Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

calaverasgrande

macrumors 65816
Oct 18, 2010
1,291
161
Brooklyn, New York.
:
There are multitudes of imaging solutions for PC, even remote imaging solutions using Intel Pre Execution Environnement (PXE).
That you don't know how to do this stuff with OS X server and Netboot on a Mac does not make it easier to image Macs, it just makes it easier to you.

- Then there's the whole thing about optical archival, which is more reliable than hard drives with spinning parts and cheaper than Flash based media...

I can set up a MAC disc image with nothing more than a stock Mac. No "imaging solutions" or PXE required. Sure you can use Ghost, Acronis whatevs and grab an image from a PC, save it to a share. But ghost/Acronis etc cost money, and I will still have to deal with licensing individualization. Either with an answer file or by manually entering the OS key and other keys most likely as well. The worst I've had to deal with on the Mac side is that Logic, Final Cut and a few other apps will know they have been copied and ask for their key again. As long as you are legit on your licensing this is no problem.
About your other asertion, optical storage is not foolproof or robust. The cat is way out of the bag on that one. CDr, CDRW, DVDr, DVDRW it doesnt matter. They fail MUCH worse than hard drives or tape based media. I dont see anyone using opticals for long term or short term offline storage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

KnightWRX

macrumors Pentium
Jan 28, 2009
15,046
4
Quebec, Canada
I can set up a MAC disc image with nothing more than a stock Mac. No "imaging solutions" or PXE required. Sure you can use Ghost, Acronis whatevs and grab an image from a PC, save it to a share. But ghost/Acronis etc cost money, and I will still have to deal with licensing individualization. Either with an answer file or by manually entering the OS key and other keys most likely as well.

Read up on sysprep.

And sure, I can image any Unix system using dd and netcat, but that's not quite as easy you as you make it sound. Macs will still require the use of a Netboot server or somekind of external media still. There is very much still a "solution" required. That you have to pay or not for it does not mean it is harder which was the initial argument here (Macs are easier to image is what was said).

3rd party software license are not different on Windows than Mac. Some will survive imaging, some will not.

Again, because you know how to image a Mac and don't have all the details worked for Windows or Linux does not mean a Mac is easier to image. It just means you're more adept at it.

About your other asertion, optical storage is not foolproof or robust. The cat is way out of the bag on that one. CDr, CDRW, DVDr, DVDRW it doesnt matter. They fail MUCH worse than hard drives or tape based media. I dont see anyone using opticals for long term or short term offline storage.

Hard drives are the least reliable form of media. Mechanical moving parts lose everytime. Ask me how many hard drives I've swapped over the years and then ask me how many optical media I've seen fail. Let me tell you the ratio is around 50:1 in favor of the optical media. Working around a data center, you learn to never trust a hard drive.

Of course tape is the best, but at 1k$+ for a cheap LTO-1 or DLT drive, for the home I'd rather just have that 100$ Blu-ray writer. Tape also needs to be properly stored, just like optical media. Of course if you don't know how to handle optical media, that's not a fault of the media itself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

notjustjay

macrumors 603
Sep 19, 2003
6,056
167
Canada, eh?
Hard drives are the least reliable form of media. Mechanical moving parts lose everytime. Ask me how many hard drives I've swapped over the years and then ask me how many optical media I've seen fail. Let me tell you the ratio is around 50:1 in favor of the optical media. Working around a data center, you learn to never trust a hard drive.

But working around a data center, I assume you're talking about hard drives that are up and running 24/7. What if I'm a home user trying to make backups of my files? I burn a bunch of optical discs and put them on one shelf, and I fill up a couple of hard drives, power them off, and put them on another shelf. 10 years later, should I expect one or the other to have failed?
 

KnightWRX

macrumors Pentium
Jan 28, 2009
15,046
4
Quebec, Canada
But working around a data center, I assume you're talking about hard drives that are up and running 24/7. What if I'm a home user trying to make backups of my files? I burn a bunch of optical discs and put them on one shelf, and I fill up a couple of hard drives, power them off, and put them on another shelf. 10 years later, should I expect one or the other to have failed?

Doing it your way is more expensive per GB by a very big margin than optical media. You're suggesting using a hard drive as a write once medium.

And I would still trust the optical media more. Stored properly, there's no reason for it not to work vs a hard drive just trying to spin up for the first time after 10 years of sitting there.
 

notjustjay

macrumors 603
Sep 19, 2003
6,056
167
Canada, eh?
Doing it your way is more expensive per GB by a very big margin than optical media. You're suggesting using a hard drive as a write once medium.

Essentially, I am. There may be a cost difference, but it would be made up for in convenience. A 1 TB hard drive can be had for about $60 these days. The equivalent would take about 20 Blu-Ray discs or 200+ DVD-Rs. I'd hate to be backing up or restoring that many discs, even if they are cheaper.

I haven't actually taken any action yet, but I'd like to back up, for example, a pile of miniDV video tapes. An hour of tape is 13 gigs of video files. I was thinking of sitting down one weekend and digitizing all the tapes in one go onto a hard drive purchased for dedicated video archiving.

10 years may be a bit of an exaggerated figure for the shelf life -- I expect I would power up the HD periodically to look at footage, or pull some down for editing. It would certainly be easy to copy over the entire volume to a redundant backup if I was worried about the HD failing.
 

NickZac

macrumors 68000
Dec 11, 2010
1,758
8
I have several 14 year old CD-Rs that are still readable.

I have an 8 inch floppy which I have no idea if it a readable, but it is wayyyy cooler than your CDRs.

And people really get into this. It's like when the good ole' boys start arguing about Ford vs. Chevy or Miller vs. Bud or Blonds vs. Brunettes.
 

belvdr

macrumors 603
Aug 15, 2005
5,945
1,372
I have an 8 inch floppy which I have no idea if it a readable, but it is wayyyy cooler than your CDRs.

And people really get into this. It's like when the good ole' boys start arguing about Ford vs. Chevy or Miller vs. Bud or Blonds vs. Brunettes.

Yeah, I had some old Commodor 5.25" floppies that were readable after 20 years. But they won't hold much data at 320KB per side.
 

KnightWRX

macrumors Pentium
Jan 28, 2009
15,046
4
Quebec, Canada
Essentially, I am. There may be a cost difference, but it would be made up for in convenience. A 1 TB hard drive can be had for about $60 these days. The equivalent would take about 20 Blu-Ray discs or 200+ DVD-Rs. I'd hate to be backing up or restoring that many discs, even if they are cheaper.

You want LTO-4 tape. I wouldn't trust a hard drive to spin up after 10 years of sitting there. Of course, the costs for the actual drive is quite prohibitive if all you need is that 1 tape.

There's a reason we don't use hard drives in the industry ;)

Is that really a question? Of course I'd pick a Ford over a blond!

Er, wait..

So would I. A big Ford truck can get you many blonds in Texas/Arizona. It's like saying "Either take the sandwich or this 50,000$". Duh, take the cash and buy a damn sandwich. We're not all Homer Simpson ;)
 

RedTomato

macrumors 601
Mar 4, 2005
4,161
444
.. London ..
I thought we were discussing how annoying the pc vs mac debate is, not hard drives and trucks :confused::confused::confused:

Back to your thread hijack: A hard drives vs a CD / DVD?

Neither.

By which I mean I would not trust my data to a single point of storage. And a basic RAID array still counts as a single point of storage. I store my data in at least 3 places, in 2 different buildings.

I prefer HDs as the advantage is it's easy to transfer the data every 5 years to something newer and bigger. Running a data verification check on a pile of DVDs / CDs every 5 / 10 years is a pile of pain and isn't gonna happen. Transferring all your DVDs to a new uber-disc is a pain.

Running a data check on a HD is easy and it's a click and walk-away operation. Transferring to a new larger HD is easy. If one HD is dead, making a new copy from the 2 remaining HDs is easy.

Hmm, I've just looked at the oldest personal data on my laptop. Mail.app has my full email going back to 1999, and that is well backed up.

I started using email in 1993, and my email from 1993-99 is on a single CD sitting somewhere in my office. I don;t really care if I lose it, but it's interesting the difference in backup strength between CD and HD.

I feel the pain of profesisonal data archivists for whom neither CDs or HDs or any other data storage method are realistically testable long-term options for storing terabytes over 50+ years.
 

lPHONE

macrumors 6502a
Nov 17, 2009
671
1
What's there to debate?
Look, I'm not going to say "Microsoft sucks". You know it, I know it, The WHOLE WORLD knows it... I'm just not going to say it. :D
 

KnightWRX

macrumors Pentium
Jan 28, 2009
15,046
4
Quebec, Canada
Fanboi alert :rolleyes:

Not really, Microsoft does suck from a corporate stand point. They've been holding back the industry since they managed to gain control of it through IBM's PC days. They've always been against moving forward unless it meant only them could move forward.

Now that we're finally stepping away from a "Microsoft world" and into a realm where innovation and interoperability are finally possible, the industry is exploding. We're catching up the lost time. Don't tell me how Microsoft has also changed, they haven't. They just lost some control and are trying to gain it back. We should never allow it.

So whatever Windows did wrong or right over the years and whatever its technical state now, it doesn't matter. As enthusiasts we should be steering as far away as possible from Microsoft and we should also be making sure that we never again allow one of these firms to hold such a vast monopoly over any segment in the industry. Competition breeds innovation and we should nourish it.

So call me or others who don't like Microsoft "fanbois" all you want, there are very good ethical reasons to not use their products if not technical. Screw convenience if it comes at the price of innovation, competition and interoperability in the industry. It's a false convenience to begin with, locking you into a stale ecosystem.
 

Winni

macrumors 68040
Oct 15, 2008
3,207
1,196
Germany.
In my class we had a few with Macs and the rest had PCs. Some of them were PC geeks and they dragged along these huge PCs that weighed a ton. Of course the inevitable happened and we got in an argument one day, you know the classic one with PCs vs Macs. I'm trying to keep my temper down, stay cool and propose my arguments but these guys are just plain arrogant of what is the truth. I know they're in their right to have their opinion, but it just annoys me when people are arrogant and not willing to try anything new.

I've decided that next time, I won't enter the debate and just keep my trap shut and rest satisfied by having the best system.

Anyone else tried arguing with Windows people?


You speak about "the truth" like every other religious fanatic: You think that YOU own it and that everybody else who does not share YOUR opinion is blind, on the wrong track or just plain stupid. Beside other things, this is called arrogance.

I tell you something: I hate discussions with idiots, and I don't care whether they use Windows, OS X or Linux or if they are Muslims, Catholics or Protestants or Scientologists. Linux fanboys believe as much as you that they have "the best system", and so do Windows fanboys and OS X fanboys, and they all have their very individual reasons for their version of "the truth".

If the Mac really is the superior system, then how come that despite all the marketing that Apple throws at it, not even 10% of the world's market are occupied by Apple systems? Could it be, that maybe, the "best system" is only the best system for a fistful of people and a fistful of use cases? Is there a slight chance that the "inferior" PCs are actually better solutions for around 90% of the market?

You probably believe most of the marketing lies from Cupertino, for example that your Mac is magically more secure than an average Windows PC. Which is proven ********, because in every hacker contest, OS X boxes are the first to fall.

You probably believe that OS X doesn't get viruses. Well, since nobody writes them because of their tiny market share, that might even be true. But don't worry: Viruses are the least of your worries when you use Windows, because nobody really writes viruses for Windows these days either. Worms and trojans are the weapons of choice, and as you could read even here on Macrumors (look for the article about the illegal copies of iWork 09), OS X has some wonderful trojans, too - and no software to protect you from it, I might add.

You probably also believe that OS X is more stable and robust than Windows - and never wondered why you see the damn beach ball so often and it never occurred to you that it's OS X's lousy implemented Mach kernel that is causing these problems.

You probably try to convince everybody in your surrounding that the Mac is so much better, but quickly leave the room when people need certain software for which they are still no Mac counterparts and think it's a great solution to tell them that they can spend two hundred more dollars on VMWare or Parallels plus a Windows license to still run Windows. And the really sad part here is that you don't even realize that you are selling the people crutches because your Mac alone just doesn't cut it.

You believe that Apple has such great service, and don't even notice that even for all the money in the world, you won't ever get on site warranty from Apple -- which is the kind of warranty and service that every big PC label offers you.

You probably also believe that Apple is "the underdog" and that Microsoft is "the Evil Empire", totally ignoring that Apple sells more restricted products than Microsoft ever did, that Apple throughout its history has always been more sue-happy than Microsoft and that Apple even has more cash reserves than Microsoft.

Something is wrong with the picture you guys paint of Apple and Apple products, but you just refuse to see "the truth".
 

roadbloc

macrumors G3
Aug 24, 2009
8,784
215
UK
Winni, you may have had problems with your mac, but I have had none of the problems you have mentioned. I haven't had a beachball in ages... and that was when HL2 crashed because the OS X graphics drivers suck at the moment.

I see what you mean about different people's opinions and everything, but you then go and contradict your statement by offering your opinions. And they are nothing but opinions, not facts. You're as right wing as *LTD* is left wing. Mac market share so low? Due to the high price tag and the familiarity that Windows has with everyone because using Windows is taught in schools in my opinion. The evil empire? Both are business and wish to make money. I couldn't care less for the 'evil empire'. But just so you know, Microsoft are moderating their Windows Phone 7 App Store just like Apple.

MY OPINIONS:
  • Neither Mac or PC is superior. Both have their +'s and -'s. Personally, I prefer OS X. I like the way it works, I like the built in features, I like the direction that Apple is going in and I like the ecosystem.
  • But at the same time, I also respect Windows. Windows 7 is a great OS, Microsoft have put some good effort into the simplicity of the GUI in this version. Maybe 'borrowing' some features from OS X on the way, but it isn't as if Apple haven't taken Microsoft's ideas before.
  • And as for Linux, for something that is released for free, I think distributions such as Ubuntu and PCBSD are totally showing up both OS X and Windows. True, you need to know what you are doing with Linux, and fragmentation makes it a ****ing mess, but both Microsoft and Apple should be upping the game in the next few years, as Linux distro's and catching up and catching up fast.
 

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
Canada
MY OPINIONS:
  • Neither Mac or PC is superior. Both have their +'s and -'s. Personally, I prefer OS X. I like the way it works, I like the built in features, I like the direction that Apple is going in and I like the ecosystem.
  • But at the same time, I also respect Windows. Windows 7 is a great OS, Microsoft have put some good effort into the simplicity of the GUI in this version. Maybe 'borrowing' some features from OS X on the way, but it isn't as if Apple haven't taken Microsoft's ideas before.
  • And as for Linux, for something that is released for free, I think distributions such as Ubuntu and PCBSD are totally showing up both OS X and Windows. True, you need to know what you are doing with Linux, and fragmentation makes it a ****ing mess, but both Microsoft and Apple should be upping the game in the next few years, as Linux distro's and catching up and catching up fast.

Linux is unfit for average consumer-level use. Linux distros are free. Use any one of them for any length of time and you'll see why. Application quality ranges from total junk to mediocre. Works best in servers. Fun to play with, though.

The highest iteration of an OS that combines features with lowest possible maintenance is OS X. It *will* be iOS, however, with Lion.
 

Xian Zhu Xuande

macrumors 6502a
Jul 30, 2008
941
128
No, because I've found that people in these debates virtually never have a great deal of experience with both platforms. People tend to have the platform they like, and are comfortable with, and that is the platform they'll defend on any given issue, whether right or wrong.
 

OllyW

Moderator
Staff member
Oct 11, 2005
17,196
6,800
The Black Country, England
MY OPINIONS:
  • Neither Mac or PC is superior. Both have their +'s and -'s. Personally, I prefer OS X. I like the way it works, I like the built in features, I like the direction that Apple is going in and I like the ecosystem.

Same here, though it all might change if this happens...

The highest iteration of an OS that combines features with lowest possible maintenance is OS X. It *will* be iOS, however, with Lion.
 

Xian Zhu Xuande

macrumors 6502a
Jul 30, 2008
941
128
MY OPINIONS:
  • Neither Mac or PC is superior. Both have their +'s and -'s. Personally, I prefer OS X. I like the way it works, I like the built in features, I like the direction that Apple is going in and I like the ecosystem.
  • But at the same time, I also respect Windows. Windows 7 is a great OS, Microsoft have put some good effort into the simplicity of the GUI in this version. Maybe 'borrowing' some features from OS X on the way, but it isn't as if Apple haven't taken Microsoft's ideas before.
  • And as for Linux, for something that is released for free, I think distributions such as Ubuntu and PCBSD are totally showing up both OS X and Windows. True, you need to know what you are doing with Linux, and fragmentation makes it a ****ing mess, but both Microsoft and Apple should be upping the game in the next few years, as Linux distro's and catching up and catching up fast.
Way to commit! :p

Fact is, there are glaring differences between these platforms and toeing the line just isn't accurate. Linux, for example, is still a trash OS for the typical consumer. Although they've done a fine job of making it look nicer on the surface, it is still a grotesque usability nightmare under the hood.
 

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
Canada
No, because I've found that people in these debates virtually never have a great deal of experience with both platforms. People tend to have the platform they like, and are comfortable with, and that is the platform they'll defend on any given issue, whether right or wrong.

Most OS X users are current and past Windows users. Windows is for many the *reason* for switching.
 

notjustjay

macrumors 603
Sep 19, 2003
6,056
167
Canada, eh?
Fact is, there are glaring differences between these platforms and toeing the line just isn't accurate. Linux, for example, is still a trash OS for the typical consumer. Although they've done a fine job of making it look nicer on the surface, it is still a grotesque usability nightmare under the hood.

Yet Linux is the OS of choice for servers all over the world.

Isn't that the whole point? Some systems are better for some purposes than others, but no system is perfect for everybody.
 

Xian Zhu Xuande

macrumors 6502a
Jul 30, 2008
941
128
Most OS X users are current and past Windows users. Windows is for many the *reason* for switching.
True for many Mac users, but not actually the point. Even people who use both Mac and Windows tend to be comfortable and familiar with one platform and at odds with the other. This is especially true with folks who become technically savvy with an operating system.

Yet Linux is the OS of choice for servers all over the world.

Isn't that the whole point? Some systems are better for some purposes than others, but no system is perfect for everybody.
Linux does make for a marvelous server, and for many good reasons. It does help that the people screwing with Apache are technically proficient. I certainly wouldn't consider Apache, or Linux in the server environment, to be an exception to their great flaw of terrible usability.

But isn't this aside from the debate of Mac vs. PC? Whenever I've seen it, it is always about the OS on a consumer level, or use as a personal OS.
 

notjustjay

macrumors 603
Sep 19, 2003
6,056
167
Canada, eh?
Linux does make for a marvelous server, and for many good reasons. It does help that the people screwing with Apache are technically proficient. I certainly wouldn't consider Apache, or Linux in the server environment, to be an exception to their great flaw of terrible usability.

I just don't think it's a "flaw". Just a fact of life. A school bus would be a poor choice for a family commuter vehicle, but that's not a flaw. It's designed to do one thing, it's capable of doing the other but it's not where it shines.

Linux's poor usability for the home user is probably based out of its design philosophy that there must be many ways to accomplish any particular goal. Keep it wide open, give lots and lots of choices, allow a do-it-yourself mentality if that's what people want. The average home user says "I don't WANT all those choices, I don't NEED all those choices, I just want it to work!"

But isn't this aside from the debate of Mac vs. PC? Whenever I've seen it, it is always about the OS on a consumer level, or use as a personal OS.

True, but I think the point still stands. Neither Mac or PC is "right" or "wrong" for everyone. There are many factors to consider. Each OS has its strengths and weaknesses. What you consider a fatal "flaw", someone else might consider an essential feature.

I do, however, recognize that there are some (many?!) sloppy aspects of Windows, and would say "Windows is a decent OS despite these shortcomings". What I object to are the people who seem to be convinced that Windows is absolutely useless junk, or on the other end of the spectrum, those that insist it is the pinnacle of software perfection.
 

calaverasgrande

macrumors 65816
Oct 18, 2010
1,291
161
Brooklyn, New York.
Read up on sysprep.
actually I came from a Windows/Novell background prior to working with Macs in the workplace. So I am more than familiar with Sysprep, PXE (PiXie stick as MS likes to call them now), Ghostcast etc.
I stand by my assertion. There is no need to use sysprep on a Mac before you image it. There is no need to choose KMS or MAK with macs either. Or if we are gonna talk about the whole enchilada, there is no per seat/vs per server licensing to decide on.
Though with win 7 you can finally build an image independent of hardware and then build up a repository of driver profiles for your various hardware. Lots of work though.
I can pull an image off a Mac Mini and install it on a MBP. Works like a charm. Try doing that with an HP SFF and an HP elitebook.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.