On 07/21/2013 02:03 PM, Alex Stanley wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@...> wrote: >> On 07/20/2013 07:41 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote: >>> Jason: >>>> I wonder if I should shift to Mac OS or Ubuntu. >>>> Any comp expert here who could give me some >>>> ideas? >>>> >>> P.S. Back up your computer with a BluRay external >>> drive with USB-3 and ImgBurn free software. (You >>> may have to update the Win 7 drivers for this, >>> but from what I've read, Win 8 supports USB-3.) >>> >>> "I ran one experiment to confirm that USB 3.0 >>> really is about 2.5x faster (as some web sites >>> claim) to burn Blu-ray Discs (BD-R) than USB 2.0 >>> (ie. the USB channel is the bottleneck..." >>> - posted by testmaster >>> >>> Amazon review: >>> http://tinyurl.com/mznh53o >>> >>> >> Depending on one's setup and external network drive might be a better >> solution especially if you have a lot of data to back up. I got a 2 >> terabyte Seagate GoFlex Home drive a couple years back. It's a network >> drive and not that expensive. Though I could do file backups with it I >> wanted to do an occasional image backup and getting Clonezilla to see >> the drive on the network proved difficult. I finally got it working >> just yesterday. The problem is that many articles on how to do things >> are written by IT techs who do this all the time and forget steps or >> variants which are important even if you are tech savvy person but just >> don't do IT things all the time. >> >> Now I have this solved I can image back up my 1 terabyte drives on the >> Ubutnu machine and the Windows 7 which by the way are far from being >> full so the image backups which are compressed anyway won't fill up the >> Go Flex. I used an external 500 GB drive to backup the Linux partition >> on this machine especially when trying to update in which case I didn't >> like the Unity interface (not for programmers) and restored the prior >> partition. >> >> Keep your backup drive hidden so that if someone breaks in and steals >> your computer they don't steal it too. >> > For many years, I kept my desktop machine behind a DSL router as hardware > firewall, with the WiFi on a different IP address. When I got the new Netgear > wireless router, with it's built-in NAS, I ran a Cat 5 cable upstairs to the > router and plugged in my desktop machine. I have a 2T USB hardrive plugged > into the router, and I mapped the network drive to a drive letter in Windows. > I also got a WiFi color laser printer and ran Cat 5 from the living room > DirecTV receiver to the router.
The Go Flex is a stand alone NAS drive you can have off your router. It's not wifi though and it's OS is embedded Linux which rankled a lot of Linux users because it was harder to use with Linux than Windows. At least with Linux backup software though it can be used drag and drop from a browser just like you can in Windows. I want my files filtered a little better like not backing up 6 GB videos files or object files from programming. It's prime design though was as media server. The model I have is discontinued. The nice thing about it is you can unplug the drive from the base and hide it away. > > Having so much stuff connected together on a household subnet is really > convenient. More often than not, I watch satellite TV on an iPad in my office > or bedroom rather than on the big TV in the living room. All the computers, > iPads, and phones can print directly to the printer. The old Dell laptop that > runs the post count script has a scanner plugged into it, and it functions as > a color laser copier. > > When Petra was told by some muscle-testing woo-meister that she has WiFi > poisoning, I moved the router from its more centrally located position over > to the south side and config'd it to put out only 25% of full output power. > The result is that my bedroom has better bandwidth than before, and Petra's > entire side of the house has no WiFi signal at all. Everyone's happy. T-Mobie wanted to put a tower dressed up as a fir tree in the church parking lot on this block. Obviously the church was interested in the extra revenue. The neighbors fought against it worried about the effects on children playing below except that the playfield is in the park where I walk and way out of range of the proposed tower. I didn't have T-Mobile at the time so didn't get involved but if I did would have asked at the council meetings the hands of the opponents that had wifi in their house. Bet most of the did. However before the council got to vote (and I bet would have approved it) AT&T made it's noise about buying T-Mobile which of course didn't happen. So the project was tabled. Now that T-Mobile has merged with MetroPCS I probably will eventually gain access to MetroPCS's coverage which isn't bad here. AT&T has about the best coverage here with antennas at the west side of the Best Western hotel at the top of the hill. I wonder if the neighbors back when those were installed worried about the effect on the folks staying at the hotel? Bet not.
