Tech: Open thread

2011-01-19 08:31:36

#6701

FloppY_: +1,010|6544|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

mikkel wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:
mikkel wrote:
Yes. That's redundancy. It's not backup.
Seriously mikkel, just shut the hell up. You're arguing over a VERY technical meaning of a word when essentially, they're the same with perhaps only a small difference in how one goes about executing the method to achieve the result.
There are other threads on this forum in which the detailed reasons for why RAID isn't backup are spelled out so that even idiots can understand it. Some idiots, at least. To suggest that RAID is "essentially the same" as a backup suggests that you have absolutely no idea about what you're trying to lecture others on.

Sit down, be quiet, and read the other threads if you want to avoid being dense in the future.

Last time I checked, a backup was a copy of your system

Last time I checked, mirror RAID are disc pairs with identical (see copy) data

Last time I checked, normal people don't take stuff so fucking seriously nor are they completely fucking incapable of thinking a little creatively

Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me

2011-01-19 08:41:40

#6702

max: Vela Incident; +1,652|6825|NYC / Hamburg

The problem with raid1 is that windows can do funky things. It's not unheard of that Windows fucks up the file system and obliterates all data or that malware deletes something or a driver or the raid controller fucks up and writes junk to the disk or ...

If you have a bunch of data that would be a huge pain to reacquire if the HDD it's on dies, I agree that raid is a good way of protecting that data. I have a 10TB RAID5 array that I use to store my movies, music and junk. If a freak accident happens and I loose the data it won't be the end of the world.

If you have data that you absolutely cannot loose, make backups to something external.

_{once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.}

2011-01-19 08:46:18

#6703

FloppY_: +1,010|6544|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

max wrote:
The problem with raid1 is that windows can do funky things. It's not unheard of that Windows fucks up the file system and obliterates all data or that malware deletes something or a driver or the raid controller fucks up and writes junk to the disk or ...

If you have a bunch of data that would be a huge pain to reacquire if the HDD it's on dies, I agree that raid is a good way of protecting that data. I have a 10TB RAID5 array that I use to store my movies, music and junk. If a freak accident happens and I loose the data it won't be the end of the world.

If you have data that you absolutely cannot loose, make backups to something external.

I'm mainly worried about pictures I've taken and collected etc,,,

I already do an external backup to a HDD I keep in my closet, and I have a rarely updated picture disc in the bank Vault....

I just want to cut out the local backup I keep on my secondary drive The less work I have to do the more often I will do backups I guess...

EDIT: And like I said, drivers, windows & programs will not be on the RAID1 array but on the other HDD

Last edited by FloppY_ (2011-01-19 08:47:17)

Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me

2011-01-19 09:33:42

#6704

mikkel: Member; +383|6859

FloppY_ wrote:
mikkel wrote:
CapnNismo wrote:

Seriously mikkel, just shut the hell up. You're arguing over a VERY technical meaning of a word when essentially, they're the same with perhaps only a small difference in how one goes about executing the method to achieve the result.
There are other threads on this forum in which the detailed reasons for why RAID isn't backup are spelled out so that even idiots can understand it. Some idiots, at least. To suggest that RAID is "essentially the same" as a backup suggests that you have absolutely no idea about what you're trying to lecture others on.

Sit down, be quiet, and read the other threads if you want to avoid being dense in the future.
Last time I checked, a backup was a copy of your system

Last time I checked, mirror RAID are disc pairs with identical (see copy) data

Last time I checked, normal people don't take stuff so fucking seriously nor are they completely fucking incapable of thinking a little creatively

Last time I checked, the "point" of a network connection was to transfer data between systems.

Last time I checked, putting your data on physical media, travelling to the target system, and transferring the data to that system achieved that goal.

I'm sure you're also going to argue that physical media qualifies as a network connection, considering how eager you are to ignore the pertinent aspects of the concept of backups, and how you seem content with basing your argument in a failed understanding of what that concept really aims to achieve.

If you had one ounce of creative imagination, and coupled it with one ounce of logical reasoning, you'd realise that there is a distinction between "redundancy" and "backup" for a reason. Data redundancy provides a single set of data from multiple sources. Data backup provides known or assumed good data from one or multiple points in time.

If you're going to call an apple an orange and be smart about it, don't get upset when people remind you that you aren't, in fact, very smart at all.

2011-01-19 10:04:23

#6705

FloppY_: +1,010|6544|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

mikkel wrote:
FloppY_ wrote:
mikkel wrote:

There are other threads on this forum in which the detailed reasons for why RAID isn't backup are spelled out so that even idiots can understand it. Some idiots, at least. To suggest that RAID is "essentially the same" as a backup suggests that you have absolutely no idea about what you're trying to lecture others on.

Sit down, be quiet, and read the other threads if you want to avoid being dense in the future.
Last time I checked, a backup was a copy of your system

Last time I checked, mirror RAID are disc pairs with identical (see copy) data

Last time I checked, normal people don't take stuff so fucking seriously nor are they completely fucking incapable of thinking a little creatively
Last time I checked, the "point" of a network connection was to transfer data between systems.

Last time I checked, putting your data on physical media, travelling to the target system, and transferring the data to that system achieved that goal.

I'm sure you're also going to argue that physical media qualifies as a network connection, considering how eager you are to ignore the pertinent aspects of the concept of backups, and how you seem content with basing your argument in a failed understanding of what that concept really aims to achieve.

If you had one ounce of creative imagination, and coupled it with one ounce of logical reasoning, you'd realise that there is a distinction between "redundancy" and "backup" for a reason. Data redundancy provides a single set of data from multiple sources. Data backup provides known or assumed good data from one or multiple points in time.

If you're going to call an apple an orange and be smart about it, don't get upset when people remind you that you aren't, in fact, very smart at all.

I never did numbnuts.. But it gives me the same results as a local-PC backup with none of the effort

Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me

2011-01-19 10:31:01

#6706

mikkel: Member; +383|6859

Jesus christ.

2011-01-19 10:41:45

#6707

13urnzz: Banned; +5,830|6755

|_()|_!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111111!!!1!

2011-01-19 12:53:30

#6708

Benzin: Member; +576|6256

Just ignore, Floppy. He's in "Duty Calls" mode right now...
http://xkcd.com/386/

2011-01-19 13:12:53

#6709

mikkel: Member; +383|6859

CapnNismo wrote:
Just ignore, Floppy. He's in "Duty Calls" mode right now...
http://xkcd.com/386/

Congratulations, CapnNismo. You've arrived at the last refuge of idiots who insist that they aren't wrong; ridiculing the people who point out that they are. I'm sure there are plenty of comic strips around depicting that particular flavour of failure.

2011-01-19 13:16:35

#6710

Benzin: Member; +576|6256

mikkel, I love how you actually think I care what you think. Again, I said you're right. Certainly running manual/automatic backups is not exactly the same thing as a RAID set up, but my goodness, they achieve what is essentially the same goal of preserving data in the case of a mechanical or software failure. Get over it and actually argue with people who care. I'm sure the D&ST section has enough things that piss you off enough to earn a post from you.

2011-01-19 13:23:55

#6711

mikkel: Member; +383|6859

CapnNismo wrote:
mikkel, I love how you actually think I care what you think. Again, I said you're right. Certainly running manual/automatic backups is not exactly the same thing as a RAID set up, but my goodness, they achieve what is essentially the same goal of preserving data in the case of a mechanical or software failure. Get over it and actually argue with people who care. I'm sure the D&ST section has enough things that piss you off enough to earn a post from you.

Classy move, playing the apathy card despite investing yourself in the argument at hand. Posting the "Duty Calls" strip and assuming a lackadaisical demeanor when you're so eager to offer angry rebuttals at every turn is also a great way of really getting it out there that you really don't care what other people have to say.

Additionally, you miss the entire point of backups in your "BUT WE TOTALLY AGREE SO YOU'RE JUST SO STUPID FOR THINKING WE DON'T" quip. Fantastic form.

2011-01-19 13:27:00

#6712

Morpheus: This shit still going?; +508|6257|The Mitten

...Which debates are worse? The Audio debates or the RAID debates?

EE (hats

2011-01-19 13:27:52

#6713

13urnzz: Banned; +5,830|6755

Morpheus wrote:
...Which debates are worse? The Audio debates or the RAID debates?

http://forums.bf2s.com/viewforum.php?id=15

2011-01-19 13:29:15

#6714

mikkel: Member; +383|6859

Morpheus wrote:
...Which debates are worse? The Audio debates or the RAID debates?

The audio debates. In those, everyone is right for reasons that no one can explain. In the RAID debates, some people are demonstrably correct, and others refuse to accept it.

2011-01-19 15:20:55

#6715

max: Vela Incident; +1,652|6825|NYC / Hamburg

Oh ffs. STFU everyone

_{once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.}

2011-01-19 15:34:35

#6716

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6410|what

No you.

Can anyone reccomend what type of monitor I should get, LCD, LED, etc? I have a good rig, HD5970.

I've almost ruled out CRT at this stage.

2011-01-19 15:59:00

#6717

FloppY_: +1,010|6544|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

AussieReaper wrote:
No you.

Can anyone reccomend what type of monitor I should get, LCD, LED, etc? I have a good rig, HD5970.

I've almost ruled out CRT at this stage.

The only difference between LED and LCD is the backlight no?

Isn't it called OLED when it has to do with how the pixels work..

Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me

2011-01-19 16:01:12

#6718

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6410|what

Well you've proven you know what the LCD and LED acronyms stand for floppy, well done.

2011-01-19 16:02:34

#6719

Winston_Churchill: Bazinga!; +521|6996|Toronto | Canada

Is it a gaming computer? Whats it mostly used for?

2011-01-19 16:03:58

#6720

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6410|what

Yeah gaming. Media when I watch a blue ray but I'd rather the gaming quality picture over the movie picture. If that makes sense.

I'm not sure on the LED v LCD winner.

2011-01-19 16:10:41

#6721

FloppY_: +1,010|6544|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

AussieReaper wrote:
Well you've proven you know what the LCD and LED acronyms stand for floppy, well done.

hmpf...

What I meant was, (on laptops at least) the panel itself is the same but the backlight is what differs,, no?

If you want to take LED vs LCD televisions to compare, LCD is still ahead in image quality

Last edited by FloppY_ (2011-01-19 16:12:44)

Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me

2011-01-20 12:41:07

#6722

Morpheus: This shit still going?; +508|6257|The Mitten

FloppY_ wrote:
AussieReaper wrote:
Well you've proven you know what the LCD and LED acronyms stand for floppy, well done.
hmpf...

What I meant was, (on laptops at least) the panel itself is the same but the backlight is what differs,, no?

If you want to take LED vs LCD televisions to compare, LCD is still ahead in image quality

inb4freezerandplasma

...but, seriously, can;t you like go down to a computer store and look at a few examples?

Also:
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=c … lcd+vs+led

EE (hats

2011-01-20 12:46:48

#6723

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6455|Winland

FloppY_ wrote:
If you want to take LED vs LCD televisions to compare, LCD is still ahead in image quality

No. They're both just as good.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2011-01-20 12:48:23

#6724

Morpheus: This shit still going?; +508|6257|The Mitten

Actually, from the few links I've read online, it seems LED is perhaps pulling ahead?

EE (hats

2011-01-20 12:48:38

#6725

FloppY_: +1,010|6544|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

Freezer7Pro wrote:
FloppY_ wrote:
If you want to take LED vs LCD televisions to compare, LCD is still ahead in image quality
No. They're both just as good.

Not the last time the major sites reviewed them...

afaik colour is off abit on LEDs

Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me

BF2S Forums Tech: Open thread

mikkel wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

mikkel wrote:

max wrote:

FloppY_ wrote:

mikkel wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

mikkel wrote:

FloppY_ wrote:

mikkel wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

CapnNismo wrote:

Morpheus wrote:

Morpheus wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

FloppY_ wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

FloppY_ wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

FloppY_ wrote:

Board footer