Jump to content

terry1966

Anti-Spyware Brigade
  • Content Count

    9,289
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by terry1966

  1. yes it is, but you'd have to be doing something to saturate your bandwidth like uploading a video file or something to take such a hit on your speeds so i'd think you'd know if it was anything your doing that was causing such dismal speeds. don't you have a network expert working for you who can explain or further diagnose where your problem may be? still don't like that 2nd step request timed out in your trace, that definitely points to a problem somewhere to me, after all it should be the first step to your isp provider which is out side your lan. think the first step would be to log everything in your router and then study them to see if anything jumps out at you. really can't offer any better explanations or advice because i don't know a lot about networking, but if your upload is saturated then it is unable to handshake for the downloads so you get packet collisions and slowdowns far as i understand how things sort of work.
  2. that step 2 that timed out looks suspicious to me, not being anywhere near a networking expert or really understanding how things work, i'd guess all your problems are caused by that initial connection to your isp, so again i'd think i'd get them out to check your line. being in uk my traceroute is going to be completely different to yours but here's 2 i did, first is to yahoo.com 2nd is to the same ip as your last hop. mainpc:/home/suse13-1 # traceroute www.yahoo.com traceroute to www.yahoo.com (46.228.47.114), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 0.480 ms 0.576 ms 0.675 ms 2 host-92-21-160-1.as13285.net (92.21.160.1) 14.034 ms 14.186 ms 14.276 ms 3 host-78-151-230-139.as13285.net (78.151.230.139) 21.208 ms 21.306 ms 23.611 ms 4 host-78-151-230-134.as13285.net (78.151.230.134) 25.147 ms host-78-151-230-142.as13285.net (78.151.230.142) 32.384 ms host-78-151-230-136.as13285.net (78.151.230.136) 33.384 ms 5 host-78-144-0-157.as13285.net (78.144.0.157) 32.805 ms host-78-144-8-241.as13285.net (78.144.8.241) 33.293 ms 78.144.9.255 (78.144.9.255) 36.402 ms 6 host-78-144-10-144.as13285.net (78.144.10.144) 42.602 ms ge-1-1-0.pat1.the.yahoo.com (195.66.224.129) 17.333 ms host-78-144-10-140.as13285.net (78.144.10.140) 17.109 ms 7 ge-1-1-0.pat1.the.yahoo.com (195.66.224.129) 44.562 ms ae6.pat2.iry.yahoo.com (66.196.68.153) 28.497 ms ge-1-1-0.pat1.the.yahoo.com (195.66.224.129) 45.262 ms 8 ae6.pat2.iry.yahoo.com (66.196.68.153) 31.430 ms ae-3.msr1.ir2.yahoo.com (66.196.67.243) 30.753 ms 31.617 ms 9 et-17-9.bas2-2-prd.ir2.yahoo.com (217.146.185.166) 36.929 ms et-18-10.bas2-2-prd.ir2.yahoo.com (77.238.186.47) 34.174 ms et-17-18.bas1-2-prd.ir2.yahoo.com (77.238.186.41) 37.070 ms 10 et-18-10.bas2-2-prd.ir2.yahoo.com (77.238.186.47) 37.201 ms et-17-18.bas2-2-prd.ir2.yahoo.com (77.238.186.49) 37.332 ms * mainpc:/home/suse13-1 # traceroute 98.139.183.24 traceroute to 98.139.183.24 (98.139.183.24), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1) 0.348 ms 0.396 ms 0.457 ms 2 host-92-21-160-1.as13285.net (92.21.160.1) 11.775 ms 12.896 ms 12.948 ms 3 host-78-151-230-139.as13285.net (78.151.230.139) 15.560 ms 16.786 ms 18.020 ms 4 host-78-151-230-136.as13285.net (78.151.230.136) 18.476 ms 19.210 ms host-78-151-230-134.as13285.net (78.151.230.134) 20.182 ms 5 host-78-144-0-159.as13285.net (78.144.0.159) 27.344 ms host-78-144-11-45.as13285.net (78.144.11.45) 25.370 ms host-78-144-11-49.as13285.net (78.144.11.49) 26.121 ms 6 ge-1-1-0.pat1.the.yahoo.com (195.66.224.129) 28.075 ms 25.205 ms 26.068 ms 7 ae8.pat1.nyc.yahoo.com (66.196.65.61) 114.978 ms ge-1-1-0.pat1.the.yahoo.com (195.66.224.129) 18.766 ms 17.730 ms 8 ae-2.pat1.bfz.yahoo.com (216.115.100.26) 117.214 ms ae8.pat1.nyc.yahoo.com (66.196.65.61) 104.391 ms 104.275 ms 9 ae-2.pat1.bfz.yahoo.com (216.115.100.26) 114.220 ms 114.481 ms ae-3.msr1.bf1.yahoo.com (216.115.100.29) 111.266 ms 10 ae-4.msr1.bf1.yahoo.com (216.115.100.25) 114.915 ms ae-3.msr2.bf1.yahoo.com (216.115.100.31) 114.218 ms UNKNOWN-98-139-129-X.yahoo.com (98.139.129.175) 111.025 ms 11 UNKNOWN-72-30-22-X.yahoo.com (72.30.22.45) 116.513 ms xe-1-2-1.clr1-a-gdc.bf1.yahoo.com (98.139.130.7) 108.747 ms xe-2-2-1.clr1-a-gdc.bf1.yahoo.com (98.139.232.81) 117.927 ms 12 UNKNOWN-72-30-22-X.yahoo.com (72.30.22.15) 116.187 ms po-15.bas2-7-prd.bf1.yahoo.com (98.139.129.243) 116.915 ms UNKNOWN-72-30-22-X.yahoo.com (72.30.22.5) 115.207 ms 13 * * po-12.bas1-7-prd.bf1.yahoo.com (98.139.129.193) 114.824 ms
  3. bet you can stream video (not hd video tho.) jacee even tho. it's so slow as long as it's a constant speed (like indy's test) and not fluctuating up and down like robs does.
  4. for the speeds your getting you might as well be paying for the basic package. personally i'd suspect there's a fault on your line with such dismal speeds and get them out to check it unless the speeds dramatically increase at certain times of day.
  5. if things are that bad have you looked into using a 4g mobile connection for your internet or even satellite?
  6. sorry no idea what you mean by wire hookups? and without having a clue on the design or placement of the pc when in use it is hard to recommend anything anyway, personally i'd stick to how a normal pc case is layed out even tho this is going to be a cube case. so power and motherboard connections at the back, power switch,reset switch, etc etc on or near the top front.
  7. awareness is key i agree, and why it's nice to see such topics. as to anti-virus software being any use then that's where we digress and disagree, in my opinion that's no better than using a fly swatter to stop a bullet, but they are great for telling you "the horse has bolted because you left the stable door open."
  8. what happens is you'd get a javascript popup on your screen saying something like this url web address/ this page wants/says you need to update something please press ok, or you have x amount of viruses press ok to remove etc, etc. now the clue is the "this url web address/this page wants/says" so you know it is not a legitimate system/os update process so when you see something like that you just close/back out of it and NOT click ok. which would then start the install process and you'd probably have to click ok again to double check before the malware got installed too, a simple 1 click will not usually install anything. as bruce said YOU have to install malware on an android device, it can't just get on there without you installing it. it doesn't matter if the malware tries to get in by wifi or bluetooth or an infected web page and javascript. here's an example of what i'm trying to explain :- https://blog.malwarebytes.org/mobile-2/2013/12/android-pop-ups-warn-of-infection/ Contrary to what you’ve heard, Android is almost impenetrable to malware :- http://qz.com/131436/contrary-to-what-youve-heard-android-is-almost-impenetrable-to-malware/
  9. nothing against you raising the topic and pointing out these things 8210guy, such info is always nice to know. it's just i don't believe the threats are as great as the media and especially the anti virus makers would like you to believe, of course it is possible to get malware but then again it is also possible to get run over tomorrow too, personally i'd bet the odds are about the same for both yet i certainly don't go worrying about either, i take notice of what happens on my devices and i take notice of what happens on the roads. if your ever truely targeted by someone who wants your data then no amount of anti-virus software is going to stop them infecting you and getting it i'm afraid. why do you think so many people get infected when they all run anti-virus software anyway? anti virus software is just a placebo to ease peoples minds in my opinion. it doesn't have any real stopping power from a targeted malware attack or a silly user, yes it may stop a malware file after 100,000s of people have been infected first and that file is then common knowledge and added to a list, but that is no different than what happens with android anyway without running anti virus software, if a bad app manages to get onto the playstore then by the time it's found and removed would be sooner than the anti-virus software would have been updated anyway, don't forget android has it's own app checking/verifying security built into it by default along with having to enable the unknown sources too. personally my phone is set so no background data is allowed, bluetooth is always off until i need it, same with wifi. if i get infected then you can be damn sure it was my own stupid fault and no amount of anti virus software would have stopped it. should add i looked up this and that in fact too needed the user to "install" it first before it could run, so don't see why it's such a "big" thing in your mind. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabir_%28computer_worm%29 and when i say stupid, i'm not trying to be offensive i just mean being ignorant or not thinking first before acting and accepting everything just because it popped up in front of them on their screen.
  10. no actually they can't on an android device, the user always has to make at least 1, usually more, steps/decisions to accept/install any malware onto their devices. these are not like windows operating systems when 1 pc can infect every other on a network without user intervention, with android the user always has to accept something and why malware doesn't spread on android devices, yes a user can infect their own device with their own stupid decisions but that's about as far as it usually goes. anti virus software is just a big con in my opinion, it won't stop anybody getting infected especially if the user is stupid anyway and downloads from illegal/unsafe sources. eg. these anti virus software companies are good at saying things like "50% of all infected mobile devices are android phones", which actually doesn't really mean anything if you think about it. say there are 1 million infected mobile devices out there and 500,000 of them are android phones, well there are a billion android phones out there so that means that 0.05% are infected, and let me tell you there are a lot more than 0.05% of stupid android users out there. don't be stupid and your as safe using an android mobile phone with or without any antivirus whatsoever. biggest complaint i have is the amount of permissions you need to allow to install most apps that are just used for data mining and targeting ads, but that again is still down to the user if he wants the app enough to allow such privacy invasion. actually no, i'd say it's nothing like russian roulette, in actual fact i'd bet you have about as much chance of winning the lottery as getting infected by malware on an android phone running no anti-virus whatsoever and exactly the same odds even if you were running an anti virus app on your android phone.
  11. stop kicking your hubby when he's asleep then you might not break it so often.
  12. great info bruce. wish i had your googling skills, i can never seem to find exactly what i need when i do searches for some reason.
  13. no idea what you mean by "real life picture" but your tv is not "smart" or wifi capable according to this :- http://www.samsung.com/us/video/tvs/UN39FH5000FXZA so can not connect directly to the internet even if you plugged a samsung wifi usb adaptor in to it's usb port. it is 1080p tho so i suspect your "real life picture" that you expect to see is just a case of adjusting the colour settings, brightness, contrast, etc until you get the picture that looks best. tv's don't usually have the best settings by default so it is always worth spending a bit of time adjusting them manually yourself. see if these links help explain and guide you on the best way to do that yourself. :- http://oledtv-review.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/Samsung-UN39FH5000-39-Inch-1080p-60Hz-LED-TV.html http://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-display-calibration/1055906-sharing-display-menu-settings.html http://www.avsforum.com/forum/139-display-calibration/1130359-what-best-way-dummy-calibrate-his-new-lcd-tv.html
  14. you actually using btrfs or ext4 bruce? i've stated my reasons for sticking with ext4 when i update my main pc in another topic, which is it's the faster file system. yet am using btrfs on a 2nd/test pc that doesn't get used much, so i haven't even updated it since install and probably the reason why i haven't run into this problem myself yet because it was installed using all defaults so snapper must be beavering away somewhere in the background filling up the root drive on that too.
  15. glad you got it sorted. thing that really puzzles me now tho is why the root drive/partition was showing as only 63% full when in fact it must have been 100% full with the snapshots taking up all the extra space. why didn't the snapshots show up as using drive space? guessing it must be because the brtfs being the lower level file system manager doesn't tell the higher level os what space it's using to keep it's snapshots. well as usual the fix seemed pretty easy, it's always finding the cause that is the hard part. good job we have bruce. see caintry no reasons not to upgrade your systems, even tho i'd stick to the ext4 file systems. i'll even get around to updating my main pc one day.
  16. vista is win7 more or less, in other words win7 is built on the vista kernel, so drivers that work in vista usually work for win 7. more info here :- http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/98073-drivers-install-vista-drivers-windows-7-a.html http://www.techhive.com/article/153624/windows_7_under.html or visit the main hardware sites and you may find official win7 drivers instead of vista drivers for that specific hardware.
  17. you using brtfs? maybe an issue with that and the new kernel update for some reason, maybe it's made a snapshot of the old system that's taken up all the space before installing the new kernel or something. i notice you said root is installed on a 120GB ssd yet it's only 20GB in size so maybe a quick work around is to just resize the 20GB if you have the space on the ssd using a live cd, either that or like you said just do a quick install of suse again on root and remount the home partition without formatting that. when you ran the rm -rf /tmp/* did you log in as root? to get to init 3, (which i beilieve you must be in anyway to get the boot login command.) at the main menu press "e" to edit the suse boot option. use the arrow keys to navigate to the "linux" line and add a "3" after the "resume" command and before the "splash" command, make sure there is a space before and after it so it doesn't become part of any other command. then either Ctrl+X or the F10 key will start the boot process and take you to the command line login. (these changes are not perminent and are only used for that single boot.) to login as root, just type "root" (without quotes.) at the login prompt and hit enter/return key then enter roots password when prompted. when logged in as root it may be worth trying zypper dup to see if it installs anything that may fix your boot no space/problem. or start yast (type "yast" , without quotes and hit enter.) and see if you can find any more info with that, of course it will be slightly different to navigate around, using the tab and arrow keys i believe but it is still more or less the same to use when loged in usually and using a gui. no idea where btrfs may store any snapshots if not in the tmp location so can't suggest anything better than bruces remove command and seeing how you haven't installed any video drivers, can't remove those that may also have fixed things with removal.
  18. nice to know it is definitely a bios incomapibility with the q6600 chip, so you should be able to fix it easy enough. http://abit.ws/page/en/download/download_driver_detail.php@pFILE_TYPE=Driver&pMAIN_TYPE=Motherboard&pTITLE_ON_SCREEN=AW9D-MAX&pSOCKET_TYPE=LGA775 everything you may need for that motherboard from there, or go to each site individually. eg. intel :- http://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/homepage.html realtek :- http://www.realtek.com.tw/ as for the bios update, personally i'd use a usb stick and not a cd/dvd. lots of ways to make a bootable usb stick, eg:- http://technet.microsoft.com/en-gb/library/jj200124.aspx or http://www.howtogeek.com/136987/how-to-create-a-bootable-dos-usb-drive/ or this is a pdf link :- http://www.msi.com/html/pdf/How_to_flash_MSI_Notebook_BIOS_under_DOS_mode.pdf then just drag the needed files from the bios download to it and restart the pc. choose to boot from it either in the bios or by tapping one of the F keys on startup to get to the boot options menu and it should then start the bios update process. saying all that tho now you have a windows os installed you can just simple update the bios from there, then put the q6600 back in after to get it working.
  19. you don't need any os installed to update a bios, you just create a bootable cd or usb stick with the needed files.(don't think a bios update will make any difference tho unless the bios update actually fixes a specific problem you may have like cpu or ram compatibility,) more info here :- http://abit.ws/page/en/download/guide.php and here's the full bios list and what each version fixes :- http://abit.ws/page/en/download/download_bios_detail.php@pFILE_TYPE=Bios&pMAIN_TYPE=Motherboard&pTITLE_ON_SCREEN=AW9D-MAX&pSOCKET_TYPE=LGA775 you can download win7 from here :- http://www.mydigitallife.info/windows-7-64-bit-x64-direct-download-links/ check the md5 or sha sums then burn the iso image to either a cd/dvd and try with that or make a bootable usb stick with the image and try that. if you need links explaining how to make bootable cd's or usb sticks then just ask. doesn't matter what the disk looks like it can still be bad so i'd try another dvd drive to see if it can read/install from the disk where the new drive can't then if no difference try downloading the win7 iso and create a bootable usb stick and try installing with that. i guess a quick way to test the install disk you already have is to put it in your pc and see if you can copy everything from it into a folder on your desktop if it's bad you should get an error, if it copies no problem then try doing the install on the other pc with your drive and see if it still freezes, if it does then i'm wrong and the problem lays elsewhere but to be honest i think a bad disk/dvd drive is the most likely cause of the install failures. after saying all that tho i just noticed bios version 15 vista is win7 more or less and the q6600 is a kentsfield cpu, so a bios check/update like caintry said could well be the answer to your problem and it's nothing to do with the install disk or cd/dvd drive.
  20. personally i'd be thinking it's a bad copy of win7 or damaged cd/dvd disk, maybe even a failing cd/dvd drive. i'd download another copy of win 7 from the internet and try installing it from a usb stick.
  21. think of print screen like copy and paste, when you press prtscn button it copies the screen so then you have to paste it where you want it, either into a file or program, to save it, usually it's pasted into paint and saved as a jpeg image if i remember correctly. now with windows 8 tho there is another way of doing things, if you hold down the windows key and press prtscn button it copies and pastes a screen shot into the pictures screenshots folder. links explaining things win 7 :- http://www.wikihow.com/Print-Screen-on-Windows-7 win 8 :- http://windows.microsoft.com/en-gb/windows/take-screen-capture-print-screen#take-screen-capture-print-screen=windows-8
  22. just had a thought what wifi adaptor are you using and are you also using some other wifi software to control the connections and not windows? maybe it's in this other software we need to look to find the answer to your problem, or uninstall it and let windows control the wifi connections.
  23. sorry can't offer any better advice except i'd pop over to the malware part of the forum and run some scans because i really can't see how it's still being used if you've black listed it in group policy and/or white listed your connection so it is the only one able to be connected to.
  24. ok did a quick google search and i think i found the problem, so before going the group policy route follow this link and make sure the connect automatically when in rage is unticked for your neighbours wifi connection. http://www.wikihow.com/Prevent-Windows-from-Connecting-to-Unsecured-Wireless-Networks also see if this link helps stop your pc from connecting to open/unpreferred networks. http://www.kenan-flagler.unc.edu/executive-development/about/facility/laptop-settings/windows-vista-7-wireless-access just re-read topic and think nigsy made an error here. the connect to preferred network box needs to be checked and not unchecked as stated to stop it automatically finding other networks unless it actually says "connect to non-preferred networks" but the above seems to have already been suggested by nigsy so you may still need to try the group policy deny option.
×
×
  • Create New...