If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Which PC for maximum reliability?
I have a busy photo studio, and absolutely cannot put up with delays caused by a broken photo editing PC (broken hardware or screwed up microsoft windows). I need my PC to be available, always. I am willing to spend well over $10,000 if throwing money at the problem is the solution. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Which PC for maximum reliability?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Which PC for maximum reliability?
Since money is not the most limiting factor, I suggest you consider
the following NETWORK: 1) a high-end work station - lots of RAM, with RAID level 1 hard drives for the OS and raid 5 for the local data disk array - for photoshop, etc, and as a backup for #2 2) a mid-level backup work station - lots of RAM, regular hard drives (for office billing, calendaring appts, etc), but also as a backup for #1 should it fail. 3) a separate network storage device (NAS). This should have RAID 5 as well, and be used to a) backup up every thing on both machines b) serve as archive storage for all the data out of use and over 90 days old. 4) Configure all machines to accept OS updates ONLY manually - NOT auto updates. Accept Anti Virus updates daily. 5) a reliable person to set up your NETWORK, FIREWALL, BACKUPS, and INITIAL SOFTWARE INSTALLS, and to do monthly security updates, software patches, new installs, etc.and to assure your virus checking stays current. They should also set you up with a UPS on EVERY machine. 6) a firm rule that NEITHER of these machines is EVER used for web browsing. 7) another firm rule that you ONLY open email from known sources that has been through a good, current virus checker. Why? The RAID arrays assure that hard drive failures don't take you down. The controlled updates assure that patches don't cause problems the email rules and virus control keep your system from getting dirty. On 09 Jun 2007 05:16:34 GMT, Dogbert wrote: I have a busy photo studio, and absolutely cannot put up with delays caused by a broken photo editing PC (broken hardware or screwed up microsoft windows). I need my PC to be available, always. I am willing to spend well over $10,000 if throwing money at the problem is the solution. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Which PC for maximum reliability?
In article ,
Dogbert wrote: I have a busy photo studio, and absolutely cannot put up with delays caused by a broken photo editing PC (broken hardware or screwed up microsoft windows). I need my PC to be available, always. I am willing to spend well over $10,000 if throwing money at the problem is the solution. Hands down, a MacPro. There's a reason why survey after survey, both the Mac hardware, Apple's customer service, and the Mac OS X operating system continue to set the gold standard in usability and reliability. If I were you, just to hedge your bet, I will buy two MacPro's, one display, one or two keyboards, and a pair of large external firewire or USB 2 hard drives. Share the hard drives between the Macs. Use one hard drive to back up the data on the other hard drive through automated software such as SuperDuper and get Photoshop CS 3 and you are set. You can easily do that with $10,000. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Which PC for maximum reliability?
On 09 Jun 2007 05:16:34 GMT, Dogbert wrote:
I have a busy photo studio, and absolutely cannot put up with delays caused by a broken photo editing PC (broken hardware or screwed up microsoft windows). I need my PC to be available, always. I am willing to spend well over $10,000 if throwing money at the problem is the solution. That isn't enough money unless you want to do the job of TRYing to make it reliable yourself. (good luck) Since you came on here and asked the question in the first place it is pretty safe to assume that you aren't capable of doing that. When companies have mission critical computing requirements they PAY for 24\7 computer services. They don't buy their own equipment. They pay a company to maintain, backup, upgrade, and other wise meet their computing requirements. Multiply that number by 8 or more and try again. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Which PC for maximum reliability?
Dogbert wrote:
I have a busy photo studio, and absolutely cannot put up with delays caused by a broken photo editing PC (broken hardware or screwed up microsoft windows). I need my PC to be available, always. I am willing to spend well over $10,000 if throwing money at the problem is the solution. Any software and hardware can and eventually will fail in one way or the other. Therefore there is no "I need _MY_ PC available always". The only viable approach is to have backup systems. Depending on your specific needs this could be a small network with local data backup and a contract with a company, which will replace the PC within 24 hours of malfunction. Or on the other end you got hot data backup in several different geographic/global areas (in case a natural desaster kills all data centers in a specific area or a major network cable to a specific region breaks) and a distributed software system with hot standby, where another PC mimics whatever happens on the main PC and can take over immediately if PC 1 goes the way of the dodo bird. I would consult a professional company because designing and maintaining such a system is way beyond the skills of the typical PC amateur. jue |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Which PC for maximum reliability?
In article , Dogbert
wrote: I have a busy photo studio, and absolutely cannot put up with delays caused by a broken photo editing PC (broken hardware or screwed up microsoft windows). I need my PC to be available, always. I am willing to spend well over $10,000 if throwing money at the problem is the solution. As per the other responses, trying to do this with off-the-shelf PC's is an exercise in futility. You need a complete backup computer. They needn't be identical; one can be well-equipped and the other just adequate. The suggestion to use Apple Macintoshes is a great one, for several reasons: 1. Higher end off the shelf Macs are built to a far higher level of quality than ANY non-custom built PC. (Believe me - I've built PC's that try to mimic Apple quality. Not easy) There's even some argument for buying a Mac and just running Windows on it (should you insist on doing so). 2. The Mac OS has an "archive and install" feature that allows you to replace your operating system without affecting user data OR application software in most cases. The last time I reinstalled Windows over an existing setup, it almost cost me my sanity. 3. In case of a hardware failure, you can usually just pull the drive from one Mac, put it in another, and get back to work. None of this "detecting and customizing for your hardware" crap that Windows needs. Ever try that on Windows? Ugh. In fact on my primary computer, I've NEVER re-installed OS X. I started out with the beta, and have upgraded through all the versions; further, the same install of the OS is now in it's THIRD physical computer. And it's never locked up, crashed., or needed to be reinstalled. Since November of 2000... |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Which PC for maximum reliability?
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Which PC for maximum reliability?
Jürgen Exner wrote:
Dogbert wrote: I have a busy photo studio, and absolutely cannot put up with delays caused by a broken photo editing PC (broken hardware or screwed up microsoft windows). I need my PC to be available, always. I am willing to spend well over $10,000 if throwing money at the problem is the solution. Any software and hardware can and eventually will fail in one way or the other. Therefore there is no "I need _MY_ PC available always". The only viable approach is to have backup systems. Quite true. Depending on your specific needs this could be a small network with local data backup and a contract with a company, which will replace the PC within 24 hours of malfunction. Or on the other end you got hot data backup in several different geographic/global areas (in case a natural desaster kills all data centers in a specific area or a major network cable to a specific region breaks) and a distributed software system with hot standby, where another PC mimics whatever happens on the main PC and can take over immediately if PC 1 goes the way of the dodo bird. I would consult a professional company because designing and maintaining such a system is way beyond the skills of the typical PC amateur. Exactly. That's why going with Macintosh makes sense; you don't need outside help, consultants or an IT department. -- John McWilliams |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Which PC for maximum reliability?
Dogbert wrote:
I have a busy photo studio, and absolutely cannot put up with delays caused by a broken photo editing PC (broken hardware or screwed up microsoft windows). I need my PC to be available, always. I am willing to spend well over $10,000 if throwing money at the problem is the solution. Hmmm, Have one custom made. I am using a 2xdual core Pentium based server with RAID SCSI storage. Has dual monitor set up, redundant power supply on UPS, etc. Pretty fail safe box. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Energizer NiMH Reliability | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 32 | April 27th 06 08:07 AM |
Panasonic reliability?? | Jack Carter | Digital ZLR Cameras | 13 | August 5th 05 04:24 PM |
Panasonic reliability?? | Jack Carter | Digital ZLR Cameras | 1 | July 18th 05 05:18 PM |
Reliability issues with D70 and SB-800 | Owamanga | Digital SLR Cameras | 1 | March 1st 05 10:57 PM |
Reliability | David Jones | Digital Photography | 4 | October 22nd 04 11:21 PM |