My notebook has a 100GB drive, which is more than adequate for now, but
for peace of mind (backups) I went for a 250GB network storage drive.
It's a hard drive that plugs into a hub or router, and provides storage
to all computers on the same network (with account/password protection
options).
I really like the solution. It might be a little slower than a USB2.0
or Firewire drive, at 100 megabit ethernet rates, but I find it's fast
enough for my needs. Nowadays you can get gigabit rate network drives
too though. Anyway, what I like about the solution is that it allows my
wife, on her notebook, and I on mine to both work with our photos
without swapping cables. ...and I can take it with me to another
network, plug it in, and use it there too. USB2.0 drives are convenient
if you're in a single-user environment, where you don't mind being tied
to your hardware by a cable. But with a network drive, you still have
all the connection options that your network provides. In my case, that
means I can access the network drive via my WiFi-enabled computers,
without any wires, as long as the drive is plugged into a network with a
wireless router or switch.
Dave
graywolf wrote:
Why? I got along with 64K for years. And I remember how excited I was
when I was able to get a 100MB (no that is not a typo) hard drive for
only a little bit more than $200.
And now I am wondering if 640MB/60GB is enough for a sub-notebook.
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
Cotty wrote:
On 26/4/06, Joseph Tainter, discombobulated, unleashed:
If you need more storage space for digital photos, TigerDirect
currently has a Seagate 250 MB, 7200 rpm, ATA 100 drive
That would tie in nicely with Bill Gates' prediction that all we would
ever need was 640k of RAM :-)
