NEWS: Android Outsells Apple iPhone
in [Wireless Internet]
|
Prev: Introducing Poken Take your Social Network Offline
Next: Desperate Help Needed!! WIRELESS SHARING
From: Justin on 15 May 2010 22:32 Jeff Liebermann wrote on [Sat, 15 May 2010 17:44:50 -0700]: > On Sat, 15 May 2010 19:41:28 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert" > <rgilbert88(a)comcast.net> wrote: > >>Incremental backups are fine when used intelligently. That means >>something like daily incremental backups and a weekly image backup. You >> might stretch it to an image backup every two weeks. > > I've been playing computer consultant and repair person since about > 1985. Nobody does backups until AFTER they have had a disaster with > attendent data loss. The methods of doing backups have changed over > the years, starting with floppy disks, tapes, and currently > distributed between replication, image, file-by-file, on-line, and > some hybrids. They all work. > > My specific problem is getting customers to actually do backups. Most > will "forget" or find a suitable excuse. Therefore, my criteria for a > successful backup program is that it must be: > 1. Fast > 2. Easy > 3. Reasonably reliable > in that order. Note that I did not list all inclusive (i.e. gets > everyting right up to the last millisecond before the drive crashed) > and safe (i.e. encrypted and theft proof). At this time, the fastest > and easiest are the boot from a CD and run an image backup to a USB The easiest is one that does it automatically, something like carbonite or syncing to an external hard drive. Disrupting workflow will always lead to excuses and backups not done.
From: Jeff Liebermann on 15 May 2010 22:56 On Sun, 16 May 2010 02:32:01 +0000 (UTC), Justin <nospam(a)insightbb.com> wrote: >Jeff Liebermann wrote on [Sat, 15 May 2010 17:44:50 -0700]: >> On Sat, 15 May 2010 19:41:28 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert" >> <rgilbert88(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> >>>Incremental backups are fine when used intelligently. That means >>>something like daily incremental backups and a weekly image backup. You >>> might stretch it to an image backup every two weeks. >> >> I've been playing computer consultant and repair person since about >> 1985. Nobody does backups until AFTER they have had a disaster with >> attendent data loss. The methods of doing backups have changed over >> the years, starting with floppy disks, tapes, and currently >> distributed between replication, image, file-by-file, on-line, and >> some hybrids. They all work. >> >> My specific problem is getting customers to actually do backups. Most >> will "forget" or find a suitable excuse. Therefore, my criteria for a >> successful backup program is that it must be: >> 1. Fast >> 2. Easy >> 3. Reasonably reliable >> in that order. Note that I did not list all inclusive (i.e. gets >> everyting right up to the last millisecond before the drive crashed) >> and safe (i.e. encrypted and theft proof). At this time, the fastest >> and easiest are the boot from a CD and run an image backup to a USB >The easiest is one that does it automatically, something like carbonite or >syncing to an external hard drive. Disrupting workflow will always lead >to excuses and backups not done. Nope. I've had two disasters with such "continuous backup" schemes. The problem is dealing with open files. Some programs are clever and grab the FAT to see which clusters are owned by the file, backup those clusters, and re-assemble the file. That usually works. Others are just plain stupid and and ignore open files. I use Memeo for such automatic backups. The problems start when it's time to put Humpty Dumpty back together again out of the pieces scattered all over the backup device. The usual ordeal is to reinstall Windoze from scratch, reinstall all the software, deal with the serial numbers and secret incantations, and then restore the data from the backups. The time to recover, is often substantial, especially compared to an image restore. I've done it both ways. An piecemeal restore takes at least all day. An image restore, about 15-30 minutes. When the customer is breathing down my neck demanding instant recovery, image restore looks much better. Incidentally, Carbonite duz not backup to an external drive. It's an online backup to their "secure" server. It only backs up "Documents and Settings". <http://www.carbonite.com/how_it_works/> It took me all day to recover with Carbonite. The user junk in "Documents and Settings" came back, but there was quite a bit buried under other directories (including companies that like to dump their data under "Program Files") that was lost. Just installing the XP updates to SP3 and beyond took about 4 hrs elapsed time. I lose money on these time burners because I can't really bill a customer more than what their computer is worth to recover it. 8 hrs * $75/hr plus a new hard disk drive. With an image restore, about 1.5 Hrs * $75/hr plus a new hard disk drive. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl(a)cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
From: Jeff Liebermann on 15 May 2010 23:03 On Sat, 15 May 2010 19:56:05 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl(a)cruzio.com> wrote: >Nope. I've had two disasters with such "continuous backup" schemes. >The problem is dealing with open files. Some programs are clever and >grab the FAT to see which clusters are owned by the file, backup those >clusters, and re-assemble the file. That usually works. Others are >just plain stupid and and ignore open files. I use Memeo for such >automatic backups. I forgot to mumble that Memeo will also not backup the entire hard disk. One must designate which directories are to be backed up. It will not do c:\windows and has problems with c:\program files\ or any of the assorted hidden directories. It also has two bugs that their support droid indicates is "not a problem" which means that they have no intention of addressing them. One is a memory error message on startup. The other is that it trashes the shutdown process, requiring that I have to hit "shut down" twice in order for it to work. Neither is fatal, but my -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl(a)cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
From: Jeff Liebermann on 16 May 2010 13:15 On Sat, 15 May 2010 19:49:43 -0400, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >maybe yes, maybe no. i think the at&t exclusive helped initially but >it's time has passed. If AT&T really was after profits, they would never have agreed to the iPad's $30/month unlimited data plan for the iPad, which is about 60% of what a 3G dongle costs to operate. They want to hold onto customers and believe that Apple products are the way to do that. >there is mounting evidence on several fronts that support more than >just at&t with the next iphone. Maybe, but first there's some litigation to deal with. I'm not the only one speculating on what's in the contract: <http://seekingalpha.com/article/204421-the-complicated-tale-of-at-ts-exclusive-iphone-agreement> If the contract had expired or is about to expire, I'm sure there would have been leaks and pre-announcements of new Apple products. The sale of every Droid is one less sale of the mythical Verizon iPhone (within the 2 year contract period). >bottom line: nobody outside of apple and at&t knows when it's over. True. Like everyone else, I'm guessing. However, that's the way I get my thrills. >> Yet another conspiracy theory... Apple could deliver something that >> looks like an iPhone, but is sufficiently different that it would not >> appear that Apple is actually selling an iPhone to Verizon. For >> example, a two piece phone/PDA combination, where VZW provides the >> cellular layer, and Apple provides the PDA. Some kind of a sandwitch >> or book type derrangement. Whether Apple wants to risk relations with >> it's biggest and most successful customer is probably doubtful. > >that doesn't make any sense at all. Well, I'll admit it's a marginal idea, but it might be sufficient to wiggle around any contract with AT&T. The real problem is that Apple wants everything to be from Apple, and this would conglomeration would not give them control over the radio section. I don't think Steve Jobs would like that. >at&t already has an android phone, although it's not particularly good. Streak coming next month to Telefonica O2, later this summer to AT&T. <http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/13/dell-ceo-streak-coming-next-month-to-telefonica-o2-later-this/> -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl(a)cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
From: Justin on 16 May 2010 13:42
Jeff Liebermann wrote on [Sat, 15 May 2010 19:56:05 -0700]: > On Sun, 16 May 2010 02:32:01 +0000 (UTC), Justin > <nospam(a)insightbb.com> wrote: > >>Jeff Liebermann wrote on [Sat, 15 May 2010 17:44:50 -0700]: >>> On Sat, 15 May 2010 19:41:28 -0400, "Richard B. Gilbert" >>> <rgilbert88(a)comcast.net> wrote: >>> >>>>Incremental backups are fine when used intelligently. That means >>>>something like daily incremental backups and a weekly image backup. You >>>> might stretch it to an image backup every two weeks. >>> >>> I've been playing computer consultant and repair person since about >>> 1985. Nobody does backups until AFTER they have had a disaster with >>> attendent data loss. The methods of doing backups have changed over >>> the years, starting with floppy disks, tapes, and currently >>> distributed between replication, image, file-by-file, on-line, and >>> some hybrids. They all work. >>> >>> My specific problem is getting customers to actually do backups. Most >>> will "forget" or find a suitable excuse. Therefore, my criteria for a >>> successful backup program is that it must be: >>> 1. Fast >>> 2. Easy >>> 3. Reasonably reliable >>> in that order. Note that I did not list all inclusive (i.e. gets >>> everyting right up to the last millisecond before the drive crashed) >>> and safe (i.e. encrypted and theft proof). At this time, the fastest >>> and easiest are the boot from a CD and run an image backup to a USB > >>The easiest is one that does it automatically, something like carbonite or >>syncing to an external hard drive. Disrupting workflow will always lead >>to excuses and backups not done. > > Nope. I've had two disasters with such "continuous backup" schemes. > The problem is dealing with open files. Some programs are clever and > grab the FAT to see which clusters are owned by the file, backup those > clusters, and re-assemble the file. That usually works. Others are > just plain stupid and and ignore open files. I use Memeo for such > automatic backups. So, how likely are your customer to not backup often if they have to insert a CD, reboot and wait the time it takes for an image to be created? > The problems start when it's time to put Humpty Dumpty back together > again out of the pieces scattered all over the backup device. The > usual ordeal is to reinstall Windoze from scratch, reinstall all the > software, deal with the serial numbers and secret incantations, and > then restore the data from the backups. The time to recover, is often > substantial, especially compared to an image restore. I've done it > both ways. An piecemeal restore takes at least all day. An image > restore, about 15-30 minutes. When the customer is breathing down my > neck demanding instant recovery, image restore looks much better. > > Incidentally, Carbonite duz not backup to an external drive. It's an > online backup to their "secure" server. It only backs up "Documents > and Settings". Unless you change what it backs up... > <http://www.carbonite.com/how_it_works/> > It took me all day to recover with Carbonite. The user junk in > "Documents and Settings" came back, but there was quite a bit buried > under other directories (including companies that like to dump their > data under "Program Files") that was lost. Just installing the XP > updates to SP3 and beyond took about 4 hrs elapsed time. I lose money > on these time burners because I can't really bill a customer more than > what their computer is worth to recover it. 8 hrs * $75/hr plus a new > hard disk drive. With an image restore, about 1.5 Hrs * $75/hr plus a > new hard disk drive. Sounds like your customers need to learn the value of their data. |