May 4

Hi, Can anyone point out some free Barcode generating softwares?--Joseph 05:29, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sure: [1]. Shadowjams (talk) 06:51, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I go through that link. But couldn't find a download link! All I got is a zip file that contains component files.--Joseph 12:23, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found a tgz file, not a zip file. That's the way much of free software is distributed. You don't specify what platform you are on - on most UNIX/Linux/OX-X boxes, you can follow the instructions in the README file and build the program. If you are on Windows, the situation might be more complicated - you may need to get a UNIX compatibility environment like Cygwin. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:10, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See I don't have expertise in this. Is there any 'ready made' software that I can use directly on windows?--Joseph 13:35, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A quick search reveals several possible options, including at least one that is online and requires no installation at all. WegianWarrior (talk) 13:49, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can a facebook user send a message directly to the inbox of a person who is not his friend,is not being followed by him nor is the senders follower and with whom he shares no mutual friend under any circumstances and if such messages can be sent what does it mean and imply for the sender.Because i can send message to a few such persons that is not going to their other folder but going to their inbox.Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.225.143 (talk) 07:30, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook had a scheme last year where a person could send a message directly to a non-friend's inbox by paying $1. I don't know if this scheme is still in place since I can't find any mention of it in Facebook's labyrinthine help section. This site suggests that there's a "Strict" setting that people may have changed to be less strict and that may be how your messages get through. There is also mention of messages going straight to the inbox if the receiver has already corresponded with you. So, even though you may not be friends, if they've messaged you in the past, they will continue to get your messages in their inbox and not their Other box. Dismas|^(talk) 09:38, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have now installed the new hard drive into my new computer and installed Fedora 20 on it, being explicit about not changing anything on the existing Windows 8 drive.

Now both Linux and Windows work, in a way. To be able to install Fedora at all, I had to go to the boot menu and set the optical drive to override Windows EFI in the boot priority. Then I could install Fedora as normal.

When I restarted the computer, Fedora gave me a dual-boot menu asking if I wanted to boot Linux or Windows. Booting Linux worked and Fedora 20 ran all OK. But when I selected to boot Windows, I got this message:

File "/EFI/Microsoft/Boot/bootmgfw.efi" not found.

You have to boot the kernel first.

When I went to the boot menu again, and set Windows EFI to take priority over Fedora, I could boot into Windows and Windows 8 worked all OK, but the computer acted as if the entire second drive and Linux wasn't even there. Then when I went to the boot menu again and switched the priorities, I was back at the situation when only Linux worked.

Now I can sort-of boot both Linux and Windows, but I have to switch boot priorities every time. What can I do about this?

And lastly, the first thing I did in Fedora 20 was to install Cinnamon because I hate the new GNOME Panel. Cinnamon works, but I have to select it explicitly every time in the log-in screen, otherwise the session defaults into GNOME Panel. How can I make Cinnamon the default? JIP | Talk 13:41, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this http://amidstsky.com/tech/install-ubuntu-or-fedora-in-dual-boot-with-windows-8-1-uefi/ of any help? If you manage to solve the dual boot problem, please let us know! --109.189.65.217 (talk) 19:50, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have learned through bitter experience, not to allow windows on the same hard drive on which I have Linux. The Widows OS appears to have bloat that bugger up any other non-windows OS on the same hard drive. The only way I have found for a care free life, is to either have windows on a second hard drive or to run windows in (or should be on) a virtual machine, running on a Linux host. Change over now... because when Window 9 comes out it, will more than likely be given away free (as in beer) (the microsofties are learning). You will only be able to use it however, if you subscribe to their cloud; and that will come at a cost of so many dollars a month. Far more than you ever amortized on XP etc. --Aspro (talk) 01:03, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard good things about password managers (such as LastPass), but I'm curious as to how secure they are. Doesn't this create a single point of failure? Also, to a lesser extent, aren't these solutions incomplete? For example, I don't think that a password manager would work for Windows since I would need to be logged in first. Also, what about game systems such as my PS3, PS4, Vita and Wii U? I don't think there are apps for these systems. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:31, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking mainly about web passwords? Those programs have had a number of notorious security failures and I've been just using the Firefox password store instead. There is various FUD around the internet advocating separate password applications but I haven't found anything I've seen so far to be convincing. For sites where you have significant security exposure (financial sites including Paypal, domain registrars, code hosting, etc), you should use

two-factor authentication (2FA) if you can, rather than relying on a re-usable password. If you register an email address with any security sensitive sites where you don't have 2FA, you should consider the email account associated with that address to also be sensitive, as someone who gets access to the email account can potentially use it with the "reset password" link for the other account. That means you should enable 2FA for your email account if the email service supports it. 70.36.142.114 (talk) 21:48, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply

]