Main > Everything Else

Boot XP from CD-Rom? Need help fellas...

<< < (3/5) > >>

Samstag:
I strongly recommend everyone consider a RAID 5 setup.  It might seem a little expensive but it provides a big safety net when you get the inevitable drive failure.  I think all the recent versions of Windows (2000, XP, Vista?) support a software RAID configuration.  It requires a minimum of 3 drives and you lose 1 drive worth of space, but the extra money spent is worth the protection.  You can lose a whole drive and not lose any data and it doesn't take any effort.

I'm too lazy to make regular backups and I don't trust CD/DVD storage, so I keep everything important on RAID 5 arrays.

DrewKaree:

--- Quote from: Donkey_Kong on April 13, 2007, 03:32:54 pm ---Guys- Thanks for the help. Was able to finally boot up windows. Only problem now is that I lost about 200 gigs of data and I don't know how many programs(lots)
:cry:

--- End quote ---

Woogie laid it out pretty well.  "can't boot windows" is just as generically UNhelpful as "finally able to boot up windows". 

STOP WHAT THE HELL YOU'RE DOING AND DO SOME DESCRIBING!  WE WANNA HELP, BUT YOU'RE NOT LETTING US!

"can't boot windows" could be any of the items Woogie described, as well as a host of others - WHAT does that phrase mean?  Am I gonna hafta drive to CO and thrash you one?

[Jerry Maguire] Help us.  Help you.  Help US.  Help YOU!  SHOW ME THE MOOONNNNNEEEEYYYYYYYY![/Jerry Maguire]

Donkey_Kong:

--- Quote from: DrewKaree on April 13, 2007, 10:40:49 pm ---
--- Quote from: Donkey_Kong on April 13, 2007, 03:32:54 pm ---Guys- Thanks for the help. Was able to finally boot up windows. Only problem now is that I lost about 200 gigs of data and I don't know how many programs(lots)
:cry:

--- End quote ---

Woogie laid it out pretty well.  "can't boot windows" is just as generically UNhelpful as "finally able to boot up windows". 

STOP WHAT THE HELL YOU'RE DOING AND DO SOME DESCRIBING!  WE WANNA HELP, BUT YOU'RE NOT LETTING US!

"can't boot windows" could be any of the items Woogie described, as well as a host of others - WHAT does that phrase mean?  Am I gonna hafta drive to CO and thrash you one?

[Jerry Maguire] Help us.  Help you.  Help US.  Help YOU!  SHOW ME THE MOOONNNNNEEEEYYYYYYYY![/Jerry Maguire]

--- End quote ---

I just wanted to.........make you..................yell a lot......... :scared







I WIN!  :woot

shmokes:
RAID 5 is often a difficult option either because many computer cases won't hold that many drives or because of expense -- three+ drives, hardware RAID controller (if you're serious enough to go RAID 5, do you really want to trust your data to a software RAID solution?).  For that matter, does the built-in software RAID support cover RAID 5 or just 0 and 1?).  At any rate, even a simple RAID 1 drive will cover your ass and cost you quite a bit less.  You only have to have two drives (one to use and one to mirror everything you do on the other), and it has the benefit of no down time if a drive goes bad.  RAID 5 is more cost effective as you get into larger sizes, but I think RAID 1 is more realistic for the casual user.

Samstag:

--- Quote from: shmokes on April 14, 2007, 11:13:07 pm ---RAID 5 is often a difficult option either because many computer cases won't hold that many drives or because of expense -- three+ drives, hardware RAID controller (if you're serious enough to go RAID 5, do you really want to trust your data to a software RAID solution?).  For that matter, does the built-in software RAID support cover RAID 5 or just 0 and 1?).  At any rate, even a simple RAID 1 drive will cover your ass and cost you quite a bit less.  You only have to have two drives (one to use and one to mirror everything you do on the other), and it has the benefit of no down time if a drive goes bad.  RAID 5 is more cost effective as you get into larger sizes, but I think RAID 1 is more realistic for the casual user.

--- End quote ---

RAID 5 is always more cost effective (and faster, even software-based) than 1, and also has the benefit of zero downtime.  In both setups that zero downtime assumes you're willing to run your system with no safey net until the drive is replaced.  Software RAID 5 is perfectly safe, reasonably fast, and definitely supported in XP (with a hack) and 2000.  RAID 1 is the easiest option, but how many people are willing to pay double for storage?

After seeing two seperate dual drive failures recently I'm tempted to bump my arrays up to RAID 6.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version