbps = 896KBps. Fiber is faster at 15Mbps (1920KBps), 25Mbps (3200KBps), and 50Mbps (6400KBps). 2.) This bandwidth is allowed to your residence. You'll either have just one client (granting you the full bandwidth) or hook it up to a wireless router that will share this bandwidth with every client on your wireless network... so your actual bandwidth to each computer or device will be different depending on usage. 3.) Of course, now that you have all of this wonderful bandwidth, it doesn't matter if the server you connect to is slower than crap. This is something YOU cannot change. If Google is being bombarded with more http requests than it can handle, your response time with Google will suck. If Twitter is suffering a Denial of Service attack, you won't be able to access it. If you're downloading something from Rapidshare and servers are busy, your transfer rates will suffer. If you download multiple things, play online games, or whatnot simultaneously, all of those applications will share the bandwidth and suffer. I actually checked for Ports to see what you were talking about but I don't have anything to modify... so this "tweak" won't exactly benefit me in the least.

I love people on the Internet. On a relative note, Spec Ops on hardened is... hard. I'm currently stuck on Suspension thanks to the stupid helo. I got passed it once but soon afterwards a sniper spoon-fed me a .50 cal round and I choked and died.

You know, I hate politics. I think that we should be free to be able to make fun of one another without fear of repercussion... and if someone gets hurt, boo-hoo! You have the freedom of ignorance, so use it! I'm a generally courteous kind of guy so if I know you don't like something, I won't push the issue, but it's all about poking fun and living a little! If you frowned upon every little thing that COULD bother someone, what kind of a life do you really live? I can honestly say that if someone observed my daily humor or saw how I could appreciate humor in the darkest or most twisted way you could take it, they would call me out as a racist, a sexist... generally, an abomination to political correctness. But I don't live for you, or for that guy who's hurt and offended by the things I find funny or poke fun at. I live for myself. And if you don't like it, you can tell me and out of the kindness of my heart, I will keep it to a low roar when you're around. But don't expect me to change on your behalf. Now isn't that funny? The irony? Let's find some humor in this instead of going off and saying, "That's offensive to black people." I could go off on a tangent there and say that "black" people might be the wrong thing to say, because although we call Caucasians "white," we don't call Asians "yellow" or Indians "red" people, do we? I'm sure that the PC person would now aim for "African-American," but who's to say that the person with dark skin is of African descent, or even American? Did you just assume that all black people are from Africa? Isn't that a bit of a harsh, brash judgment? Hrm... we could go on all day with this and no one will be happy, or we can point, laugh, and move on. This is just the icing on the cake of things that we can find humor in. Deep down, in the layers of the Internet, you can find even more offensive, dark, and just-plain-wrong humor... all of which I, for the most part, can find and appreciate the humor in, even though the subject matter in which the humor is placed is wrong and unethical. No, I don't find dead baby jokes very funny, but I'm sure someone thrives on that crap. And I'm sure that there are some things I find pretty funny that other people will find in distaste. At home, I call my wife "woman" all the time and joke with her about "staying in the kitchen" and "make me a sammich." I also joke about myself, calling myself a man, doing manly things, and that I'm not weak, but in a light and humorous manner. She says I'm such a guy; I say that she should know her place. We thrive on that, and I'm sure that it's one of the factors that keeps us happy and smiling with each other. I call myself a chink and make fun of my own culture and race all the time, like how I see life in widescreen (slanted, Asian eyes), mispronouncing things on purpose by speaking "Engrish," saying that my distant cousin made everything you own, etc. I find that stuff funny and I like being able to make others laugh and break the ice with my company. I don't want anyone to be around me and be afraid of what to say. The same goes and comes around too... I don't want to have to feel like I can't say certain things, like I'm censored because Joe Blow or Jane over here will be butthurt by the things that I might say. If you'll be offended, I'll respect you enough not to make fun of you, but if I want to tell a joke that will make everyone else in the room laugh but you, I'm telling it.

So from what I'm understanding here, you can connect to the wireless network itself but there is no Internet access to the PC? Try restarting the cable/DSL modem for your ISP and/or do a power cycle on it. Make sure that you don't have a MAC address filter or anything of the sort that would prevent any other clients from connecting to the network. If you have a WEP/WPA key, try disabling it and then connecting to the network. Try repairing the wireless connection for the PC. Log into your router using your wired PC and check to see if the other wireless PCs are actually connected to the router. Flash the latest firmware for the router and update to the latest drivers for your wireless hardware. Try all of that. I know that wireless networks can be a pain in the neck... I hope that you get this issue solved within a "timely" manner. Can anyone offer any more input?

That sounds more like an operating system error than a hardware one, but I could be wrong. If the laptop is relatively new and you don't mind, reformat and reinstall. (That'll give you the opportunity to have a clean installation of everything that you want without the bloatware that most likely came with it.) If you want to keep things the way they are, try a system repair using the Windows 7 recovery tool on the DVD or by snagging/downloading dedicated recovery discs from Microsoft. (I know you said you used a recovery tool, but I don't know what you used, specifically.) This site will help you out a bit more concerning recovery without me reiterating everything. And for future reference, if you haven't gotten the hint by now, always have a surge protector handy. They're relatively cheap and worth their weight in gold if you are susceptible to power surges, and if you really want to make sure that things don't go awry with your electronics, a UPS from APC or another reputable brand will protect against surges and brownouts. (Not as applicable to your laptop since you have a battery in it.)

2.) I did some looking into audio coming out of the HDMI port using a surround sound test file. With my laptop plugged into the HDTV and a TOSLINK digital audio cable [from the HDTV] going into the receiver, I played the file and it correctly identified the front left, center, and front right speakers, but I could still hear diminished rear left and rear right sound effects out of the front speakers. (Considering the fact that the surround sound speakers aren't even hooked up, I'm wondering if this is a normal thing or if this answers my question and confirms that HDMI output out of the laptop isn't true 5.1. speaker output.) I now have a third question... 3.) What's worth Blu-Ray? What I mean by this is what movies are actually worth getting in Blu-Ray? I did the obvious picks and see how there would be a phenomenal improvement in watching Black Hawk Down, Gladiator, or any war movie just for the sound alone, and I know there's quite the visual "pop" from CG movies like Pixar's Up, Horton Hears A Who!, and Monsters, Inc., but aside from obvious visual clarity, would there be any real benefit from getting a chick flick on Blu-Ray? Would The Truman Show, The Green Mile, or The Shawshank Redemption benefit enough to justify the cost of Blu-Ray? I know there will be obvious visual improvement and clarity, especially on a large HDTV screen, but this thought came to mind when I tried to visually compare my compressed and 720p versions of Horton Hears A Who!. My HDTV seems to upscale the crappier compressed version so that, for lack of a better verbal description, the only differences I can actually see at a glance is that details are slightly fuzzier, edges are less defined, and color saturation is... well, slightly less saturated (bright and colorful) than its HD counterpart. There wasn't much if any "blockiness" either that compressed video is infamous for (most noticeable in a dark area of the picture). The crazy part is that I probably wouldn't see enough of an immediate difference when sitting on the couch between the HD and the compressed video. Even last night when my wife had the first season of Eureka! on, it looked damn good just playing off of the DVD from an Xbox 360 hooked up with component and digital TOSLINK audio. For comparison purposes on paper: the 720p version of Horton Hears A Who! is an MPEG-4 container with a 1280x690 1950Kbps AVC Main @ L4.1 video stream, whereas the DivX version is also an MPEG-4 container but with a 688x366 967Kbps DivX5 Advanced Simple @ L5 video stream. Am I crazy? Or is the image upscale processing that good on my HDTV to the point where I'm feeling that I shouldn't bother buying the Blu-Ray versions of movies that are less engaging?

Is there enough of a dramatic difference in power to recommend a 14.4V over a 12V drill? What would you recommend to the average joe that wants just a step up from Black & Decker? What about drill bits? I've only had some experience with Ryobi, DeWalt, and Milwaukee (with most of the experience on Milwaukee-brand drills) but we have a mish-mash set of drill bits. Would you recommend DeWalt bits? (I haven't broken one yet.) What would you get for the best bang for your buck? (I'm actually looking to snag a drill for home improvement since my current method of using an Allen wrench tool to poke holes through drywall isn't exactly the best way to go.)

I work at job sites from time to time and we use Milwaukee drills to do our work. They are definitely sturdy and rugged and I haven't had any real problems with them yet. I believe these are the drills we use. I would buy Black and Decker only for occasional home use... people are right about them not being as powerful or durable. Other brands you might consider include Ryobi, Skil, Ridgid, and DeWalt. I'd be wary of anything else. I know that money's always an object, but I think that this would be one of those deals where you get what you pay for.