Let's Build Me a Computer

[dhilberg]

. . . reparitioning is hard . . .

I've used EASEUS Partition Manager to repartition a couple of times. The Home version is free (32-bit only, 64-bit is not free). Makes repartitioning a breeze. Ideally you shouldn't have to repartition, but if you're running out of space you'll need to.

Honestly, multiple partitions is high maintenance and not necessary (for Windows anyway). I won't go that route again. A separate physical drive (ideally SSD) for the OS and programs (C: drive), and then another physical drive (or two) for all your important data. That's the way to go.

Don't forget externals or a docking station w/internals (my method) for backups. And backup often. I do backups nightly.

 

[JClishe]

Don't forget externals or a docking station w/internals (my method) for backups. And backup often. I do backups nightly.

Better yet, get a Windows Home Server to manage and automate your nightly backups. As well as being an excellent storage option for your photos.

Jason

 

[dhilberg]

Better yet, get a Windows Home Server to manage and automate your nightly backups. As well as being an excellent storage option for your photos.

Jason

A good idea if you have more money to spend and have multiple PCs. However, a good docking station (like mine) will run you only $40, plus a decent sized internal drive maybe $100. Write up a quick batch file that does incremental backups on the folders of your choice, then automate it by having the task manager run it every night.

A good server will run you at least $500, but it's definitely something to look into if you have a lot of PCs.

 

[JClishe]

A good server will run you at least $500, but it's definitely something to look into if you have a lot of PCs.

I'm not talking about "a server", I'm talking about "Windows Home Server". It's a specific OEM product. The Acer AH340 goes for $350 with 1TB of storage and is expandable to 7 TB. And yes, it's target use case is automated PC backups and centralized storage for multiple PC homes.

Jason

 

[dhilberg]

I'm not talking about "a server", I'm talking about "Windows Home Server". It's a specific OEM product. The Acer AH340 goes for $350 with 1TB of storage and is expandable to 7 TB. And yes, it's target use case is automated PC backups and centralized storage for multiple PC homes.

Jason

Windows Home Server is simply an operating system produced by Microsoft (available separately). You still need the hardware (the "server") to run it on. Many--if not most--of these "servers" have the Windows Home Server OS pre-installed when you buy them. Maybe you don't refer to them as "servers," but that's what they are, and that's what they're known as in the industry.

Newegg.com - home server

 

[JClishe]

Maybe you don't refer to them as "servers," but that's what they are, and that's what they're known as in the industry.

Newegg.com - home server

LOL, thanks. A "server" is a generic term. It could refer to an Asus Windows Home Server, an IBM x3250, or even a Dell PowerEdge M910 blade. These are all servers. When you said "a good server will run you at least $500", I took that to mean that you were using "server" in the generic sense, meaning you could be referring to any box running a server OS. My reply was simply to re-iterate that I was talking about a SPECIFIC class of server - Windows Home Servers - which are great boxes and readily available for sub $500.

 

[dhilberg]

Maybe you don't refer to them as "servers," but that's what they are, and that's what they're known as in the industry.

Newegg.com - home server

LOL, thanks. A "server" is a generic term. It could refer to an Asus Windows Home Server, an IBM x3250, or even a Dell PowerEdge M910 blade. These are all servers. When you said "a good server will run you at least $500", I took that to mean that you were using "server" in the generic sense, meaning you could be referring to any box running a server OS. My reply was simply to re-iterate that I was talking about a SPECIFIC class of server - Windows Home Servers - which are great boxes and readily available for sub $500.

Okay, but since we were discussing Windows Home Server based on your initial input (see your post in #17 here), it would have been reasonably safe to assume I was not talking about "generic" servers. That seems to have led to your confusion.

Anyway, YES, a Windows Home Server (to use your term) is definitely an option for backup.

 

[icassell]

This is the reason I decided to buy rather than build. I got a Dell XPS 8100 with i7 - 860Quad, 8GB RAM, 640 G HD, Radeon HD5450, as well as 2 DVD RW drives, Win 7 Home Premium for $700. Sure it's a Dell refurb, but it is fully warranteed. I'm one of those who has owned many Dells with no problems. I figured I could build one with high-end components (which Dell doesn't necessarily use), but could also afford to replace this one if it died and keep the cost at under what it cost me to buy assembled.

 

[Garbz]

I've used EASEUS Partition Manager to repartition a couple of times. The Home version is free (32-bit only, 64-bit is not free). Makes repartitioning a breeze. Ideally you shouldn't have to repartition, but if you're running out of space you'll need to.

Sorry I didn't mean physically hard, I meant structurally hard to accomplish on a modern file system making it a very high risk operation that could instantly bone not just some files but the entire partition in one go. As drives get larger and larger you ultimately end up losing more with each failure. I would avoid it like the plague!

Better yet, get a Windows Home Server to manage and automate your nightly backups. As well as being an excellent storage option for your photos.

You're making a copy of your files from one computer to another. That is not a good backup solution if it's running in your house. It's not a backup if a lightning strike can kill your computer and your windows home server. It's not a backup if a fire can burn down your computer and your windows home server.

It's probably still a cool idea to use anyway. I have a linux box in the backroom which accomplishes the same thing. I copy my final photos on it and it has a RAID1 array for high availability (RAID is not a backup). But once every 2 months I bring a 500GB harddisk home from work. Backup my photos, personal files, tax etc, and the day after take it back and sit it in the bottom drawer of my office desk.

If my house burns down my backup is safe. (Actually if Brisbane gets nuked my backup is safe too since my office building is a blast proof bunker but hey no one needs to go to those lengths )

 

[JClishe]

It's not a backup if a lightning strike can kill your computer and your windows home server. It's not a backup if a fire can burn down your computer and your windows home server.

Yup, excellent point. Using cloud backup is pretty common in the WHS community to get your data offsite. There are even some cloud backup providers that have WHS-specific add ons. Currently I'm just doing what you are, taking a disk offsite, but I'm planning on moving to cloud backup soon. Whenever I get around to it, actually.

 

[dhilberg]

You're making a copy of your files from one computer to another. That is not a good backup solution if it's running in your house. It's not a backup if a lightning strike can kill your computer and your windows home server. It's not a backup if a fire can burn down your computer and your windows home server.

This is why I backup to two separate drives, one of which I keep in a safe deposit box at the bank. I swap them usually around the first of each month.

Granted, the threat of losing the house is minimal, but you have to be prepared. It could happen.

 

[Garbz]

Yup, excellent point. Using cloud backup is pretty common in the WHS community to get your data offsite.

Just a word of caution on that point too. The T-Mobile sidekick had the same idea till some idiot contractor at Microsoft cut corners and lost a lot of customer data. That and at 60MB/s sustained copying speed on a harddisk vs the 1MB/s download rate of a modem if you're lucky the time taken to recover data from the cloud would be crippling if you have 15GB of wedding photos to recover that need to be processed.

 

[JClishe]

That and at 60MB/s sustained copying speed on a harddisk vs the 1MB/s download rate of a modem if you're lucky the time taken to recover data from the cloud would be crippling if you have 15GB of wedding photos to recover that need to be processed.

For me, the recovery time is an acceptable trade-off for the peace of mind of knowing that I have a fully automated offsite backup solution that doesn't require any user intervention on my part. If I rotate an external backup disk to an offsite facilty (such as my desk drawer at work) once a week, than I know that I'm at risk for losing up to a weeks worth of data if I experience a disaster at home.

So the choices boil down to either permanently losing up to a weeks worth of data, or, losing no data but having having to wait a few days for everything to recover. I personally prefer the second option, but this is an individual decision that folks need to make for themselves based on their own personal needs.

Jason

 

[NV-Studio]

The i7 is great if ur going to do photography if ur pictures are insanely large. I run an i7 with an ati 4850 hooked up to my 55 inch flat and editing photos are awesome.

 

[iflynething]

I'm dealing with D300 RAW files, 18-20mb per file. I wouldn't really be using the processing and memory power until I go to panoramas. I'm big into that and also HDR. I hate to wait. I have 2 panoramas which are hugh that I have done. One is of the Charlotte, NC skyline and has 88 pictures all stitched together. I don't even know how long that took. Another is of the inside of a church and I set that to piece together in Photoshop all night. I don't actually know how long it took.

I just want more speed when I'm going through pictures and multitasking.

~Michael~