boggy4062

boggy4062

53p

116 comments posted · 1 followers · following 0

503 weeks ago @ The Home Server Show P... - Using The Drobo S with... · 0 replies · +1 points

WHS 2011 seems to be the "Vista" of Home Server's. The 2 TB limit is a joke. I am hoping that Window 8 based server is going to solve all the file system issues.

530 weeks ago @ Breitbart.tv - Thrill Is Gone? Matthe... · 0 replies · +2 points

So, Chris, you are NOT as smart as "dumb" Sarah Palin, aren't you? Did you and Obama figure out how many states US actually has?

539 weeks ago @ We Got Served - Connec... - Intel Proposes New Ced... · 0 replies · +1 points

Really? Virtualization on 4GB RAM machine? ATOM is just fine for backup / file server duties. I agree 100% with ViridianPC guy. Lowest power consumption is a very high priority, since such machines are to run 24/7 (like routers). Media machines is a different animal. New i5/i7 processors provide enough umph with reasonable power consumption. I don't believe that these machines would be a good candidate for Virtual Host either, since somebody in your home (like mother, or wife or child may decided to pull a plug any time). These machines are/should be dedicated machines with specific purpose. Virtualisation is a nice concept, but do they have any use in typical home? Don't think so. Geeks will always need something special, something extra. WHS is not. It is something that most modern homes should have, even though people don't realize it (well many of them, don't carry any insurance, but this does mean that they are right,right?)._

562 weeks ago @ We Got Served - Connec... - Windows Home Server vs... · 0 replies · +2 points

OK... as much as I am disappointed by MSFT (not the first time, and not the last-for-sure-time), I will be carefully watching what my options are with the new version. There is one thing I've learned in last few months, as I watched the V1 vs V2 discussions: having everything running in one box is NOT the optimum solution.
New generation of hardware allows me to separate some distinctive functionality of my home computing requirements into few dedicated, smaller, very efficient boxes. Boxes that will play nicely with each other.

1. I do not need a very powerful processor to run my backups/file serving functionality. Energy efficiency, storage redundancy, storage expandability are THE most important factors. Removal of DE is certain blow to this, but I do believe in free market forces, and I am certain somebody will meet this demand.
Drobo and other flex-Raid-like solutions could be the answer.

2. For my media, I am already using a dedicated Windows 7 box, attached to a 55" bad-a$$ TV with a network dual tuner (hdHomeRun), and I am happy. It is more important for me that the new solution plays nicely with any new media devices I may have on the network, so I can stream, record from any place, to any devices, any time.

As Terry mentioned, for those who already own WHS v1, there is no reason to rush to switch (will not), until the situation becomes more clear on options that the new WHS brings.

562 weeks ago @ We Got Served - Connec... - Windows Home Server vs... · 0 replies · +1 points

Let's not get religious about it Paul ;)

570 weeks ago @ We Got Served - Connec... - Enter Another DE Repla... · 0 replies · +2 points

No it wasn't the reason. MSFT couldn't make both DE and the new application support (letter assignment) to work nicely, and they gave up on DE. Wrong decision IMHO. This executive decision is going to bite them in the .... Drobo and now these new Windows products will fill the void and... people will really start to ask:"why do we need Microsoft?".
My main reason for WHS is its backup with DE. I simply love it. I couldn't care less about all the "extras" like remote access / website /media. There are so many other solutions today that can provide these functions. Only WHS v1 gives me everything that is important for my house in one neat package.

570 weeks ago @ We Got Served - Connec... - Enter Another DE Repla... · 2 replies · +1 points

Executives don't make so lightly decisions who clearly embarrass the company. It is a documented fact, that Vale WAS to deliver all WHS v1 features and some, so... removing one of the main features from WHS due to acknowledged technical problems constitutes a failure to deliver, and the lack of (or at least limited) internal talent, IMHO.

This does not reflect badly on MSFT (all companies experience that). It simply indicates existing limitations of current development group working on WHS. Luckily MSFT does have resources to go outside and get whatever it needs.

570 weeks ago @ We Got Served - Connec... - Enter Another DE Repla... · 2 replies · +1 points

Should any of these products be good enough, I can almost bet that MS folks are going to fork out some $$ to license / buy the talent. This would be my way of fixing the lack of internal talent. Let's hope the solution is near.. Love capitalism, and individual drive to succeed.

572 weeks ago @ We Got Served - Connec... - Installation Issues Wi... · 0 replies · +1 points

I had an automatic update turned on, and after I woke up the update was installed without any problems, with one exception... :) I had to reboot my client PCs in order for the client software to be installed, and manually reran failed backup for the day. No problems since then.

574 weeks ago @ We Got Served - Connec... - Microsoft Breathes Lif... · 0 replies · +1 points

EVERYBOXY would like to get the newest-the greatest WHS (or any other software for that matter), but it doesn't mean that the not-so-new version does not work, or doesn't meet our main requirements. I am VERY happy with WHS as it is today. Would I want more features? SURE! However It does not make my WHS v1 running on my EX475 obsolete. I will keep using my little box as long as I can. I f it breaks... I will replace it with another one, even refurbished. I don't need multiterrabytes of storage. When I do... somebody will have it, or I will add eSata Box for expansion...
:)