Talk:SpeedFan: Difference between revisions
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SpeedFan closed as keep |
→Crashes attribution: Wiki editor please help! |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
[[User:D0s4d1|D0s4d1]] ([[User talk:D0s4d1|talk]]) 07:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Keila |
[[User:D0s4d1|D0s4d1]] ([[User talk:D0s4d1|talk]]) 07:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Keila |
||
:Actually, it even says in the manuals of these types of programs that they can crash the PC... It warns you in SpeedFan specifically that disabling fans or tweaking CPU speeds can 'lead to system instability'. On some chipsets, just 'probing' them with the wrong method will crash some chip on the bus, possibly even including the bridges. That's why there's a big warning on the chipset tweaker in pretty much ALL such programs. SpeedFan, i8k, etc. Go look them up. ;) Calling it a rootkit is partially correct, in the same way that a parallel-port bit-banging driver or antivirus is. The actually correct technical terms are pointer or reflection or redirect or vector depending on the technology (Intel used the term interrupt vector and DOS programmers kept the term, for example). It's essentially like a software interrupt but patches the pointers instead of instructions. [[Special:Contributions/71.196.246.113|71.196.246.113]] ([[User talk:71.196.246.113|talk]]) 20:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC) |
:Actually, it even says in the manuals of these types of programs that they can crash the PC... It warns you in SpeedFan specifically that disabling fans or tweaking CPU speeds can 'lead to system instability'. On some chipsets, just 'probing' them with the wrong method will crash some chip on the bus, possibly even including the bridges. That's why there's a big warning on the chipset tweaker in pretty much ALL such programs. SpeedFan, i8k, etc. Go look them up. ;) Calling it a rootkit is partially correct, in the same way that a parallel-port bit-banging driver or antivirus is. The actually correct technical terms are pointer or reflection or redirect or vector depending on the technology (Intel used the term interrupt vector and DOS programmers kept the term, for example). It's essentially like a software interrupt but patches the pointers instead of instructions. [[Special:Contributions/71.196.246.113|71.196.246.113]] ([[User talk:71.196.246.113|talk]]) 20:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC) |
||
== Crashes attribution == |
|||
To 71.196.246.113 and to the attention of a real Wiki editor: |
|||
1) 71.196.246.113, you deleted my text without discussion. |
|||
2) I tried my best to follow all Wiki guidelines, although I acknowledge I am a noob. You have not registered an account, but you refer to me or my comment as "unverified". Who are you? |
|||
3) The text I added was presented as one eye-witness account. If you dispute the accuracy of that one eye-witness account, say why. Or was that an implied ad-hominim? If you meant to say that just because it happened to me doesn't mean it will happen to everyone else, that is true, but my text acknowledged that. |
|||
4) You failed to provide a rationale for deleting my text, but deleted it anyway. |
|||
5) You issued a ruling, not engaged in a discussion. Only a well-known Wiki editor can provide that type of final say about something. Secret Authority-Man, who are you? |
|||
5) If SpeedFan's manual states that this type of program can crash a PC, that information is valid for inclusion in this Wiki article. Since you deleted my text, why don't you add that instead, with a citation. |
|||
6) The rest of your comments here are true but do not constitute an argument over the main point at issue, which is that my section contained a useful caution to the casual user of this computer software. Please argue on the point, not around it. |
|||
6) At least re-post my text here in the talk pages so people can see what we're talking about. I assume you can get it back? |
|||
7) You called me unverified but you are identified by only your IP, 71.196.246.113. Glass house throwing stones? I at least made an account. Can a Wiki editor mediate, here? |
|||
8) Is someone from SpeedFan company changing this page? Wiki editor please! Seriously, that's bad faith if that's what this is. This is the second time. |
|||
[[User:D0s4d1|D0s4d1]] ([[User talk:D0s4d1|talk]]) 09:27, 9 December 2013 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 09:27, 9 December 2013
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 5 August 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | Computing: Software Stub‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
drive-by tagging
This article received a drive-by tag of advert, npov, and cleanup, with no discussion in the talk page. I'm not disputing any of it, but removed the tags until someone can discuss the relevant points. wraith808 (talk) 18:25, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
SpeedFan crashed my computer
I edited this article after SpeedFan crashed my computer & corrupted the registry. I chose to reinstall XP rather than take my chances, since registry corruption was obvious; my computer is for professional multi-track audio recording, and I can't have any instability. I found so many references to this happening to others that I had to warn people about this, hence my added "Dangers" section.
I'm not a regular wiki contributor, and I don't have an account, but if you want to contact me you can do this via d0s4d1@yahoo.com.
dosadi (talk) 01:51, 17 July 2010 (EST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.72.87.247 (talk)
- This is correct. Any kind of power failure, unclosed files, and so on, can cause corruption. BTW: If you had a system restore point from before installing SpeedFan, this could have been fixed in 5 minutes. 71.196.246.113 (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Some n00b undid my edits with no talk page
User 109.154.160.28 undid the edits I made in SpeedFan's article. This user has made no other Wikipedia contributions.
My edits were appropriate, pointing out the risk of installing Ring 0 software (software that can do *anything* to your computer). I documented links to discussion forums & web pages that showed evidence of the software causing computers to crash, which carries the risk of data corruption.
So who is this 109.154.160.28 who changed it? Can we have a discussion first? I'm going to restore that section for now, and if I did something wrong, can someone tell me rather than just change things with no conversation?
Crashes attribution
The entire section of crashing is attributed to one unverified forum post. This hardly seems accurate. D0s4d1 (talk) 07:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC)Keila
- Actually, it even says in the manuals of these types of programs that they can crash the PC... It warns you in SpeedFan specifically that disabling fans or tweaking CPU speeds can 'lead to system instability'. On some chipsets, just 'probing' them with the wrong method will crash some chip on the bus, possibly even including the bridges. That's why there's a big warning on the chipset tweaker in pretty much ALL such programs. SpeedFan, i8k, etc. Go look them up. ;) Calling it a rootkit is partially correct, in the same way that a parallel-port bit-banging driver or antivirus is. The actually correct technical terms are pointer or reflection or redirect or vector depending on the technology (Intel used the term interrupt vector and DOS programmers kept the term, for example). It's essentially like a software interrupt but patches the pointers instead of instructions. 71.196.246.113 (talk) 20:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Crashes attribution
To 71.196.246.113 and to the attention of a real Wiki editor:
1) 71.196.246.113, you deleted my text without discussion.
2) I tried my best to follow all Wiki guidelines, although I acknowledge I am a noob. You have not registered an account, but you refer to me or my comment as "unverified". Who are you?
3) The text I added was presented as one eye-witness account. If you dispute the accuracy of that one eye-witness account, say why. Or was that an implied ad-hominim? If you meant to say that just because it happened to me doesn't mean it will happen to everyone else, that is true, but my text acknowledged that.
4) You failed to provide a rationale for deleting my text, but deleted it anyway.
5) You issued a ruling, not engaged in a discussion. Only a well-known Wiki editor can provide that type of final say about something. Secret Authority-Man, who are you?
5) If SpeedFan's manual states that this type of program can crash a PC, that information is valid for inclusion in this Wiki article. Since you deleted my text, why don't you add that instead, with a citation.
6) The rest of your comments here are true but do not constitute an argument over the main point at issue, which is that my section contained a useful caution to the casual user of this computer software. Please argue on the point, not around it.
6) At least re-post my text here in the talk pages so people can see what we're talking about. I assume you can get it back?
7) You called me unverified but you are identified by only your IP, 71.196.246.113. Glass house throwing stones? I at least made an account. Can a Wiki editor mediate, here?
8) Is someone from SpeedFan company changing this page? Wiki editor please! Seriously, that's bad faith if that's what this is. This is the second time.