That was my point, now I can just pipe my cable signal into my computer and
use that to record my shows. I don't know how much TiVO runs, but the
set-up I'm using can be had for about $50 (TV tuner card) and included
software. Electronic programming guides can be found online for free
(www.titantv.com). Plus, there's no monthly fees (something I'm assuming
TiVO has, but I'm not sure). I can then burn the shows onto CDs or DVDs (if
I want particularly high quality) and watch them on my TV via the DVD
player. Or, just watch them on the computer. I think it kicks butt.
My laptop & desktop each lost a hard drive in the past 12 months. Bummer
reinstalling everything, and there were some things I didn't have backed
RAID 0 is "Striped Disk Array without Fault Tolerance." IMO this is too
risky. My next desktop will be mirrored hard drives at a minimum.
I thought about that, but at the moment my storage needs are pretty high.
I've only had this system for about a month and have used a full 200 Gb of
storage space. I turn over a lot of space with multimedia work - I've
gotten pretty involved in making home movies with my DV camcorder.
Reinstalling stuff IS a bummer, but it really isn't that big a deal. I've
done it many times, and it usually takes maybe 2-3 hours max. Not that big
a deal, IMO. I routinely backup data to CD's, and now that I have the DVD
writer, I've been using some DVD-RW discs (basically extra 4.3 Gb hard
drives). I would bet I only have about 10-20 Gb of "critical" data that I
need to make sure I don't lose. Plus I have access to network storage space
(about 100 Gb for my personal use) that I can access from home, too.
In all the years I've been using computers, I've only had one hard drive
fail. Maybe I'm just lucky, but I think that the mfgs have gotten pretty
good at quality control.
The other big issue is that the RAID 1 arrays suffer pretty significantly in
performance compared to the RAID 0 arrays. What's the point of having all
the processor, memory and video performance if you handcuff it with a slow
data storage/retrieval architecture?
If this were business intensive and I couldn't handle a day of downtime,
worst case, then I probably would do the same as you and go for the RAID 1,
but then I'd probably go with a terabyte of total storage (500 Gb usable).
To amplify... <g> installing the OS isn't bad. I've done it probably 200
times since Win3.x. It's everything else I use as a software developer that
takes the install/config time. Starting with FDISK it's about a 1.75 day
process. Office XP Developer, Visual Studio.NET, SQL Server 2000, ... This
time around I didn't install Delphi, Visual Studio 6 or IBM's DB2 database.
Hope I don't need 'em anymore.
I'd had good luck for years too then :-( two failures in a few months.
IIRC RAID 5 has performance and fault tolerance. More info here.
You could leave your transient data on RAID 0 for max speed and have the OS
and programs on mirrored (if you were concerned about fault tolerance).
Especially on separate controllers that would be very fast. I've read of
systems setup this way.
RAID 5 is what the big boys use. It has some overhead but if you spread the
stripes across a lot of drives it isn't bad.
This was crucial in AS/400s where the loss of one drive usually meant you lost
all of them.
I'm lucky enough at work to have a RAID-5 setup with hot swap on my
desktop machine (along with two 3+ghz P4 Xeons and 2GB ram). It just
showed up on my desk a couple months ago because I guess we needed more
machines for our simulations and I had the oldest computer. It's a 6
drive array, several hundred GB of SCSI drives. I don't even know what
to do with it all. It's a little more than I think I'd do for a shop
computer. My 5 year old HP is fine for that.
Greetings and Salutations.
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 16:20:25 GMT, "Mark Jerde"
My experiences have been mixed. I just lost a hard drive in
one of my systems, a Seagate, that just would not load any more, or
recognize. I had a Western Digital drive (20 gig) that went for
about 4 weeks in a web server before going toes up. Of course, that
was after I had run a burn in on it for a week.... Apparently WD
has had some quality issues with the 20 gig drives, as my supplier
said they had gotten a LOT of the 20 gig units back. The bigger
drives seem reliable...but that 20 gig mech just was a bit flaky.
You REALLY should not see a performance hit if you use a RAID
controller (either separate or built into the motherboard). The
controller takes care of all that, and, at a fast enough speed
that there should not really be a hit. Now...if you are trying to
do it with sofware emulation...good luck...even if you ARE using
Depends on what is important to save. Any data that is not
backed up on at least ONE separate media is subject to loss. I would
go with having everything on the most fault tolerant media possible.
After all, it can really darken one's day to finish up an 8-10 hour
editing session and have a drive crash and lose everything.
My practice is to constantly write to three hard drives:
- Work on either the desktop or laptop's C:
- Check the work into the version control system
running on the desktop's E:
- "Get latest version" to the C: of the other computer.
At the end of the day I often zip everything and send it to an email account
that I access only by webmail so if the office burned down overnight the
latest & greatest is safely offsite.
weird, I have an old Imac(1998), and i've beaten the hell out of the drive,
many force restarts(removing the power cord) and moved huge numbers of files
through it(I have several games which I install, and delete when I get bored
of them, along with zbrush and all my random drawings, so it has a lot of
erasing and writing, and it never died(it died once, but a little
reformatting fixed that)
Speaking of money down the toilet....we have till the 15 to upgrade some of
our 2000 seats or they will no longer be updateable....to me that is
I use Land Development Desktop and Civil packages which cost about $8000 for
a new seat...sigh...
Having made a living as a computer jockey since nineteen and aught
sixty-two, and having bought a RAS in 1965, here are some drips of
wisdom (?) from jo4hn's john. If WW tools had changed as much as
computers in the past 40 years, one would walk into the shop, say
good-day to the RAS, tell it cherry end-table, and go watch tv. The saw
would quickly order and accept delivery of the wood, oversee jointing
and planing, joinery, dry fit, glue-up, sanding and painting within a
The same could be said of toasters and sewing machines. Somebody
already did it with cars. The computer is a different tool in the
infancy of its development. The TS (and toaster and...) are fairly
mature tools and will not change much unless the addition of a computer
chip will create a more saleable item. Dream away folks.
The creation thereof is the basic permise behind the latest in CNC
machinery. The problem is keeping the cost down. I would love to have a
machine in the shop, that cost less than a grand, that you could basically
program to create a ball-and-claw cabriole leg, and then walk away. Even
When I was a kid, sometime in elementary school, the Stanley plant in town
let us tour the shop floor. There we saw workers loading boxes full of wood
chunks, essentially cubes or rounds, into a hopper, and removing totes full
of completed tool handles from the other end. Inside, the machine spun
several cutters and removed everything that wasn't programmed to be a tool
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.