Why is he so great?

Similar Questions

• Why ASO described so great?

  Can someone explain why the contours of the ASO are so great? I have two lines on the server and they are two 225 MB. I even opened an and deleted all the dimensions and then saved on my drive c:\ local and it's still 225 MB... I'm confused as to why on gods Earth that might be?
  
  New to the ASO and perhaps do not understand something fundamental.

  the utility can be run in any event. to compact the real contour or to make a copy of it to use later (perhaps to replace the original sketch). I have run the utility on use exposes several times and have not had any problems. But to skeptics, I suggest first of all run on a copy and be amazed at how the contour compact.

  When you add/remove plus members, the sketch will develop and will need to be repacked. I include it as part of a regular maintenance routine. It actually does not take very long

  Edited by: GlennS_3 may 3, 2012 07:56

• Why keep you removing GREAT features as multi-frames and vector paint?

  The software is not everything becomes faster and each CC version has less and less. AFX is back to not using all the processors again.

  "The new architecture will allow a future version of After Effects to use CPU and RAM threads more effectively simultaneous multiple images rendering functionality could never."

  WHY? It worked fine in the latest version of 2014!

  Stop this!

  Pain of vector is a huge loss and now this?

  Please start treating your base as professionals who really RELY on your software users!

  Javier Castro wrote:

  The new architecture will allow a future version of After Effects to use threads processor and RAM more efficiently than the simultaneous multiple images rendering feature ever could. »

  WHY? It worked fine in the latest version of 2014!

  No, it wasn't. There were a number of effects or even some EXPRESSIONS that would kill multiprocessing. Seriously - the wrong kind of expression could kill and do all the rendering on a single heart. Good luck to know which of your layers in all your precomps to the offending phrase!

  Multiprocessing was a hack several decades old to try to make architecture of ageing of EI to use multi-core processors. When it worked, it was nice, but the system was NOT "fine." In fact, if you have spent a lot of time on these forums over the last years the chorus "broken multiprocessing" would be rather familiar to your ears.

  There are a few pieces of good news:

  1. There is a new version in preparation that will be better than the old. (Finally!)

  2. you can always use multiprocessing now. Simply, open a project in CC 2014 (even if it was created by 2015 CC) and make the. That's what I do. I do use the term better handling, more vivid interface, etc. in 2015 CC, then (if it's a project that would use multiprocessing), I visited in 2014 CC.

• Why BMPS are so great?

  MoE

  dumb and old format does not use babes

• CP5 - screenshots are 4 MB, why it is so great

  Hi all

  I just upgraded to CP5 and when I recorded something in automatic mode later, I noticed these slide background images in the library. they are a piece of 4 MB. I was looking around the settings and preferences to see if I could change that. These files are large quiet.

  Is it possible to influence this?

  Thank you and have a nice weekend

  Peter

  Hello

  To add to the answer of Rod: If you really want to limit the size of the file, choose the lowest resolution possible for your capture. I don't think your capture performed to more than 1024 x 768 resolution, either? When captured to 970 x 600 background images are around 2, 4 MB large. But it is indeed the size of the resulting file of the published SWF file that is important, and this can be influenced by the quality of the blade and the audio quality settings.

  Lilybiri

• Why page load too great in internet explorer?

  I am responsible for a student Web site project.  The students do their webpages in Kompozer and I edit in Dreamweaver (CS4).  They display correctly using safari and firefox, but today I had to use IE to display the final results to the students.  Most of the pages loaded fine, but a load such as a very large page with a scroll down bar.  I don't know what is different on the code in this particular page which causes which, or would it be a matter of too much graphic background?  The page can be found at:

  http://www.Hawaii.Hawaii.edu/nursing/RNHawaiian10.html

  Assistance amendments of the code or how to solve the problem would be appreciated.  I would like the page to fit the screen viewers so that they can see the entire width without having to scroll left/right.

  If you have your image as a background image and set the container or the element, it is 100%, then he must fill the width, provided that the image is large enough.

  So if you have an image that is 1500px wide as a background image in a

  that is to say of 1000px wide, would show only 1000px.

  The norm for us, the page is 960px wide, give or take a little.  This allows a computer with a screen resolution of 1024 to view the entire width without scrolling.

  Gary

• Why index has a greater than its table dimension

  I have a table with 25 columns, but most of the columns is zero except the primary key. Dba_tables and dba_indexes, I worked on that the primary key index has 309 MB and has 280 MB table.
  
  Suppose the index blocks contains the key identifier and table indexes, and blocks of table contains its data in the column and the rowid. If this is true, the primary key index should has the same size as the table which is null everything except the primary key. How is my index is 10% larger than the table?

  An index is a B-tree +, where B is balanced.
  It consists of blocks of leaf and nonleaf.
  Blocks not sheet are a kind of pre-Selection mechanism, to avoid, consider all the blocks of leaves.
  Buy a book on data structures and/or to read the Oracle documentation you will see it explained in detail.
  If you issue
  analyze the index validate structure;
  and
  question
  Select * from index_stats;
  right after that, you will see how many levels have the index.
  This allows the 10% overload.
  Also the data blocks contain no ROWID.

  ------------
  Sybrand Bakker
  Senior Oracle DBA

• Why is my user library so great?

  My MS user lib is 25 MB, even if there is only a handful of parts.  My corp lib is 14 MB with hundreds, maybe thousands, of pieces.  Why is he so great?

  Is it swelled with the space that has not been recovered?  Is there a way to rebuild and return to the size?

  Thank you.

  You can clean your user database while preserving your structure using the database merge option (Tools > database > fusion Database).

  (1) close Multisim

  (2) move your current database of the user to a new location

  (3) beginning Multisim (this should generate a new database user in the directory where the old one was)

  (4) merge the original database in the database of the user.

  This should clean up all non related data while preserving the original formatting all of your database.

  However, make sure doublecheck that all of your data has been successfully transferred before removing the original database, as this can update pieces that were created in older versions.

• Why is my VM so great? How can I reduce the size?

  I started several years with over a VM in XP Pro OS X 10.5 (currently OS X 10.6.8 Fusion 4.1.2), which has grown to about 15 GB of 2 GB. Shrink brought up to about 13 or 14 GB.

  I only use the VM for QuickBooks Pro and casual browser tests. Not to mention that QuickBooks, my additional applications only are Microsoft Security Essentials, CC Cleaner, Primo PDF, Firefox and Safari. The only document that I keep on the virtual machine is the current QuickBooks company file. I use instant No.

  So, my question is, why my VM so great? How indigestion can be removed?

  Thank you

  David

  P.S. - I think I figured out how to see the size of the disk in Windows Explorer > workstation > disc Local (c). Capacity is 19.9 GB, is 11.7 GB used space and free space is 8.24 GB.

  Post edited by: davidb2 (added P.S.)

  First of all, I was just a point and the disk image hard virtual is strictly only with Windows XP Professional SP3 installed with the standard Microsoft Defaults and no additional software applications like Microsoft Office etc.   It is not unreasonable for a fully installed system (Windows XP and user Applications) to consume more than 2 GB, but the real problem is that David started with a Virtual Machine that has been much lower, then it is now and it must be understood that it is unfortunately quite normal for the drive to become bloated and if it was just a normal physical system probably , would not be a problem though because it is a Machine virtual use of space on the host, it is a question.   He has some choice, learn how to remove what is not really necessary, or perform a clean build, which will be initially much smaller the current even if virtual machine it to finally happen in size unless the indigestion is controlled along the way.

• Why is the size of my PDF from my InDesign export still big?

  I'm doing a class project which is a document of four pages, the seven-image with very little text. The project must be submitted as a PDF under 300 KB. However, when I export the document to the title of the smallest size of predefined file and with the compression up to 72 dpi, I get a PDF file that is 612 KB.

  All my classmates are able to get less than 300 KB, so I'm confused as to why mine is so great. I use 5 2 gif and jpg files and each take a in 5 by 5 inch paper square. They are relatively very small photos (approx. 250 KBS) and I have re-saved everything to be less than 100 KB, but the PDF size only drops to about 500ko I transferred between CC InDesign on Mac and InDesign CS5 on Windows and I wonder if this is a problem.

  Just wanted to share the results, in case someone falls on this forum in the future.

  Layout of danegonzalezfour-page InDesign, seven black and white images have been used.  Three pages contained two 5 "5" with images of seven lines of text under each image and the last page had one set of image-description of similar sizes.  A check of the PDF made on Acrobat (below) shows that the images made up the majority of the size of the file.

  

  Since the images have some detail, I thought that changing their file type would be the best way to create a more compact PDF file and preserve the integrity of the images.  So I cropped the images to the size and saved PNG 24-bit files.  Even if the PNG files are larger than the originals, he gave good results PDF.  Here are the results of the audit of the PDF update after using predefined default to InDesign "smallest file size".

  

  I am happy that we managed to solve this problem.

• Creating files of great Lightroom cr_sdk_*.tmp

  I use Lightroom 4.1 RC2 on 64-bit Windows 7. My C: drive is an SSD and roughly 8 GB free. My catalogue and Lightroom cache are configured to live on my drive F: However, so I would not have thought that this would be a problem.

  What I see is after an hour or so of editing (in module development only), I have run out of space on my C: drive that causes Lightroom out and other instability of the general system (for example Windows Explorer matrices). Looks like Lightroom to create large files in my temp (C:\Users\ < username > \AppData\Local\Temp) for example called cr_sdk_03182513.tmp directory.

  What these files are for and why they are so great? Can I set up Lightroom to store elsewhere (ideally without moving my temp dir)?

  http://forums.Adobe.com/message/4355507

  or

  http://forums.Adobe.com/message/4334670

• white screen: why no content?

  My page is coming with only the bottom of the body and nothing else. Can someone check my coding errors?
  
  Thank you!
  
  

  Quote:
  Posted by: brégent
  > And why now in FF and Netscape, when it wasn't before?

  Try to clear manually.

  Yes, it worked. I feel stupid - I would have thought that :-) This is why you are so great!

• Two backup machines, we work, we have no

  Another experience of hair pulling. I noticed that my MacBook Pro had not saved for several days. A few days later, I tried to understand why. I have failed and need help/guidance. I think he started his problems after I installed 10.11.4, but I can't be sure.

  Apple Time Capsule (APTC), iMac connected cable, MBP connected by cable. The two machines running 10.11.4. APTC guests wi - fi, but turned off on both computers.

  Network settings on the computers look identical.

  APTC can be connected to the internet or not. Same results.

  On both machines, I can copy (drag / move) a file/folder of the APTC partition in the finder, and it happens immediately.

  iMac backup normally, from one day to the next, with no problems.

  MBP prepares backup (30 GB - don't know why, it's this great) for two hours and began transmitting at a pace I calculate will take 5-10 days to complete.

  I have:

  -Run the MBP disk utility, corrected some errors found, now clean tracks

  -Reinstall 10.11.4 the combo charger

  -people with mobility reduced/removed various demons/startup process that seem like they may interfere

  -no antivirus program

  -check the console as backup log starts and progresses, and don't see anything that stands out

  -Manual backup with time machine power, both exhibit the same slow performance.

  Seems to boil down to Time Machine somehow, since all the other communal work. I turned TM, then turn it on again, re-slected my backup drive; There seems to be little to do with it.

  I don't know where to go from here - what to try next. Help?

  Ben

  You have tried most of what I would say.

  It's time for the big guns... Delete the backup... and reset TM, and start over.

  I don't know why it's necessary, but it is. TM just gets stuck and no response.

  As ways to work around the problem without taking major measures.

  Plug a USB on the MBP and TM allows to make a local backup... If it works fine, it proves several things... most TM works, just not to the objectives of the network.

  If you upgraded the MBP several times... make a NVRAM and reset the SMC... It can help.

  Finally I would buy Carbon Copy Cloner and use it. It is simply much more reliable than TM, if not quite as competent in the management of incremental backups.

  I use CCC and TM... I think that there is a good place to use both.

• Mysterious solution

  On the suggestion that a tek, I unplugged my power cord from this HP2000-2 b, out the battery, which the switch is held down 4 20 sec, reconnect power and IT WORKS all of a SUDDEN!  -WHY?

  This can be the wonder the formula you can read:

  By performing a hard reset, you must remove all power from the computer. This will not occur when you restart or shut down the computer. Even by removing the battery briefly, there may be still some electricity stored in capacitors.

  When you do the hard reset it deletes the last drop of power from the computer. This clears all the RAM and basically force the computer to re-establish a connection between the BIOS and hardware. It will solve some problems wobbly a majority of the time, and therefore, why it is a great troubleshooting step base.

  Thank you

• Satellite P200 - 1 K 9 and performance issue

  I hope IM this ad in the right area...

  Hello

  I have a Satellite P200 - 1 K 9 with the following specifications:

  Intel Core 2 Duo T7700 @ 2.40 GHz CPU
  3 GB RAM
  32 bit
  Note Windows experience 4.8

  ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2600 map graphic and one
  HD sound card...

  My problem is that since I bought my laptop about 7-8 months ago slowed down the performance. Of course, since then I had filled my hard drive (partition) with the media and understand that this is at the expense of the performance of the system. However, since this grateful I released a lot of disk space. I have 40 GB free on my C: and 90 GB free on my D:. Total, shared capacity is 250 GB (125/125).

  Basically, while being largely ignorant of the technical questions, laptops and technology altogether, the way I noticed the inability of systems to "return" to its original factory running (which, I might add, I was very impressed by) is when it comes to games. Football Manager 2009, for example running very slowly. I had a peek in the Task Manager, because I play the game in a window, and the CPU usage works 100%, although I'm sure the culmination of the individual tasks and Applications is not equivalent to that (maybe there is a program hidden Hogging my CPU speed?). Call of Duty 4, which took place on medium-high graphics settings when the laptop was new, now struggles on the lower graph and the sound settings, without that there is a problem with internet connectivity. In addition, (for reference, I m not not the game breath) Battlefield 2, which is about 3-4 years of age very slowly also works. He ran too extremely fast, on the highest graphics settings when the laptop was brand new.

  Basically, what I want to do, is to return the system to its original performance. It is always too slow when two hard drives were full of games and media. Now, despite the withdrawal of many of them, the system works like a sloth.

  Means I ve done to solve performance problems are: disk defrag, disk clean up, error checking, virus scan (with Kaspersky), scanning of spyware (with PC tools Spyware Doctor), deleted the old files with CCleaner and erased files not deleted with a program called eraser... As well as the release of about 50% of the disk space.

  Add to that, I ve noticed performance was much more when I first turn on the laptop and the sides of it n t had the chance to become hot. I understand what is normal, and he did before when the laptop was new and was operating at optimum performance, but perhaps I have an overheating problem? I'll let you know what is the temperature, but I put just t know.

  I hesitate to return the system to its factory settings and if necessary I'll take to a computer store, if there is something they can do. But in the meantime I d like to listen to any advice on general issues that I face, and possible solutions to my problem.

  Thank you very much.

  The problem with Windows is that it becomes slower and slower that you operate.

  When the devices and programs are installed, they increase the size of the registry, activate the Services, add resident DLLS and drivers, slow down the file system by adding thousands of files. As well, the operating system can get damaged after some time due to the loss of power and software poorly written.
  Even if you use CCleaner and other utilities and uninstall several programs, it is never as fast as a fresh installation of windows. Uninstalling programs rarely remove the program completely 100%.

  The antivirus can have a huge effect on performance, that's why the system runs great when the image of the plant is installed (which has usually no anti-virus).

  So basically if you want the system making a lot once again, you must back up your data and perform the recovery. I myself do it once a year to restore performance.