up vote 15 down vote favorite
10
share [g+] share [fb]

As Super Users in the computer land, many of us has heard about lots of myths about computer systems.

What are your most heard common myths about PC?

  • For readability reason, please limit each entry to one answer only.
  • Hardware and software myths are welcome!
  • Not limited to Windows but Mac/Linux are welcome too...

Please do not debate/rebut people's answers, but I think intelligent discussions will lead to more meaningful Q&A in superuser.com. I'll start with this hardware myth:

You should always power on your PC because powering on/off your PC is a bad thing. Heating up and cooling down the IC expands and contracts the molecules, which will damage the silicon die and its connections traces.

link|improve this question
13  
"do not debate" but "intelligent discussions" ... how does that work? – gbarry Sep 7 '09 at 7:27
2  
As opposed to a false fact? :P – Lawrence Velázquez Nov 9 '09 at 7:47
show 3 more comments
feedback

closed as off topic by Sathya Mar 27 '11 at 18:41

Questions on Super User are expected to generally relate to computer software or computer hardware, within the scope defined in the faq.

34 Answers

1 2

Microsoft is Evil.

Apple machines never crash.

Linux is the saviour of the computer world.

Full hard drives weigh more than empty ones! (not a myth, but funny recent question!)

(I hear loads on a daily basis! This question did not say one per entry, so if this thread is popular, I will add to the list as time goes on!)

link|improve this answer
5  
-1 These are not myths, but opinions (referring to M$ is evil and Linux will save the world) – hasen j Nov 9 '09 at 4:02
1  
@Wil, no, a myth is something that's just plain false. – hasen j Nov 9 '09 at 11:39
7  
Actually a full SSD is heavier than an empty one, since it retains data by trapping electrons. But not by much, maybe a the mass of a few protons heavier. ;) – tvanover Nov 9 '09 at 18:34
3  
@Wil: Linux is a savior OS. whylinuxisbetter.net/items/other_countries – hasen j Nov 9 '09 at 23:41
4  
@hasen j: Keep your Linux fanboy comments to yourself please... – musicfreak Nov 14 '09 at 4:26
show 6 more comments
feedback

Macintosh systems cannot be infected by Viruses (or some variation). It's a ridiculous statement. If Macs were as popular as Windows systems, there would be just as many viruses for them.

link|improve this answer
5  
Some operating systems have just better designed security than MS Windows, so infection with virus is much less likely (with worm on the other hand...) – Jakub Narębski Sep 7 '09 at 9:07
2  
@Nippysaurus - Had the same approach for years now. Nowadays, viruses are not nearly as dangerous as they used to be (most of them just annoy you, very few do some real damage like mass deleting your data or something like that). – ldigas Sep 7 '09 at 12:54
1  
How much malware is there out there, live in the wild, for various sorts of computers? If you're wondering if your computer is secure, that's a very important question. If you just want to argue which OS would be more secure under hypothetical circumstances, it may be irrelevant. Windows has been becoming more inherently secure, but I'd still set a naive Internet user up with a Mac or with Ubuntu if I could. – David Thornley Sep 9 '09 at 14:29
show 7 more comments
feedback

While most people do not care about the tower components - to them, those are just black boxes), one of the most enduring hardware myths I have encountered is that of monitor radiation.

For some reasons, maybe a hold-back from those 21" Trinitron CRT days, alot of older users I have interacted with are morbidly afraid of looking at a screen without some "Anti-Radiation" filter on, or some lucky magnet/charms etc. And I mean even when the monitor is a notebook LCD, they will find a way to position a 17" "radiation filter" over it.

They got more to worry about bluetooth, microwave devices, and wireless networks than from a monitor!

As a reference below is a handy radiation chart from XKCD, as you can see using a crt monitor for a year provides less Ionizing radiation (which is the dangerous kind) than a X-Ray of your hand.

enter image description here

link|improve this answer
3  
More is a correctly used relative term; even these other radiations are debatable. – nik Sep 7 '09 at 4:32
2  
@nik : -laughs- yeah, those BT, microwaves, wireless radiations are each standalone myths by themselves too. How many time have I saw in the news about some unfortunate soul having splitting headaches because of Wi-Fi? – caliban Sep 7 '09 at 4:49
2  
Of course if the same one was in a place supposedly without wifi, but in which there was in fact an access point, then no headache to report. Induced headache (and other sickness), always a marvel of the human body. – Gnoupi Sep 7 '09 at 8:34
show 2 more comments
feedback

You get what you pay for.

Paying more does not always mean you get something better suited to what you need.

In hardware, buying the most expensive system you can afford may buy more than you need of one or more components, whether in capacity or speed, and also cost more to run it and cool it. The same can hold for individual components. In both cases, however, buying the cheapest is rarely good economy in the long term. Using a reputable make but not a 'designer label' or the very latest model is often a good way forward.

In software, buying expensive software doesn't guarantee that you get software that better fits your requirements or that you'll get better (or any) support if you have problems. It may well mean you have to pay more for upgrades and for hardware that can run it well. It may also mean that file formats are proprietary and you are committed to using the that vendor's software in the future to access your own data. As a corollary, using free software does not mean it is worth less, or worthless. It may be ideal for your needs and the concept of free (as in freedom, not just price) may be a better fit for you than proprietary software.

link|improve this answer
1  
ON the one hand, yes. On the other hand, take a look at Photoshop.... – RCIX Sep 7 '09 at 15:08
show 4 more comments
feedback

Back in the days of 56 kbit/s modems, I met quite a few people who thought that moving the mouse around will make websites load faster.

I actually had that feeling, too, sometimes. I wonder why. Maybe because if you're moving the mouse around, it passes the time, so it feels faster?

link|improve this answer
5  
Sounds like some modern adaptation to hammering the keyboard on a multi-user terminal to get faster compiles because the system would allocate more cpu time to interactive users to have it behave more responsive... – Oskar Duveborn Sep 9 '09 at 13:11
1  
I know it sounds crazy but maybe there were some bug in the browser or the op system (Win95 and IE...) that caused this effect which I had too. Moving around the mouse were sometimes needed to load the page. If you didn't move, nothing loaded. After browser or machine restart this effect disappeared. But came back later. – Vili Sep 17 '09 at 14:07
2  
Oskar's right. The mouse interrupt service goes around and wakes up other tasks that are sleeping on the job. – gbarry Oct 6 '09 at 18:19
6  
support.microsoft.com/kb/168702 -- "If you move your mouse pointer continuously while the data is being returned to Microsoft Excel, the query may not fail. Do not stop moving the mouse until all the data has been returned to Microsoft Excel." – zildjohn01 Nov 9 '09 at 5:01
show 4 more comments
feedback

Editing the Registry is the most dangerous activity ever thought of, since the invention of computers.

link|improve this answer
show 5 more comments
feedback

Error messages contain no useful information, therefore one should not read, or write down the message for later communication.

Not so much an acknowledged myth, but so far most people with computer problems that I've encountered, believe this one whole-heartedly.

link|improve this answer
show 3 more comments
feedback

Slam the tower (or the screen) to make the machine work.
(when the computer is slow or it doesn't respond)

link|improve this answer
4  
It is called "percussive maintenance" – Paperflyer Mar 2 '10 at 21:13
show 3 more comments
feedback

Open source software is of universally better quality than closed-source.

link|improve this answer
2  
I agree this one is a myth when generally applied, but would argue that it is true when applied to encryption / security products. Knowledge of the algorithm should not in any way weaken good encryption, and making the source open means that people can check for poorly-implemented code which weakens an otherwise great mathematically-secure algorithm (eg poor choice of salt, repeating some algorithms more than once which allows a vector of attack etc). Note: open source does not have to be free... – AdamV Nov 9 '09 at 8:59
5  
+1, this is my pet peeve. Open source does not mean "great". In fact, I've used some very crappy open source software, to which there are great commercial alternatives. (Open Office, anyone?) – musicfreak Nov 14 '09 at 4:24
show 1 more comment
feedback

Obsessively defragmenting your harddrive will ALWAYS improve disk access time.

I knew people who stares at the monitor while the Windows 95 disk defragmenter is doing it job, and they are very happy and proud of what they do.

link|improve this answer
7  
HEY. I'm quite fond of all the childhood time I whittled away staring at the Windows 95 defragmenter. – Lawrence Velázquez Nov 9 '09 at 7:31
show 2 more comments
feedback

"This computer is completely secure."

Which is only true if your computer is not connected to the Internet, isn't using any software which you did not write yourself, doesn't allow users to connect an USB device or insert a CD/Floppy/Disk device to run applications and even then only when it's turned off and has no power cable connected to it. (And it must be located in a vault beneath the Pentagon...)

Wasn't there a virus once at the IIS Space Station?

link|improve this answer
1  
"I have never been hacked" and "I never had a virus" – Oskar Duveborn Sep 9 '09 at 13:10
show 1 more comment
feedback

Pressing Enter/Return/Double-Click/Spacebar/whatever repeatedly will make the machine go faster, and finish the task in question.

I heard some people think the same about elevator buttons. Since the elevator "sees" you press the 3rd floor button 9 times, it would realize you're in a hurry, and go faster.

link|improve this answer
1  
I like to press repeatedly, but mostly because I'm just completely bored. – waiwai933 Sep 9 '09 at 13:04
3  
This reminds me of the elevator design failure where I cannot UNpress a button if I change my mind... especially if some kid has been pressing every floor button inside the elevator it would be nice to be able to just press them again to cancel them >< – Oskar Duveborn Sep 9 '09 at 13:13
show 4 more comments
feedback

Windows is user friendly, does what the user wants it to and is easy to install.

link|improve this answer
2  
Well, it is. It's just picky over who its friends are :) – ldigas Oct 13 '09 at 18:39
show 1 more comment
feedback

"Screensavers will lengthen my monitor's life and prevent pixel burn-in."

In this day and age, where we mainly use LCDs instead of CRTs and have both hardware- and software-managed power-saving modes, screensavers aren't much more than an extension of personalization and individuality, much like desktop wallpapers and media player skins.

link|improve this answer
show 1 more comment
feedback

You have to change the SID of a Windows machine after you clone it if you want both to be on the same network.

link|improve this answer
show 3 more comments
feedback

If you place a cactus near you monitor or computer, it will gather all bad radiation emitted by the hardware

link|improve this answer
2  
Is this for real? Do people really believe this? – Lawrence Velázquez Nov 9 '09 at 7:32
show 2 more comments
feedback

That Ctrl+C won't work unless you do it 5 times.

Must have developed the habbit while I was learning HTML.

link|improve this answer
show 1 more comment
feedback

Articles from Snopes -- Look at the red marked (alt text) articles and compare with the others

  1. Virus Hoaxes and Realities

These links do not limit to the PC Machine itself;
they are a bit more generalized to Computers, Networking and Security.
Edit: Have split the other points into different answers...

link|improve this answer
3  
Isn't that Snopes? – Nathan Fellman Sep 9 '09 at 13:25
show 1 more comment
feedback

I've seen people who were convinced that dragging the progress bar on the OS load screen for MacOS 7.x and 8.x would make the machine boot quicker.

link|improve this answer
feedback

Computers can do anything that Hollywood says they can do.

Refer to the following article: 5 Things Hollywood Thinks Computers Can Do

link|improve this answer
show 3 more comments
feedback

Right-clicking on your Windows Desktop and clicking 'Refresh' a number of times is good luck.

I've seen so many folks amateur or professionals do this, as if it's some sort of Windows religious ritual for keeping everything in order. It's a habit and worse than narcotics. I am glad I've kicked the ass of my mad habit of refreshing.

This article explains better...

link|improve this answer
show 1 more comment
feedback

People that work with computers can be infected with computer viruses.

link|improve this answer
4  
Never heard of this one – Nathan Fellman Sep 9 '09 at 13:25
1  
I haven't heard of this one in quite a few years. It used to crop up every so often. – David Thornley Sep 9 '09 at 14:33
feedback

From the point of view of the parents, it's always their kids that breaks their PC. But in fact it's what the parents are doing which they try do hide, that is breaking their PC.

I've heard a lot of time in my small career of computer technician: "My child broke my PC" and when you do some research you find that it's the parents that broke the "Windows installation" and that's pretty funny.

link|improve this answer
show 1 more comment
feedback
  • The other day I heard someone call an acer a '2nd tier' computer because one acer they knew of had a problem, and said we should only buy stable 'name brand' higher quality pc's for our office, like a dell or hp. Not saying those are bad systems, I just think it's a myth that the lesser-known PCs must somehow be cheap or break down easily.

  • Norton is the best antivirus because it's the biggest, the most well known, the most popular. And free ones aren't to be trusted because you get what you pay for.

  • If your computer can't boot, time to buy a new one.

  • Defrag and delete cookies and temporary internet files to really speed up a slow computer.

  • Hackers are constantly looking to break in to your specific machine, every day, and without a firewall they will get your credit card info and steal your identity (not something said out loud but it feels like a lot of average users think this way, and certainly AV ads seem to prey on this).

  • If you get pirated software online you're pretty much guaranteed to get a virus.

link|improve this answer
feedback

You might also want to read up: Truth about computer security hysteria postings

link|improve this answer
feedback

From US-Cert: National Cyber Alert System: Cyber Security Tip ST04-009,
Identifying Hoaxes and Urban Legends

Refers other sites that discuss urban legends.

link|improve this answer
feedback

"I knew people who stares at the monitor while the windows 95 disk defragmenter is doing it job, and they are very happy and proud of what they do."

I am guessing, they were staring at the monitor while defragging simply because the graphic display of the defrag process was extremely soothing and somehow satisfying. I loved it myself, and I still miss it.

Also, IF they were proud... why shouldn't they be? Until not very long ago, everyone, E-VE-RY SINGLE "expert" and website, kept hammering the idea that defragging was essential to good performance.

I never believed it myself, not even in those days when everyone was recommending it. My experience showed me the improvement was minimal at best - except, maybe, in those cases where the HD was severely fragmented. (A friend of mine had a 36% fragmentation at one time; and I remember seeing a HD with 75% fragmentation. But those people were just pigs! ;))

So, mostly I defragged because I like maintaining my "property" well oiled and in good working order - and because I LOVED the hypnotic graphic os the defragging process. Oh, how I miss it... :)

link|improve this answer
feedback

If Mac OS X or Linux were as popular as MS Windows, they would have just as many viruses.

link|improve this answer
2  
You rated me down for what you call a opinion and then you write this - when you have no facts so this cannot be a myth according to you? ... Also, recently there has been more attacks on OS X in direct relation to their popularity. (sorry for being negative, but I get this way when people vote me down for what I think isn't a good reason). – William Hilsum Nov 9 '09 at 4:21
1  
Downvoted because not only is this utterly false (you have no proof otherwise), but I agree with Wil, that was just rude IMO. – musicfreak Nov 14 '09 at 4:25
show 4 more comments
feedback
1 2

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.