Latest posts of: JavaJones - DonationCoder.com
Welcome Guest.   Make a donation to an author on the site August 05, 2015, 03:32:42 AM  *

Please login or register.
Or did you miss your validation email?


Login with username and password (forgot your password?)
Why not become a lifetime supporting member of the site with a one-time donation of any amount? Your donation entitles you to a ton of additional benefits, including access to exclusive discounts and downloads, the ability to enter monthly free software drawings, and a single non-expiring license key for all of our programs.


You must sign up here before you can post and access some areas of the site. Registration is totally free and confidential.
 
View the new Member Awards and Badges page.
   
  Forum Home Thread Marks Chat! Downloads Search Login Register  
  Show Posts
      View this member's profile 
      donate to someone Donate to this member 
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 101 Next
26  Main Area and Open Discussion / Non-Windows Software / Re: Thoughts on "next generation" forum systems? (Discourse, nodeBB, etc.) on: July 20, 2015, 12:54:06 PM
Interesting to hear from a bbPress user. I must admit I pretty much wrote it off due to its Wordpress plugin nature, I figured it'd be a bit clunky, not as full-featured, etc. Does it have some of the Discourse features you like (e.g. new topic from reply)? Or are you more choosing it for ease of management?

- Oshyan
27  Main Area and Open Discussion / Non-Windows Software / Re: Thoughts on "next generation" forum systems? (Discourse, nodeBB, etc.) on: July 20, 2015, 12:10:00 PM
Thanks for your thoughts Tux.

When you say "pointless technical restrictions of usability", are you just referring to needing Javascript, or more than that? Because I think it's a very conscious and - to some people, including myself - worthwhile choice that Discourse, nodeBB, and others are making to use modern web development technologies and methods to enable the best "normal" interaction and responsiveness. Without Javascript or some equivalent, many of the valuable (IMO) features of Discourse simply wouldn't work. It's clearly not a forum designed for those who fear Javascript, nor is it one designed for accessibility, but those two problem cases remove only a relatively small minority of the potential user base. That seems to include you, which is understandable, but I don't think it's an indictment of the system(s) as a whole. If there are other, better ways to get the kind of functionality and UI interaction they've created then I'd love to hear more about that. Hell, at least it's not Flash. Wink

As for using Docker, it's not actually a *requirement* of using Discourse as far as I know, it's just the easiest way to deploy. For me use of Linux for hosting is *the* right way to do it anyway, so it's not a concern. But if it's a worry for you (and you're actually still interested in Discourse cheesy ), it looks like Docker will be Windows compatible in the future: http://thenewstack.io/doc...or-windows-is-on-its-way/

Meanwhile, I'm not quite sure where I stand on the argument that these different systems are for different audiences, different types of communities interacting. Technically it is true right now, but I would be quite surprised if many of the current forum communities had not migrated from newsgroups previously, and surprised as well if the trend I'm seeing in some of my communities - to move onto Facebook (Groups), etc. - is not reflective of a greater overall trend. Which means that *the same users and communities* are migrating from one system to another (and have done so before).

Systems *do* often replace other systems, and the same people who used an older system may switch to a different, newer one for various reasons. The fact that some percentage stays behind and becomes a "hardcore" community still using some older technology may indeed actually mean that for those people the newer system is *not* an adequate replacement, much less upgrade, but they are often in the minority in my experience. The question for me is not "where are the hardcore hanging out?", it's "what is the best system to use to serve a modern community that will best be able to gain and maintain popularity, offer smooth and enjoyable interaction for the users, and be capable of long-term maintainability?".

I never liked IPB myself, but I'll have to take another look at it on your recommendation. I suppose part of what put me off is the cost, hehe. vB is IMO atrocious, which just goes to show that popularity isn't the sole and best metric on which to judge a system. cheesy

I'm a bit confused about your comment on "lack of structure". Discourse definitely has categories. The default UI may not do the best job of showing them, but it's easily configurable, and there are themes out there that better mimic (and IMO improve on) more traditional designs. There is a "Material Design" Discourse theme I mentioned above that I quite like, for example.

[attach=1]

Final point, consolidation is a sign both of a maturing technology landscape, but also sometimes of one in decline. Again I'd be surprised if it were true that forums are anywhere near as popular now as they were 10 years ago, at least in English speaking countries (I say that because I know e.g. many Asian countries seem to have really different online interaction preferences than those in the US, and I just don't have familiarity with what they're doing or why).

Curious to hear more from those who may have tested any of these systems. But recommendations for more up-to-date and well maintained "traditional" forums (like IPB) are welcome too. smiley

- Oshyan
28  News and Reviews / Official Announcements / Re: DonationCoder Major Upgrades - Progress Report Thread on: July 19, 2015, 08:17:31 PM
mouser, I forgot to post the list of SMF anti-spam addons I use. Here you go:
httpBL: http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/?mod=2155
StopSpammer: http://custom.simplemachines.org/mods/?mod=1547
KeyCaptcha: http://custom.simplemachi...g/mods/index.php?mod=2839

And here's a new thread to discuss Discourse and other "modern"/"next-generation" forums:
http://www.donationcoder....m/index.php?topic=41284.0

- Oshyan


29  Main Area and Open Discussion / Non-Windows Software / Thoughts on "next generation" forum systems? (Discourse, nodeBB, etc.) on: July 19, 2015, 08:17:02 PM
With the coming upgrades to DC that mouser is working on, I got to thinking about the future, the long view, how to future-proof a community like this. I run a couple of forums myself, all based on SMF (and have administered vBulletin, phpBB, and other forums as well), and while I've found SMF to be my favorite overall of the free options I've tried, its development now seems troubled and its design a bit archaic.

With the current dominance of social media and new methods of interaction that are evolving (short Twitter posts, @mentions, tagging, video and photo posting, coming interactivity/VR, who knows what else), I started to feel like traditional forums might be on their way to becoming antiquated in the way that Newsgroups are now - they still exist, people still use them, but they're relegated to a seldom-used part of the Internet where most people seldom venture. I have seen traffic diminish on the forums I manage and am part of over the past 5+ years, which might support this idea...

So I started to wonder what might be next. If SMF and the traditional forum model are losing popularity and not as appealing to new users, and perhaps younger users, then what is out there to replace these systems? What can you download and run the same way you run SMF, but with more modern features, design, interaction methods, etc? I found a few obvious answers in the most popular of such "next generation" systems, notably Discourse and nodeBB, along with a few hybrids like BurningBoard, and even (just today) some forks of SMF like ElkArte that add some needed features to SMF's base code.

Discourse seemed a bit alien to me at first, but also rather exciting in its potential. Once I found a Material Design theme for it, it looked a lot more appealing too. The others I've looked into a lot less, but from my not-very-well-researched position Discourse still appears to stand-out in features and goals. Unfortunately I haven't had a chance to try *any* of these systems yet though.

I'd love to hear thoughts and experiences from anyone who has been looking into similar systems, or better yet, who have tested one or more of these (doesn't have to be ones I mentioned, just a system that is more "modern" and "progressive" than SMF is, and ideally free/open source).

- Oshyan
30  News and Reviews / Official Announcements / Re: DonationCoder Major Upgrades - Progress Report Thread on: July 19, 2015, 01:48:52 PM
Tuxman, I'm curious to hear your thoughts about Discourse. I "discovered" it some months ago (or perhaps re-discovered) and I have kind of a love/hate relationship with it. I'm not actively running it on any sites mind you, so my experiences are limited. I absolutely *love* some aspects of it (the default design is not one of them), and I really like what their goals are, what they're trying to do. But as I said I do have issues with the design, and there are some other concerns too. So I'd be interested in hearing your perspective, especially since you said you're tinkering with some SMF forks (don't know why I didn't think to look for some before now!). Perhaps this should be split off into its own thread? cheesy

- Oshyan
31  News and Reviews / Official Announcements / Re: DonationCoder Major Upgrades - Progress Report Thread on: July 15, 2015, 06:47:03 PM
I guess it's probably too late now but for whatever it's worth I have a couple of anti-spam mods installed on 2 fairly active forums I run and they take care of 99% of spam. We very rarely have a problem with an actual spam post getting through. The most I have to do is check and approve (or delete) a couple of questionable registrations once a week. On DC it'd probably be more like every couple days with the volume, but still the actual work is minimal and done mostly by the plugins.

- Oshyan
32  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: The end of the hard disk on: June 25, 2015, 03:29:29 PM
Relevant:
http://www.techspot.com/n...ield-ssd-reliability.html

There are now at least 3 studies on SSD reliability that I'm aware of. The above link discusses/mentions 2. The third is discussed here:
http://www.extremetech.co...ve-study-sheds-some-light

Note also that most of these studies are - by necessity - performed on older drives. The trend may not be toward higher reliability, but generally speaking that is more likely than a trend toward lower reliability as the technology matures.

- Oshyan
33  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: Interesting "stuff" on: June 20, 2015, 06:13:11 PM
Holy shit, snakes are so badass!

- Oshyan
34  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Microsoft "Hyperlapse" tech is finally available to play with on: June 18, 2015, 09:36:38 PM
Uh, perhaps I should note that the term "hyperlapse" is a *general* word, it's not Microsoft's name for the software. The video you link above with all those complicated steps is *not* using Microsoft's software. It is, in fact, a description of *exactly* the kind of in-depth, laborious work that Microsoft's research project was trying to avoid and, to some degree, it succeeds in doing so, although the results are certainly less controllable (but also a helluvalot more automated; 75% or more of those steps are unnecessary with Microsoft's app).

- Oshyan
35  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: PayPal about to claim rights in all IP sold/licensed using PayPal for payments on: June 10, 2015, 12:25:14 PM
Every time a company changes their ToS to include these kinds of clauses people freak out, and every time it has had the same basic reasoning and meaning. It has happened with Google, Facebook, Flickr, and many more. No company in their right mind would actually try to appropriate your content *and get away with it*. It's way too far reaching, and the actual potential benefit to the company is questionable. We need to be vigilant to make sure no one is trying to do those things merely *because* people expect it to be too audacious, but in reality the actual danger from ToS changes is fairly low.

- Oshyan
36  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: The End of my Macbook Pro Experiment on: June 08, 2015, 12:57:33 PM
tomos: yes, style over substance! I think you may be right, at least to some degree. It also may be true that Macs actually were "easier to use" somehow, in the past, but as Windows has evolved to be easier and more hand-holding, and OS X has evolved to have more features (overall), perhaps they've converged more than not.

It reminds me of the classic and still-repeated "Macs are better for artists" BS which only ever had a logical basis nearly 2 decades ago when Macs had more creative-oriented software and better graphics capability (hardware-wise and OS-support-wise) than Windows. There was a period of maybe 5 years where those differences were really true and clearly evident, and another 5 years or so of decline where the differences were rapidly diminishing, but there were still some advantages for artists and creatives of being on a Mac. That period ended at least 10 years ago though, and PCs have been as good as - or often better than - Macs at doing graphics and other creative tasks since then. Yet so many people *still* to this day will repeat the "Macs are better for artists" BS.

The Mac's main remaining advantage at this point is reputation, the *idea* that it's easier to use. We all know how the placebo effect works, right? And confirmation bias? And over-justification? All of these logical failings are factors in the ongoing success of the Mac desktop platform, in my opinion. Which probably boils down largely to good marketing and product positioning.

- Oshyan
37  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: why MS Word breaks format on: June 07, 2015, 09:40:07 PM
ok guys, but the success of a program is not to spend 1 whole year to master it!!!
Where's the "like" button when you need it? cheesy

- Oshyan
38  Other Software / Found Deals and Discounts / Re: 365 day trial of AVG AntiVirus 2015 on: June 07, 2015, 04:08:14 PM
mouser, how is AVG on memory and CPU use these days? It seems all the AV apps change tremendously between some versions and their resource use shifts a lot. Very frustrating. Like how Eset/NOD used to be the "lean, low impact" choice, and then... it wasn't. Argh.

- Oshyan
39  Main Area and Open Discussion / Living Room / Re: The End of my Macbook Pro Experiment on: June 07, 2015, 04:03:24 PM
The thing that gets me about Mac users is...

Well, I am also one of those people that don't "get" Mac. I've accepted that this is true and that I never will "get" it, just like Innuendo above. I always thought there really was something to "get" though, that there really was some identifiable, useful difference - an advantage. In terms of hardware this was arguably true for a long time, at least for non-custom builds, and still is to *some* degree in the laptop area. But Windows machines are catching up steadily, and with the hardware inside being essentially identical for years now, soon there will be little overall difference physically.

I do see OS X doing a number of pretty nice things that I would count as advantages... but they're strangely *not* the thing that *most* Mac users I know actually like or even use much. In fact, having lived with a Mac user for a while now, and knowing several others over the years, it's amazing to me how little they take advantage of even what OS X *does* offer (nevermind the things it's missing that they could benefit from).

But here's what's confusing to me: Mac users are, as a whole, very loyal to and "satisfied" with their platform. If you ask most of them they'll sing its praises, how easy it is to use, how "intuitive", etc. But have you ever actually watched and lived with a Mac user for a long period of time? They have just as many frustrations and issues with their computers as Windows or Linux users! True story. I've seen hard freezes, random reboots, inability to shut down, crashing apps, install/uninstall issues, and much more. Macs aren't, on the whole, more stable or reliable than any other machine, nor more easy to troubleshoot. And when you start to look into the world of troubleshooting Mac issues you discover there's a whole ugly underbelly there. Threads 10s or 100s of pages long in Apple's support forums of users reporting the same issues, like problems with switching between onboard and discrete graphics in laptops. And these are issues that aren't necessarily solved between hardware revisions. And new issues crop up with every new piece of hardware, despite how minor many of the iterations are!

Perhaps even worse, in my eyes, they often use their computers in the most naive and ignorant ways. For example, OS X doesn't (as far as I know) have a really easy way to minimize/maximize a window (rather than use "full screen") by clicking something (on Windows you just click the entry on the taskbar and the app comes up and then minimizes again, easy and clean). So many Mac users I know just *drag the window to the edge of the screen* when they want to see something behind it, or another app, then *drag the window back afterward*. This is incredibly cumbersome and time consuming, and it means that your windows are almost always in slightly different places because you're dragging them arbitrarily around. This makes difficult to develop really good muscle memory for where buttons and functions are, for one thing. OS X has a decent way to deal with this, which is a couple of hotkeys/shortcuts like Command-H and Command-M (hide/minimize), but no Mac user I know uses them! I suspect it's because hotkeys are, for them, "too techy" or advanced or something.

The reality actually is that Macs and OS X in particular *can* be pretty awesome for advanced users as you almost need to be one to use the OS properly and efficiently (ironic!) *and* it's got BSD underpinnings so there's a pretty sweet commandline, piping, and all kinds of other stuff going on there that's fun for power users... But *most* users actually use the OS very inefficiently and suffer from and struggle with its limitations or design choices fairly frequently (whether they realize it or not). Take the still-batshit-crazy-to-me behavior of OS X (and Mac for as long as I've known) of separating applications and their windows. Why do I want MS Word to be open and sitting there in the background *if there are no documents open in it*? How many times have I seen a Mac user using some high-memory application, then close all its windows but *leave the application running* because *closing all windows does not close the app*? (hint: many, many times)

Granted on Windows there are occasionally some awkward things that result from the Windows behavior being opposite (applications are defined by their windows and closing all windows usually closes the app), for example applications that always want to have *some* document open, so if you close the last one it creates a new, default, blank document (many applications work around this by having a background "workspace"). Hardcore Mac users will tell you that the advantage of having these floating windows that are not "contained" by their parent app and a "workspace" is that you can more easily drag and drop things between apps, a function that Windows has in a more limited capacity as far as I know, and one which I think is theoretically useful. But practically I've actually *never* seen an average Mac user do any of this fancy drag-and-drop between apps. So once again some theoretically advanced capability of OS X goes underutilized.

In the end I think this all goes a long way toward explaining why Apple may be merging iOS and OS X in the end. Much less of iOS's functionality is wasted simply because it has less functionality. So much of OS X that Apple has to maintain is really being lost on the majority of their users. They've been steadily alienating their power users while profits soar, so I think they're on the right track, at least as a business. If they go through with it they can probably reduce complexity of their core OS (and fragmentation) by 75% while maintaining 95% of their market. Win!...

But I'll never be a Mac user. cheesy

- Oshyan
40  News and Reviews / Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Not-so-mini review of CrashPlan backup software on: May 27, 2015, 02:30:52 PM
Update 2 on iDrive: Another problem found.

The impression of iDrive being a feature-rich but fairly naively implemented application continues to solidify for me. The latest issue is that backups take a *really long time* (about 14 hours on an overclocked 4.2Ghz i7 2700k with 32GB of RAM). Now of course we're talking about 3TB of data, but these are incremental backups. The problem appears to be that iDrive is very bad at identifying what data has changed and so it basically scans through *all data in the backup set* and then updates anything new or changed that it finds. You can see in this screenshot of the log that it's actually only backing up a mere 47 changed files! But it still took 14hrs to do it because there are 1.3 million total files.

[attachimg=1]

I'm fairly certain there are more effective approaches, such as using the NTFS file table to look for changed files, doing active file system monitoring (performance considerations?), etc. And of course the tremendous length of time is due largely to the sheer size and number of files in my backup. Still though, I don't think this should be considered normal and expected behavior, right? If I recall correctly from my time with CrashPlan, this kind of thing was not really a problem. But this may go into the pile of evidence suggesting that CrashPlan's high memory use had a bit more reason to it than I'd expected, i.e. if it's doing more work in monitoring the file system for changes, deduplication, etc. than iDrive is. It's still an open question whether the memory trade-off is worth it for those features...

I should note that there is a separate "continuous data protection" option that may help with my particular needs, but it's a bit of a workaround. Here's their page on the feature (emphasis mine):
https://www.idrive.com/he...ontinuous_data_protection
Quote
The Continuous Data Protection feature allows IDrive to automatically recognize the changes to files present in your backup-set and back them up in real-time...

What's odd is that this indicates the technology I'm talking about *does* exist in iDrive, it's just not used for the main backup. So why not just use this Continuous Data Protection *instead* of the main backup? Well, the big limitation is it does not consider or backup files larger than 500MB. As their FAQ indicates:

Quote
CDP is not a replacement for the traditional schedule backup feature but works along with the scheduled backup to provide timely protection for your data.

Now thinking about my particular backup needs, dealing with files greater than 500MB in size is fortunately not actually that common. So my current thinking is I will enable this CDP feature and see how well it works, and lower the frequency of the full backups to once or twice a week instead of daily as I have it now. If I'm right about not dealing with large files that much, then this should give me a good level of protection through the week, and then reserve the once-weekly full backup to basically just catch any missed big file changes. It will still take a long time, but at least it will only be once a week. The one big exception is my Lightroom catalog, which is currently around 1.6GB in size. This is a pretty important one for me, so I need to think about how much this puts me at risk... I'm also not sure whether this CDP option works for both online and local backup.

Does anyone else deal with big quantities of data?

I think once I've worked out all the kinks and addressed all my own questions I'll try to write a separate "mini" review of iDrive to distill these experiences down into something more immediately useful and accessible.

- Oshyan
41  News and Reviews / Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Not-so-mini review of CrashPlan backup software on: May 25, 2015, 09:46:06 PM
4wd, glad to hear the updates work for you. Must be some configuration issue on my end. I'll have to look into it.

- Oshyan
42  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Help me choose an online backup service on: May 25, 2015, 02:34:28 PM
Before anyone switches to iDrive, you should read the latest update post in my CrashPlan review thread:
http://www.donationcoder....26224.msg382264#msg382264

- Oshyan
43  News and Reviews / Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Not-so-mini review of CrashPlan backup software on: May 25, 2015, 02:34:04 PM
Update on iDrive: All is not so rosy.

I have run into a couple of concerns and issues over the past week or two that I thought I should mention here.

First off I get notifications for updates to the client but trying to use the built-in update function never works. It downloads to 100%, then just sits there and never applies an update. This may be a security setting issue on my end. It's a minor but consistent annoyance. Downloading the application from their server manually and then just reinstalling it seems to work fine to update though.

Second - and perhaps most importantly - their system's support for deduplication seems to either be extremely minimal/simplistic or *non-existent*.

This is normally considered as much of a benefit to the host/service provider as to the user in that it can help them reduce data use on their end *if* it's done *between* people's accounts (i.e. if you have a large movie file downloaded and Joe Schmoe who also uses iDrive does, then they only need to store a single instance of the file on their server). This is an obvious privacy and security risk and it does not appear that iDrive does this (which is good for you, the user). For the user the main benefit is reduced bandwidth use if the file can be found to already exist on their server.

If deduplication is done *within a single user's account* it can still help with bandwidth, i.e. if you *move* files around on your system, it does not have to re-upload them. Unfortunately iDrive does not seem to handle this, or doesn't support it very well. What happened is I have 2 physical hard drives being backed up to the same location at iDrive (and locally). I had 150GB of photos on one drive when I did my original iDrive Express "seeded" backup that I sent to them. I later moved that 150GB of photos to the other drive, where all the other pictures live; it's a sort of archive, whereas the main drive is an SSD and a "working drive". So I do such file transfers semi-frequently. iDrive then had to *re-backup* all 150GB of photos (re-upload), even though they were the same exact photos and had simply been moved from one drive to another!

I consider this to be a pretty big drawback, at least for my usage patterns. I will seldom be moving such a large amount of data at once, usually it's more like 10-15GB, and that can re-upload fairly quickly. But it's still a needless inconvenience and evidence of an extremely simplistic - frankly naive - backup client. It is quite honestly not confidence inspiring, although I have no other specific reason to believe that their backup system is shoddy. It just seems like such a big, important, and obvious thing, one wonders what else they're overlooking...

It also may help explain why CrashPlan - which uses fairly sophisticated deduplication, block-level even, I believe - might be using so much more memory than iDrive. It seems reasonable to conclude that CrashPlan is just doing a lot more with the data locally, i.e. it also does compression, whereas iDrive seems to do so minimally if at all (the local backup size is roughly equivalent to the original data size on disk), or to only do it for remote backup and not local. I would really like to see both compression *and* deduplication and I consider both it to be an important features of any modern backup solution. The fact that iDrive appears to be missing both this (to some degree) is worrisome. They do claim to have compression and incremental backup on their features page, but I assume both are it is referring to remote backups, and apparently "incremental" doesn't cover my scenario of moved-but-not-modified files. [edit: I later found that compression *is* working]

Lastly, when I contacted support to discuss this issue they were not exactly impressively knowledgeable. The rep did eventually tell me several times that the data would have to be re-uploaded, but couldn't explain why and didn't seem to understand that this was a missing *feature* (and an important and relatively standard one). He did say he'd open a feature request for that, but had no information about whether such a request was common. Visiting their (surprisingly hard to find from their site) forums I don't see any other mention of it, which is surprising. Maybe my usage pattern is unusual.

Anyway, all that being said I'm still sticking with iDrive for a while, both because I have invested money in it, and because CrashPlan was not without its (significant) problems either. As I've mentioned, I have such a large amount of data that a "seeded" backup service is necessary, and the per-GB storage cost needs to be reasonably low. iDrive and CrashPlan are the only 2 services that seem affordable for my needs at present, but I'd love to hear about other options if anyone is aware of one that fits those specific needs.

Last but not least if you're still interested in iDrive after my concerns expressed above, and if you don't need 10TB of space like I do, this deal might be more of interest (I haven't tested it to see if it's still live):
https://www.idrive.com/id...ive/deals/pd/backupreview

- Oshyan
44  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: WildOpal - hypothetical new idea for a "find and replace" program on: May 25, 2015, 02:09:47 PM
Interesting discussion. As someone who has struggled with RegEx in the past but regularly uses simpler search operators and wildcards (e.g. *.jpg, *DCM_??, etc.) I might find this tool useful. Especially if it interfaces with/generates RegEx. It of course would need to do that if it has no built-in editor capability. If it did, it could get some use especially if it could be invoked easily through e.g. Notepad++ ("Open this file in WildOpal"). Generating RegEx would extend its reach quite a bit more.

Anyway, I find the idea appealing. And since you're already going forward with it, I am curious to see what you come up with.

- Oshyan
45  News and Reviews / Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Not-so-mini review of CrashPlan backup software on: May 19, 2015, 05:58:52 PM
Yeah, plus $80 for the initial data import, which is free with iDrive. cheesy

I certainly think Glacier and a RYO solution is a great option to have. For those more security concerned, or who want more specific setups, etc. But indeed for my needs iDrive seems to be a better deal *and* have more features, be easier to setup and manage, etc.

- Oshyan
46  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Microsoft "Hyperlapse" tech is finally available to play with on: May 19, 2015, 05:55:21 PM
Cool trek! Now I know why you're called 4wd. Wink And not a bad result on the hyperlapse either.

- Oshyan
47  News and Reviews / Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: Not-so-mini review of CrashPlan backup software on: May 18, 2015, 12:25:04 PM
Roll your Own isn't an option for me due to the sheer size of my data set (unless Amazon offers a service where you can send them a hard drive and they'll stick it on Glacier storage - do they?). Even if such an option were available, it would have to have a clear price advantage and require minimal maintenance, otherwise it really wouldn't be worth it for me. But I'm *definitely glad* such options exist. Can't let the big backup players get too complacent. When storage is available so simply and cheaply direct to the user, the backup companies have to compete on features and price, which is good. smiley

- Oshyan
48  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Microsoft "Hyperlapse" tech is finally available to play with on: May 18, 2015, 12:22:06 PM
Requiring WMP is pretty lame! Has anyone tried the mobile apps yet?

- Oshyan
49  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Microsoft "Hyperlapse" tech is finally available to play with on: May 17, 2015, 09:38:59 PM
Yeah, ICE (Image Composition Editor) is also really cool tech, and is actually usable (no watermark, I think). It works better than many other apps I've tried for stitching, including Photoshop (panorama stitch mode).

- Oshyan
50  Main Area and Open Discussion / General Software Discussion / Re: Seeking experiences from people backing up relatively large personal data sets on: May 17, 2015, 07:51:37 PM
I finally had to let go of CrashPlan due to the memory use issue, primarily. I am now using iDrive. Details if you're interested:
http://www.donationcoder....26224.msg381832#msg381832

- Oshyan
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 101 Next
DonationCoder.com | About Us
DonationCoder.com Forum | Powered by SMF
[ Page time: 0.048s | Server load: 0.09 ]


Share on Facebook
submit to reddit