Building a Computer?

[Wesman61]

I was talking to a guy who said his daughter wanted a Macbook for college. He looked at the price and said "how about a decked out laptop PC?" I'd be tempted to build my own desktop PC and get better parts than are available with lower priced off the shelf computers. Is this practical? Can I save enough money to make it worth the trouble this way?

[amigo30]

For desktops, building your own is the ONLY way to go.

For a college student, a laptop is probably a necessity these days.

[5E3]

It's a great way to go ... provided it runs when you are finished :)

[ChmpgnSupernover]

Yes people have been building custom PCs as long as they've been making individual components.. Its not hard provided you have some sense and follow the instructions that come with the motherboard. I wouldn't recommend it for someone who is compu-tarded.

I can't tell from your post if you want to build a desktop or a laptop though.

[corbs]

I built mine for years when I was gaming. Having a "fast" pc was must !! I saved a ton of cash building them and learned alot.


Do some research and set price limits. It's not that difficult putting one together, it's probably harder to figure out what hardware you should get. Troubleshooting can be a pain, so make sure you have access to the internet while you are building the new pc.

[tinman475]

That's the thing that kills me about all the "macs are better folks" ..stripped down with no os they are the exact same basic hardware...

I have built many desktops.. You get longer life out of them and can tailor it for your needs.. Upgrading is not an issue down the road..

[Dirtybender]

Very easy to build your desktops. Way cheaper and you can customize it to your needs. I've been building my own computers for about 10 years no and no problems I couldn't solve

[cob666]

I used to build all of my own PCs but over the last 5-10 years I've noticed that unless I'm building a machine for gaming or something that needs to be decked out I can buy something much cheaper that what it would cost to build it myself, especially once you factor in the cost of the OS.

Please - no Windows VS Linux rants. For what I'm doing I need to run Windows so a 'free' OS is not an option.

[stvnscott]

I'm with cob666. I build my own, but I build top of the line workstations and have an MSDN license for operating systems. If I was going to buy an 'average' computer, I would check out specials from Dell and others. They are selling desktops dirt cheap these days. You really can't do any better than that DIY and can easily do worse if you factor in buying the OS. Just be prepared to uninstall all the crap that comes with them.

[tinman475]

Thing about those dirt cheap desktops (ESPECIALLY DELL), you will be replacing it about every year or 2... I always recommend Sony to someone looking to purchase a manufactured system.

[CharAznable]

A laptop is a necessity for college, so I'd say building your own is out of the question.

I build my own PC's because it's fun and I like to get exactly what I want. Saving money is a bad reason to build your own, because it's not really any cheaper, and you get basically no support when things go wrong.

[Wesman61]

The main point to the story in the OP was that the Guy had a laptop built using upscale graphics and other components. I bought a desktop from Walmart years ago and replace nearly every part of it. Then it just crashed. If I were to buy an off the shelf computer I'd want to make sure it was a quality unit w/o having to pay for a bunch of upgrades I don't need. Is there a middle ground between cheap everything and top of the line everything?

[Vince]

Do it! It's a blast. There are so many options these days you can just geek yourself to death and save a ton of dough too.

[Ken Ho]

Sure, but once it's all put together, a Mac has an ease of use that is worth way more than the price difference, especially for the computarded, like moi.

That's the thing that kills me about all the "macs are better folks" ..stripped down with no os they are the exact same basic hardware...

I have built many desktops.. You get longer life out of them and can tailor it for your needs.. Upgrading is not an issue down the road..

[waylay00]

I built my first PC when I was 13. It's not difficult at all. The most difficult aspect is researching the best parts to buy, as well as which ones are compatible with one another. Read up on forums like Anandtech (the "Gear Page" of computer hardware). I researched for a few months before building my first one.

FWIW, none of the PCs I've built have ever had any major issues. They have all run extremely smooth and better than any pre-built PC I've ever owned.

[kludge]

That's the thing that kills me about all the "macs are better folks" ..stripped down with no os they are the exact same basic hardware...

I have built many desktops.. You get longer life out of them and can tailor it for your needs.. Upgrading is not an issue down the road..

Not exactly the same hardware. I don't think you can buy a PC laptop with something like the Apple magnetic power connector, and nobody has anything I've seen that matches the touchpad on a Macbook. But ultimately, you're paying for integration, not parts. This is kinda like saying that there's no difference between a Jay Turser Strat and a Fender Custom Shop Strat. Functionally, they're the same. (and I suppose if you're really ignorant about guitar construction, they are)

If you're going to do a desktop PC at all, and you know at all what you're doing, definitely build from scratch. But if you don't know what you're doing, don't try doing it to "save money". You won't, especially if you put any sort of price on your time.

Personally, I say it's worth it to pay the money for a low-end Macbook. But that just proves I'm a brainwashed, trendy fool who has forgotten everything he's learned by working on computers for 30 years.

[tinman475]

Sure, but once it's all put together, a Mac has an ease of use that is worth way more than the price difference, especially for the computarded, like moi.


Mac OS is pretty simple to figure out compared to microshaft er I mean soft.. :D

Windows 7 came a long way tho to bridging the gap...

[kludge]

Also, note that the original request is for a college student. A desktop computer may be cheaper and faster, but it is in no way mobile, and that functionality is probably more make-or-break than "performance".

[tinman475]

Not exactly the same hardware. I don't think you can buy a PC laptop with something like the Apple magnetic power connector, and nobody has anything I've seen that matches the touchpad on a Macbook. But ultimately, you're paying for integration, not parts. This is kinda like saying that there's no difference between a Jay Turser Strat and a Fender Custom Shop Strat. Functionally, they're the same. (and I suppose if you're really ignorant about guitar construction, they are)

If you're going to do a desktop PC at all, and you know at all what you're doing, definitely build from scratch. But if you don't know what you're doing, don't try doing it to "save money". You won't, especially if you put any sort of price on your time.

Personally, I say it's worth it to pay the money for a low-end Macbook. But that just proves I'm a brainwashed, trendy fool who has forgotten everything he's learned by working on computers for 30 years.

Not a good comparison IMO.. at the core of both the mac and the PC is Intel or AMD.. I am sure the truser strats and fender strats aren't gonna have the same pups...

[Ken Ho]

It's not about the parts. It's about the integration of the whole.
Stuff just works. Plug in a printer, and it just works.
Camera ? No software needed, just works.
And that touchpad ..................
Start up time ? Seconds, not minutes. And then it does what you want it to do. It doesn't spend 20mins checking for MS updates and running virus scans and updates.
Wanna load that cip nto youtube ? Press one button.
I have done so many things since I got my Mac that were impenetrable to me before.


Mac OS is pretty simple to figure out compared to microshaft er I mean soft.. :D

Windows 7 came a long way tho to bridging the gap...

[kludge]

Not a good comparison IMO.. at the core of both the mac and the PC is Intel or AMD.. I am sure the truser strats and fender strats aren't gonna have the same pups...

Actually, it's a great comparison. No, a Turser and a CS won't have the same pickups... but is that alone enough to justify a 10-30x price difference? And the pickups are both made out of alnico magnets, wire, and PVC.

Spend some time with, say, motherboard design (I have), and you'll start seeing the nuances of good construction, why the same set of chips on one board isn't either as reliable or as performant as another, better-designed board.

But really, paying a premium for an incremental improvement in quality is standard practice for most consumer goods. It's the difference between a $1000 bike and a $300 bike, or a $200 guitar and a $2000 guitar, or restaurant sushi and grocery store sushi. As premium products go, Apple computers are a bargain. Geez, here we are on TGP, where we'll argue endlessly over the merits of $200+ boutique Fuzz Face clones with seven parts in them. TGP members are, for the most part, connoisseurs. As such, I find the rabid anti-Apple mentality some here have to be rather odd. Apple is selling a premium product and charging extra. Their customers feel they're getting their money's worth (especially repeat customers). Not to mention there's a solid penny-wise/pound-foolish argument to be made for Macs over PCs, when you start factoring maintenance costs in and putting a price on your time.

I've been down all the roads. I've bought commercial PCs, built my own, run every version of Windows since 3.0, run Linux off and on since Slackware was the cutting-edge distro... but given a choice, I'll take a modern Mac. Money, I have. I'll use it to buy peace of mind when I can.

[Vince]

So I gotta ask, is there a way to get the Mac OS on PC hardware and still be "legal"?

[Ken Ho]

To carry the guitar analogy, that would be like slotting boutique pups into a cheap guitar, and expecting to become a great guitar.
It's the total package that makes Macs so user-friendly and popular, not one element of it.


So I gotta ask, is there a way to get the Mac OS on PC hardware and still be "legal"?

[johnrea_77]

For desktop all I do is BYOC - highly desirable if you build for performance. I have two I built three years ago and they still rock. I have ideas for the next one in mind (SSD hard drive for OS, Fermi graphics, performance stuff). I prefer a quality case with adequate ventilation and a highly rated motherboard is an important part of the decision.

For laptops - check the reviews in quality/reliability. Sometimes it is worth it to spend an extra $100 to get a better laptop. Also the ones advertised on TV for $499 have a way of costing almost double that after the sales pitch (bait & switch).

[kludge]

So I gotta ask, is there a way to get the Mac OS on PC hardware and still be "legal"?

No, but it's possible to run Windows on a Mac - simultaneously with the Mac OS, even. It's almost certainly a violation of the Apple EULA to run OSX on PC hardware, even if you could make it work technically.

[waylay00]

Actually, it is possible to run Mac OS X on some PCs. It's called a "Hackintosh."

http://www.hackintosh.com/

[paulscape]

Been building my own desktop's for my wife and I for about 7 years and it definately saves you money while adding performance. You can tailor it to suit your needs. Not really that hard to put together either. That said I mostly use my macbook pro laptop now and also have an Imac. My wife is still on windows.

Someone else here mentioned getting a good box with decent fan and ventilation. I would second this. The first PC I built I used a really cheap case trying to save some money. I thought meh its just a box. It caused all sorts of problems. Next time I brought the best I could find and it is still in use after having 3 sets of hardware through it. Plus its got cool blue LED lights to match my pedals.

[Wesman61]

To clear up some confusion, the guy I was talking to about building a computer had a laptop built for his daughter. I was curious about building a desktop. It was the conversation about building with premium parts that got me to thinking.

[stvnscott]

Again, if you are building for high performance, you can save money by building your own. If you are building for average performance, you probably won't save much money, but it can be a fun and rewarding experience. Once you have invested in a case, power supply, hard drives, optical drives, etc. you can keep using them for years and just upgrade the motherboard, CPU, and RAM each time you want a performance boost. Assuming you invested in good stuff, that is...

[Go Cat Go!!]

I've been building my PC's since the Pentium II was the chip to have. Things have gotten easier since then. For me it's more cost effective to build. I'm not a gamer so I usually go with a mid priced parts. The onboard video is usually good enough for me. You can build a pretty nice PC for about $300 these days. That's not including the monitor. It's amazing that a high end video card could cost about twice that.

Regarding the OS I have been an MS guy since DOS 2.0. I remember getting super excited when the xcopy command was released. Wow! You mean now I can move a whole directory and all its sub-directories with just one command?! I never played with a MAC for any significant amount of time. However, my impression was that it was a highly integrated machine where everything had been designed for the user. I had a friend who started her own business out of her apartment. She had a Mac. She bought the matching color printer to go with it. She had $$$ to burn btw. She called me at work and asked if I could set it up for her. I work in IT. I get to her place and she had already unboxed it and was printing away. Her sister and I went out to dinner. BTW we came back she was already printing color catalogs in booklet form. I was impressed!!! She had been a complete novice printer wise a few hours ago. To achieve the same results in Windows 95 would have taken significantly more time. Results is what it's all about isn't it? I'm comfortable in Windows but have recently started using Ubuntu Linux. I like it a lot. Use whatever OS you're comfortable with.

[kludge]

Building "premium" for a desktop isn't just about part quality, either. For example, when I built a computer for my kids last year, I installed two drives and set it up for RAID 1 (mirroring). That way, if one of the drives goes bad, I don't lose the whole computer. It was an extra $60 of construction cost and another 15 minutes or so of my time when building, which is a great deal for a home builder. This is a feature that simply does not exist on relatively inexpensive commercial computers. I also got a better quality case and a blu-ray drive. Came in at about $850 in parts to build a pretty decent gaming machine.

My son is a gamer. That's a good reason for him to stick to Windows and build desktops from scratch.

[stratology]

Building a PC is a good option if you cannot afford a Mac, or if you're a gamer.
You'll get a machine that has specs that look great on paper, which does not necessarily mean good real-world performance.


Be aware that by going that route, you will be investing in some seriously outdated technology, like BIOS, MBR, needing 2 machines to run 32 and 64 bit apps side by side, lackluster cooling, etc.


If you need a laptop, get a Mac, you can run OS X, Windows, Linux at the same time (Virtual Box is free, VMware and Parallels are commercial virtualisation solutions..).

[stratology]

... For example, when I built a computer for my kids last year, I installed two drives and set it up for RAID 1 (mirroring). That way, if one of the drives goes bad, I don't lose the whole computer. It was an extra $60 of construction cost and another 15 minutes or so of my time when building, which is a great deal for a home builder. This is a feature that simply does not exist on relatively inexpensive commercial computers. I also got a better quality case and a blu-ray drive. Came in at about $850 in parts to build a pretty decent gaming machine.

My son is a gamer. That's a good reason for him to stick to Windows and build desktops from scratch.

For gaming, build your own is probably the best option.

Regarding RAID, just for the record, you can do RAID 0 and RAID 1 out of the box on any Mac, you can raid internal HDs (if you have a Mac Pro or Mini server with more than 1 HD), or external disks. You can even plug in 2 USB sticks, and RAID them. The price for software RAID 1 is always performance, as everything has to be written twice. Hardware RAID cards are a better solution, you can go for RAID 5 (with 4 disks) etc.


Macs have a feature called Time Machine, complete back-up every hour, maintenance free. You can restore single files from any date in the past, or restore a complete system. No need to worry about RAIDs etc. (which still have their place if you run a server, or need high-end performance for pro video, or huge databases...)

[Mike9]

I used to build custom hi performance raid systems for graphics designers, video guys, gamers, etc. Got to be a hassle when they'd screw them up, but I regress.

This is just my opinion - given what's available it's not cost effective for roll your own anymore. I mean it depends on what you want it for, or if you just what the experience of building one. I was going to build a HTPC, but bought a recertified Gateway for a few hundred and upgraded the video card and I couldn't be happier. I had to spend some time sorting through the software bundle, but it's pared down nicely now and with 4GB ram and the 1GB vid card it performs better than I had hoped. All for @ $450 - less than if I bought everything from New Egg and built it myself.

[kludge]

Yeah, I LOVE Time Machine on the Mac. It's pretty close to ideal home backup. I upgraded the drive in my Macbook shortly after getting it, and restoring my content from Time Machine was flawless and near-trivial. Just one more way in which OSX is seriously superior to Windows.

I'd still recommend secondary offsite backup via Mozy or somesuch, though.

[stratology]

I'd still recommend secondary offsite backup via Mozy or somesuch, though.

+1, it's always a good idea to have more than one backup of any important data. HDs can fail, including the HDs where a Time Machine backup is stored...

[lanesmat]

I used to build custom hi performance raid systems for graphics designers, video guys, gamers, etc. Got to be a hassle when they'd screw them up, but I regress.

This is just my opinion - given what's available it's not cost effective for roll your own anymore. I mean it depends on what you want it for, or if you just what the experience of building one. I was going to build a HTPC, but bought a recertified Gateway for a few hundred and upgraded the video card and I couldn't be happier. I had to spend some time sorting through the software bundle, but it's pared down nicely now and with 4GB ram and the 1GB vid card it performs better than I had hoped. All for @ $450 - less than if I bought everything from New Egg and built it myself.

+1
I used to build my own desktops for gaming, but a few months ago I ran the numbers between "rolling my own" and found that it was a wash. I ended up buying my desktop from cyberpower, which gives you tons of options on your build. What I liked about Cyberpower is that it let you pick your motherboard, which I believe is key on getting a reliable, upgradable system. If you know what type of components you want, Cyberpower is a pretty good deal; I'm happy with the purchase.

[stvnscott]

Yeah, I LOVE Time Machine on the Mac. It's pretty close to ideal home backup. I upgraded the drive in my Macbook shortly after getting it, and restoring my content from Time Machine was flawless and near-trivial. Just one more way in which OSX is seriously superior to Windows.

I'd still recommend secondary offsite backup via Mozy or somesuch, though.

Windows 7 has an excellent backup suite built in including file and image backup. It is built into the shell and is very easy to use. It just doesn't have a nifty name.

[stratology]

Windows 7 has an excellent backup suite built in including file and image backup. It is built into the shell and is very easy to use. It just doesn't have a nifty name.

Never heard of that. Does it include versioning, meaning, can you choose which version of your daily/monthly backups of a file you retrieve? What's the interface for retreiving files like? Does in only work in Windows Explorer, or within other apps as well? What's the technology on Windows that tells you when files in the file system have changed? My understanding was that there is nothing similar to fsevents, as low level changes to the file system or kernel would affect backwards compatibility.

I hope we talk about the same thing - a backup solution is not the same as an app that can copy files or disk images to a backup disk.

[Vince]

I wish they'd start selling roll-your-own laptop components. I'd be on that in a second.

[stvnscott]

Never heard of that. Does it include versioning, meaning, can you choose which version of your daily/monthly backups of a file you retrieve? What's the interface for retreiving files like? Does in only work in Windows Explorer, or within other apps as well? What's the technology on Windows that tells you when files in the file system have changed? My understanding was that there is nothing similar to fsevents, as low level changes to the file system or kernel would affect backwards compatibility.

I hope we talk about the same thing - a backup solution is not the same as an app that can copy files or disk images to a backup disk.

It may not be as feature-rich as Time Machine. I haven't used Apple's, so I don't know. The Windows Backup suite allows you to right-click any file or folder and view all the saved versions from your backups and your restore points. You can select any one of the versions and "restore" it to any location you wish. You can also do this from some applications if they are Shadow Copy aware.

Apple's may be (and probably is) better, but it is a fallacy to say Windows doesn't have a good backup solution. It does.

[Go Cat Go!!]

I used to build custom hi performance raid systems for graphics designers, video guys, gamers, etc. Got to be a hassle when they'd screw them up, but I regress.

This is just my opinion - given what's available it's not cost effective for roll your own anymore. I mean it depends on what you want it for, or if you just what the experience of building one. I was going to build a HTPC, but bought a recertified Gateway for a few hundred and upgraded the video card and I couldn't be happier. I had to spend some time sorting through the software bundle, but it's pared down nicely now and with 4GB ram and the 1GB vid card it performs better than I had hoped. All for @ $450 - less than if I bought everything from New Egg and built it myself.

Hi Mike - I just built an HTPC for myself. What kind of parts were you looking at? I got a nice case, mobo, cpu and video card for $240. I was able to salvage 2GB of memory and an DVD burner from an old build. If I had bought new it would still be less than $450. This is the case I got:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811121100

It's a great little case. Everything fit perfectly and had absolutely no issues since putting it all together. XBMC rocks!

Oops. I forgot I added a terabyte disk to the price. I was able to get one on sale for $65.

[Devnor]

$240.00 PC does that include the Windows license too?

I used to build all the office computers but in the last few years just started buying Powerspec PCs. They are cheap, hold up very nicely. We use 'em for DAQ and instrument controls, graphic workstations & regular office duties. This stuff must run 24/7 with no downtime & they deliver. There is zero reason to build these things anymore.

[stratman34]

I'm in IT... for my home systems, I usually take the middle of the road. Meaning, I buy pre-built configurations, but then reload the OS fresh on day one. I spent years building my own PCs. I wasn't a gamer, but I needed stability for development & testing software. But, the last few I have bought medium grade prebuilt hardware configurations, then simply wiped it and re-installed the OS fresh. I have legal access to all MS software via a partnership agreement, so that's not a problem for me.

IMHO, lots of the PC perception issues with stability are because of the unstable OS builds the OEMs put out. Crap-ware has its hooks in everything and OEM security and update tools are akin to a built-in virus. :)

[Go Cat Go!!]

$240.00 PC does that include the Windows license too?



I'm using Ubuntu. I was going to use Win7 but really wasn't into loading all bloat that comes with it. I wanted it lean and mean. It's been about a month since I built it. I think I'm going to have it go straight into XBMC upon bootup.

[stratology]

It may not be as feature-rich as Time Machine. I haven't used Apple's, so I don't know. The Windows Backup suite allows you to right-click any file or folder and view all the saved versions from your backups and your restore points. You can select any one of the versions and "restore" it to any location you wish. You can also do this from some applications if they are Shadow Copy aware.

Apple's may be (and probably is) better, but it is a fallacy to say Windows doesn't have a good backup solution. It does.


Ah, you're talking about Shadow Copy. This is totally different to Time Machine. Ancient tech. You always have to take a snapshot of the whole system. No tracking of changes on individual files. That means, backups from 2 days are as big as the data on 2 complete hard disks, not the size of your data on disk plus the 50MB of files you added. You can look up Shadow Copy and Time Machine on Wikipedia to get a basic idea.

You can compare Shadow Copy to the 'Restore' function in Disk Utility, but please not to Time Machine. Underlying tech like hard links and fsevents is the foundation. Again, you just can't compare the two, the tech simply is not there on the Windows side.


As to a 'good' backup solution: many average users never think about backup. When you plug in an external hard disk, the Mac asks you once if you want to use it for backup, you click ok and never worry about it again. Having to manually create restore images is non-trivial for the average computer user, and plain awkward...

[stvnscott]

Ah, you're talking about Shadow Copy. This is totally different to Time Machine. Ancient tech. You always have to take a snapshot of the whole system. No tracking of changes on individual files. That means, backups from 2 days are as big as the data on 2 complete hard disks, not the size of your data on disk plus the 50MB of files you added. You can look up Shadow Copy and Time Machine on Wikipedia to get a basic idea.

You can compare Shadow Copy to the 'Restore' function in Disk Utility, but please not to Time Machine. Underlying tech like hard links and fsevents is the foundation. Again, you just can't compare the two, the tech simply is not there on the Windows side.


As to a 'good' backup solution: many average users never think about backup. When you plug in an external hard disk, the Mac asks you once if you want to use it for backup, you click ok and never worry about it again. Having to manually create restore images is non-trivial for the average computer user, and plain awkward...

Seriously. No. You do not have to take a disk image every time. Shadow Copy simply allows you to copy a file at a low level even when it is in use and "locked". Some disk image software uses Shadow Copy, but its use is not limited to disk imaging. And I don't even know if that is what the backup system is using. It may be something else.

The technology IS there. I use it all the time and I am not taking disk images.

Again. It is a fallacy to say Windows does not have a good backup solution. It does. Millions of people use it.

Perhaps YOU should read Wikipedia RE Shadow Copy. The information is right there.

[stratology]

Perhaps YOU should read Wikipedia RE Shadow Copy. The information is right there.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_Copy, Overview section:

Unlike a true versioning file system, however, users cannot trigger the creation of new versions of an individual file, only the entire volume.

You are right, the information is right there...

[tinman475]

A couple of misconceptions so far..

1. You do not have to run a 32 bit and 64 bit system side by side to have capability to run programs of both. One system with windows 7 or even vista takes care of all of it.

2. Windows backup allows you to restore individual files based on a date you pick. It runs just like many of the back up utils you purchase where you can specify to back up changes to files and folders or a snap shot at a scheduled time..


Not pulling for either team, just don't want folks to be swayed by bad intel..

[stvnscott]

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_Copy, Overview section:

Unlike a true versioning file system, however, users cannot trigger the creation of new versions of an individual file, only the entire volume.

You are right, the information is right there...

I can't help that you have reading comprehension problems.

That part of the Wiki entry is referring to VSS or Volume Snapshot Service. The keyword here is "Volume". That is only one way to use Shadow Copy. As I said before, Shadow Copy is a technology that allows you to copy a file at a low level (the block level in this case) even if it is locked by another application. That's it. That is all it is. Call it old tech if you want. It is still very useful tech.

I'll spell it out very simply for you...

Shadow Copy is a simple tool like a hammer. From the basic hammer concept, you can create a claw hammer, framing hammer, auto hammer, sledge hammer, jackhammer, etc. It's all in the implementation. Shadow Copy is no different.

Carbonite uses Shadow Copy. So does Mozy. So does Acronis. So does Ghost. You get the idea.

There are two major features of Windows Backup & Restore Center. System Image allows you to take disk images any time you want regardless of what that ultra-reliable source, Wikipedia, says. I'm running one as I type this just for fun. Windows Backup makes differential backups of individual files and indexes them for fast retreival. Both features use Shadow Copy.

Windows Backup checks files once per day in the background to see if they have changed. If they have changed, a new indexed copy is created in the backup location.

Any time you want to revert back to an older version of your file, you can right-click the file and choose "Previous Versions" from the context menu. That opens a dialog which searches all your disk images, backup locations, and restore points for copies of the file. You select the one you want to restore, click the copy or restore button, tell Windows where to put it, and it restores it to that location. If you accidentally delete a file, you can open Backup Center and browse your backups for the file and restore it from there.

Wow! That's amazing. How does it work?! It's magic. That's all I can say. Magic. It's better than magic. Because it doesn't exist. Because the tech isn't there. Magic!

There's this other crazy feature. When you plug a thumb drive or an external hard drive in for the first time, Windows asks you if you want to set up backups to that drive. It's just nuts. I would never do that.

Here is a pic of the restore feature for a file on my desktop. It's a fake though, because it can't be true, because the technology just isn't there!


http://www.secondstorysoft.com/download/pics/restore.png


I love it people pretend to be experts on things they know nothing about. I especially love when they are all smug and smart-assy about it.

So anyway Mr. OP... Building your own PC can be fun and rewarding and can save you some coin under the right circumstances. I've been doing it for about 20 years now I guess. But back then you had to buy your parts sight-unseen from those ginormous "Computer Shopper" catalogs and hope for the best.

[Go Cat Go!!]

But back then you had to buy your parts sight-unseen from those ginormous "Computer Shopper" catalogs and hope for the best.

I loved pouring through those back then. Ginormous is definitely the best way to describe them.

[stratology]

A couple of misconceptions so far..

1. You do not have to run a 32 bit and 64 bit system side by side to have capability to run programs of both. One system with windows 7 or even vista takes care of all of it.

Please explain why Microsoft is selling separate 32 and 64 bit versions of Windows.


2. Windows backup allows you to restore individual files based on a date you pick. It runs just like many of the back up utils you purchase where you can specify to back up changes to files and folders or a snap shot at a scheduled time..


Not pulling for either team, just don't want folks to be swayed by bad intel..


Keyword is 'restore'. You have to know the exact name and location, as well as the correct backup date, to restore it. Second keyword is 'snap shot at a scheduled time'. Scheduled indexing. Not versioning.

[stratology]

I can't help that you have reading comprehension problems.

....

I'll spell it out very simply for you...

...
I love it people pretend to be experts on things they know nothing about. I especially love when they are all smug and smart-assy about it.

....

Wow, what's with the drama? Didn't want to hurt your feelings, just chat about tech. Feel free to look up fsevents or hard links some time, to better understand what I was trying to say. These are open source technologies, by the way, not invented at Apple. Or, just have a look at Time Machine on a Mac. See how it works. The arstechnica reviews of OS X have better explanations of the underlying tech than I can provide. Peace.

[tinman475]

Please explain why Microsoft is selling separate 32 and 64 bit versions of Windows.




Keyword is 'restore'. You have to know the exact name and location, as well as the correct backup date, to restore it. Second keyword is 'snap shot at a scheduled time'. Scheduled indexing. Not versioning.


Sure not a problem.. Cause people still make 32 and 64 bit hardware... When you buy windows 7 you get a 32 and 64 disk... If you have 64 bit hardware you can run the 64 bit OS, which includes the 32 bit OS inside it as well.. I run all my 32 bit software on my 64 bit system just fine... NOW if you have older 32 bit hardware you install the 32bit OS cause you can't utilize the 64 bit architecture... SO THERE IS NO NEED FOR 2 SYSTEMS TO RUN YOUR 32BIT STUFF.. does that clear it up for you..;)


You are way off on the backup stuff.. not even gonna waste my time explaining it cause you obviously don't understand it at all.. You keep talking about versioning like it is something special and it really isn't .. All I wanted to do was make sure the correct info is put out..

[stvnscott]

Please explain why Microsoft is selling separate 32 and 64 bit versions of Windows.




Keyword is 'restore'. You have to know the exact name and location, as well as the correct backup date, to restore it. Second keyword is 'snap shot at a scheduled time'. Scheduled indexing. Not versioning.

You really need to stop. It is painfully obvious you don't know what you're talking about. Stop talking.

[stratology]

Sure not a problem.. Cause people still make 32 and 64 bit hardware... When you buy windows 7 you get a 32 and 64 disk... If you have 64 bit hardware you can run the 64 bit OS, which includes the 32 bit OS inside it as well.. I run all my 32 bit software on my 64 bit system just fine... NOW if you have older 32 bit hardware you install the 32bit OS cause you can't utilize the 64 bit architecture... SO THERE IS NO NEED FOR 2 SYSTEMS TO RUN YOUR 32BIT STUFF.. does that clear it up for you..;)


You are way off on the backup stuff.. not even gonna waste my time explaining it cause you obviously don't understand it at all.. You keep talking about versioning like it is something special and it really isn't .. All I wanted to do was make sure the correct info is put out..


OK, so if I understand correctly, you need a separate Windows 32 bit to run older processors like Pentiums, and all Core i5 and core i7 Windows machines come with 64 bit Windows. Meaning, 64 bit Windows is not backwards compatible. Correct?
My Mac has a Core i7 processor. The kernel runs at 32 bit. The rest of the OS runs at 64 bit. Apps run at 32 bit and 64 bit side by side. Mac OS X always worked on 32 bit and 64 bit hardware. No need for 2 OSs. Or for the end user to decide which disk to use.
(What's curious is that on current Macs, which are obviously 64 bit, you can run 32 bit Windows under Boot Camp. Hm. :-) )


About the versioning: Spotlight search and Time Machine do not rely on scheduled indexing of the file system. Indexing on a scheduled time slows down all foreground processes. Search that relied on scheduled indexing was used in the 90s on OS 8 and 9, last seen on OS 10.3, in 2003.

The way it works now is that the kernel sees any change to the file system in the moment the file system is changed. This means, the search index, which is used as the index for the backups, is updated immediately. And it's light on resources.
Backups are created at an hourly basis, and later merged to daily, weekly etc backups. Spotlight and Time Machine go hand in hand. That means, if you do not know where a file is located, or if you have accidentally deleted a file (nothing to right click on for older backups) etc., you can still find it by using Spotlight in the Time Machine timeline.

If you look at what a TM backup looks like physically on a disk, you will see a backups folder, with folders with dates in it, which include folders that show your hard disk, with all subfolders. If you take the Applications folder, for example, you will see all your apps, not shortcuts, in all folders. That means, Firefox can show up several hundred times, on different dates, even if you never updated it. Still, it is physically on the HD only once -> hard links.

[stratology]

Stop talking.

Welcome to the ignore list.

[stvnscott]

Welcome to the ignore list.

AWWWWWWWWW! I'm gettin' misty!

[tinman475]

Why would you need to run windows under MAC? HMM

Seriously you aren't grasping the whole 64bit\32bit thing... So I am going to stop.. You are obviously one of those PRO MAC gurus who knows little about anything else..

[kludge]

32 bit Windows is separate from 64 bit Windows because many drivers and apps die in a 64 bit environment, because Microsoft is terrible at planning or enforcing real coding standards, and many of their APIs are broken due to incompetence or backwards compatibility to previous incompetence (I wish I had the long "blecherous losing Windows" series of emails from a friend who was a professional device driver programmer).

Macs can detect apps that aren't 64 bit clean at run time and put them in their own little 32 bit rubber room. This is the sort of thing that can be done with smart, sophisticated Unix kernels, but doesn't work well in Windows due to excessive coupling between layers. So a 32 bit Windows app may not only crash in a 64 bit environment, it can take out the operating system as well (this is especially true of things with deep hooks, like device drivers).

To be fair (or to damn with faint praise), Microsoft's ability to get their developer community into a 64 bit clean world was hampered by the clusterxxxk that was Vista. Apple is much more skilled at imposing standards on their dev community to plan for the future, because they have much clearer internal plans. And even Apple hits limits on this stuff... a lot of apps broke under the Leopard OS release. But in general, non-Apple software for the Mac is less likely to be broken, due to a cleaner, more sophisticated OS and better long-term planning. Hence, no need for a 32/64 separation like Windows.

[wpod]

Build your own desktops and buy lapr's...easy,smart and fool proof.

[stratology]

Why would you need to run windows under MAC? HMM

Seriously you aren't grasping the whole 64bit\32bit thing... So I am going to stop.. You are obviously one of those PRO MAC gurus who knows little about anything else..

You would need to run Windows on a Mac if you have apps that are not available on OS X, like Autodesk, or specific apps in the medical sector.


Not sure what else there is to grasp about 64 bit. I have 8GB of RAM in the computer, the OS can address more than 4GB. Apart from that, a slight speed increase, and better security, due to the larger address space.

The whole point of the way Macs handle 64 bit is that users don't have to think about it, worry about it, make decisions, etc. Apple has quietly migrated the whole user base to 64 bit computing, without the majority of the users even noticing.


I'm certainly pro Mac. I've had years of experience with Windows XP. Never used it for a single minute without getting paid for it, mind you.. I have no experience whatsoever with Windows 7, that's why I kept asking questions. What I've heard is that, feature-wise, it's competing with OS X 10.3 from 2003. That's why I was persistently asking about modern technologies. Could have been they've actually created something new (like the first working search engine that became available in Vista).


As I mentioned before, the technologies I discussed are not Apple technologies. They've been around for a long time before they were adopted by Apple.

[pmcqueen]

You really need to stop. It is painfully obvious you don't know what you're talking about. Stop talking.

this is usually how conversations with "mac gurus" go.

no offense to apples, or steve jobs (okay nevermind, **** you, steve jobs), or their users, but jesus christ if another person walks up to me and starts babbling about all of the viruses on my pc, I am going to kill a baby seal.

edit: I just read the title of the thread again. why am I getting into the ole mac vs pc spiral? :(

[stratology]

32 bit Windows is separate from 64 bit Windows because many drivers and apps die in a 64 bit environment, because Microsoft is terrible at planning or enforcing real coding standards, and many of their APIs are broken due to incompetence or backwards compatibility to previous incompetence (I wish I had the long "blecherous losing Windows" series of emails from a friend who was a professional device driver programmer).

Macs can detect apps that aren't 64 bit clean at run time and put them in their own little 32 bit rubber room. This is the sort of thing that can be done with smart, sophisticated Unix kernels, but doesn't work well in Windows due to excessive coupling between layers. So a 32 bit Windows app may not only crash in a 64 bit environment, it can take out the operating system as well (this is especially true of things with deep hooks, like device drivers).

To be fair (or to damn with faint praise), Microsoft's ability to get their developer community into a 64 bit clean world was hampered by the clusterxxxk that was Vista. Apple is much more skilled at imposing standards on their dev community to plan for the future, because they have much clearer internal plans. And even Apple hits limits on this stuff... a lot of apps broke under the Leopard OS release. But in general, non-Apple software for the Mac is less likely to be broken, due to a cleaner, more sophisticated OS and better long-term planning. Hence, no need for a 32/64 separation like Windows.


And the technological problems that Apple faces are the same. That's why the kernel on OS X runs in 32 bit on most Macs. Most 3rd party kernel extensions (-> device drivers) are still 32 bit. So Apple decided to run the kernel in 32 bit on machines that are most likely to run 3rd party kexts, with an option to boot into a 64 bit kernel (by holding down '6' and '4' during boot) - to provide a stable system for end users. That's why servers, where you don't expect that many 3rd party kexts, and may need a larger address space for the kernel, boot into the 64 bit kernel by default. Simple, well thought-out, user friendly. And future proof for the time that most 3rd party kexts will be 64 bit.

[stratology]

this is usually how conversations with "mac gurus" go.

no offense to apples, or steve jobs (okay nevermind, **** you, steve jobs), or their users, but jesus christ if another person walks up to me and starts babbling about all of the viruses on my pc, I am going to kill a baby seal.

edit: I just read the title of the thread again. why am I getting into the ole mac vs pc spiral? :(

You have viruses on your PC? First mention of that in this thread. Kind of off-topic, isn't it?

;)

[tinman475]

Well I guess when you got 10% of the market you can take your time and plan everything to the T.. The world runs on microsoft.. Maybe it's harder to change on that scale than you may think...

[Shiny McShine]

I was talking to a guy who said his daughter wanted a Macbook for college. He looked at the price and said "how about a decked out laptop PC?" I'd be tempted to build my own desktop PC and get better parts than are available with lower priced off the shelf computers. Is this practical? Can I save enough money to make it worth the trouble this way?

Technically, you're not building a computer. You're assembling a computer system from components. Intel and Motorola build computers.

BTW, I'm on tour next month! That is, I'm playing at a couple of house parties in two nearby cities.

I think you get my point.

[stratology]

Well I guess when you got 10% of the market you can take your time and plan everything to the T.. The world runs on microsoft.. Maybe it's harder to change on that scale than you may think...

Or: if you have 90% of the market, you could afford the best resources, have the biggest budget, hire the best engineers, come up with the best tech...


Quality and innovation have nothing to do with market share. Why would market share keep anyone from coming up with a magsafe adapter, or an illuminated keyboard, or a multitouch trackpad??

[Vince]

Or: if you have 90% of the market, you could afford the best resources, have the biggest budget, hire the best engineers, come up with the best tech...


Quality and innovation have nothing to do with market share. Why would market share keep anyone from coming up with a magsafe adapter, or an illuminated keyboard, or a multitouch trackpad??

Yes, we're all quite sure that Apple has a monopoly on the best and brightest developers and engineers in the world. Oh yeah, and customers too. The rest of us are just poor fools somewhere far behind them.

The reason Microsoft has a 90% share is because they haven't excluded the outside world of hardware and software developers. They actually let the rest of the industry participate in the development of the category. Of course, collaboration always has a price. You can't always do things the way YOU want to when there are lots of other people to consider. Yet, without all those other people, you probably only end up with about 10% of the market.

You see, it's very easy to run a small country and do just what you want when you're an absolute dictator who makes the rules for everyone and everyone must bow to your will or be killed. It's quite another thing to be the leader of the free world.

[quadrophenia]

This thread has infected me with the upgrade bug! I used to be really into building/tweaking PC's but haven't really messed with it in the past 3 - 4 years. As such, my s-939 AMD X2 machine is starting to get a little age on it. I did put a new video card in about 6 months ago, but only because the old one died. It still runs pretty well (I did a fresh OS install when Windows 7 came out), but it's no longer in top form compared with the best out there.

I did some pricing on Newegg and it looks like I can get new motherboard, RAM, and quad-core CPU for about $400. Problem is, I'm having trouble justifying the upgrade since I don't game at all anymore, and I think that I might just be wanting to do the upgrade for the fun of it. Help me talk myself into it!

[stratology]

You see, it's very easy to run a small country and do just what you want when you're an absolute dictator who makes the rules for everyone and everyone must bow to your will or be killed. It's quite another thing to be the leader of the free world.

Funny, because the advanced technologies I discussed are open source...

[Jube2550]

I don't game at all anymore, and I think that I might just be wanting to do the upgrade for the fun of it. Help me talk myself into it!

If not gaming then don't do it! I've got an X2/Radeon HD platform and while I always try to read up with current hardware the brief life cycle is out of control. It's back in the same boat when new octo-cores trump the current quads and six-bangers and on and on. Remember, businesses used to run on x86 platforms. Why do we need all that power...cause we just do I guess. I keep up on Tom's site.

http://www.tomshardware.com

Will agree building a PC is very fulfilling "geek yourself to death" (as Vince nicely put). I did find a few choice deals locally on craigslist for higher end parts. Example was a $300 ATI video card for $80 that was 6 months old. Upon pick up the deep pocketed gamer told me he wasn't getting enough frame rate as a sniper in left for dead so he upgraded. There are hardware junkies out there that will constantly upgrade so be on the lookout for cheap deals. Most PC parts eventually become obsolete and valueless.

Remember to recycle!

[stratology]

Here is a link to PCmag's review of the new iMac:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2367102,00.asp

- it's their Editors' Choice for mid-priced all-in-one desktops.

- "What's notable is the iMac with its "entry level" Core i3 processor beat the Lenovo ThinkCentre M90z ($1,199 direct, ) with its faster, mid-range Core i5-650 processor, on all tests."

- "The iMac 21.5-inch (Core i3) is even faster in Windows 7 (64-bit) while running Boot Camp. ... Even the current Editors' Choice, the Core 2 Quad-powered Lenovo IdeaCentre B500 .. wasn't able to keep up."