The Mac vs. Windows War is Over. And the Winner is...

oriel36 wrote:
So this is what you are left to talk about .The magnificense of the the
great astronomical cycles before you and the giant stellar galactic
islands to admire yet nobody big enough to emerse themselves in the
material.

Go ahead and have a ball with your dark matter and your dark
energies,for a intutive astronomer they exist only as symptoms of ad
hoc solutions piled one on top of the other with no substance in
content and character.Much like the original Newtonian solution for
planetary motion.

No doubt this forum has shut down or run on safe mode but when it comes
back it will not be due to the behavior of you and your theoretical
colleagues.Being exposed as having no astronomical roots other than the
late 17th century mutations,you lack any depth
technically,astronomically and bottom line so all that will be left is
astrophotography and its effiminate tendencies.

So, there.

Can't you at least learn to spell, if not to think?
magnificence
immerse
intuitive
effeminate

How easy it is to shut down sci.astro.amateur with just a few posts
correcting the pathetic attempts to justify and retain the clockwork
celestial sphere system.What you do tommorrow is your own business but
it will always be as astrophotographers ,all pretty pictures and good
spelling but talentless in astronomical matters.

Keep congratulating each other on your pictures and give yourselves
group hugs but that is not the once noble discipline of
Copernicus,Kepler and Roemer.

wrote in message
oups.com...

Umm, I don't think the ability to do that is limited to Macs. I too can
grab a file off my wife's computer from mine and attach it to an e-mail.
No problem there at all. As for it being faster, I don't know what kind
of
adapter Macs use, by at 100 MB/sec, I don't know why you would need
anything faster than ethernet for most purposes. That's about as fast
as
the ATA 100 harddrives in most computers today (yes I know there are
faster
harddrives, as I have serial ATA 133).

George

Anything newer than the first generation G4's (at least 4 years old)
Mac's come with a gigabit ethernet interface standard. As for needing
anything faster think about the very common network attached storage
(NAS) devices that you can buy at BestBuy/CircuitCity. A 1 terabyte
(TB) NAS can be had at CircuitCity for $799. With a Mac this NAS
automatically shows up and transfer rates (measured by BONNIE) are the
same as a local SATA disk. With a standard 100BaseT almost any local
device outperforms the network.

But across the network, the speed is essentially the same. A network is no
faster than its weakest link. And how many people actually own a NAS
device. At that price, I don't think I'll be running out to buy one
anytime soon.

George

George wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Umm, I don't think the ability to do that is limited to Macs. I too can
grab a file off my wife's computer from mine and attach it to an e-mail.
No problem there at all. As for it being faster, I don't know what kind
of
adapter Macs use, by at 100 MB/sec, I don't know why you would need
anything faster than ethernet for most purposes. That's about as fast
as
the ATA 100 harddrives in most computers today (yes I know there are
faster
harddrives, as I have serial ATA 133).

George

Anything newer than the first generation G4's (at least 4 years old)
Mac's come with a gigabit ethernet interface standard. As for needing
anything faster think about the very common network attached storage
(NAS) devices that you can buy at BestBuy/CircuitCity. A 1 terabyte
(TB) NAS can be had at CircuitCity for $799. With a Mac this NAS
automatically shows up and transfer rates (measured by BONNIE) are the
same as a local SATA disk. With a standard 100BaseT almost any local
device outperforms the network.

But across the network, the speed is essentially the same. A network is no
faster than its weakest link. And how many people actually own a NAS
device. At that price, I don't think I'll be running out to buy one
anytime soon.

George

Since Circuit City/BestBuy/CompUSA has a shelf full of
Maxtor/Seagate/Sony/Buffalo/LinkSys one-touch backup NAS's and since
they are advertised one per customer prominently in the weekly adds
somebody is buying them. As for network speed, everything in both my
house and at work are using 1000BaseT networking the 2tb NAS in the
basement next to the router serves up files faster than a PC disk.
Apple, Sun, HP/Compaq/Dec and IBM (power5 types) all EXPECT 1000BaseT
to be the norm. At work we are considering 10GigE for at least the
servers. Only the PC's are stuck at 100BaseT with this weird SMB stuff

On 20 Apr 2006 16:43:23 -0700, wrote:

Since Circuit City/BestBuy/CompUSA has a shelf full of
Maxtor/Seagate/Sony/Buffalo/LinkSys one-touch backup NAS's and since
they are advertised one per customer prominently in the weekly adds
somebody is buying them. As for network speed, everything in both my
house and at work are using 1000BaseT networking the 2tb NAS in the
basement next to the router serves up files faster than a PC disk.
Apple, Sun, HP/Compaq/Dec and IBM (power5 types) all EXPECT 1000BaseT
to be the norm. At work we are considering 10GigE for at least the
servers. Only the PC's are stuck at 100BaseT with this weird SMB stuff

Just out of curiosity, why are your PCs "stuck" at 100BT? Mine are all
running 1000BT just fine, and the latest batch of Dells I bought (low
end) all had motherboard 1000BT. What's the computer type got to do with
the network speed?

I haven't done any rigorous performance tests, but network file
transfers are obviously much faster with the faster network than they
were at 100BT.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

No reason at all! It is that the lastest batch of "high-performance
workstations" (??) that were foisted on us for delivery in this fall
had 100BaseT on the motherboard and it costs additional to add the
1000BaseT. I assumed (that's an ass in front of u and me) that 100BaseT
was still standard. Particularly since I got "what ever would you want
1000BaseT for? look when I inquired about 1000BaseT from $(VENDOR). Of
course the $(PC)'s were twice as expensive and have half the perfomance
as the Sun Ultra 20's we wanted

wrote in message
oups.com...

George wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Umm, I don't think the ability to do that is limited to Macs. I too
can
grab a file off my wife's computer from mine and attach it to an
e-mail.
No problem there at all. As for it being faster, I don't know what
kind
of
adapter Macs use, by at 100 MB/sec, I don't know why you would need
anything faster than ethernet for most purposes. That's about as
fast
as
the ATA 100 harddrives in most computers today (yes I know there are
faster
harddrives, as I have serial ATA 133).

George

Anything newer than the first generation G4's (at least 4 years old)
Mac's come with a gigabit ethernet interface standard. As for needing
anything faster think about the very common network attached storage
(NAS) devices that you can buy at BestBuy/CircuitCity. A 1 terabyte
(TB) NAS can be had at CircuitCity for $799. With a Mac this NAS
automatically shows up and transfer rates (measured by BONNIE) are the
same as a local SATA disk. With a standard 100BaseT almost any local
device outperforms the network.

But across the network, the speed is essentially the same. A network is
no
faster than its weakest link. And how many people actually own a NAS
device. At that price, I don't think I'll be running out to buy one
anytime soon.

George

Since Circuit City/BestBuy/CompUSA has a shelf full of
Maxtor/Seagate/Sony/Buffalo/LinkSys one-touch backup NAS's and since
they are advertised one per customer prominently in the weekly adds
somebody is buying them. As for network speed, everything in both my
house and at work are using 1000BaseT networking the 2tb NAS in the
basement next to the router serves up files faster than a PC disk.
Apple, Sun, HP/Compaq/Dec and IBM (power5 types) all EXPECT 1000BaseT
to be the norm. At work we are considering 10GigE for at least the
servers. Only the PC's are stuck at 100BaseT with this weird SMB stuff

How long do you think that will last (pcs being stuck at 100BaseT)? I
don't disagree with what you are saying above. I'm just saying that for
most people, an $800 storage system is quite pricey.

George

On Fri, 21 Apr 2006 17:48:34 GMT, "George"
wrote:

How long do you think that will last (pcs being stuck at 100BaseT)? I
don't disagree with what you are saying above. I'm just saying that for
most people, an $800 storage system is quite pricey.

As noted, PCs aren't stuck at 100BT. And you don't need a network
storage device to take advantage of 1000BT- one of my XP machines serves
files at that speed to a few other XP machines on my network. Nothing
expensive involved. My observatory connection is now 1000BT, too, which
is really nice for transferring big video files when I'm doing webcam
imaging (which quickly add up to many GB).

Anyone considering a new computer purchase should probably get it with a
1000BT interface- regardless of the type of machine, it will either be
standard or a very cheap upgrade.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com