On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:50:42 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Hmmm,
Most mobo BIOS can do a recovery, all the Lenov(IBM) laptops has a blue
button to push for recovery/restore coming from hidden partition, etc.
Just bring up the task manager to see what's going on and adjust atart
up applications.

There's "recovery" and there's "recovery."
Google lenovo restore crash.
Doesn't look "push button" to me.
Plenty of gotchas with Thinkpads.
Back to strategies and goals.
You have to define your "recovery" goals.
Here's mine.
- If my C: drive crashes I want to put a new one in or swap in an
existing drive, then be back real close to where I was in 10 minutes.
- If I get hit by or even suspect a virus I want to be back real close
to where I was before the infection in 10 minute.
- I never want to install my OS more than once.
- I never want to install an important app more than once.
My strategy has known weaknesses.
Everything is on the local box, no external storage.
A fire or a lightening strike that gets both hard drives with the
stored images blows me out of the water.
Maybe I'll address that. Not really enthusiastic about it, but I
should at least put my images on an external drive and put that in a
different room.
I refuse to rent a safe deposit box.

Anyway laptops, desktops, home and corporate all require a strategy
that works for the individual.
The home desktop has an advantage.
When I was toting a corporate Thinkpad and crashed the HD the image
that corporate put back needed a lot tweaking to get me back where I
had been.
Hours worth.
I do much better with my home computers.
The Thinkpads were good machines and didn't crash often.
But *nothing* is entirely "push button" without some upfront work.

Since I was often involved in recovery of various corporate mainframe
systems I always covered my ass real well.
So when we went to Thinkpad workstations and I had a lot of important
data in Office I used the company backup software to back it up.
But as usual I verified the backups, and the size growth wasn't right.
Like others who even bothered to schedule backups mine were scheduled
for the lunch hour, and I never closed Office.
I dug into the enterprise-wide backup software logs for my machine and
found that Office wasn't backed up if it was running.
Duh. The imaging team appreciated hearing that and issued a
"directive."

Non-Lan home systems are much more clear cut.
Many ways to meet my goals, but I've been using Ghost for years.
Some people don't want to go to the effort and have no problem
re-installing Windows or losing data.
I bet my brother has installed one version or another of Windows a
thousand times. I think he actually likes doing it.
Different strokes.

--Vic

Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:50:42 -0700, Tony
wrote:

Hmmm,
Most mobo BIOS can do a recovery, all the Lenov(IBM) laptops has a blue
button to push for recovery/restore coming from hidden partition, etc.
Just bring up the task manager to see what's going on and adjust atart
up applications.

There's "recovery" and there's "recovery."
Google lenovo restore crash.
Doesn't look "push button" to me.
Plenty of gotchas with Thinkpads.
Back to strategies and goals.
You have to define your "recovery" goals.
Here's mine.
- If my C: drive crashes I want to put a new one in or swap in an
existing drive, then be back real close to where I was in 10 minutes.
- If I get hit by or even suspect a virus I want to be back real close
to where I was before the infection in 10 minute.
- I never want to install my OS more than once.
- I never want to install an important app more than once.
My strategy has known weaknesses.
Everything is on the local box, no external storage.
A fire or a lightening strike that gets both hard drives with the
stored images blows me out of the water.
Maybe I'll address that. Not really enthusiastic about it, but I
should at least put my images on an external drive and put that in a
different room.
I refuse to rent a safe deposit box.

Anyway laptops, desktops, home and corporate all require a strategy
that works for the individual.
The home desktop has an advantage.
When I was toting a corporate Thinkpad and crashed the HD the image
that corporate put back needed a lot tweaking to get me back where I
had been.
Hours worth.
I do much better with my home computers.
The Thinkpads were good machines and didn't crash often.
But *nothing* is entirely "push button" without some upfront work.

Since I was often involved in recovery of various corporate mainframe
systems I always covered my ass real well.
So when we went to Thinkpad workstations and I had a lot of important
data in Office I used the company backup software to back it up.
But as usual I verified the backups, and the size growth wasn't right.
Like others who even bothered to schedule backups mine were scheduled
for the lunch hour, and I never closed Office.
I dug into the enterprise-wide backup software logs for my machine and
found that Office wasn't backed up if it was running.
Duh. The imaging team appreciated hearing that and issued a
"directive."

Non-Lan home systems are much more clear cut.
Many ways to meet my goals, but I've been using Ghost for years.
Some people don't want to go to the effort and have no problem
re-installing Windows or losing data.
I bet my brother has installed one version or another of Windows a
thousand times. I think he actually likes doing it.
Different strokes.

--Vic
Hi,
Recovery to a known state, back up/restore, save/restore. All the time
when I was active or at home I have been using Thinkpads. We have 4 in
our home at the moment, 2 desktops, one server. Computers in every floor
all networked via wire or dual band wireless. Nothing in the world is
perfect. Simply you gotta know what you are doing. I retired in 1996. Is
there any major corporation w/o disaster recovery plan with regular
staff training?
All the places I worked military, commercial, industrial, educational
outfits had vaulted backup data kept in more than one place and within
24 hours in most case system will be running again. If hardware suffered
a fire or something they take backup data to other operational site.
No RAID in your disk susbsystem? My server has, level 5. one drive
crash? no sweat it keeps chugging along pull bad drive plug another new
one in.
I usually do incremental backup, Every 6 months or so, image backup.
At home I use DLT tape library on SCSI. What is your specialty in IT
world? Trying to impress ordinary Joe, the consumer?

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:40:40 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:

All the places I worked military, commercial, industrial, educational
outfits had vaulted backup data kept in more than one place and within
24 hours in most case system will be running again. If hardware suffered
a fire or something they take backup data to other operational site.

Yep. BTDT. Nothing to do with Higgs though, except to point out
there are gotchas all over the place.

No RAID in your disk susbsystem? My server has, level 5. one drive
crash? no sweat it keeps chugging along pull bad drive plug another new
one in.

So tell Higgs how to RAID his box.
I don't think he needs it, but maybe you can convince him.

I usually do incremental backup, Every 6 months or so, image backup.
At home I use DLT tape library on SCSI. What is your specialty in IT
world? Trying to impress ordinary Joe, the consumer?

Not at all. Not me talking about SCSI.
Maybe you can convince Higgs to use SCSI.
Hardly a "Joe, the consumer" solution.
Higgs has to say what he wants before anybody can offer advice.
That was my point about goals, and pointing out different needs.
And letting him know there is no "push button" recovery solution.
If that ruffled your feathers, well, tough ****.
My past specialty doesn't matter.
My current specialty regarding this thread is meeting my home desktop
recovery goals, as I stated them.
Higgs might have different goals.

--Vic

Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:40:40 -0700, Tony
wrote:

All the places I worked military, commercial, industrial, educational
outfits had vaulted backup data kept in more than one place and within
24 hours in most case system will be running again. If hardware suffered
a fire or something they take backup data to other operational site.

Yep. BTDT. Nothing to do with Higgs though, except to point out
there are gotchas all over the place.

No RAID in your disk susbsystem? My server has, level 5. one drive
crash? no sweat it keeps chugging along pull bad drive plug another new
one in.

So tell Higgs how to RAID his box.
I don't think he needs it, but maybe you can convince him.

I usually do incremental backup, Every 6 months or so, image backup.
At home I use DLT tape library on SCSI. What is your specialty in IT
world? Trying to impress ordinary Joe, the consumer?

Not at all. Not me talking about SCSI.
Maybe you can convince Higgs to use SCSI.
Hardly a "Joe, the consumer" solution.
Higgs has to say what he wants before anybody can offer advice.
That was my point about goals, and pointing out different needs.
And letting him know there is no "push button" recovery solution.
If that ruffled your feathers, well, tough ****.
My past specialty doesn't matter.
My current specialty regarding this thread is meeting my home desktop
recovery goals, as I stated them.
Higgs might have different goals.

--Vic
Hi,
We used to have jokes which goes like this.
Answer to smart question is free and welcome.
Answer to dumb question will cost you.
Most annoying thing in my working days was people lie
to cover their a*&, machine never lies. I wasted lot of
valuable time because of lying people.
Partitioning a big drive does not make much sense.
If it crashes everything on it is lost and it has
only one moving head arm creating bottle neck for I/O.
Instead of 1 TB drive, better idea is to have two 500GB
drive. Running system needs strict dicipline. Some day it'll
pay a big dividend. Over and Out.

On Jan 20, 3:37*pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:13:38 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson

wrote:

When I got my present computer, nearly 6 years ago, I thought about
partitioning, but I didn't have the skill, and 40 GB seemed to stretch
into the dim horizon. Well, we know better now! *I have checked out
some Seagates wih 500 GB for $114.00; doesn't sound bad. *I understand
that it's more eexpensive if you buy complete with cables and manual.
Is a non-geek safer doing that than going bare? I read that I HAVE the
cables and of course the motherboard. *But I want a HD that, as one
kind poster put it, lets you just press a button to transfer all
existing data.

Whoa. *Spending money on a 500GB drive when you have plenty left on
your 160GB makes no sense.

The 160 GB is EXTERIOR.

My main HD is only 40 GB, of which about 80% is Used.

PC manufacturers set the big partitioned HD trap for many customers.

Memory and backups are unrelated.
You got good advice on the memory issue. *Remove what caused it - some
kind of Norton app -

Yes, Norton Security, whole package. Bought few years ago and renewed
annually. BUT NOW WHOLE NG IS URGING ME TO DUMP IT AND GO TO AVAST OR
SOME OTHER ANTI-VIRUS.

or add memory, or both.

So, good idea to add memory to existing 40GB HD? In earlier posts on
this thread, I said that I started 6 years ago with a "big" 256 of
memory, then added another 512 a few years ago. (Stupid! I could
have bought a Gig for not much more!).

Backups, partitioning (usually unnecessary) and recovery strategies
are a different issue.
As far as a "press a button" method, that probably exists with an
external HD/software combo but I don't know anything about it.
Probably way expensive too, and it won't be "push button."

Don't toss your Norton Ghost CD. *
It's good stuff when used correctly. *Wait a while until you learn
more.

OMG I am losing what's left of my mind!!! Are you saying that Ghost
can be used independently of the whole Norton Security package???
IOW, when Norton renewal time comes up in a month or so, if I don't re-
up w/Norton, can I still use Ghost?

Please clarify on this; I am getting more & more confused. NOTE THAT
OTHERS ARE SAYING THAT THE (TO ME) VALUABLE BACKUP, ETC. FUNCTIONS OF
GHOST CAN BE PERFORMED INDEPENDENT OF GHOST BY EXISTING PROGRAMS
WITHIN WINDOWS, ETC.

HB

On Jan 20, 5:15*pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:50:42 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Hmmm,
Most mobo BIOS can do a recovery, all the Lenov(IBM) laptops has a blue
button to push for recovery/restore coming from hidden partition, etc.
Just bring up the task manager to see what's going on and adjust atart
up applications.

There's "recovery" and there's "recovery."
Google lenovo restore crash.
Doesn't look "push button" to me.
Plenty of gotchas with Thinkpads.
Back to strategies and goals.
You have to define your "recovery" goals.
Here's mine.
- If my C: drive crashes I want to put a new one in or swap in an
existing drive, then be back real close to where I was in 10 minutes.
- If I get hit by or even suspect a virus I want to be back real close
to where I was before the infection in 10 minute.
- I never want to install my OS more than once.
- I never want to install an important app more than once. *
My strategy has known weaknesses.
Everything is on the local box, no external storage.
A fire or a lightening strike that gets both hard drives with the
stored images blows me out of the water.

Maybe I'll address that. *Not really enthusiastic about it, but I
should at least put my images on an external drive and put that in a
different room.

WHY DOES YOUR EXTERNAL HD HAVE TO BE IN A DIFFERENT ROOM? Straight
question.

[...snip...]

HB

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 19:50:54 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson
wrote:

My main HD is only 40 GB, of which about 80% is Used.

Case closed!!!

Move up

Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 20, 5:15 pm, Vic wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:50:42 -0700, Tony
wrote:

Hmmm,
Most mobo BIOS can do a recovery, all the Lenov(IBM) laptops has a blue
button to push for recovery/restore coming from hidden partition, etc.
Just bring up the task manager to see what's going on and adjust atart
up applications.

There's "recovery" and there's "recovery."
Google lenovo restore crash.
Doesn't look "push button" to me.
Plenty of gotchas with Thinkpads.
Back to strategies and goals.
You have to define your "recovery" goals.
Here's mine.
- If my C: drive crashes I want to put a new one in or swap in an
existing drive, then be back real close to where I was in 10 minutes.
- If I get hit by or even suspect a virus I want to be back real close
to where I was before the infection in 10 minute.
- I never want to install my OS more than once.
- I never want to install an important app more than once.
My strategy has known weaknesses.
Everything is on the local box, no external storage.
A fire or a lightening strike that gets both hard drives with the
stored images blows me out of the water.

Maybe I'll address that. Not really enthusiastic about it, but I
should at least put my images on an external drive and put that in a
different room.

WHY DOES YOUR EXTERNAL HD HAVE TO BE IN A DIFFERENT ROOM? Straight
question.

[...snip...]

HB
Hmmm,
Just don't waste too much money on a box nearing it's obsolescence.
Do you know what kinda motherboard you have? Quickest recovery is
possible running Raid 1 with two identical HDD. Is your HD controller
Raid capable? What brand motherboard? No backup utility will give you a
recovery in 10 mins.

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 20:02:07 -0700, Tony Hwang
wrote:



Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 18:40:40 -0700, Tony
wrote:

All the places I worked military, commercial, industrial, educational
outfits had vaulted backup data kept in more than one place and within
24 hours in most case system will be running again. If hardware suffered
a fire or something they take backup data to other operational site.

Yep. BTDT. Nothing to do with Higgs though, except to point out
there are gotchas all over the place.

No RAID in your disk susbsystem? My server has, level 5. one drive
crash? no sweat it keeps chugging along pull bad drive plug another new
one in.

So tell Higgs how to RAID his box.
I don't think he needs it, but maybe you can convince him.

I usually do incremental backup, Every 6 months or so, image backup.
At home I use DLT tape library on SCSI. What is your specialty in IT
world? Trying to impress ordinary Joe, the consumer?

Not at all. Not me talking about SCSI.
Maybe you can convince Higgs to use SCSI.
Hardly a "Joe, the consumer" solution.
Higgs has to say what he wants before anybody can offer advice.
That was my point about goals, and pointing out different needs.
And letting him know there is no "push button" recovery solution.
If that ruffled your feathers, well, tough ****.
My past specialty doesn't matter.
My current specialty regarding this thread is meeting my home desktop
recovery goals, as I stated them.
Higgs might have different goals.

--Vic
Hi,
We used to have jokes which goes like this.
Answer to smart question is free and welcome.
Answer to dumb question will cost you.
Most annoying thing in my working days was people lie
to cover their a*&, machine never lies. I wasted lot of
valuable time because of lying people.
Partitioning a big drive does not make much sense.
If it crashes everything on it is lost and it has
only one moving head arm creating bottle neck for I/O.
Instead of 1 TB drive, better idea is to have two 500GB
drive. Running system needs strict dicipline. Some day it'll
pay a big dividend. Over and Out.
But if you DO have a 500GB or 1TB drive, one way to speed it up is to
partition it.

Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 20, 3:37 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:13:38 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson

wrote:

When I got my present computer, nearly 6 years ago, I thought about
partitioning, but I didn't have the skill, and 40 GB seemed to stretch
into the dim horizon. Well, we know better now! I have checked out
some Seagates wih 500 GB for $114.00; doesn't sound bad. I understand
that it's more eexpensive if you buy complete with cables and manual.
Is a non-geek safer doing that than going bare? I read that I HAVE the
cables and of course the motherboard. But I want a HD that, as one
kind poster put it, lets you just press a button to transfer all
existing data.
Whoa. Spending money on a 500GB drive when you have plenty left on
your 160GB makes no sense.

The 160 GB is EXTERIOR.

My main HD is only 40 GB, of which about 80% is Used.

Jikes. your system disk should be 40+ % free.
You are on the brink of disaster.
Mine is 80GB,25% used,since 2004, and about 150 programs/packs
installed.
When you get near 60%, get a new harddisk, and clone your old
disk onto it.

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 19:50:54 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson
wrote:

On Jan 20, 3:37Â*pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:13:38 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson

wrote:

When I got my present computer, nearly 6 years ago, I thought about
partitioning, but I didn't have the skill, and 40 GB seemed to stretch
into the dim horizon. Well, we know better now! Â*I have checked out
some Seagates wih 500 GB for $114.00; doesn't sound bad. Â*I understand
that it's more eexpensive if you buy complete with cables and manual.
Is a non-geek safer doing that than going bare? I read that I HAVE the
cables and of course the motherboard. Â*But I want a HD that, as one
kind poster put it, lets you just press a button to transfer all
existing data.

Whoa. Â*Spending money on a 500GB drive when you have plenty left on
your 160GB makes no sense.

The 160 GB is EXTERIOR.

My main HD is only 40 GB, of which about 80% is Used.
I'd be replacing the 40 with something a bit bigger

PC manufacturers set the big partitioned HD trap for many customers.

Memory and backups are unrelated.
You got good advice on the memory issue. Â*Remove what caused it - some
kind of Norton app -

Yes, Norton Security, whole package. Bought few years ago and renewed
annually. BUT NOW WHOLE NG IS URGING ME TO DUMP IT AND GO TO AVAST OR
SOME OTHER ANTI-VIRUS.

or add memory, or both.

So, good idea to add memory to existing 40GB HD? In earlier posts on
this thread, I said that I started 6 years ago with a "big" 256 of
memory, then added another 512 a few years ago. (Stupid! I could
have bought a Gig for not much more!).

I gb of ram is almost a requirement to run more than one app under XP.

Backups, partitioning (usually unnecessary) and recovery strategies
are a different issue.
As far as a "press a button" method, that probably exists with an
external HD/software combo but I don't know anything about it.
Probably way expensive too, and it won't be "push button."

Don't toss your Norton Ghost CD. Â*
It's good stuff when used correctly. Â*Wait a while until you learn
more.

OMG I am losing what's left of my mind!!! Are you saying that Ghost
can be used independently of the whole Norton Security package???
IOW, when Norton renewal time comes up in a month or so, if I don't re-
up w/Norton, can I still use Ghost?

Yes you can still use Ghost. I'm not a big fan of it, but it is about
the only Norton product I'll use.

Please clarify on this; I am getting more & more confused. NOTE THAT
OTHERS ARE SAYING THAT THE (TO ME) VALUABLE BACKUP, ETC. FUNCTIONS OF
GHOST CAN BE PERFORMED INDEPENDENT OF GHOST BY EXISTING PROGRAMS
WITHIN WINDOWS, ETC.

HB

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 19:53:34 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson
wrote:


WHY DOES YOUR EXTERNAL HD HAVE TO BE IN A DIFFERENT ROOM? Straight
question.


Simply to secure the data.
A lightening strike can wipe out every hard drive in your computer,
and externals connected to it, and so can a fire.
Just talking about where you store it. Unplug it and put it elsewhere
if you're using it for backups and want to be safe about it.

--Vic

On Jan 20, 8:50*pm, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 20, 3:37*pm, Vic Smith wrote:



On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:13:38 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson

wrote:

When I got my present computer, nearly 6 years ago, I thought about
partitioning, but I didn't have the skill, and 40 GB seemed to stretch
into the dim horizon. Well, we know better now! *I have checked out
some Seagates wih 500 GB for $114.00; doesn't sound bad. *I understand
that it's more eexpensive if you buy complete with cables and manual.
Is a non-geek safer doing that than going bare? I read that I HAVE the
cables and of course the motherboard. *But I want a HD that, as one
kind poster put it, lets you just press a button to transfer all
existing data.

Whoa. *Spending money on a 500GB drive when you have plenty left on
your 160GB makes no sense.

The 160 GB is EXTERIOR.

My main HD is only 40 GB, of which about 80% is Used.

PC manufacturers set the big partitioned HD trap for many customers.

Memory and backups are unrelated.
You got good advice on the memory issue. *Remove what caused it - some
kind of Norton app -

Yes, Norton Security, whole package. Bought few years ago and renewed
annually. *BUT NOW WHOLE NG IS URGING ME TO DUMP IT AND GO TO AVAST OR
SOME OTHER ANTI-VIRUS.

*or add memory, or both.

So, good idea to add memory to existing 40GB HD? *In earlier posts on
this thread, I said that I started 6 years ago with a "big" 256 of
memory, then added another 512 a few years ago. *(Stupid! *I could
have bought a Gig for not much more!).

Backups, partitioning (usually unnecessary) and recovery strategies
are a different issue.
As far as a "press a button" method, that probably exists with an
external HD/software combo but I don't know anything about it.
Probably way expensive too, and it won't be "push button."
Don't toss your Norton Ghost CD. *
It's good stuff when used correctly. *Wait a while until you learn
more.

OMG I am losing what's left of my mind!!! *Are you saying that Ghost
can be used independently of the whole Norton Security package???
IOW, when Norton renewal time comes up in a month or so, if I don't re-
up w/Norton, can I still use Ghost?

Please clarify on this; I am getting more & more confused. *NOTE THAT
OTHERS ARE SAYING THAT THE (TO ME) VALUABLE BACKUP, ETC. FUNCTIONS OF
GHOST CAN BE PERFORMED INDEPENDENT OF GHOST BY EXISTING PROGRAMS
WITHIN WINDOWS, ETC.

HB

==
You have received some very good advice from three or four people.
Deep sixing Norton AV using an uninstall utility from their website
should be number one on your priority list. I will never allow McAfee
AV or Norton AV on any computer of mine ever again. I use Avast FREE
and it has performed well for years but there are others just as good.
If you choose to ignore most of the suggestions, that is your
prerogative but would be a mistake IMHO.
==

On 1/19/2011 11:28 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 19, 1:41 pm, wrote:
On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 12:34:39 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson

wrote:
QUESTION: What is "sandboxing"? I am running XP, but don't know what
"SP3" means.

Service Pack 3...likely you are updated with patches? Right?

Give us the rest of the system information...

At least the HDD size and/or if you have two HDDs.

OK, here goes:

At least the HDD size and/or if you have two HDDs.

OK, here goes:

Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition Version 2002 Service Pack 3

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!

Buy memory. Everything else is sort of OK.

Jeff

On 1/20/2011 10:50 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 20, 3:37 pm, Vic wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:13:38 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson

wrote:

When I got my present computer, nearly 6 years ago, I thought about
partitioning, but I didn't have the skill, and 40 GB seemed to stretch
into the dim horizon. Well, we know better now! I have checked out
some Seagates wih 500 GB for $114.00; doesn't sound bad. I understand
that it's more eexpensive if you buy complete with cables and manual.
Is a non-geek safer doing that than going bare? I read that I HAVE the
cables and of course the motherboard. But I want a HD that, as one
kind poster put it, lets you just press a button to transfer all
existing data.

Whoa. Spending money on a 500GB drive when you have plenty left on
your 160GB makes no sense.

The 160 GB is EXTERIOR.

My main HD is only 40 GB, of which about 80% is Used.

PC manufacturers set the big partitioned HD trap for many customers.

Memory and backups are unrelated.
You got good advice on the memory issue. Remove what caused it - some
kind of Norton app -

Yes, Norton Security, whole package. Bought few years ago and renewed
annually. BUT NOW WHOLE NG IS URGING ME TO DUMP IT AND GO TO AVAST OR
SOME OTHER ANTI-VIRUS.

or add memory, or both.

So, good idea to add memory to existing 40GB HD? In earlier posts on
this thread, I said that I started 6 years ago with a "big" 256 of
memory, then added another 512 a few years ago. (Stupid! I could
have bought a Gig for not much more!).

Buy more memory. Buy more memory. Buy more memory. This is wayyyy too
little. Everything wants more memory these days, FF in particular.

Then upgrade your main HD or move virtual memory and and as much else
to another drive. 40GB is too small these days.

Oh, and buy more memory. Or turn off the flaming alert and learn to live
with a slowed down computer because it is using the swap file.

Buy more memory. In this case Norton is right, computer memory is too low.

Did I forget to mention buying more memory?

Jeff
PS. You need more memory.

Higgs Boson wrote:

WHY DOES YOUR EXTERNAL HD HAVE TO BE IN A DIFFERENT ROOM? Straight
question.


So that whatever happens in the vicinity of your computer does not affect
your backups.

So, what could happen?

* A burglar breaks in and carries off everything in sight. I had this happen
to one of my customers THREE TIMES in ten days. If not for backups that were
completely out of the building, he'd have been more screwed. Computers and
software are easily replaced; it's the data that's valuable.

* A small fire, perhaps started by a cheap computer built in Bangladesh.

* A user has a fit and smashes everything on the counter.

The best backup is one that is completely out of the building, since the
whole building could burn down (or be covered in a mud slide, blown away by
a tornado, collapsed in an earthquake, etc.).

One easy way to get your backups out of the building is to send them as an
email attachement to your Gmail address. Google now allows almost 8 gigs of
storage space.

Higgs Boson wrote:
On Jan 20, 3:37 pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:13:38 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson

wrote:

When I got my present computer, nearly 6 years ago, I thought about
partitioning, but I didn't have the skill, and 40 GB seemed to
stretch into the dim horizon. Well, we know better now! I have
checked out some Seagates wih 500 GB for $114.00; doesn't sound
bad. I understand that it's more eexpensive if you buy complete
with cables and manual. Is a non-geek safer doing that than going
bare? I read that I HAVE the cables and of course the motherboard.
But I want a HD that, as one kind poster put it, lets you just
press a button to transfer all existing data.

Whoa. Spending money on a 500GB drive when you have plenty left on
your 160GB makes no sense.

The 160 GB is EXTERIOR.

My main HD is only 40 GB, of which about 80% is Used.

PC manufacturers set the big partitioned HD trap for many customers.

Memory and backups are unrelated.
You got good advice on the memory issue. Remove what caused it - some
kind of Norton app -

Yes, Norton Security, whole package. Bought few years ago and renewed
annually. BUT NOW WHOLE NG IS URGING ME TO DUMP IT AND GO TO AVAST OR
SOME OTHER ANTI-VIRUS.

or add memory, or both.

So, good idea to add memory to existing 40GB HD? In earlier posts on
this thread, I said that I started 6 years ago with a "big" 256 of
memory, then added another 512 a few years ago. (Stupid! I could
have bought a Gig for not much more!).

Backups, partitioning (usually unnecessary) and recovery strategies
are a different issue.
As far as a "press a button" method, that probably exists with an
external HD/software combo but I don't know anything about it.
Probably way expensive too, and it won't be "push button."

Don't toss your Norton Ghost CD.
It's good stuff when used correctly. Wait a while until you learn
more.

OMG I am losing what's left of my mind!!! Are you saying that Ghost
can be used independently of the whole Norton Security package???
IOW, when Norton renewal time comes up in a month or so, if I don't
re- up w/Norton, can I still use Ghost?

Please clarify on this; I am getting more & more confused. NOTE THAT
OTHERS ARE SAYING THAT THE (TO ME) VALUABLE BACKUP, ETC. FUNCTIONS OF
GHOST CAN BE PERFORMED INDEPENDENT OF GHOST BY EXISTING PROGRAMS
WITHIN WINDOWS, ETC.


Answers in no particular order:

* GHOST is a separate application program and has no connection to, nor
requirement of, any other Symantec product. You may use GHOST independently
of anything else.

* The size of your hard disk is completely independent of the size of your
on-board memory (RAM). The two do not depend on one another in any way. The
larger your RAM (memory), the less the computer will have to use the hard
drive to roll things in and out, but other than that you can have enormous
memory and a small hard drive or vice-versa without either being the wiser.

* The hard drive is not memory; it is a filing cabinet. As another poster
said, memory (or RAM) is the surface of your desk - where you do your work.
You can have a large desk and no filing cabinet (i.e., smart phones), or a
huge filing cabinet and a small workspace, viz: "Cloud Computing."

* When you buy a new, larger, hard drive it will come with cloning software.
That is, you install the new drive (you'll need a screwdriver, nothing else)
and run the included cloning software. In a bit, the new hard drive is ready
to become your system drive. You can take out the old one. You now have a
Terabyte drive with 97% free space (i.e., 968Mbytes). Not only that, it will
be more than ten times faster than your external drive.

* The mayor of Washington once said: "If you ignore the homicides,
Washington is a safe place to live." Likewise with Norton. If you ignore its
large footprint and drain on the system's resources, it's a perfectly
adequate system. If it didn't cost nothin'.

Avast, AVG, and Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) are far, far better
replacements inasmuch as they're FREE!

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 19:50:54 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson
wrote:


My main HD is only 40 GB, of which about 80% is Used.


First off, these are general thoughts and might not fit you situation.
I don't have a clear idea on what you want in terms of backups.
Do you have a 2nd internal hard drive?
40GB is plenty for your system drive if you use it for that and don't
load it up with non-system/non-app data.
By "system" I mean your OS and the applications you use.
Not movies, pics and other stuff that load up a drive.
Those should go on a second drive, and why I ask if you have one.
Your external drive is probably USB, which is much slower.
Good for backing up data though.

XP with many apps attached probably won't go much past 5-10 GB.
There are "special" apps that take more, but unless you have them
they're not a concern.
If you go to Win7 you're talking about 30GB.
But then you might be talking about going to a new box, and you don't
have to if XP is working for you.
Bottom line is for what I'm going to recommend if we get into backing
up your *system* is you want a second internal HD.
160GB will do fine.
I haven't priced drives in a while so that's your call.
You probably have PATA controllers on your box, so you need a PATA
drive.

Yes, Norton Security, whole package. Bought few years ago and renewed
annually. BUT NOW WHOLE NG IS URGING ME TO DUMP IT AND GO TO AVAST OR
SOME OTHER ANTI-VIRUS.


or add memory, or both.


I agee with them. Free AVG and free ZoneAlarm is what I use.
Others will argue for others.
If getting rid of the Norton Suite clears up your memory problem,
don't bother with more memory.
Anybody else is welcome to tell you otherwise and how to do it.

So, good idea to add memory to existing 40GB HD? In earlier posts on
this thread, I said that I started 6 years ago with a "big" 256 of
memory, then added another 512 a few years ago. (Stupid! I could
have bought a Gig for not much more!).


Memory is the mem chips and virtual memory files on your HD.
The hard drive memory is more correctly called "virtual" memory.
If you haven't messed with the XP virtual memory settings you're
probably okay.
Getting rid of the Norton Suite should fix your memory issues.
If it doesn't we can talk then.

Please clarify on this; I am getting more & more confused. NOTE THAT
OTHERS ARE SAYING THAT THE (TO ME) VALUABLE BACKUP, ETC. FUNCTIONS OF
GHOST CAN BE PERFORMED INDEPENDENT OF GHOST BY EXISTING PROGRAMS
WITHIN WINDOWS, ETC.

Nothing in XP creates an image file like Ghost does.
Win7 does better, but has holes, so I use Ghost.
Last time I used Ghost that came with a Symantec suite I had the
option to just install Ghost, which is what I did.
Only reason I bought that was for Ghost - System Works I think it was
called.
You use "advanced" install and pay attention to what boxes get ticked.
But I'm not telling to use Ghost because I don't know your goals.
You already got good advice about clearing up your memory problem.
For that get rid of the entire Norton suite and install the free
stuff.
Watch the install check boxes there too or you'll get their browser
toolbars and maybe other crap installed.

--Vic

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff Thies
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.

Buy memory. Everything else is sort of OK.

Jeff

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:30:22 -0500, Jeff Thies
wrote:

So, good idea to add memory to existing 40GB HD? In earlier posts on
this thread, I said that I started 6 years ago with a "big" 256 of
memory, then added another 512 a few years ago. (Stupid! I could
have bought a Gig for not much more!).

Buy more memory. Buy more memory. Buy more memory. This is wayyyy too
little. Everything wants more memory these days, FF in particular.

Then upgrade your main HD or move virtual memory and and as much else
to another drive. 40GB is too small these days.

Oh, and buy more memory. Or turn off the flaming alert and learn to live
with a slowed down computer because it is using the swap file.

Buy more memory. In this case Norton is right, computer memory is too low.

Did I forget to mention buying more memory?

Jeff
PS. You need more memory.

What I hear Jeff saying is "memory" (RAM) and more of it.

Buy a matching pair/set (or two)! Equal in size, speed, etc. The
maker of your motherboard can give you details of the maximum RAM
supported.

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 19:53:34 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson
wrote:

WHY DOES YOUR EXTERNAL HD HAVE TO BE IN A DIFFERENT ROOM? Straight
question.

It may not fit into the bank safe deposit box.

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:50:34 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Avast, AVG, and Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) are far, far better
replacements inasmuch as they're FREE!


I had no idea MSE was available for XP. The OP should take advantage
of it. It is real time and not a freebie you have to manually clean
up the mess.

On 1/21/2011 3:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.


There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.

TDD

Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:50:34 -0600, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Avast, AVG, and Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) are far, far
better replacements inasmuch as they're FREE!


I had no idea MSE was available for XP. The OP should take advantage
of it. It is real time and not a freebie you have to manually clean
up the mess.

Yep. We use it on all our XP machines (and a Vista and one Win7).

HeyBub wrote:
Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:50:34 -0600,
wrote:

Avast, AVG, and Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) are far, far
better replacements inasmuch as they're FREE!


I had no idea MSE was available for XP. The OP should take advantage
of it. It is real time and not a freebie you have to manually clean
up the mess.

Yep. We use it on all our XP machines (and a Vista and one Win7).


Hmmm,
MSE has a habit of deleting things it does not like on it's own.
It tells you what it did dter scan is done.
Things nothing to do with security.

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:25:17 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 3:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.


There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.

TDD

Forget where I read it. Moons ago, the BIOS would steal some RAM.

A meg or less.

Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:25:17 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 3:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.


There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.

TDD

Forget where I read it. Moons ago, the BIOS would steal some RAM.

A meg or less.

On 1/21/2011 7:18 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:25:17 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 3:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.


There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.

TDD

Forget where I read it. Moons ago, the BIOS would steal some RAM.

A meg or less.

I think you better do a little research, the motherboard can share a
lot of memory with on-board graphics adapter. I just checked a little
Celeron computer I have and it will use up to 64MB of memory for it's
built in video. Newer motherboards with more advanced on-board graphics
chips can use a lot more memory.

TDD

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:56:30 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 7:18 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:25:17 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 3:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.


There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.

TDD

Forget where I read it. Moons ago, the BIOS would steal some RAM.

A meg or less.

I think you better do a little research, the motherboard can share a
lot of memory with on-board graphics adapter. I just checked a little
Celeron computer I have and it will use up to 64MB of memory for it's
built in video. Newer motherboards with more advanced on-board graphics
chips can use a lot more memory.

TDD

I don't doubt your graphics. Just saying once upon-a-time the BIOS
got a little bit on the side (RAM).

Today? Now worry mate.

Tony Hwang wrote:


HeyBub wrote:
Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:50:34 -0600,
wrote:

Avast, AVG, and Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) are far, far
better replacements inasmuch as they're FREE!


I had no idea MSE was available for XP. The OP should take advantage
of it. It is real time and not a freebie you have to manually clean
up the mess.

Yep. We use it on all our XP machines (and a Vista and one Win7).


Hmmm,
MSE has a habit of deleting things it does not like on it's own.
It tells you what it did dter scan is done.
Things nothing to do with security.


Perhaps you can provide some examples of such behavior. I've been
using MSE since it became available and have not noticed any such actions.

What am I missing?

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:06:40 -0800, Oren wrote:

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:56:30 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 7:18 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:25:17 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 3:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.


There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.

TDD

Forget where I read it. Moons ago, the BIOS would steal some RAM.

A meg or less.

I think you better do a little research, the motherboard can share a
lot of memory with on-board graphics adapter. I just checked a little
Celeron computer I have and it will use up to 64MB of memory for it's
built in video. Newer motherboards with more advanced on-board graphics
chips can use a lot more memory.

TDD

I don't doubt your graphics. Just saying once upon-a-time the BIOS
got a little bit on the side (RAM).

Today? Now worry mate.
It depends how you set up your bios. Some motherboards have a "bios
cache" option. This does take RAM (because it moves the bios from ROM
to RAM)

On 1/21/2011 8:06 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:56:30 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 7:18 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:25:17 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 3:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.


There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.

TDD

Forget where I read it. Moons ago, the BIOS would steal some RAM.

A meg or less.

I think you better do a little research, the motherboard can share a
lot of memory with on-board graphics adapter. I just checked a little
Celeron computer I have and it will use up to 64MB of memory for it's
built in video. Newer motherboards with more advanced on-board graphics
chips can use a lot more memory.

TDD

I don't doubt your graphics. Just saying once upon-a-time the BIOS
got a little bit on the side (RAM).

Today? Now worry mate.

Oh heck, you were referring to System BIOS Shadow, my mistake. :-)

TDD

wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:06:40 -0800, wrote:

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:56:30 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 7:18 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:25:17 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 3:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.


There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.

TDD

Forget where I read it. Moons ago, the BIOS would steal some RAM.

A meg or less.

I think you better do a little research, the motherboard can share a
lot of memory with on-board graphics adapter. I just checked a little
Celeron computer I have and it will use up to 64MB of memory for it's
built in video. Newer motherboards with more advanced on-board graphics
chips can use a lot more memory.

TDD

I don't doubt your graphics. Just saying once upon-a-time the BIOS
got a little bit on the side (RAM).

Today? Now worry mate.
It depends how you set up your bios. Some motherboards have a "bios
cache" option. This does take RAM (because it moves the bios from ROM
to RAM)
Hmmm
ROM is much faster in speed and moving it to RAM what do you gain?
Cache has to be at least 4 times faster than memory it serves.

On 1/21/2011 8:56 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:
On 1/21/2011 7:18 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:25:17 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 3:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.


There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.

TDD

Forget where I read it. Moons ago, the BIOS would steal some RAM.

A meg or less.

I think you better do a little research, the motherboard can share a
lot of memory with on-board graphics adapter. I just checked a little
Celeron computer I have and it will use up to 64MB of memory for it's
built in video. Newer motherboards with more advanced on-board graphics
chips can use a lot more memory.

In this case she has a 256 meg and a 512. It's stated late in one of the
threads. I haven't seen a 256 for some time!

She may still have on board video.

Whatever, 750MB (give or take) isn't much and is going to get eaten
up is she has more than a little open at one time.

I don't think any of us expected that she would have so little. We
are agreed she needs more?

Jeff


TDD

The Daring Dufas wrote:

There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.


The 32-bit version of XP (and others) can address 2^31 + 1 bytes. This is a
bit over 4 Gigs.

But the motherboard steals some of that memory to support some of its
functions, the largest being a video controller. As a result, the memory
available to the operating system is reduced to the neighborhood of 3.5
gigs.

The 64-bit version of XP (and others) can address up to umpty-ump RAM (16.8
million terabytes). This figure is misleading, since CPU chips have their
own built-in limits. AMD, for example, limits its accessible addres space to
52 bits.

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 20:47:53 -0700, Tony Hwang wrote:



wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:06:40 -0800, wrote:

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:56:30 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 7:18 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:25:17 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 1/21/2011 3:49 PM, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 07:08:58 -0500, Jeff
wrote:

Computer Intel (R) Pentium (R) 4 CPU 2.80 GHz
2.79 GHz 750 MB of RAM


750MB is completely inadequate. I don't even know how you get that
figure these days!


Good catch on that "figure".

Something (BIOS or OS) not seeing and reporting accurately.


There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.

TDD

Forget where I read it. Moons ago, the BIOS would steal some RAM.

A meg or less.

I think you better do a little research, the motherboard can share a
lot of memory with on-board graphics adapter. I just checked a little
Celeron computer I have and it will use up to 64MB of memory for it's
built in video. Newer motherboards with more advanced on-board graphics
chips can use a lot more memory.

TDD

I don't doubt your graphics. Just saying once upon-a-time the BIOS
got a little bit on the side (RAM).

Today? Now worry mate.
It depends how you set up your bios. Some motherboards have a "bios
cache" option. This does take RAM (because it moves the bios from ROM
to RAM)
Hmmm
ROM is much faster in speed and moving it to RAM what do you gain?

You have it backwards, RAM is faster than ROM. ROM is optimized for density.

Cache has to be at least 4 times faster than memory it serves.

ROM typically isn't cached, so moving the relevant parts of BIOS to RAM is a
double win.

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 22:13:14 -0600, "HeyBub" wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:

There may be on-board video that's sharing memory with the CPU.
Depending on the type GPU some on-board video can use as much
on-board memory as a separate video card.


The 32-bit version of XP (and others) can address 2^31 + 1 bytes. This is a
bit over 4 Gigs.

Make that 2^32 (addresses 0 to 2^32-1), It 2^32 is defined as 4 GB
(4,294,967,296 bytes). ;-)

But the motherboard steals some of that memory to support some of its
functions, the largest being a video controller. As a result, the memory
available to the operating system is reduced to the neighborhood of 3.5
gigs.

All I/O and memory in the I/O channel is mirrored. Not just the video memory.

The 64-bit version of XP (and others) can address up to umpty-ump RAM (16.8
million terabytes). This figure is misleading, since CPU chips have their
own built-in limits. AMD, for example, limits its accessible addres space to
52 bits.

Model specific, though it doesn't matter. You'll never fit that much in the
machine. Besides, everyone knows that 640K is more than enough.

On Jan 20, 9:53*pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 19:53:34 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson

wrote:

WHY DOES YOUR EXTERNAL HD HAVE TO BE IN A DIFFERENT ROOM? *Straight
question.

Simply to secure the data.
A lightening strike can wipe out every hard drive in your computer,
and externals connected to it, and so can a fire.
Just talking about where you store it. *Unplug it and put it elsewhere
if you're using it for backups and want to be safe about it.

--Vic

Grrrr...I've been asking people (not on this NG) for YEARS about this
subject! At present my 160 GB HD is what I am using for backup. It
is on the same desk as my computer. How can I back up if they are not
connected? Are you saying that I should disconnect it, haul it
somewhere else, and reconnect it every time I want to back up???

Also: When Norton Ghost says it's doing period backup, WHERE IS IT
STORING THE DATA????

On Jan 21, 12:31*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Higgs Boson wrote:

WHY DOES YOUR EXTERNAL HD HAVE TO BE IN A DIFFERENT ROOM? *Straight
question.

So that whatever happens in the vicinity of your computer does not affect
your backups.

So, what could happen?

* A burglar breaks in and carries off everything in sight. I had this happen
to one of my customers THREE TIMES in ten days. If not for backups that were
completely out of the building, he'd have been more screwed. Computers and
software are easily replaced; it's the data that's valuable.

* A small fire, perhaps started by a cheap computer built in Bangladesh.

* A user has a fit and smashes everything on the counter.

The best backup is one that is completely out of the building, since the
whole building could burn down (or be covered in a mud slide, blown away by
a tornado, collapsed in an earthquake, etc.).

One easy way to get your backups out of the building is to send them as an
email attachement to your Gmail address. Google now allows almost 8 gigs of
storage space.

Now THAT sounds like a keeper. I'm assuming we are talking only about
DATA files, not programs, etc. that can be reinstalled (though a
PITA).

Question #1: If I have more than one Gmail address, can I send
"almost 8 gigs" to EACH of those addresses? Or only a total to ALL
Gmail addresses?

Question #2: How do I back up the backups? IOW, I send, say 7 gigs
of data files today. What happens when I have new data next week?
Does the new batch override the existing, or supplement it?

I know these are pitiful questions, so be kind g

HB
HB

On Jan 20, 8:13*pm, wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 19:50:54 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson



wrote:
On Jan 20, 3:37*pm, Vic Smith wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:13:38 -0800 (PST), Higgs Boson

wrote:

When I got my present computer, nearly 6 years ago, I thought about
partitioning, but I didn't have the skill, and 40 GB seemed to stretch
into the dim horizon. Well, we know better now! *I have checked out
some Seagates wih 500 GB for $114.00; doesn't sound bad. *I understand
that it's more eexpensive if you buy complete with cables and manual.
Is a non-geek safer doing that than going bare? I read that I HAVE the
cables and of course the motherboard. *But I want a HD that, as one
kind poster put it, lets you just press a button to transfer all
existing data.

Whoa. *Spending money on a 500GB drive when you have plenty left on
your 160GB makes no sense.

The 160 GB is EXTERIOR.

My main HD is only 40 GB, of which about 80% is Used.

I'd be replacing the 40 with something a bit bigger





PC manufacturers set the big partitioned HD trap for many customers.

Memory and backups are unrelated.
You got good advice on the memory issue. *Remove what caused it - some
kind of Norton app -

Yes, Norton Security, whole package. Bought few years ago and renewed
annually. *BUT NOW WHOLE NG IS URGING ME TO DUMP IT AND GO TO AVAST OR
SOME OTHER ANTI-VIRUS.

or add memory, or both.

So, good idea to add memory to existing 40GB HD? *In earlier posts on
this thread, I said that I started 6 years ago with a "big" 256 of
memory, then added another 512 a few years ago. *(Stupid! *I could
have bought a Gig for not much more!).

I gb of ram is almost a requirement to run more than one app under XP.



Backups, partitioning (usually unnecessary) and recovery strategies
are a different issue.
As far as a "press a button" method, that probably exists with an
external HD/software combo but I don't know anything about it.
Probably way expensive too, and it won't be "push button."

Don't toss your Norton Ghost CD. *
It's good stuff when used correctly. *Wait a while until you learn
more.

OMG I am losing what's left of my mind!!! *Are you saying that Ghost
can be used independently of the whole Norton Security package???
IOW, when Norton renewal time comes up in a month or so, if I don't re-
up w/Norton, can I still use Ghost?

Yes you can still use Ghost. *I'm not a big fan of it, but it is about
the only Norton product I'll use.

I should have mentioned that a rep. at Norton sent me the Ghost FREE
because I had been unable to get GoBack to work. She explained that
Ghost had replaced GoBack. (Now I can't get GoBack to shut the hell
up; every time I boot up, it's there, asking if I want to reinstall
it. I can't get rid of it through Control Panel Add/Remove Programs.
It comes up with "error 1327, invalid Drive F". (My Ext. HD varies
between E and F depending what else is running.) That's when I
contacted Norton in despair, and they sent me the Ghost. Wish there
was a computer silver stake I could drive through the heart of GoBack
-- like they used to do with vampires -- bury them at a crossroads and
drive a silver stake through their hearts. g )