From: Mike '/m' 

Hmmm... I may look into picking up a couple more for hot spares.  ;-)

My next planned purchase is a gigabit network switch.  Then I can put lots
more stuff on the media server, and do things like editting across the
network.

  /m

On Mon, 26 May 2003 13:12:58 -0500, "Randy H"
 wrote:

>Sam's Club is selling those 160 GB drives for $150/ea. And I heard that
>CompUSA is flogging the same drive after rebates for ~$100.
>
>I'm living dangerously right now-I broke my IBM 60 GB mirror into a striped
>120 GB set to house my media.
>
>"Mike '/m'"  wrote in message
>news:0bf4dvkgl7nmhjsqlhl15oim40g0coamgt{at}4ax.com...
>>
>> If you check www.dell.com.nytimesoffer once or twice a week, you'll often
>> see a "free shipping" promotion.   Now, if I could only
get rid of that
>> forced Windows XP purchase on the Dell desktop, I might even be tempted.
>>
>> I picked up a nice media server from that page.  600SC box, Pentium 4
>> 2.4GHz, 128MB memory, lots of drive bays, 40GB 7200GB drive, Intel gigabit
>> NIC.  $312 including tax, no shipping charges.
>>
>> The box was OS-free.  It is now running RH Linux 8.0 with a 3Ware IDE RAID
>> controller; and 3 Maxtor 160GB 8MB cache 7200 rpm IDE drives, plus a 40GB
>> boot drive. It's also running Samba for Windows networking.  :-)
>>
>>  /m
>>
>> On Mon, 26 May 2003 09:49:45 -0400, "John Beamish"

>> wrote:
>>
>> >I _almost_ agree with the Dell recommendation.  Just remember that you
>will have to pay shipping charges and at that price range they can represent
>a non-trivial portion of the total cost.
>> >
>> >OTOH ... if you value your time at $50/hr the "cost"
of driving over,
>picking up and bringing back the machine can easily match the Dell shipping
>costs.
>> >  "Rich"  wrote in message
news:3ed1b231$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> >     I wouldn't recommend a best buy no-name box or the similar cheap
>ones at compusa either.  You can get an inexpensive Dell or HP box with
>Windows XP preloaded for less than $400.
>> >
>> >     I thought I saw one at compusa earlier today but can't find it on
>their web site.  Best Buy has a $499 HP system with a $100 gift card at
>http://www.bestbuy.com/detail.asp?e=11216104&m=0&cat=0&scat=0.
 There is a
>Presario desktop at
>http://www.bestbuy.com/detail.asp?e=11214707&m=488&cat=490&scat=491
which is
> also $499 and looks to have a $100 gift card and a $50 rebate.  The HP
>system looks nicer as one might expect for $50 more.
>> >
>> >     On its web site, Dell has a 2.2 GHz, 256 MB RAM, 30 GB disk, CD-R/W
>system for $299.  There is no free shipping this week so unless you can
>convince them it may cost another $90 or so.
>> >
>> >  Rich
>> >
>> >    "Robert Comer" 
wrote in message
>news:3ed19786{at}w3.nls.net...
>> >    Cheapie consumers machines can do that nicely, so it'd probably pay
>you
>> >    time-wise and frustration-wise to get an XPHome machine and be done
>with it.
>> >    I saw one in the Best Buy paper for less than $400, gotta add a
>monitor
>> >    though. (or a Linux machine for even cheaper)
>> >
>> >    - Bob Comer
>> >
>> >
>> >    "Ellen K." 
wrote in message
>> >    news:u343dv4kkk471lf1ls9r08qgb4tgji980b{at}4ax.com...
>> >    > This isn't my development box, it's more like my
email / internet /
>> >    > cardfile box.
>> >    >
>> >    > On Wed, 14 May 2003 16:35:36 -0400, "Robert Comer"
>> >    >  wrote in message
:
>> >    >
>> >    > >Ellen, I agree with Rich (for once. ), a
new install is the
>best way
>> >    to
>> >    > >go over an upgrade.
>> >    > >
>> >    > >64MB would run W2K as Rich says, but it would be
pretty slow doing
>> >    > >development stuff.  I'd get an upgrade if you
can. (you can never
>have
>> >    > >enough RAM is what I go by and it's the absolute
first upgrade I
>think
>> >    about
>> >    > >if there's a performance problem...)
>> >    > >
>> >    > >- Bob Comer
>> >    > >
>> >    > >
>> >    > >"Rich"  wrote in message
news:3ec2a71a{at}w3.nls.net...
>> >    > >   The system requirements for Windows 2000
Professional can be
>found at
>> >    >
>>http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/professional/evaluation/sysreqs/.
>> >    64MB
>> >    > >is the low end.
>> >    > >
>> >    > >   Again, if you do this I would recommend
against an upgrade.  Do
>a
>> >    clean
>> >    > >install and reformat the hard disk.
>> >    > >
>> >    > >Rich
>> >    > >
>> >    > >  "Robert Comer"
 wrote in message
>> >    > >news:3ec2a370$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> >    > >  > Would W2K even run on such a box?  (I
bought in in early '98 I
>> >    think.)
>> >    > >
>> >    > >  Most likely, but there may be a driver problem
if it's not
>standard
>> >    stuff
>> >    > >  from that time.
>> >    > >
>> >    > >  >So far
>> >    > >  > I can't find memory for it, only have 64MB.
>> >    > >
>> >    > >  What is it?  (Make/model)  I'll see if I can
find out more about
>it.
>> >    > >
>> >    > >  > Also, with W2K wouldn't I want NTFS?  
Right now it's FAT32.
>> >    > >
>> >    > >  If all you're going to do is run one OS on it,
yep, you'd want
>NTFS --
>> >    the
>> >    > >  W2K offers to upgrade your drive to NTFS, no
problem. If you
>have other
>> >    > >  partitions, there's a convert program you run
after you do the
>install.
>> >    > >
>> >    > >  - Bob Comer
>> >    > >
>> >    > >
>> >    > >
>> >    > >
>> >    > >  "Ellen K"
 wrote in message
>> >    > >  news:909377.ae7c35{at}harborwebs.com...
>> >    > >  > Would W2K even run on such a box?  (I
bought in in early '98 I
>> >    think.)
>> >    > >So
>> >    > >  far
>> >    > >  > I can't find memory for it, only have 64MB.
>> >    > >  >
>> >    > >  > Also, with W2K wouldn't I want NTFS?  
Right now it's FAT32.
>> >    > >  >
>> >    > >  > > From: "Robert Comer"

>> >    > >  > > Why not upgrade to W2KPro or WinXP --
it wouldn't be the
>speediest
>> >    box
>> >    > >  in
>> >    > >  > > the world, but it'd be more stable
and run more of today's
>> >    programming
>> >    > >  > > stuff?
>> >    > >  > > - Bob Comer
>> >    > >  > > "Ellen K"
 wrote in message
>> >    > >  > > news:509347.ac8012{at}harborwebs.com...
>> >    > >  > >> Urk.  If that's the case then the
only thing I'd get with
>98SE
>> >    would
>> >    > >be
>> >    > >  > > the
>> >    > >  > >> ability to run newer versions of
stuff that don't run on 95
>any
>> >    more
>> >    > >  (like
>> >    > >  > > the
>> >    > >  > >> Norton security stuff).
>> >    > >  > >>
>> >    > >  > >> Anything resembling power
management is already disabled.
>> >    > >  > >>
>> >    > >  > >> How do you shut down to the
"orange-on-black idiot screen
>only"?
>> >    > >  > >>
>> >    > >  > >> What about Rnaapp?
>> >    > >  > >>
>> >    > >  > >> Maybe the original hard drive is
starting to go bad... ?
>> >    > >  > >>
>> >    > >  > >> > From: "Frank
Haber" 
>> >    > >  > >> > Why do you think 98SE will
help your shutdown problem?
>Win 95
>> >    did
>> >    > >a
>> >    > >  > > pretty
>> >    > >  > >> > good job shutting down early
APM systems.  98SE had
>notorious
>> >    > >  problems
>> >    > >  > > with
>> >    > >  > >> > that, got two partially
successful patches for it, has
>had whole
>> >    > >  > > websites
>> >    > >  > >> > written about its power
problems.  There are still a
>bunch of
>> >    > >  machines
>> >    > >  > > out
>> >    > >  > >> > there that won't shut down properly.
>> >    > >  > >> > Have you considered just
disabling power management,
>shutting
>> >    down
>> >    > >to
>> >    > >  > > the
>> >    > >  > >> > orange-on-black idiot screen
only, then leaning on the
>power
>> >    switch
>> >    > >  for
>> >    > >  > > five
>> >    > >  > >> > seconds?
>> >    > >
>> >    > >
>> >    >
>>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4