🚀 go-pugleaf

Rod:

I tried real hard to be a nice guy and let you state your point in a rational way.  You have
failed to provide any information to back up your statements.  All you did was curse and
name call.  It is neither professional nor a positive sign of good character.  Therefore I
have to come to the negative conclusion that you are a character w/o any redeeming
qualities.  But I did give you a chance.

Having said that...

The Dell Dimension 4550 is an excellent Pentium 4 platform that uses the i845 chipset.  I
see no reason to negate the use of RAID 5 SCSI or RAID 5 SATA on this platform.  In
comparison the i4004, a 4 bit CPU, got us to the moon and the number of MIPS the Dell Dim.
4550 platform significantly outperforms a VAX PDP11.

There is nothing foolish about making the data used on a PC reliable.  On the contrary, it
is fool hardy to not protect data assets.  The most important aspect of a computer is the
data.  This is the information age and information is what is stored on the hard disk
sub-system.  If the Original Poster (OP) indicates that she needs 250Gbs to store the
content of her photography than the loss of said data can be catastrophic.  Unfortunately
the use if one hard disk to store this valuable data leads to a single point of failure and
the possible complete loss of her data.  What is the cost of data loss to the OP ?  That is
the relevant point here.  Not the cost of the disk sub-systems as compared to the platform
used.  There is nothing in the computer world that states you have to spend $20K on a
computing platform to spend $2K on the disk subsystem.  It just doesn't work that way.   You
don't compare the platform cost vs the disk subsystem cost.  You look at the whole cost of a
complete system based upon the need for the system.  The platform, storage and backup media
is all a part of that overall cost.  The cost of restoring lost data is always *much higher*
than the cost of maintaining and or protecting the data. In addition as an external
sub-system, if the dell Dim. 4550 platform itself should fail, the disk sub-system is easily
ported over to a replacement platform.  Today the OP might have the Dim. 4550 tomorrow, the
OP might buy a replacement platform.  As a subsystem, it is easily moved to the newer
platform thus the overall cost is spread over a longer period of time.

The OP has to perform a personal Cost Benefit Analysis and has to determine what is the cost
to her if all the objects of her photographic art were lost.  250GB is alot of data.  The OP
has to ask herself....How many DVD discs would it take to backup the data ?  How many CDROMs
?  What is the cost of a tape backup system ?

The OP has asserted that she will go with a "large second drive".  Lets assume that drive is
250GB.  If she doesn't go with a reliable storage solution she MUST have a tertiary storage
solution in case the "large second drive" fails.  If she was to go for say a USB2 AIT2 tape
drive she would still be looking at $900~$1400 for the tape drive and atleast $45 per tape
and it would take all nite to perform the backup.  So if you compare the cost of a backup
solution for 250GBs worth of data as compared to the cost of a reliable storage solution
they equalize.  Then when you look at the benefits of RAID 5 it actually outweighs the
benefits of a cheap large drive and a backup solution.

If one drive in the array fails then the OP would still be able to access her data and then
buy a replacement drive and then rebuild the data striped to the drive.  This is alot
quicker than restoring 250GB from 2 to 3 100GB AIT tapes.

There is no foolishness in anything that I have stated nor have I stooped to your level of
cursing and ridiculing.

The rest of my replies are inline....

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bqr1mt$26iccm$1@ID-69072.news.uni-berlin.de...
|
| David H. Lipman <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote
| in message news:7A6Ab.251$vg4.71@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
|
| > And what does the model 4550 have to do with it ?
|
| Its the system being discussed where the
| cost of RAID5 SCSI cant be justified, fool.


And what is the cost of replacing the 250GB of data if the drive fails ?  what is the
opputunity cost in that ?


| > It is a computing platform, it has a CPU and RAM and
| > processes using a high level GUI based operating system.
|
| And is a fairly basic desktop system
| where IDE is perfectly adequate, fool.
|


IDE, SCSI, SATA, PATA - one drive leads to a single point of failure and 250GB of data lost
on just one drive is very, very costly.


| > So what's your point ?
|
| Even you should be able to bullshit you way out of your
| predicament better than that pathetic effort, Lipman.

Childish, moronic, and pitiful way to make a statement don't you think ?  since UseNet data
is cached and stored is THIS the way you want to be viewed ?  You come off as an ignorant
ranting child.


| > You should have seen what I was doing
| > with IBM286 based MCA based platforms.
|
| This is where we're all supposed to swoon is it Lipman ?


No it is meant to point out the fact that the Dell Dim. 4550 is no "dog".  It a high end
system that can outperform a system of just a dozen years ago that wasused a server doing
alot more and cost thousands of dollars more.


| Aint got the remotest relevance to what makes sense on
| a  4550 TODAY, you pathetic excuse for a bullshit arstist.


You show that you are actually a computer illiterate fool who's only way out of a discussion
is to curse, rant and verbally harass.  That what separates an expert like me from and
newbie user like yourself.  I get paid for my opinions and when I discuss computer
technology and application a room full of people become quiet, listen and take notes.
That's how I have come to the position of working for a Fortune 100 IT outsourcing company
and have been contracted to (censored) for close to a dozen years.

That's it for me.  I have wasted enough time rebuking you.  However, those who are reading
this thread will hopefully think about their data and ramifications of catastrophic data
loss and how to safeguard their data and protect themselves from a major loss.

Mr. David H. Lipman