Melor wrote:
Johnny, I have been reading about the WHS from HP for a while now. If you may entertain a question: About the scheduled backups. Do you have to leave the computers on each night you want to perform the backup? Will it turn off the computers after the backup or do you have to do that manually? My hope is instead of shutting down the computers, I could run a "backup and shutdown" routine when I wanted to perform a backup.
Thanks for any info. It looks like a slick device, and from what I read on the net a decent performer.
They have to be on to back up. It will wake them from sleep or hibernate, back them up, then return them to the state that it found them in.
Full power on just isn't possible--software can't initiate a power switch---I don't think safety design features would allow a pc designed like that to be sold. It could turn them off, but I don't believe the functionality is there. Once some user groups get up and running we may find a way, as I'd like to do it that way too.
Johnny Bravo wrote:
They have to be on to back up. It will wake them from sleep or hibernate, back them up, then return them to the state that it found them in.
Full power on just isn't possible--software can't initiate a power switch---I don't think safety design features would allow a pc designed like that to be sold. It could turn them off, but I don't believe the functionality is there. Once some user groups get up and running we may find a way, as I'd like to do it that way too.
I just get a kick out of all the Microsoft bashers out there...
From the Wikipedia link you provided:
"In addition, in order to get WoL to work it is sometimes required to enable this feature on the card. This can be done in Windows from the properties of the network card in the device manager, on the "Power Management" tab. Check "Allow this device to bring the computer out of standby" and then "Only allow management stations to bring the computer out of standby" to make sure it does not wake up on every single network activity that occurs."
Don't quote an article that tells how to configure the feature in Windows if you're going to imply (oh wait, you didn't imply it...you came right out and said it, "I guess Micro$oft never has either") that Microsoft can't do it.
Microsoft's market dominance is due to producing EXCELLENT products.
You must not have had a windows machine lock up on you or ever tried to uninstall an application only to find that it had it's hooks into various parts of the operating system and you can't get rid of it. Not to mention how bad it's network operating system sucked before they made it more like Netware. Microsoft's genius has never been in it's products, many of which they bought and did not develop in house. Microsoft's genius has always been in marketing their products.
You must not have had a windows machine lock up on you or ever tried to uninstall an application only to find that it had it's hooks into various parts of the operating system and you can't get rid of it. Not to mention how bad it's network operating system sucked before they made it more like Netware. Microsoft's genius has never been in it's products, many of which they bought and did not develop in house. Microsoft's genius has always been in marketing their products.
Gary, you gotta quit bogarting that roach!! Yea, that must be why they've dominated the market--no value in their products, just great marketing. All those IT department managers out there are just slaves to a good commercial.
Let me guess, Microsoft be hooked up with the illuminati, huh? But you, you've got The Secret, huh? You're a brilliant warrior on a white horse, working behind the scenes with your bootleg operating software, kinda like that dude in Martrix, right? AWESOME. Man, can I follow you around and be your deciple? You can call me Grasshopper if you'd like.
From everyone's comments so far it's obvious none of you actually know how to use Wake-On-Lan.
On a compatible system yes, it can turn on a PC that is fully powered off. As long as the machine is plugged into an electrical outlet and connected to the network AND it is configured to enable Wake-On-Lan functions.
You must not have had a windows machine lock up on you or ever tried to uninstall an application only to find that it had it's hooks into various parts of the operating system and you can't get rid of it. Not to mention how bad it's network operating system sucked before they made it more like Netware. Microsoft's genius has never been in it's products, many of which they bought and did not develop in house. Microsoft's genius has always been in marketing their products.
Gary, you gotta quit bogarting that roach!! Yea, that must be why they've dominated the market--no value in their products, just great marketing. All those IT department managers out there are just slaves to a good commercial.
Let me guess, Microsoft be hooked up with the illuminati, huh? But you, you've got The Secret, huh? You're a brilliant warrior on a white horse, working behind the scenes with your bootleg operating software, kinda like that dude in Martrix, right? AWESOME. Man, can I follow you around and be your deciple? You can call me Grasshopper if you'd like.
In most cases at large companies IT managers didn't want Microsofts network operating system. It was the IT managers managers who didn't know diddly about IT who were sold on Microsoft by their reps presentations. BTW, Novell, who at one time had over 80% of the networking market, was one of the worst companies ever at marketing their products. After many CIOs and many deadend products, Novell barely exists in the market place. But, not because they had a bad product. They had bad management. Take it from a guy who has over twenty years in IT, grasshopper.
Gary, you gotta quit bogarting that roach!! Yea, that must be why they've dominated the market--no value in their products, just great marketing. All those IT department managers out there are just slaves to a good commercial.
Let me guess, Microsoft be hooked up with the illuminati, huh? But you, you've got The Secret, huh? You're a brilliant warrior on a white horse, working behind the scenes with your bootleg operating software, kinda like that dude in Martrix, right? AWESOME. Man, can I follow you around and be your deciple? You can call me Grasshopper if you'd like.
In most cases at large companies IT managers didn't want Microsofts network operating system. It was the IT managers managers who didn't know diddly about IT who were sold on Microsoft by their reps presentations. BTW, Novell, who at one time had over 80% of the networking market, was one of the worst companies ever at marketing their products. After many CIOs and many deadend products, Novell barely exists in the market place. But, not because they had a bad product. They had bad management. Take it from a guy who has over twenty years in IT, grasshopper.
You're talking to a guy who has 30, and you're talking rediculous tripe. Yea, all those thousands and thousands of companies, poorly managed by their top dogs and you lil IT weenies woulda rode in on your white horses, like that guy in MATRIX!!!! If we'da just left it to you, you could BUILD your OWN networks,...... really boss, we could!!! Please boss, dont buy dat bad network from Bill Gates, buy dis here lil network from me and my buddy Bob!!! Please massa, don't whip me no mo, please massa!!!!
With 30 years in IT, how is it that you so blatantly misunderstand the true functionality of wake-on-LAN?
As AJ mentioned (and I have known all along because I use it both at home and at work) wake-on-LAN can turn a computer on, not just from a sleep state, but from a typical shut-down state.
Oh, and BTW, grasshopper, M$ may be fine for typical LAN environments but, above and beyond that, systems are running Solaris, BSD, or some flavour of Linux... and Cisco, Foundry, Juniper, etc. take care of getting traffic where it needs to go. The M$ products have no place anywhere outside the LAN. I work for a major Internet co-location provider and I can tell you from direct experience that M$ "web environments" are compromised several orders of magnitude more than those based on *nix. Any critical services in our customers' environments and across our ASs are built on systems that do not run M$ products. We have a strict policy against M$ products running anywhere outside our Corporate LAN.
As you can see from the following links, most of the boys who know better run something other than M$:
Sorry, but you're comparing web site hosts/sites/servers to a home network storage/sharing device. I don't see where those stats have any bearing on setting up shared storage for a home network.
Like earlier in this thread, it's an Apples to Oranges comparison.
With 30 years in IT, how is it that you so blatantly misunderstand the true functionality of wake-on-LAN?
As AJ mentioned (and I have known all along because I use it both at home and at work) wake-on-LAN can turn a computer on, not just from a sleep state, but from a typical shut-down state.
Oh, and BTW, grasshopper, M$ may be fine for typical LAN environments but, above and beyond that, systems are running Solaris, BSD, or some flavour of Linux... and Cisco, Foundry, Juniper, etc. take care of getting traffic where it needs to go. The M$ products have no place anywhere outside the LAN. I work for a major Internet co-location provider and I can tell you from direct experience that M$ "web environments" are compromised several orders of magnitude more than those based on *nix. Any critical services in our customers' environments and across our ASs are built on systems that do not run M$ products. We have a strict policy against M$ products running anywhere outside our Corporate LAN.
As you can see from the following links, most of the boys who know better run something other than M$:
I can see why you never made it into management after 20 years in IT!!
You keep switching topics, trying to sound like you're winning points. Then posting URL's that aren't on topic.
So folks, let's drop this nonsense. The fact is that msoft makes fine products, and the whining of lower level IT weenies isn't going to change that. The product that HP came out with is very well done--you msoft bashers couldn't design a better product in your dreams.
Forrest Egan wrote:
Sorry, but you're comparing web site hosts/sites/servers to a home network storage/sharing device. I don't see where those stats have any bearing on setting up shared storage for a home network.
Like earlier in this thread, it's an Apples to Oranges comparison.
I was specifically addressing Johnny's statements about M$ "networking" prowess...
Johnny Bravo wrote:
I can see why you never made it into management after 20 years in IT!!
You keep switching topics, trying to sound like you're winning points. Then posting URL's that aren't on topic.
So folks, let's drop this nonsense. The fact is that msoft makes fine products, and the whining of lower level IT weenies isn't going to change that. The product that HP came out with is very well done--you msoft bashers couldn't design a better product in your dreams.
You have no idea how many years I've worked in the industry or what level I currently work at, so maybe it's best not to assume anything.
The urls I posted were directly related to your statements about M$ "networking". Anyone in the industry knows what an oxymoron that is.
Furthermore, associates at my workplace have built, upon open source code, a product that far exceeds the abilities of this HP/M$ gizmo, which provides support for all current RAID levels, CIFS, NFS, iSCSI, and has virtually no limit to it's storage capacity and the cost for the software is $0. The only price of admission is the cost of the hardware. It all comes packaged with a web GUI that allows complete control over LDAP authentication, quotas, volume management, etc. Oh, and it helps if you have a bloody clue what you're doing. You guys should have no problem with it, and save a bundle, given your obvious experience.
And, on top of all that, I'm the guy bogarting that roach, so stop given' the credit to Gary!
Lets beat the dead horse even more. I use SMUGMUG, cost me 99yr. I have unlimited space. They have 3 copies of each photo in three different states. Plus I have my own copy at home. Thats a 4 teir backup system.
Let's make glue out of that horse... (Yeah, I know.)
I use smugmug as well, but also recognize the fact that they can't store your raw files or other non-photo related data. They only store jpg, gif, and mpeg-1 video.
Right, but if you are using them for photos, you should be able to handle all the other photo releated stuff on your own with no issues. I use a program called AllSync for data between drives.
