Situations can get bad enough that . . .

Post #11,980 by Andrew Grygus 10/5/01 3:37:53 PM Reply	Situations can get bad enough that . . . . . Drive Savers, one of the leading data recovery houses, employs Niki Stange (a former suicide hot line councilor) to handle the more distraught customers. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #11,995 by Ashton 10/5/01 5:08:39 PM Reply	!!! - words fail..
Post #12,010 by kmself 10/5/01 7:45:29 PM Reply	Ounce of prevention I can believe it. I still don't have to sympathize. `-- Karsten M. Self [link\|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com\|kmself@ix.netcom.com] What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?`
Post #12,103 by dmarker2 10/6/01 9:34:44 PM Reply	Re: Backups are a PITB - but ... Having been part of corporate business for the best part of 30 years & having once had the job of teaching, setting up & testing CICS back-up & recovery systems. I find backups on PCs a PITB. My answer is to have 4 computers each with massive disk capacity divided into 5 logical disks. Each disk H: has copies of old files etc:, each disk G has copies of new software etc: the others have installed pgms & data. I have 2 rw cdroms & hate them both - they are so damn erratic. I know I should buy a good SCSI disk & rwCDROM but just haven't got round to it. But I still do periodic writes to CDs as well. I have tried r/w CDs but find them irritatingly slow. So use them as periodical back up like I do with W CDs. I have lost 3 disks in the past 12 months but have been able to recover each one except for one bit of 4 weeks incoming mail items. It is so much easier to copy stuff to a fast server. Cheers Doug Marker
Post #12,110 by kmself 10/6/01 10:55:07 PM Reply	Filesystem structure The GNU/Linux (or Unix) filesystem hierarchy makes backups so much easier. The utter lack of architecture under Windows is what makes backups so difficult. Under GNU/Linux, a user wants their personal stuff backed up? `$HOME`. As a sysadmin the local installation stuff? `/usr/local`. A decent systemwide backup? `/etc, /root, /boot, /var/stuff, /home, /usr/local`, plus a list of currently installed packages and/or versions. You're 100% at that point. Over-the-net backups -- that's an option. It's convenient, but it's not a full solution, and the expense (particularly for multiple versions or historic backups) are prohibitive. MS Windows backups are a PITA? Blame the [link\|http://www.microsoft.com/\|fucking vendor]. `-- Karsten M. Self [link\|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com\|kmself@ix.netcom.com] What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?`
Post #12,117 by static 10/7/01 1:35:27 AM Reply	Others by implication. ArcServe is horrible. Over-engineered, over-priced rubbish. Oh it backs-up okay, but I wish they'd spend all their millions on a cadre of decent UI designers. The thing is a real pain-in-the-arse to configure. Wade. "All around me are nothing but fakes Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"
Post #12,121 by pwhysall 10/7/01 3:36:29 AM Reply	Arcserve has one terrible, terrible feature It makes Backup Exec look good. And that, believe me, is a BAD thing. Peter Shill For Hire [link\|http://www.kuro5hin.org\|There is no K5 Cabal]

Welcome to IWETHEY!