skillz22

I see. The thing that had me worried was that this was the first time that I had ever experienced the issue with a display. Any reasons why this may be happening with this particular display?

I have a Lenovo Legion 5 Pro (IPS display panel, 165Hz, 2560 x 1600, 16"), and I've noticed very slight image retention occurring with the display. If I have high contrasty content (particularly UI) on the display for maybe 10-15 mins, then I switch to a the grey color at the Rtings image retention test: I can see the outlines of the UI. Furthermore, when I run the above test properly by playing back the video, after initial 10 mins, there are some faint outlines of the Rtings logos faintly visible on the display. My only problem is, this issue basically unnoticeable during normal use, meaning I really don't even notice it unless I get up the grey color tone from the video above, and turn the brightness on the display all the way up to max. I'd prefer not to have to send my device back for repair, so I was wondering whether this small amount of image retention on the display can be considered normal? Or whether it is actually defective?

This is what I meant haha, if by some slim chance this is something I can get off the ground, I do plan on continually improving it. That is not something I considered, so thanks for the suggestion :)

I have a program that is about 50% away from a stage I think would be considered complete. I have a bit of a problem regarding the business model of the software. I would love to make it free and/or open source, but I foresee the development time of the software taking a significant amount of time, and I'm not in a position to devote a large portion of my free time to development unless there is a possibility of being able to earn back some of that time in revenue. I imagine the free software model, supplemented by user donations, becomes a good idea if your software has a large user base, but maybe not so much for a smaller user base. On the other hand, the paid model for software means that you can start earning revenue right from the start, with the caveat of less people wanting to spend anything on a software that they've never heard of right from the start. Morally, I'm really inclined towards to free + donation model, but, I'm not sure of how many people will really be interested in the software, meaning there is a chance that I don't get anything back for the time I put in. I have done some research, and there seems to be nothing exactly like the program that I am making, but this nonetheless doesn't mean that there will actually be a userbase actually interested in using my software, so I'm at a dilemma of what business model would be suitable for me. There is a third, less appealing option of making it free and plastering ads in it, but I like this option the least because I detest ads as a matter of principle. What do you guys think? In which situations would each software model be appropriate, and what should I be considering when deciding what is right for my own program?

When you search on google for a physical store, it shows a graph of how busy the store is currently, in comparison to how busy it is normally, and how the busyness varies over the course of a day. I was wondering whether Google offered an API or something of that sort that I could use to directly access the live 'busy' amount of a local store. As it stands, the 'Popular Times' section doesn't actually provide any hard numbers, it just shows how busy the store is relative to other times of the day. If possible I would like to integrate this data into Home Assistant.

My Intel Graphics driver or the AMD one or just do both?

I have this issue when I'm playing a game, sometimes something important in my system crashes. First the game window freezes. after a few seconds, all of my monitors go completely black, then they turn back on. Only, now, the game window is transparent. In most cases I can still hear the game audio and the game keeps running, but the visuals are gone. When I go into task manager, I can see that my dedicated GPU has been at 100% for ages, and at the point of the crash and after, the GPU usage goes down to zero and I have to restart the game to fix this. The thing is, it doesn't just affect the game window. Most of the time Discord and Chrome windows(s) have also gone completely black, and I have to restart them to get them working again. This specific crash scenario has happened to me while playing Rainbow 6 Siege, CSGO, Fortnite and Rocket League. Rocket league however has recovered from this crash once and has continued to function as per usual after the crash. Because this is happening only when I play a game, it has led me to believe that this has something to do with my dedicated graphics. I've updated drivers, but this isn't a recent thing, it has happened for probably at least 6 months. This is happening on a laptop with an i7 8550U and a Radeon 530 GPU.

Thanks for the info! I did not know that this was possible.

I get that the device compresses the signal, what I meant was I do not understand how you can send data over a single wire. You need a closed circuit to send any sort of current (and thus a signal)... right? In Linus' video, both the sender and receiver were floating, and there was no way for the two devices' grounds to be tied together. How did he get a video signal over the single wire?

I saw this video from LTT: and they didn't bother to explain how the product actually worked. I had a look on the website, and it seems to say that you usually need two wires to get the sender and receiver to work. They show Linus' video on the website proclaiming that Linus even got this to work with one wire, but it works better with two. My question is, how does this product actually work? Two wires make sense to me, one to tie the grounds together and the other to send data, but how did Linus get this one wire configuration working? Furthermore, how does adding a second wire help the signal if one wire works fine?

Not an ultrabook (Dell Inspiron 15 5000). I think it just has horrible cooling tbh.

Pretty sure opening it up doesn't void the warranty, I had a dell service agent come and repair my keyboard, and he told me that I should add a bit more RAM. Kind of inferring here, but it seems like it's fine to open it up.

I have a Dell laptop with an i7 8550U and a Radeon 530 GPU. This isn't a recent thing, it has been happening since I got it, which was about a year ago (the problem may have increased without me noticing). Every time that I stress test the CPU or even just play a game, the CPU and GPU temps get crazy high, I'm talking above 90 degrees Celcius for the CPU and 84 Celcius for the GPU (furmark stress test and CPU stress test at the same time). If I run a benchmark inside XTU, the maximum temperature is displayed as 99 Celcius. This is with the graphics not being used at all. Basically, both the CPU and GPU thermal throttles really bad, for example, If I run the stress test on CPU-Z, the multi-core performance reaches peaks of 2100 when I first start it and slowly starts dropping off as the CPU heats up, once the boost period ends, it comes to rest at 1650. While the GPU bench is also running, I get dips of CPU multi-core performance down to 1400 in CPU-Z. What's going on? Is my laptop's cooling system just really garbage? I attempted undervolting the CPU, but using that XTU benchmark, the maximum temperature was the same. I have actually thought about opening up the laptop to clean out the fan since it never stops spinning completely now (it used to when completely idle). Any other fixes that I should know about? is reapplying thermal paste a good idea?

I bought a microphone, a proper one they use in music performances and stuff. It has XLR out on the bottom, and the cable outputs to a 6.35mm AUX jack on the other end. Only annoying thing is, I don't have anything to plug this into. I want to use this with my computer. I went on eBay and found this (https://ebay.us/qsDibt). It says Headphone in the listing, so I'm not sure whether it will work. I have never used this kind of setup before, so sorry if this is a stupid question... Thanks

That's my mistake, $100 is definitely not high end. Thanks for your suggestion.

At this point in time, I've gone through quite a few cheap printers. It has finally dawned on me that cheap inkjet printers are a massive waste of money (the ones that come with the print-head on the cartridge) because I can usually just buy a new printer for the same amount of money as a new set of cartridges. So I settled for cheap inkjets and cartridge refills for the past few years. Now, I kind of had enough and came to the forum for some advice. I initially thought of going all out and cashing in 300 bucks for a decent laser printer. I did a bit of cost calculation in terms of the toner cartridges and found that, again, a full set of cartridges can cost more than the printer itself... Even on eBay... I have never used a laser printer in my life, so I don't really know how to compare it to an inkjet. I know that it has a much higher page yield, but I still don't feel like this is worth it for my uses, since I usually only print about a few colour documents per week. So I moved away from laser printers and started having a look at the higher level inkjet ones. I found one in the $100 area that has decent specs and pretty cheap cartridges on eBay. I was planning on buying this, but I wanted some more advice. What do you guys recommend I do? Are laser printers worth the extra purchase and maintenance cost? Or should I stick with inkjet for now?

I had a friend who recently built a PC in a room with carpet, and he didn't have any issues. If you're concerned, build it in a room without carpet, and ground yourself every once in a while by touching a grounded piece of metal, as others have suggested. Edit: keep in mind the metal on your table will not be grounded. Also remember your PSU might have a coating of non-conductive material on its casing.

I have this old laptop with a core 2 duo. At one stage I thought it was broken, so I took out the CPU and proceeded to get a 3v battery back and randomly probe the CPU contacts with it. (Don't ask me what I was thinking, this was years ago, I was much younger and stupider) Anyway, I discovered that the computer wasn't actually broken. Basically, I put the CPU back in, and the system worked perfectly. It still does, I'd say it's about 10 years old at this point. Yeah well, go figure.

Communication between the devices on the same network should be faster than your actual internet speeds technically... right?

But what about wired speeds? Why did they not go above 100 megabits?

There's an easier way to get windows activated with a proper digital licence, but I think it's illegal and not allowed in this forum. It's free, but counts as piracy, so not allowed.

I did a test where I shared a folder to the network in Windows and added it as a network location on a different computer. I had a 2Gb file in the folder which I copied to the second computer. (I know this doesn't matter, but I always copied to and from SSDs) For some reason, on 802.11ac WiFi devices, the wifi transfer speeds were never more than 5 megabytes per second... I also attempted this test using straight up Ethernet. But the speeds were never more than around 12 megabytes per second, and it never went over 100 megabits per second. I did a bit of googling, and 802.11ac has a theoretical maximum speed of over 1 gigabit. I tested the WiFi speeds on two different routers and once on my mobile hotspot. Can someone please tell me what's going on?

Look up a tutorial on youtube and just follow that

Try what others said about disk management, and if it's not there, update your motherboard/storage controller drivers. (If you have a Dell, you can use Support Assist, if you don't, visit your PCs support website for more info)

This PC (https://www.jbhifi.com.au/computers-tablets/laptops/dell/dell-inspiron-15-5000-15-6-laptop-i7/340622/) has an 8GB Optane drive in combination with a 1TB Hard Drive. A while back, I bought the same PC with exactly the same configurations except, instead of Optane and a HDD, it had a 250GB SSD. (Exact same price) Which one do you guys think is the better deal?