neon

I can confirm that 20 is still the maximum number of simultaneous connections, not sure why that wouldn't be enough for a consumer/non server OS, but 20 is still the maximum.

You should use your 'main' Microsoft account, which is the one you have your gamertag on and the one you have bought apps or anything on, if you don't have a gamertag or have never bought anything on Windows 8 or Windows Phone then you can pick any Microsoft Account you like but I would suggest you use your 'name' email if you have it, ie firstlast@Whatever.com (you can also use a gmail or a personal domain to create a Microsoft Account too)
Microsoft's main email is outlook.com if you have firstlast@outlook.com and you don't have a gmaertag or purchasers on another account then use that email.

FYI this is IP Cameras NOT webcams attached to your computer

Thanks for your reply, I started going though your list I couldn't ping anything externally, then I pulled out a very old WiFi router and plugged into that to see if it was a router problem and it worked, I could use the internet then, went back to my router to find the problem and low and behold the internet was working then.
 
No idea what went wrong but whatever it was plugging into another router fixed it, strange it only affected my computer on the network but it seems to be ok now.
 
Thanks again 

Ok FYI just right clicking and selecting 'Delete' (including creating a new user and deleting the old one) does not erase your data at all a next owner it would be trivial to find any files.
 
When you are selling a computer you should erase the HDD using something like DBAN, I understand you are worried about loosing your Windows 7 Starter install, you have two options 1. you can just ditch it and install Ubuntu or 2. if you know what you are doing you can modify a Windows 7 ISO to install Starter edition (instructions here). Also read this.
 
If you don't feel confident in creating the Starter ISO then you should delete as much personal files as possible off the computer (which you seem to be doing), uninstall any programs that you have installed, and then use something like ccleaner to perform a 'Wipe free space' this is not a preferred method but it should protect your data from being recovered the best it can be without a full erase and reinstall of the OS.

you sir ,you just made me switch over to musicbee 
THANK YOU.

MusicBee is my player of choice, highly recommend.

MusicBee is my player of choice, highly recommend.

I strongly suspect you will install the Windows just as you do now, and then either in initial setup or just after the first boot into the OS you will sign in with your Account ID and it will activate, like Windows 7 there might be a 30 day unactivated Window before you need to activate, this would help if you don't have internet during first setup.
 
I can't really think of a legitimate argument against this, it has worked for years with iTunes and in a similar way Steam, if it stops the scum pirating it and is not needlessly intrusive then it's fine by me, and it makes it easier to move the OS to different computers.

Even if you have a data connection at all time, it still won't be as fast as local storage. Most people don't have an unlimited data plan either.
 
Videos doesn't get more compressed when you put them on a phone (they might do if you got an iPhone but whatever). I never transcode any of my videos no matter what device I am watching it on so for me, a 4K video will be the same size on my desktop as on my phone. Hopefully we will get proper support for HEVC and VP9 (both encoding and decoding) before we start pushing out lots of 4K videos though. That would really help with the file size issues.
 
It is best to have a backup of your data, but don't expect privacy since Google and Microsoft have implemented things such as PhotoDNA which looks through all your images.
 
For me it's mostly about not having to worry about storage. On my Nexus 10 I have to constantly delete and replace things because I keep running out of space.
If I had 128GB of storage then I no longer would have to go "ohh which episode do I want to bring with me today? Guess I have to go through them one at a time and find a few good ones to transfer". Instead I would go "Oh I want to watch Top Gear. I'll transfer 5 seasons so that I can pick one later".

Cloud storage is not the same, you always require a data connection, you're at the mercy of other companies, if you are recording any video, esp. 4K which it may or may not be able to do, try using the cloud for that.
I prefer to control my own data, you can't trust other companies to keep your data safe, and finally there is no reason to artificially limit the storage, yes most people do not need 128GB or more but that doesn't mean that it is pointless to have or even unnecessary.

Microsoft in it's infinite wisdom decided that an 8 key cannot activate an 8.1 install even though it's basically just a service pack.
 
Therefore you can only clean install 8 then upgrade to 8.1 through the store, there is no way to clean install it direct, so all you can do is what Rashy said.

LOL it's free....... Just use it with it's free on demand scanning then have a real time antivirus that runs all the time, I suggest Avast - that is free too, then every so often give a scan with malwarebytes.

MusicBee is what I suggest has everything you ask for, it's customisable has scrobbling and some good skins, it's better than Foobar2000 IMO, and it works straight out the box.

If you cannot tell the difference between the Total Biscuit video and the Lets Play I showed then...., hint: one is a critique of the game one is a play through of the storyline, (and the two videos I posted are of the same game) I am not and never have talked about the 'game footage', I am talking about the scripted content of the game (the story line and arc), which you refuse to understand.
 
Ubisoft allow people to do lets plays for free and monetise them as long as they they follow certain conduct rules (which includes Watch Dogs), this is Ubisoft exerting control over their IP, if they were not allowed to exert control of their IP then people would not be compelled to follow their guidelines, again reviews are exempt from following these guidelines because it is a critique and critiques cannot be forced to be censored.
Microsoft has similar guidelines.
 
- I have never said Let's Plays are or should be illegal - it is not defined however it is accepted that they should be licensed, either for free or by royalty, it's the 'owners' to decide.
- I have said that it is reasonable that when someone is using the scripted storyline of a game then they should licence and (if the 'owner' wants) pay royalties (something that is the general consensus of the industry and internet (but (unsurprisingly) to some extent not the people who do the Lets Plays) -  you have said explicitly that you agree with this.
- the Youtube TOS that you say are to protect content creators from having their content stolen (and to make Youtube money), for instance if someone downloads LinusTechTips videos and re uploads them for their own profit then Linus can exert control and make money from his property.  Nintendo became a Youtube partner to exert it's control on it's IP and went mostly after full video walkthroughs, or in other words videos that use the storyline.
- Other publishers have done similar action on their content including EA and Activision
- If the Youtubers who do a Let's Play have their content flagged and monetised by Nintendo ect. then that is allowed by Youtube TOS, if they were unhappy with that then they should not have agreed to those Terms when they joined Youtube, and they should take Youtube to court for allowing this.
- If the Youtubers (and other fair use activists) felt strongly that using a games scripted storyline in a Let's Play if fair use then they should take it to court for a ruling, but I very much doubt they will as, I think, judging buy what agreements already exists, they would loose.
- Your argument seems to be more at Youtube for allowing this (especially by their Content ID system which has had a lot of bad news), Nintendo along with all other 'owners' have the right to control their IP.
 
 
Again to absolutely clarify I have been talking about the scripted storyline in a game and it's use by people for profit, this is what Nintendo went after last year, now obviously some legitimate videos may have been caught but everyone knows nothing is perfect and the kinks I think were partly ironed out (and then Youtubes Content ID system partly screwed it all up again)
I am not talking about using video footage of a game at any length (if someone wants to upload 6 hours of footage stealing taxis on GTA that, arguably, should be fine),
 
I would thank you for finally understanding the difference between footage of the game used in an acceptable manner and using the scripted storyline for your own personal gain, and am not bothered in reading any more of your fictitious 'words' I have 'apparently' said, when you clearly misunderstood the point I have made, and is completely agreed by most. 
 
I will leave this as someone else saying essentially what I've been saying http://metro.co.uk/2013/05/19/the-legalities-of-lets-play-readers-feature-3788322/
we don't have to agree but I have made my points clear, and they are the views of content creators and general interested parties and the public alike. 
 
You have said that Nintendo taking the advertising revenue from Let's Plays is illegal, it is not, there has been no ruling that it is and it seems that everyone is scared to even take it to court, it is however a generally accepted practice Nintendo (among many other parties) has done and one that no one has yet chalenged, because perhaps they deep down they know Nintendo et al are right.

I think we will just have to agree to agree on some point and disagree on others, I can clearly see the difference between a Let's Play and the Review using game footage, a lot of Let's Plays do not remove the game audio or cut scenes, at least the popular ones (from Youtube searches) seem to not (and there are even Let's Plays with no voice over), a Let's Play is also inherently different from a walkthrough which would remove stuff like story dialogue if favour of how to complete a level, ect.
 
For better or worse the Content ID type system, where copyright owners can take the revenue, is there and is tolerated by the community at large even if they do speak against it, Youtube is a global website and has enabled Nintendo to do this so they don't have to take the Youtubers to court in every country.
The only way to stop Nintendo and others taking the revenue is for the Youtubers to take Nintendo (or Google for allowing it) to a court (probably a US one).
 
I think it does depend on the game, you used an example of Pac Man, watching someone play Pac Man does not detract from then playing the game, but watching someone play the linear storyline of a single player game can do.
 
Anyway Nintendo is just using the tools Google gave them, as many others have and do, the licencing/partner scheme that Nintendo is setting up does seem the best of a bad situation for all parties (everyone gets paid), even if it is quite a convoluted way of doing it.
 
We will just have to see what happens in the future. But I think we both agree on more points than not.

If you cannot tell the difference between the Total Biscuit video and the Lets Play I showed then...., hint: one is a critique of the game one is a play through of the storyline, (and the two videos I posted are of the same game) I am not and never have talked about the 'game footage', I am talking about the scripted content of the game (the story line and arc), which you refuse to understand.
 
Ubisoft allow people to do lets plays for free and monetise them as long as they they follow certain conduct rules (which includes Watch Dogs), this is Ubisoft exerting control over their IP, if they were not allowed to exert control of their IP then people would not be compelled to follow their guidelines, again reviews are exempt from following these guidelines because it is a critique and critiques cannot be forced to be censored.
Microsoft has similar guidelines.
 
- I have never said Let's Plays are or should be illegal - it is not defined however it is accepted that they should be licensed, either for free or by royalty, it's the 'owners' to decide.
- I have said that it is reasonable that when someone is using the scripted storyline of a game then they should licence and (if the 'owner' wants) pay royalties (something that is the general consensus of the industry and internet (but (unsurprisingly) to some extent not the people who do the Lets Plays) -  you have said explicitly that you agree with this.
- the Youtube TOS that you say are to protect content creators from having their content stolen (and to make Youtube money), for instance if someone downloads LinusTechTips videos and re uploads them for their own profit then Linus can exert control and make money from his property.  Nintendo became a Youtube partner to exert it's control on it's IP and went mostly after full video walkthroughs, or in other words videos that use the storyline.
- Other publishers have done similar action on their content including EA and Activision
- If the Youtubers who do a Let's Play have their content flagged and monetised by Nintendo ect. then that is allowed by Youtube TOS, if they were unhappy with that then they should not have agreed to those Terms when they joined Youtube, and they should take Youtube to court for allowing this.
- If the Youtubers (and other fair use activists) felt strongly that using a games scripted storyline in a Let's Play if fair use then they should take it to court for a ruling, but I very much doubt they will as, I think, judging buy what agreements already exists, they would loose.
- Your argument seems to be more at Youtube for allowing this (especially by their Content ID system which has had a lot of bad news), Nintendo along with all other 'owners' have the right to control their IP.
 
 
Again to absolutely clarify I have been talking about the scripted storyline in a game and it's use by people for profit, this is what Nintendo went after last year, now obviously some legitimate videos may have been caught but everyone knows nothing is perfect and the kinks I think were partly ironed out (and then Youtubes Content ID system partly screwed it all up again)
I am not talking about using video footage of a game at any length (if someone wants to upload 6 hours of footage stealing taxis on GTA that, arguably, should be fine),
 
I would thank you for finally understanding the difference between footage of the game used in an acceptable manner and using the scripted storyline for your own personal gain, and am not bothered in reading any more of your fictitious 'words' I have 'apparently' said, when you clearly misunderstood the point I have made, and is completely agreed by most. 
 
I will leave this as someone else saying essentially what I've been saying http://metro.co.uk/2013/05/19/the-legalities-of-lets-play-readers-feature-3788322/
we don't have to agree but I have made my points clear, and they are the views of content creators and general interested parties and the public alike. 
 
You have said that Nintendo taking the advertising revenue from Let's Plays is illegal, it is not, there has been no ruling that it is and it seems that everyone is scared to even take it to court, it is however a generally accepted practice Nintendo (among many other parties) has done and one that no one has yet chalenged, because perhaps they deep down they know Nintendo et al are right.

What exactly is you problem? you have descended into some form of insults now, are you that desperate? I have never said Lets Plays are illegal or that they should be, so you can put a sock in that, what I have said is that there needs to be the question asked is if a Lets Play (which is just a straight play of the story line of a game) can or should be considered like a script (similar to the lyrics of a song) and when people use it for profit they should pay royalties?  
 
What are you talking about? Where have you got this 'script of a voice-over' from? I been meaning the script of the game, games are scripted and storyboarded.
 
I would have thought anyone would have been able to understand the difference between a review and a Lets Play, if you need help then this is a review: 
and this is a Lets Play or a 'gameplay' as many call it  note the review is a critique of the game showing many different areas of the game while explaining the premise and the quality of the game among other things, the Lets Play is just someone playing the game with the odd bit of talk over. 
I know this is your thread you started but I am not attacking you, I don't have to like something to have an objective and open mind, I have said that no one knows and until something solid happens (i.e. a court case) all we can do is ask questions, and I would think that you should do the same.  We cannot say that Nintendo are not within their right that they should receive money from Lets Plays, and it seems their affiliate scheme is a good way of doing that protecting their copyright material but allowing people to make money from it.  
Just because one company doesn't ask for royalties doesn't meant that non can, it's very much up for debate.
 
You have now made a post agreeing that it is just opinion and it needs to be decided if a Lets Play is of fair use and how much talk over counts as 'enough', so I don't know what you have been arguing about, pity it took someone else to say what I've been saying all along for you to agree, what a waste of time.

That is the question, even games like Bioshock Infinite, 90% of the game is identical for everyone but a couple of decisions here and there change things, and can affect the story a lot, like on Beyond Two Souls.
 
That is why I ask is (or should) the story arc be protected like a novel, song or film, all aspects of it are pre planned and only varies on an choose A, B or C method, which most games are completely linear, I think we all agree that a multiplayer part of a game is generally infinitely different and watching someone kill the opposing team on CoD cannot really be protected as there is no detrimental effect from watching it, but a Lets Play does have something that is scripted which if watched can negate playing that part of the game.
 
Until there is something solid (like a court case), all we can ask is questions, the Youtubers who make Lets Plays will always turn on something (Nintendo) trying to take their money away, but it doesn't mean they are right.

Because a review is a critique of the artwork, it does not use the entire works, but shows samples of the gameplay to review the product to provide feedback and commentary, and to let people decide whether to buy the product/go see it (if movie or theatre).
 
From what I can see Campbell could have possibly sued Andy Warhol if they wanted but they decided that the free advertisement was of far more benefit, and since Andy Warhol has died his estate has apparently got a licencing agreement with Campbell for use of the artwork on the can.
 
It is not too hard to see the same being the exact case for Lets Plays, we know many of the publishers and owners are completely happy to let Lets Plays use their work (and how do we know there are not already licences in place for the big Youtubers), but it is silly to think that everyone is the same, Nintendo has obviously decided it doesn't want people using their content in Lets Plays, and they are within their right to do so (I seem to remember a few indie developers have said the same), with there being no precedent on video games then it's fair game until someone takes it to court.
 
We are not talking about a quick 5 min video of how to beat a tricky boss, but the systematic play through of the entire story arc which could easily be argued belongs to the 'writer/publisher/owner', I think you are splitting hairs on the fact that a 'player' can modify it buy pressing Up, Up, Down, Up, Up rather than just Up, Up, Up the end is exactly the same.  Not to mention cut scenes they are definitely non modifiable, yet are included in Lets Plays.

Because a review is a critique of the artwork, it does not use the entire works, but shows samples of the gameplay to review the product to provide feedback and commentary, and to let people decide whether to buy the product/go see it (if movie or theatre).
 
From what I can see Campbell could have possibly sued Andy Warhol if they wanted but they decided that the free advertisement was of far more benefit, and since Andy Warhol has died his estate has apparently got a licencing agreement with Campbell for use of the artwork on the can.
 
It is not too hard to see the same being the exact case for Lets Plays, we know many of the publishers and owners are completely happy to let Lets Plays use their work (and how do we know there are not already licences in place for the big Youtubers), but it is silly to think that everyone is the same, Nintendo has obviously decided it doesn't want people using their content in Lets Plays, and they are within their right to do so (I seem to remember a few indie developers have said the same), with there being no precedent on video games then it's fair game until someone takes it to court.
 
We are not talking about a quick 5 min video of how to beat a tricky boss, but the systematic play through of the entire story arc which could easily be argued belongs to the 'writer/publisher/owner', I think you are splitting hairs on the fact that a 'player' can modify it buy pressing Up, Up, Down, Up, Up rather than just Up, Up, Up the end is exactly the same.  Not to mention cut scenes they are definitely non modifiable, yet are included in Lets Plays.

That is the question, even games like Bioshock Infinite, 90% of the game is identical for everyone but a couple of decisions here and there change things, and can affect the story a lot, like on Beyond Two Souls.
 
That is why I ask is (or should) the story arc be protected like a novel, song or film, all aspects of it are pre planned and only varies on an choose A, B or C method, which most games are completely linear, I think we all agree that a multiplayer part of a game is generally infinitely different and watching someone kill the opposing team on CoD cannot really be protected as there is no detrimental effect from watching it, but a Lets Play does have something that is scripted which if watched can negate playing that part of the game.
 
Until there is something solid (like a court case), all we can ask is questions, the Youtubers who make Lets Plays will always turn on something (Nintendo) trying to take their money away, but it doesn't mean they are right.

32 more bits... and a brand new instruction set.
 
What that translates to a very big performance increase. Just switching to ARMv8 alone will give us a ~20% performance increase (and in certain situations like some crypto things we will see an 800% performance increase).
The move to 64bit ARM processors will be a big leap. Not just "wow more RAM!" like a lot of people think.

I really hope you're joking. I am getting really sick and tired of this "we don't need more than X" argument that seems popular lately. "It's good enough" is NEVER a reason to stop improving. With that logic, we would still be stuck with single core processors and a few MB of RAM. I strongly disagree that 8Mbps is enough as well and @neon has already said why we need more.
 
 
To answer OP's question. I currently use 1Gbps. My NAS and end point devices aren't fast enough to handle more than ~70MBps so I still have some way to go before 1Gbps bottlenecks me.

You're talking about internet speed the OP is talking about local Ethernet speed, the type of speed you have on your LAN to access files on a NAS, stream games via in-home-streaming I'd like to see anyone (who uses a NAS, ect.) cope with an 8Mbit LAN.
 
And I disagree that 8Mbps is good enough internet speed, you are not the measure of the world, perhaps it's good enough for a one person household who does one task online at a time and has plenty of time and money on their hands.  Those who are able to leave their computer on overnight while it downloads a film on iTunes or a game on Steam (3.5GB film would take an hour, 15GB game would take over 4 hours (this is at perfect speed, ever forbid that there is a glitch and it pauses the download so when you wake up the next morning wanting to play that movie/game you have to restart the download possibly from scratch)).  The extra electricity it would use by leaving said computer on (multiplied by thousands and millions of households because everyone has only 8Mbps), but even to an 'average' household, 4 people, all want to watch catch-up, iPlayer, 4oD, Netflix, Youtube, one wants to play a game, you soon have saturated the connection and it's all gone belly up.
 
Faster internet means less compromise allowing people to actually use the internet the way they want to, and the added benefits that come along with it, less electricity usage, you are able to go out for the evening instead of having to stay in to watch the TV, less waste from DVDs and VHSs going in landfill.  Then most importantly, future proofing, 10 years ago you probably would have said no-one needs more than 56 or 128kbit, by laying an infrastructure down that is by far more than adequate it saves a lot of time and money later on and allows people to access those services, by having an internet speed that is much faster than what is needed you take a lot of strain from the system because of the increase in bandwidth meaning the network can handle far more data, it's much better for the ISP (esp. mobile ISPs) to have you on the network for a short fast 'burst' than for you to take 4-5 hours to download a game all that time consuming valuable resources on their network.
 
Also there is no 'rule' saying 1080p video is 5Mbps, I have 1080p video right here that is double that, there is only compressed compromise (a-la Youtube), it's like saying SSD should be limited to HDD speeds, it's like saying the Ford Model T had 4 wheels and got you from A to B, why does anyone want anything better?
 
Convenience and technological advancement and future proofing are not bad things, they are very good things, like people who say "3G is good enough why do people want LTE", the world is bigger than any one person, one consumer is not representative of the entire industry or world.