Battery capcity
2009-2012 non-retina 15" MacBook Pros have a starting battery capacity of 6900. I believe that a 15" Retina 2012-2014 has a capacity of 8727 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1399560), which is a 26% increase for a retina MacBook Pro, though you loose the Ethernet connection, DVD-RW drive, a line in port, and Firewire 800, but gain an additional Thunderbolt port and battery caacity. I'd assume the processor uses a little less draw being a smaller architecture and that the screen uses a little more, so I would guess that the retina could get better battery life, but I am not sure.
Times
I have an external hard drive with an OSX 10.8 installer, and two bootable carbon copy cloner clones.
On a late 2008 Unibody15" MacBook Pro 2.53 GHz Core 2 Duo
Time it takes to boot to the 10.8 installer on the external hard drive (holding option), wiping the drive in disk utility, and then running the 10.8 installer- 6:30
(Then I unplug the hard drive as it restarts)
It says it will take 21 minutes
Total time (27 minutes)
Time to format a 320GB drive with 1 pass of encryption zero out data (estimated 1:13:00)
Estimated time to copy 104 GB in Restore Time Machine (1HR) though when running time machine to back up data, it claimed an hour estimate initially but was closer to 1:40.
-There are a few ways of using Time Machine to get your data on a new computer.
One is Migration Assistant which you can use if you already have an computer set up and want to add to it. The imported data, appications, etc, will then be will create a second user account on that computer with all the settings from the other computer and with their username.
During a fresh install of OSX, you have the option to Restore from a Time Machine, or Reinstall OSX. I know Reinstall OSX will also create the restore partition for Mountain Lion. It takes 20 minutes to set up, and then you get to choose a username and everything. I am testing now to see if the Restore will also include a restore partion.
---
Why two bootable carbon copy clones?
If I want to put one of the clones onto a new hard drive,(despite it taking an extra 40 seconds to boot when doing it this way if the OS was set up on a different computer than it will be used in)
1. can boot into the other clone on the hard drive,
2. Open disk utility to format, name, partition etc the new hard drive in the connected computer
3. open the carbon copy cloner app, select the carbon copy clone you aren't booting from on the external hard drive as the source and the newly formatted hard drive in the actual computer as the destination.
4. It will clone the hard drive and usually not ask you for new serials (CleanApp may have asked for a new serial but CS5 didn't)
5. You will now have the system pretty much exactly the way it was when it was cloned. The same programs autostart
6. If you copied it to a different MacBook Pro than the clone was from, you may get annoyed by the long boot time (I have seen it take as long as 1:30 on an i5 17" macBook pro from 2010). Normal bootup should be 40 seconds or less (perhaps 20 seconds if you have an SSD though I have seen less on YouTube)
Thursday, January 24, 2013
4 ways to backup data on a Mac (Time Machine, Carbon Copy Cloner, Super Duper, and drag and drop)
When to use Time Machine vs Carbon Copy Cloner vs Super Duper
Ok, so you want to backup your data on a Mac. What is the best way to do it? Here are some options.
Time Machine is the built in backup application.
Pros: What is nice about it is that it is free, simple to use, and integrated well into transferring data and settings to a new computer during the setup process since the Mac installation manager asks if you have any Time machine drives you want to import. Also, a fresh install on OSX and transferring data from your time machine won't increase your bootup time as significantly as a clone from Carbon Copy Cloner and I assume Super Duper) would. (An extra 40-60 seconds) With a Time Machine 104GB restoration, boot time for 2008 Core 2 Duo is between 48 and 62 seconds 320GB 5200rpm hard drive. Virtual Machines, CS6, etc all seem to work after being transferred.
Cons: It is hard, and sometimes not worth the time, to find files on your backup hard drive. If you backed up a paper under 'Documents' and someone took your computer and you just have your hard drive with your Time machine backup, you will probably have a hard time finding your paper. The Time Machine backup does not backup all your folders in an easily navigable way. It backs up things in an incremental way with the changes saved on the time Machine date it was saved so it had files for differnt dates... it's a mess. Maybe a Find would help... Not sure.
I did notice that in "Mail" it did not copy the e-mail messages stored "On My Mac" section and many of the other folders though it copied the folder names but not the e-mails in the mail folders. I have also noticed that sometimes an application may ask for the product key again, like CS5.
It also does not copy some files that you don't really need like some temporary files and stuff like that you don't need, so it may save a little space.
Carbon Copy Cloner (CCC) - This software will exactly copy your hard drive, so you can navigate the folders, find your files on your backup drive, AND one of the coolest features is that it will let you make a bootable copy on a hard drive including your USB drive (or another laptop hard drive). This means you can connect the USB drive with your bootable backup into ANY Mac, hold down "Option" as it is starting up, and you will be able to choose which hard drive you want to boot from, including the backup of you other computer.
It also will install the Mountain Lion backup/recovery partition if you tell it to, which is nice. Usually you need the 10.8 install file for that.
3.4.5 is freeware that I use. Looking at their site 3.4.7 is the most recent freeware version. Newer versions you have to pay for since the company apparently thought they would make more money charging for their product instead of asking for donations.
There is a message that pops up saying that it hasn't been throughly tested with Mountain Lion (OSX 10.8) but I haven't had any huge issues.
I have seen the boot times with CCC clones onto main hard drives take 1:00-1:50 which is long...
Super Duper- My understanding is that it is virtually identical to Carbon Copy Cloner. I used it in 2010 to clone my hard drive. I tried it again in 2012 and the version I use would just freeze when I tried to make a bootable backup. One really nice thing it let me do (without freezing) was opt to only backup (and set a schedule to continue to sync after the initial copy) my folders with data I care about and exclude operating system and application files (things you don't want on a new computer if you went through a techie phase where you tried every application you could get your hands on to see if it was worthwhile). This is something I like doing for myself when it is time to wipe my hard drive, reinstall an OS and the applications I actually use, and then replace my personal files (pictures, documents, etc.)
Drag and drop - This can be fine, but there are some exceptions. In 2010, I copied my iPhoto folder from one computer to a new one. When I did that, I got a lot of duplicate pictures, I got a large amount of images of just faces that were supposed to be used to identify people you knew to tag them, but they showed up as images themselves. Also, some pictures came across only at thumbnail resolutions and not full resolution. It was really weird and disappointing.
Interesting notes
You can take a hard drive out of one MacBook and put it into another macbook Pro and it will work. however, it will add about 40 second to the bootup time. This longer boot time also applies if you use Carbon Copy Cloner or SuperDuper to make a bootable backup on an external hard drive, (that also has another bootable backup on it) then put a new hard drive in a connected MacBook, then start up the computer holding 'Option'
If you are installing OSX, you have the option to "restore from backup" or to "Reinstall OSX 10.8". I recommend Reinstalling 10.8 because it will then also install the recovery partition." the "Restore from backup" will not install the recovery partition.
Time machine time says it takes about 60 minutes to backup, but it takes longer.
2010 17" i5 Macbok Pro too 1:30 to start up with a
Ok, so you want to backup your data on a Mac. What is the best way to do it? Here are some options.
Time Machine is the built in backup application.
Pros: What is nice about it is that it is free, simple to use, and integrated well into transferring data and settings to a new computer during the setup process since the Mac installation manager asks if you have any Time machine drives you want to import. Also, a fresh install on OSX and transferring data from your time machine won't increase your bootup time as significantly as a clone from Carbon Copy Cloner and I assume Super Duper) would. (An extra 40-60 seconds) With a Time Machine 104GB restoration, boot time for 2008 Core 2 Duo is between 48 and 62 seconds 320GB 5200rpm hard drive. Virtual Machines, CS6, etc all seem to work after being transferred.
Cons: It is hard, and sometimes not worth the time, to find files on your backup hard drive. If you backed up a paper under 'Documents' and someone took your computer and you just have your hard drive with your Time machine backup, you will probably have a hard time finding your paper. The Time Machine backup does not backup all your folders in an easily navigable way. It backs up things in an incremental way with the changes saved on the time Machine date it was saved so it had files for differnt dates... it's a mess. Maybe a Find would help... Not sure.
I did notice that in "Mail" it did not copy the e-mail messages stored "On My Mac" section and many of the other folders though it copied the folder names but not the e-mails in the mail folders. I have also noticed that sometimes an application may ask for the product key again, like CS5.
It also does not copy some files that you don't really need like some temporary files and stuff like that you don't need, so it may save a little space.
Carbon Copy Cloner (CCC) - This software will exactly copy your hard drive, so you can navigate the folders, find your files on your backup drive, AND one of the coolest features is that it will let you make a bootable copy on a hard drive including your USB drive (or another laptop hard drive). This means you can connect the USB drive with your bootable backup into ANY Mac, hold down "Option" as it is starting up, and you will be able to choose which hard drive you want to boot from, including the backup of you other computer.
It also will install the Mountain Lion backup/recovery partition if you tell it to, which is nice. Usually you need the 10.8 install file for that.
3.4.5 is freeware that I use. Looking at their site 3.4.7 is the most recent freeware version. Newer versions you have to pay for since the company apparently thought they would make more money charging for their product instead of asking for donations.
There is a message that pops up saying that it hasn't been throughly tested with Mountain Lion (OSX 10.8) but I haven't had any huge issues.
I have seen the boot times with CCC clones onto main hard drives take 1:00-1:50 which is long...
Super Duper- My understanding is that it is virtually identical to Carbon Copy Cloner. I used it in 2010 to clone my hard drive. I tried it again in 2012 and the version I use would just freeze when I tried to make a bootable backup. One really nice thing it let me do (without freezing) was opt to only backup (and set a schedule to continue to sync after the initial copy) my folders with data I care about and exclude operating system and application files (things you don't want on a new computer if you went through a techie phase where you tried every application you could get your hands on to see if it was worthwhile). This is something I like doing for myself when it is time to wipe my hard drive, reinstall an OS and the applications I actually use, and then replace my personal files (pictures, documents, etc.)
Drag and drop - This can be fine, but there are some exceptions. In 2010, I copied my iPhoto folder from one computer to a new one. When I did that, I got a lot of duplicate pictures, I got a large amount of images of just faces that were supposed to be used to identify people you knew to tag them, but they showed up as images themselves. Also, some pictures came across only at thumbnail resolutions and not full resolution. It was really weird and disappointing.
Interesting notes
You can take a hard drive out of one MacBook and put it into another macbook Pro and it will work. however, it will add about 40 second to the bootup time. This longer boot time also applies if you use Carbon Copy Cloner or SuperDuper to make a bootable backup on an external hard drive, (that also has another bootable backup on it) then put a new hard drive in a connected MacBook, then start up the computer holding 'Option'
If you are installing OSX, you have the option to "restore from backup" or to "Reinstall OSX 10.8". I recommend Reinstalling 10.8 because it will then also install the recovery partition." the "Restore from backup" will not install the recovery partition.
Time machine time says it takes about 60 minutes to backup, but it takes longer.
2010 17" i5 Macbok Pro too 1:30 to start up with a
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
One reason why you may copyright someone's name
You can copyright a name so you can press civil charges against someone
that uses a name for personal benefit without permission. One scammer,
Ryan Zull, collected donations for memorials (in his front yard) for
personal profit. She was able to press charges against him for using the
name of her son without permission after copyrighting her son's name.
http://www.stltoday.com/suburban-journals/stcharles/news/war-memorial-at-st-charles-county-home-draws-flak/article_e7784c7d-5d1c-543c-a9af-c10935fd3210.html
The picture she painted was less friendly than the one presented in the article. She believes he grabbed a few names and pictures of servicemen killed in action and asked people to donate
http://www.stltoday.com/suburban-journals/stcharles/news/war-memorial-at-st-charles-county-home-draws-flak/article_e7784c7d-5d1c-543c-a9af-c10935fd3210.html
The picture she painted was less friendly than the one presented in the article. She believes he grabbed a few names and pictures of servicemen killed in action and asked people to donate
Data and Partition Recovery Software/Programs
There are a lot of data recovery programs out there. Most of them are trialware with limitations.
My goal is to find one that will recover data from a fat32 partition that was accidentally formatted on an external hard drive.
Windows
-------------
GetDataBack - http://www.runtime.org/data-recovery-software.htm runs on disks with FAT32 and NTFS. I have used this successfully.
Active@ Partition Recovery - www.partition-recovery.com
Remo Recover Windows 3 0 0 119- (couldn't get my hands on the mac version)
My goal is to find one that will recover data from a fat32 partition that was accidentally formatted on an external hard drive.
Windows
-------------
GetDataBack - http://www.runtime.org/data-recovery-software.htm runs on disks with FAT32 and NTFS. I have used this successfully.
Active@ Partition Recovery - www.partition-recovery.com
EASEUS Data Recovery Wizard Professional 5.6.5 -
AidFile Recovery (Supposed to suppoert Fat32, ExFat, NTFS) http://www.exfatrecovery.com/
AidFile Recovery (Supposed to suppoert Fat32, ExFat, NTFS) http://www.exfatrecovery.com/
Hetman Partition Recovery v1.0 - may hang
Remo Recover Windows 3 0 0 119- (couldn't get my hands on the mac version)
----------------------------
Windows Mentionables
----------------------------
Easeus Partition Recovery - CNET Download.com -Lame because the free version may only recover 1gb of data
Active Undelete?
Recuva-Free undelete program, but I'm not sure if it will restore an overwritten partition
-------
Linux
-------
TestDisk- Free Linux based recovery tool- http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/TestDisk
---
Mac
--------
Leawo.Software.Co.Ltd.Data.Recovery.Pro.v3.1.0.MACOSX -Fail! It recognized the 100MB partition on my flash drive (that I can't delete) but failed to find my hard drive or my actual USB drive.
-----------
Background
Have an External hard drive that has a GUID Partition Table (for newer Macs). Master Boot Record is greyed out in Disk Utility.
Windows XP does not
Windows Vista+ recognized ExFAT (which is an improved file format comparable to NTFS but that is *supposed to be read by Mac 10.6+can be read).
I don't know of an ExFAT recovery program.
I don't know of a program that could recover an HFS+ Mac hard drive that had been overwritten with NTFS or some other program. Maybe these could.
XP failed to read any space on the 2.72 ExFAT formatted drive (Which Windows 7 and Mac recognized. (0 MB) in My computer, but XP's Computer Management recognized 2794.32 GB as
What I've done.
-XP offers to format the drive as ExFAT or NTFS by right clicking in My Computer but fails formatting to ExFAT. Does format the drive to NTFS. Fails at formatting the now NTFS 3TB drive to
-Computer Management at one point offered Fat32 or NTFS, but it is only offering to format the now unallocated 3TB to NTFS.
-Made a 200GB partition and formatted it as NTFS
-Windows failed at formatting the 200GB NTFS to ExFAT in My Computer again in XP
-Connected hard drive another MacBook Pro running a Windows 7 and used it to format it to ExFAT again. Mac did not detect ExFat drive. Connected drive back to Windows 7. It was recognized. Connected drive back to Mac. 10.8. It was not recognized.
-Used Mac Disk Utility to convert the drive to a 200GB ExFAT
-Got stuck and found the web page below
"Unfortunately, Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 will only format a removable drive in FAT32 if it’s less than 32GB! Hmmm…that pretty much cuts out ALL modern external hard drives!
However, Windows can format a drive that is larger than 32GB in FAT32, but you have to use the DOS command prompt. However, if you have a drive that is 1TB or larger, you may still get an error saying “The volume is too big for FAT32”.
In that case, you can use a free program called SwissKnife that will allow you to format an external hard drive that is up to 2TB in size. Let’s go through both methods. In case you are having problems getting your external hard drive to show up in Windows, read my article on how to change the drive letter for an external drive in Windows.
http://www.online-tech-tips.com/computer-tips/formatting-external-hard-drive-to-fat-32/ "
--Before I do that, I use Disk Utility to create a 200GB partition of MS-DOS (FAT) at the end of the hard drive, and another partition of 190GB ExFAT inside of it. I want to see if either of these can be recognized by Windows 7 and Windows XP. The rest of the drive is free space. Still is GUID Partition table. OSX 10.8 recognizes both partitions it just created.
-Pluged into another MacBook Pro with a virtual machine of Windows 7. It auto opened in Windows 7 without me asking where to connect the new drive (Mac or Windows 7). Windows 7 recognizes both the FAT32 and ExFAT partitions.
-I am starting to wonder if something is wrong on the XP virtual machine I have been using. I open an XP Virtual machine on another computer. It takes about 2 minutes after getting the USB drive connected for XP to recognize the FAT32 and ExFAT partitions. Success!! Maybe I just didn't wait long enough for it to be recognized earlier. --Confirmation that a GUID based FAT32 drive created in Disk Utility is readable on Windows XP (at least one of my two) and Windows 7. The ExFAT partition shows up as "Not Formatted" in Windows XP but is readable on Windows 7. Maybe there was an update this XP version didn't install yet that gives it ExFAT support. I will stick with FAT32 for now.
Now I need to test that I can recover photo data from a FAT32 external hard drive and place the backup files on one of these FAT32 or ExFAT partitions.
Prep.
I will format a USB drive (Master Boot Record, not GUID) with FAT32. Copy pictures to it. Then I will format the drive in disk utility by creating 2 new partitions on top of that (and maybe writing something to the second partition to be more real world... but it may just take the recovery longer... but it is just an 8GB drive. May as well get as close to the real things as possible.)
I am formatting an 8GB SanDisk Cruzer Micro (which has a 100MB partition Disk Utility doesn't recognize) as FAT32 in Disk Utility. I am naming this "original" partition ORIGINALDR. I am creating three picture folders on it TestPicFolder1, 2, and 3. TestPicFolder1 has 5 pictures of some artwork I did. TestPicFolder2 has 5 pics of me. TestPicFolder3 has 5 pictures of mountains.
Now I am using Disk Utility to try to shrink the FAT32 volume... and it does not let me like it does with HFS+ (Mac's hard drive format). I click on partition Layout, and change it to 2 partitions. The first will be Fat32, named Part1FAT32 and 3.81GB, and second partition HFS+ (Mac OS Extended (Journaled)) titled Part2HFS and is 4.23GB. (I do that to be able to tell them apart in more than one way if the titles are stripped in the recovery program and just sizes show up of potentially recoverable drives.) Clicked "Apply". Ejecting from this computer with the potentially bad Windows Virtual Machine that may not read the large external drive which will be where we will transfer recovered pictures to.
I will try running the recovery program in Windows 7 x64, though it was probably made for XP x32 because I am curious if it will work. I also don't want to be stuck using XP forever.
Installing Runtime GetbackData for FAT on Windows 7 x64. I select the option for Systematic File Damage (because that is what you are apparently supposed to click if you format a drive you need to recover). It says not data could be written over it. I do not believe data was written over the section I need. My guess is if I did the next most extensive option (sustained file damage), that it would take even longer to run.
I can select the whole flash drive, or just one of the partitions. Since this is experimentation time and I want to save time on the larger actual 500GB drive (and not have it scan an extra 250GB), and I know the data would be underneath only the first partition, I will select the first partition fat32 and see if it can recover the picture folders and images hidden underneath that part of the drive. 5 minute estimate.
I am given two FAT32 partitions to choose from,
one at sector 30,616 (3.53GB) with no data listed on the right of the screen next to FAT1, FAT2, FAT root, or 1st Root Cluster.
the other below it is at sector 14,524 (3.54GB) and does have FAT1 34 (Quality=9%)... which scares me Fat2 (Quality 9%) Total clusters 928,260.
I clicked NEXT for the partition with data.
I got ..fsevesntsd which had 3 junk files in it.
Spotlight V100 with two folders in it.
[0007E5] with some junk data and two junk folders
Glad we tried that. Now I will try the partition with seemingly no data. It finished running in 5 seconds.
I see the folders listed above and TestPicFolder1 through 3. All of them have 5 pictures. I can double click and open each one. Success!
Turns out the folder is automatically created on your destination drive/folder when you select the files in a folder, and click "Copy" It asks for where I want to store them. The application will not let me copy the pictures to the \\vmware-host\Shared Folders\Desktop. It will let me copy the folders to the C drive. My virtual machines are only 40GB, so I have to use an external media for the 160ish GB of images I need to recover. I Went o Options-Environment and changed the default save directory to the FDrive (My ExFat drive... saving my FAT32 for the real thing). I just click on the folder (with the included file names shown on the right) and click copy. Then the folder gets saved to the drive I had specified. Perfect.
The file size is identical betweern the copy and the original.
I am now going back to step 1 and recovring the full 8GB drive. 10 minute estimate for 8GB.
I get FAT32 at 30,616 (7.47GB)- same sector as the other one.. Same test pics
Fat32 sector 14,263,036 (699MB)-and I found some older pictures that had been overwritten a year ago.
FAT32 sector 14,524 (3.54 GB) (same as the other)
FAT32 sector 11,467,883 (2.02 GB)
Finally doing the real thing!
Going to just to the first partition since the original files were about 150GB, estimated time is almost 7 hours for 288GB, but the countdown timer was going faster until 6:30 was left (first 2 minutes of running)
Background
Have an External hard drive that has a GUID Partition Table (for newer Macs). Master Boot Record is greyed out in Disk Utility.
Windows XP does not
Windows Vista+ recognized ExFAT (which is an improved file format comparable to NTFS but that is *supposed to be read by Mac 10.6+can be read).
I don't know of an ExFAT recovery program.
I don't know of a program that could recover an HFS+ Mac hard drive that had been overwritten with NTFS or some other program. Maybe these could.
XP failed to read any space on the 2.72 ExFAT formatted drive (Which Windows 7 and Mac recognized. (0 MB) in My computer, but XP's Computer Management recognized 2794.32 GB as
What I've done.
-XP offers to format the drive as ExFAT or NTFS by right clicking in My Computer but fails formatting to ExFAT. Does format the drive to NTFS. Fails at formatting the now NTFS 3TB drive to
-Computer Management at one point offered Fat32 or NTFS, but it is only offering to format the now unallocated 3TB to NTFS.
-Made a 200GB partition and formatted it as NTFS
-Windows failed at formatting the 200GB NTFS to ExFAT in My Computer again in XP
-Connected hard drive another MacBook Pro running a Windows 7 and used it to format it to ExFAT again. Mac did not detect ExFat drive. Connected drive back to Windows 7. It was recognized. Connected drive back to Mac. 10.8. It was not recognized.
-Used Mac Disk Utility to convert the drive to a 200GB ExFAT
-Got stuck and found the web page below
"Unfortunately, Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 will only format a removable drive in FAT32 if it’s less than 32GB! Hmmm…that pretty much cuts out ALL modern external hard drives!
However, Windows can format a drive that is larger than 32GB in FAT32, but you have to use the DOS command prompt. However, if you have a drive that is 1TB or larger, you may still get an error saying “The volume is too big for FAT32”.
In that case, you can use a free program called SwissKnife that will allow you to format an external hard drive that is up to 2TB in size. Let’s go through both methods. In case you are having problems getting your external hard drive to show up in Windows, read my article on how to change the drive letter for an external drive in Windows.
Format external drive in FAT32 using DOS
walkthrough... "
http://www.online-tech-tips.com/computer-tips/formatting-external-hard-drive-to-fat-32/ "
--Before I do that, I use Disk Utility to create a 200GB partition of MS-DOS (FAT) at the end of the hard drive, and another partition of 190GB ExFAT inside of it. I want to see if either of these can be recognized by Windows 7 and Windows XP. The rest of the drive is free space. Still is GUID Partition table. OSX 10.8 recognizes both partitions it just created.
-Pluged into another MacBook Pro with a virtual machine of Windows 7. It auto opened in Windows 7 without me asking where to connect the new drive (Mac or Windows 7). Windows 7 recognizes both the FAT32 and ExFAT partitions.
-I am starting to wonder if something is wrong on the XP virtual machine I have been using. I open an XP Virtual machine on another computer. It takes about 2 minutes after getting the USB drive connected for XP to recognize the FAT32 and ExFAT partitions. Success!! Maybe I just didn't wait long enough for it to be recognized earlier. --Confirmation that a GUID based FAT32 drive created in Disk Utility is readable on Windows XP (at least one of my two) and Windows 7. The ExFAT partition shows up as "Not Formatted" in Windows XP but is readable on Windows 7. Maybe there was an update this XP version didn't install yet that gives it ExFAT support. I will stick with FAT32 for now.
Now I need to test that I can recover photo data from a FAT32 external hard drive and place the backup files on one of these FAT32 or ExFAT partitions.
Prep.
I will format a USB drive (Master Boot Record, not GUID) with FAT32. Copy pictures to it. Then I will format the drive in disk utility by creating 2 new partitions on top of that (and maybe writing something to the second partition to be more real world... but it may just take the recovery longer... but it is just an 8GB drive. May as well get as close to the real things as possible.)
I am formatting an 8GB SanDisk Cruzer Micro (which has a 100MB partition Disk Utility doesn't recognize) as FAT32 in Disk Utility. I am naming this "original" partition ORIGINALDR. I am creating three picture folders on it TestPicFolder1, 2, and 3. TestPicFolder1 has 5 pictures of some artwork I did. TestPicFolder2 has 5 pics of me. TestPicFolder3 has 5 pictures of mountains.
Now I am using Disk Utility to try to shrink the FAT32 volume... and it does not let me like it does with HFS+ (Mac's hard drive format). I click on partition Layout, and change it to 2 partitions. The first will be Fat32, named Part1FAT32 and 3.81GB, and second partition HFS+ (Mac OS Extended (Journaled)) titled Part2HFS and is 4.23GB. (I do that to be able to tell them apart in more than one way if the titles are stripped in the recovery program and just sizes show up of potentially recoverable drives.) Clicked "Apply". Ejecting from this computer with the potentially bad Windows Virtual Machine that may not read the large external drive which will be where we will transfer recovered pictures to.
I will try running the recovery program in Windows 7 x64, though it was probably made for XP x32 because I am curious if it will work. I also don't want to be stuck using XP forever.
Installing Runtime GetbackData for FAT on Windows 7 x64. I select the option for Systematic File Damage (because that is what you are apparently supposed to click if you format a drive you need to recover). It says not data could be written over it. I do not believe data was written over the section I need. My guess is if I did the next most extensive option (sustained file damage), that it would take even longer to run.
I can select the whole flash drive, or just one of the partitions. Since this is experimentation time and I want to save time on the larger actual 500GB drive (and not have it scan an extra 250GB), and I know the data would be underneath only the first partition, I will select the first partition fat32 and see if it can recover the picture folders and images hidden underneath that part of the drive. 5 minute estimate.
I am given two FAT32 partitions to choose from,
one at sector 30,616 (3.53GB) with no data listed on the right of the screen next to FAT1, FAT2, FAT root, or 1st Root Cluster.
the other below it is at sector 14,524 (3.54GB) and does have FAT1 34 (Quality=9%)... which scares me Fat2 (Quality 9%) Total clusters 928,260.
I clicked NEXT for the partition with data.
I got ..fsevesntsd which had 3 junk files in it.
Spotlight V100 with two folders in it.
[0007E5] with some junk data and two junk folders
Glad we tried that. Now I will try the partition with seemingly no data. It finished running in 5 seconds.
I see the folders listed above and TestPicFolder1 through 3. All of them have 5 pictures. I can double click and open each one. Success!
Turns out the folder is automatically created on your destination drive/folder when you select the files in a folder, and click "Copy" It asks for where I want to store them. The application will not let me copy the pictures to the \\vmware-host\Shared Folders\Desktop. It will let me copy the folders to the C drive. My virtual machines are only 40GB, so I have to use an external media for the 160ish GB of images I need to recover. I Went o Options-Environment and changed the default save directory to the FDrive (My ExFat drive... saving my FAT32 for the real thing). I just click on the folder (with the included file names shown on the right) and click copy. Then the folder gets saved to the drive I had specified. Perfect.
The file size is identical betweern the copy and the original.
I am now going back to step 1 and recovring the full 8GB drive. 10 minute estimate for 8GB.
I get FAT32 at 30,616 (7.47GB)- same sector as the other one.. Same test pics
Fat32 sector 14,263,036 (699MB)-and I found some older pictures that had been overwritten a year ago.
FAT32 sector 14,524 (3.54 GB) (same as the other)
FAT32 sector 11,467,883 (2.02 GB)
Finally doing the real thing!
Going to just to the first partition since the original files were about 150GB, estimated time is almost 7 hours for 288GB, but the countdown timer was going faster until 6:30 was left (first 2 minutes of running)
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
How to buy a computer
As of 2012
*These are my working notes which I'll update as I get time. I'm publishing it as-is to help anyone that can make sense of it.*
What to look for when buying a computer...
As a techie, I find myself talking with people too scared to buy a computer even though they need one because they feel it will be outdated too soon or they generally don't know what to look for.
Start off with your expectations.
If you want a computer that gets you by, expect something in the $350 range if it's used. It may have choppy video playback, freeze more often than you like, have a small trackpad, etc. But hey, it gets you by. Much less than $350 and it's probably junk. You'll get a slow integrated video card. Expect a Geekbench score of 1,500-2,500, http://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks something to use as a performance comparison against the other classes of computers. Graphics card performance will be around 150-350 on http://www.videocardbenchmark.net.
Right now you can expect to pay about $450 for a 1-2 year old solid mid-grade computer with an i5 processor, a dedicated video card, and maybe a decent track pad, and USB 2.0. This applies to both laptops and desktops. These will have Geekbench scores of about 3,500-4,500. Graphics card performance will be around 300-750.
For $600-$800, you can get a used computer that will do pretty much anything you throw at it. This includes a second or third generation quad core i7 processor, USB 3.0, a larger trackpad, and if you look hard, a good dedicated video card so you can put together home movies without much of a lag time. These will have Geekbench scores of about 6,000-10,000. Graphics card performance will be around 750-1,600.`kpads may be too sensitive)
HP Envy line
The quick answer is one with...
1. Intel i5 dual-core processor (or anything with a 4000+ score on http://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks.) General rule of thumb is i3 is for basic users, i5 (and first (of three) generation) is for mid grade users, i7 (second and third gen) for advanced users. These are about 75% the performance of the i5s.
2. A video card with a score of 300 or higher on http://www.videocardbenchmark.net. This generally means any dedicated video card with 512MB RAM or more (you can save some money and settle for an Intel HD 4000 found in 2012 models. Stay away from Intel Accelerated graphics cards. In my experience the ones from 2010 and older are slow and may have problems with video. (The HD 3000 and 4000 videocards are decent, but there are many better ones). 2010 512MB DDR3 video cards will get you scores around 500-700. 1GB DDR5 videocards are a significantly more powerful (and will run you at least $75 extra used. May be worth it if you want to do video editing and futureproof your computer.)
3. The right quantity of RAM.
You'll want 4-8+ GB if running Vista, 7, or Windows 8 or Mac OSX 10.5 or higher. Some people with video editing may use 16 GB.
4. The right speed of RAM.
At least 4gb of 1333 MHz or faster RAM. Also comes in 333, 666, 1066 (all slow) and 1600 speeds which is even better.
5. Proper hard drive space.
160GB is fine for business use without needing to store many files. For home use, I'd recommend 500GB+ if you think you'll store a decent amount of video, music, etc.
6. Hard drive speed
SSD is the fastest, most durable, reliable, and by far the most expensive. $350+ for 480GB
Hybrid drives are cheap, have faster load times than most 7200 and 5200 drives.
About $125 for 500GB
7200 RPM 500GB drive, about $90
5400 RPM 500GB drive (the slow standard) about $75.
I hate the slow application load times of 5400 RPM drives. I used to always recommend 7200 RPM drives until SSD drives became affordable. If you have the extra money and hate wasting your time waiting for things to load, go with a Solid State Drive.
Most laptop hard drives spin around at 5,400 revolutions per second. There are other very slightly more expensive ones that spin at 7,200 and these can perform about 40% faster, but they may reduce your battery life by about 5 minutes. Not a huge deal in my mind. The faster it spins, the faster it opens applications and large documents. The best hard drive is an SSD (Solid State Drive) in that it can take harder drops without loosing data. It is built on flash memory instead of spinning mechanical platters. SSDs can offer better battery life, unless someone is using a low power hard drive. SSDs are pretty expensive though, but they can be a great thing for people that think seconds count. I use an SSD. Maybe it's overkill, but I'm happy with it. I was frustrated at how long it took Windows XP and Mac OS 10.5-10.8 to load on a 5,400 rpm drive (about 1:45). With an SSD it dropped to between 8 and 45 seconds. To save on cost, there are hybrid drives (though Macs have been known to not like them much), and also dual drives, there the operating system and applications are loaded on a small SSD (maybe 160GB) and then their files are stored on a second hard drive in the computer. Some PCs have started offering a built in version of this where 8GB of SSD storage is built into the computer and stores the most commonly loaded files and a 5,400 rpm hard drive holds all the data. This helps with boot speed. Windows 7 and 8 were designed to have very fast boot speeds regardless of the type of hard drive. So test a few configurations out.
7. Features to consider
-Screen size 11-12" is for single tasks and nothing intensive like video editing. Kind of can be used like a tablet. Fine for single window things, but too small for me personally.
13"-15.6" kind of the standard for typing papers and college kids. These are generally considered portable. Good for college students because they fit in backpacks. The 13-15" MacBook Pros are good options, but they can initially be a bit more expensive than their Windows counterparts, but you don't need to worry as much about viruses. The Dell Studio and XPS series are a plce to start
15.6"-17"+ Good for desktop replacements or a home computer you may want to move around. If you get a thin 17" like the discontinued MacBook Pro, it isn't much bigger or heavier than the 15 but has a super awesome high resolution screen. If you can get your hands on a 2011 17" MacBook Pro, you will probably be a happy person. The HP Envy 17 can be pretty good if you confirm the processor and video card performance of the model. the 13" and 17" MacBook Pros are good.
-backlit keyboard- The keys have a light behind them so you can type in the dark. I really like it.
-Screen resolution. The 17" MacBook Pro has a hi res screen of 1920 x 1200 and I love it. The standard 15 Macbook is 1440 x 900. The hi res 15" MacBook Pro is 1680 x 1050 and I like that. The standard 13" MacBook Pro 1280x800. I definitely prefer the hi res screen option to the standard one. You can fit more on your page and see more in a side by side view since toolbars and stuff show up smaller. Some Samsung 15" have 1600 x 900. Many Windows 15" laptops have 1366 x 768 resolution. This is fine if you only use one window at a time, but I personally do side by side windows and like hi res screens, though they cost a little more.
-SD card reader- lets you slide your SD card into your computer without any cables to get pictures off of it.
-Aluminum vs plastic case- Aluminum comes off as more professional and is a bit more expensive. The aluminum may help distribute heat from the graphics card (GPU) and processor (CPU) and may mean less fan noise. It does dent and scratch (metal on metal) easier than plastic though and is more expensive to replace.
-HDMI-good for connecting the computer (with audio) to an HDTV (Though I have had problems with there not being an overscanning option to make the picture fit the size of the screen, so you may not be able to see the toolbar.
-Upgraded Audio-May be nice since many laptops are not very loud when watching movies. USB
-3.0-a much faster connection than USB 2.0, the current standard, but you have to have a USB 3.0 peripheral. May be nice but probably unnecessary unless you are regularly transferring large files to an external hard drive.
-Blu-Ray-How many Blu-Ray DVDs do you have? Really?
-Bluetooth-not many things use bluetooth anymore. Maybe a wireless headset. My phones don't transfer files over bluetooth like they used to with my RAZR flip phone years ago.
-Thunderbolt-Fastest connection, but peripherals with this connection are very expensive.
*Here is a quick tutorial and explanations on how to get computer specs. Find the exact model of computer you are considering. For this example 'Toshiba Satellite A665-3DV6' is the one we want. You can try your luck googling it, but a better idea is to go to the manufacturer's website, in this case Toshiba, and type the model number in the search. It shoudl give you this page, (which also may show up in google search results. http://us.toshiba.com/computers/laptops/satellite/a660/a665-3dv6/
Go to the specifications tab. Then you will be able to find the highlights.
1. Processor = Intel® Core™ i5-460M processor
Copy '460m' and go to http://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks and click ctrl+f to bring up the find on the page. paste the '460m' in the find, and you will see that the processor gets a Geekbench score of 4248. That is over 4000, so I could recommend that as a computer that will last at least 3+ years and be decent.
2. Graphic/video card = NVIDIA® GeForce® GTS 350M
Copy 'gts 350m' and go to www.videocardbenchmark.net/. You will have to pick which graph you think the graphics card will be on. Most 2010+ GeForce and Radeon graphics cards will be on the high end graph, the first one on the left. If it is an Intel 3000 or 4000, it may show up on the 'Common'. If it is tied to an i3, i5, or i7 processor. Since this is a GeForce, it is probably on the high end, so we go to that link (http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html), do the ctrl+f and serach for the 'gts 350m'. It shows up with a score of 567. This is grater than 300, so it's ok for a basic user who may want to play the occasional game like Call of Duty on medium quality. Do keep in mind that the high end 2011 1GB DDR5 graphics card can get a score of about 1,300-1,600 for comparison's sake.
3. RAM quantity = 4GB
(4GB started being the standard configuration in 2011. It can show up in 256MB (1/4 GB) through 32GB. High end users use 8GB. Crazy video professionals may choose 16GB. The downside to 16GB of RAM is that the computer needs to use 16GB of the hard drive to put the computer to sleep, so you loose this much in available disk space.)
4. RAM Speed---?
(It doesn't tell you the speed of the RAM, which I think is lazy on their part. 1066 MHz is generally 2008-10, 1333 MHz is generally high end 2011, and 1600 MHz is high end 2012. The higher numbers are better. Stay away from 333 MHz and 666 MHz unless you are getting the computer for free. 1333MHz is mid grade in 2012.)
5. Hard drive capacity- 640GB
160GB-1TB(1,000GB). The size you need depends on what you plan on storing. Hard drives are cheap if you want to install your own, but it can be a hassle on Windows. Mac is pretty easy to upgrade your hard drive and transfer everything with TimeMachine, SuperDuper, or CarbonCopyCloner
6. Hard drive speed- 5,400 rpm
My evaluation of this computer is that it has a solid mid grade processor, a mid grade video card, the right amount of RAM, the RAM speed is most likely 1066 or 1333 which is mid grade, the hard drive size is pretty large. The hard drive speed is slow, but acceptable if you aren't a complete power user. This computer is mid grade all the way and a solid choice. It will probably run you about $450 as of late 2012.
Here are some basic things I look for:
1. Processor performance
Processors control how fast calculations are done. The faster the better, but there is a point where you can pay a whole lot for a negligible amount of performance increase.If you see a computer you are interested in, look up the processor model and do a find for it on this page. http://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks
When looking for a decent computer, a basic user will want a processor with a score of at least 3000, such as most Intel i3 processors. I tend to recommend something at least in the 4000+ range because I don't want the reputation for recommending a computer people may find slow in a year. Intel i5 Processors generally fit this. I personally use a 2011 MacBook Pro with a quad core 2.3 GHz i7 processor with a geekbench score of 8540. I use it because I run Windows and Mac at the same time and need the extra resources so they both run smoothly. A regular user should be fine with an i5.
Additional remarks: I have worked ok running both Mac 10.8 and Windows XP on a 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo T9600 (Geekbench score of 3087), but have found myself frustrated with lag times with processors slower than that.
2. Video card/ graphics card performance
Video cards control the fluidity of the things on your screen and also do any graphics calculations if you do video or hard core photo editing. You will likly run into issues if your card scores under 250 in one of the graphs here http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/.
Check out your score http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html
or
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/common_gpus.html
Advanced: Just so you know, the cheap common integrated graphics cards are the...
Growing up, these were the speeds of integrated graphics cards (graphics cards we all hated but were all we could afford)
Mobile Intel 915GM/GMS 910GML Express Chipset F (score 76)
Intel Media Accelerator 3150 (score 73)--I bought a desktop computer with this video card because I liked the processor, but the computer couldn't play YouTube videos. I sold that computer and bought one with a dedicated video card.
Mobile Intel GMA X3100 (score 87)--found in the 2007 white MacBook Pro and several windows computers.
integrated GeForce 9400m (score 147)--2008-9 13" MacBook Pro had these
I mustered through with a x3100 and 9400m in college and wasn't happy with their performance. There was a lot of lag time and screen shadowing, but computers with better graphics cards were to expensive.
Intel Media Accelerator HD (score 236)--This was an update to the Intel media accelerator line, but still was considered poor
Some older dedicated graphics cards included...
Apple's NVidea GeForce 9600m 512MB (score 347)--found in the high end 2008-9 15 and 17" MacBook Pro
GeForce GT 330M (score 330) MacBook Pro 2010
I did see that several 2011 processors have Intel graphics built into them and their speed depends on the processor. I think a lot of the low end laptops and even $900 desktops use these integrated graphics, and I'm not impressed. In my mind, desktops should outperform laptops since they can use more power and have the inconvenience of not being mobile.
Do not purchase a computer with a non HD Intel graphics card. The general Intel HD graphics like the ones listed below (not the 3000 or 4000) cards are baseline basic.
Intel HD Celeron B810 (score 174)--tested 2011-10-18
Intel HD i5-2557M (score 224) --2011-06-21 *probably a common speed... for a desktop with Intel HD... and it's poor
Intel HD i7-2600S (score 297)-tested 2011-2-3
Intel HD (score 306)---not sure what this is since it isn't tied to a processor
Intel has significantly improved integrated cards out, but they aren't in all low end computers.
2011 Intel HD 3000 (score 326)-Used in the 2011 13" MacBook Pro
2012 Intel HD 4000 (score 498). This is used in the 2012 13" MacBook Pros and several Windows laptops.
Integrated graphics are generally criticized for poor performance, ghosting, and low frame rates when playing games. I wouldn't recommend anything slower than the Intel HD 3000. The 4000 seems fine for mid grade use.
Dedicated video cards will almost always have better performance than the Intel graphics made in that year. But watch out and run the score on the chart because some old 2009-2010 dedicated graphics cards are worse than the Intel HD 3000 and 4000. The Intel HD 3000 (circa 2011) is on par with and the Intel HD 4000 (circa 2012) is better than many of the dedicated video cards of 2010, when the the first gen i3, i5, and i7 processors came out. So you will see computers with i5 processors and poor video cards. Also, even in 2012, several laptops are not using the Intel 300 or 400 series. They're using general Intel HD graphics, which are below par. Newer dedicated graphics (2011-12) can be pretty great, and are generally worth some extra cash if you'll use your computer for video and larger programs. 256MB and 512MB are on the low-mid-range scale. 1-2GB videocards are in the mid-upper performance range. DDR5 is much better than DDR3. There are high end video cards like the 4GB DDR5 Quadro K5000M with a graphics benchmark score of 2,433, high for a laptop.
Just for perspective...
This is a computer with a slow i3 processor (Geekbench score under 4000), so I'd be hesitant to buy it. It may be ok for super basic stuff, but it may lag.
-2010 Toshiba Satellite core i3-m350 2.27GHz (geekbench 3531) NVidia GeForce GTS 350M 2781MB total: 1GB GDDR3 discrete memory + up to 1757MB shared memory w/NVIDIA® TurboCache™ technology (score 567)
Some fine cheap computers
-December 2009 Dell Studio 14 Core i5-520M (geekbench 4257) ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4530 512MB (DDR3?) (score 259 or 330) (Rated as a low end graphics adapter http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-4530.13972.0.html) Good school computer and you can play mid-level games on it. I bought this for my sister and she loves it. It can be bought with a backlit keyboard which my sister and I like. $389 on ebay.
Good mid grade options
-HP ENVY 15-1055SE Beats edition 1.6 GHz i7-720QM (Geekbench 4782) Mobility Radeon HD 4830 (Graphics 674) 1920x1080 screen :) $500 Great screen, good audio, backlit keyboard...
-late 2010 Dell Studio 16 i7 720QM 1.6GHz (Geekbench 4782) ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5730 - 1GB (video card score (score 694)--this slow i7 is slower than some newer i5s with faster clock speeds $510 ebay 12-12-12
Good mid-high options
-HP Envy 17 1012NR Mobility Radeon HD 5850 1GB DDR5 (graphics score 744) i5-3210M (geekbench 5769)-$630 ebay and comes with improved speakers. Increasing to an i7 for a real power user would be cool if you can afford even more and want to run virtual machines. Good speakers.
-2011 Samsung 7 series with an AMD Radeon HD 6490M with 512 MB DDR5 RAM (score 645).
This is 29% faster than the Intel 4000 series. i7-2675QM 2.2 GHz (geekbench 7461) $580 ebay +$30 VGA adapter = $610. Seems like a pretty good choice. It has better than average screen resolution for a 15".
-A 2011 MacBook Pro has the 6770M 1GB DDR5 (score 1,359, may be lower since graphics cards may be clocked down in Apple products, maybe to save on battery life)-This score is probably a 2 GB version
-The 2012 15" MacBook Pro has a 1GB GeForce GT 650M (score 1,247?)-comes in 1gb and 2gb
Top end computers (more for reference)
One of the laptops with the best hardware I've seen so far is the Dell Precision line targeting professionals who need high graphic performance such as when using Auto CAD in designing complex things and such. I don't know what's stopping gamers from getting their hands on this, other than it looks more utilitarian and probably doesn't have amazing speakers. 17" laptops tend to handle more powerful graphics cards and sometimes a second hard drive.
http://www.dell.com/us/enterprise/p/precision-m6700/pd
This computer has some pretty great specs and it can be bought used for $1,300-1,600.
Another place to check out graphics card performance is the last column in http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html
*These are my working notes which I'll update as I get time. I'm publishing it as-is to help anyone that can make sense of it.*
What to look for when buying a computer...
As a techie, I find myself talking with people too scared to buy a computer even though they need one because they feel it will be outdated too soon or they generally don't know what to look for.
Start off with your expectations.
If you want a computer that gets you by, expect something in the $350 range if it's used. It may have choppy video playback, freeze more often than you like, have a small trackpad, etc. But hey, it gets you by. Much less than $350 and it's probably junk. You'll get a slow integrated video card. Expect a Geekbench score of 1,500-2,500, http://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks something to use as a performance comparison against the other classes of computers. Graphics card performance will be around 150-350 on http://www.videocardbenchmark.net.
Right now you can expect to pay about $450 for a 1-2 year old solid mid-grade computer with an i5 processor, a dedicated video card, and maybe a decent track pad, and USB 2.0. This applies to both laptops and desktops. These will have Geekbench scores of about 3,500-4,500. Graphics card performance will be around 300-750.
For $600-$800, you can get a used computer that will do pretty much anything you throw at it. This includes a second or third generation quad core i7 processor, USB 3.0, a larger trackpad, and if you look hard, a good dedicated video card so you can put together home movies without much of a lag time. These will have Geekbench scores of about 6,000-10,000. Graphics card performance will be around 750-1,600.`kpads may be too sensitive)
HP Envy line
The quick answer is one with...
1. Intel i5 dual-core processor (or anything with a 4000+ score on http://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks.) General rule of thumb is i3 is for basic users, i5 (and first (of three) generation) is for mid grade users, i7 (second and third gen) for advanced users. These are about 75% the performance of the i5s.
2. A video card with a score of 300 or higher on http://www.videocardbenchmark.net. This generally means any dedicated video card with 512MB RAM or more (you can save some money and settle for an Intel HD 4000 found in 2012 models. Stay away from Intel Accelerated graphics cards. In my experience the ones from 2010 and older are slow and may have problems with video. (The HD 3000 and 4000 videocards are decent, but there are many better ones). 2010 512MB DDR3 video cards will get you scores around 500-700. 1GB DDR5 videocards are a significantly more powerful (and will run you at least $75 extra used. May be worth it if you want to do video editing and futureproof your computer.)
3. The right quantity of RAM.
You'll want 4-8+ GB if running Vista, 7, or Windows 8 or Mac OSX 10.5 or higher. Some people with video editing may use 16 GB.
4. The right speed of RAM.
At least 4gb of 1333 MHz or faster RAM. Also comes in 333, 666, 1066 (all slow) and 1600 speeds which is even better.
5. Proper hard drive space.
160GB is fine for business use without needing to store many files. For home use, I'd recommend 500GB+ if you think you'll store a decent amount of video, music, etc.
6. Hard drive speed
SSD is the fastest, most durable, reliable, and by far the most expensive. $350+ for 480GB
Hybrid drives are cheap, have faster load times than most 7200 and 5200 drives.
About $125 for 500GB
7200 RPM 500GB drive, about $90
5400 RPM 500GB drive (the slow standard) about $75.
I hate the slow application load times of 5400 RPM drives. I used to always recommend 7200 RPM drives until SSD drives became affordable. If you have the extra money and hate wasting your time waiting for things to load, go with a Solid State Drive.
Most laptop hard drives spin around at 5,400 revolutions per second. There are other very slightly more expensive ones that spin at 7,200 and these can perform about 40% faster, but they may reduce your battery life by about 5 minutes. Not a huge deal in my mind. The faster it spins, the faster it opens applications and large documents. The best hard drive is an SSD (Solid State Drive) in that it can take harder drops without loosing data. It is built on flash memory instead of spinning mechanical platters. SSDs can offer better battery life, unless someone is using a low power hard drive. SSDs are pretty expensive though, but they can be a great thing for people that think seconds count. I use an SSD. Maybe it's overkill, but I'm happy with it. I was frustrated at how long it took Windows XP and Mac OS 10.5-10.8 to load on a 5,400 rpm drive (about 1:45). With an SSD it dropped to between 8 and 45 seconds. To save on cost, there are hybrid drives (though Macs have been known to not like them much), and also dual drives, there the operating system and applications are loaded on a small SSD (maybe 160GB) and then their files are stored on a second hard drive in the computer. Some PCs have started offering a built in version of this where 8GB of SSD storage is built into the computer and stores the most commonly loaded files and a 5,400 rpm hard drive holds all the data. This helps with boot speed. Windows 7 and 8 were designed to have very fast boot speeds regardless of the type of hard drive. So test a few configurations out.
7. Features to consider
-Screen size 11-12" is for single tasks and nothing intensive like video editing. Kind of can be used like a tablet. Fine for single window things, but too small for me personally.
13"-15.6" kind of the standard for typing papers and college kids. These are generally considered portable. Good for college students because they fit in backpacks. The 13-15" MacBook Pros are good options, but they can initially be a bit more expensive than their Windows counterparts, but you don't need to worry as much about viruses. The Dell Studio and XPS series are a plce to start
15.6"-17"+ Good for desktop replacements or a home computer you may want to move around. If you get a thin 17" like the discontinued MacBook Pro, it isn't much bigger or heavier than the 15 but has a super awesome high resolution screen. If you can get your hands on a 2011 17" MacBook Pro, you will probably be a happy person. The HP Envy 17 can be pretty good if you confirm the processor and video card performance of the model. the 13" and 17" MacBook Pros are good.
-backlit keyboard- The keys have a light behind them so you can type in the dark. I really like it.
-Screen resolution. The 17" MacBook Pro has a hi res screen of 1920 x 1200 and I love it. The standard 15 Macbook is 1440 x 900. The hi res 15" MacBook Pro is 1680 x 1050 and I like that. The standard 13" MacBook Pro 1280x800. I definitely prefer the hi res screen option to the standard one. You can fit more on your page and see more in a side by side view since toolbars and stuff show up smaller. Some Samsung 15" have 1600 x 900. Many Windows 15" laptops have 1366 x 768 resolution. This is fine if you only use one window at a time, but I personally do side by side windows and like hi res screens, though they cost a little more.
-SD card reader- lets you slide your SD card into your computer without any cables to get pictures off of it.
-Aluminum vs plastic case- Aluminum comes off as more professional and is a bit more expensive. The aluminum may help distribute heat from the graphics card (GPU) and processor (CPU) and may mean less fan noise. It does dent and scratch (metal on metal) easier than plastic though and is more expensive to replace.
-HDMI-good for connecting the computer (with audio) to an HDTV (Though I have had problems with there not being an overscanning option to make the picture fit the size of the screen, so you may not be able to see the toolbar.
-Upgraded Audio-May be nice since many laptops are not very loud when watching movies. USB
-3.0-a much faster connection than USB 2.0, the current standard, but you have to have a USB 3.0 peripheral. May be nice but probably unnecessary unless you are regularly transferring large files to an external hard drive.
-Blu-Ray-How many Blu-Ray DVDs do you have? Really?
-Bluetooth-not many things use bluetooth anymore. Maybe a wireless headset. My phones don't transfer files over bluetooth like they used to with my RAZR flip phone years ago.
-Thunderbolt-Fastest connection, but peripherals with this connection are very expensive.
*Here is a quick tutorial and explanations on how to get computer specs. Find the exact model of computer you are considering. For this example 'Toshiba Satellite A665-3DV6' is the one we want. You can try your luck googling it, but a better idea is to go to the manufacturer's website, in this case Toshiba, and type the model number in the search. It shoudl give you this page, (which also may show up in google search results. http://us.toshiba.com/computers/laptops/satellite/a660/a665-3dv6/
Go to the specifications tab. Then you will be able to find the highlights.
1. Processor = Intel® Core™ i5-460M processor
Copy '460m' and go to http://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks and click ctrl+f to bring up the find on the page. paste the '460m' in the find, and you will see that the processor gets a Geekbench score of 4248. That is over 4000, so I could recommend that as a computer that will last at least 3+ years and be decent.
2. Graphic/video card = NVIDIA® GeForce® GTS 350M
Copy 'gts 350m' and go to www.videocardbenchmark.net/. You will have to pick which graph you think the graphics card will be on. Most 2010+ GeForce and Radeon graphics cards will be on the high end graph, the first one on the left. If it is an Intel 3000 or 4000, it may show up on the 'Common'. If it is tied to an i3, i5, or i7 processor. Since this is a GeForce, it is probably on the high end, so we go to that link (http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html), do the ctrl+f and serach for the 'gts 350m'. It shows up with a score of 567. This is grater than 300, so it's ok for a basic user who may want to play the occasional game like Call of Duty on medium quality. Do keep in mind that the high end 2011 1GB DDR5 graphics card can get a score of about 1,300-1,600 for comparison's sake.
3. RAM quantity = 4GB
(4GB started being the standard configuration in 2011. It can show up in 256MB (1/4 GB) through 32GB. High end users use 8GB. Crazy video professionals may choose 16GB. The downside to 16GB of RAM is that the computer needs to use 16GB of the hard drive to put the computer to sleep, so you loose this much in available disk space.)
4. RAM Speed---?
(It doesn't tell you the speed of the RAM, which I think is lazy on their part. 1066 MHz is generally 2008-10, 1333 MHz is generally high end 2011, and 1600 MHz is high end 2012. The higher numbers are better. Stay away from 333 MHz and 666 MHz unless you are getting the computer for free. 1333MHz is mid grade in 2012.)
5. Hard drive capacity- 640GB
160GB-1TB(1,000GB). The size you need depends on what you plan on storing. Hard drives are cheap if you want to install your own, but it can be a hassle on Windows. Mac is pretty easy to upgrade your hard drive and transfer everything with TimeMachine, SuperDuper, or CarbonCopyCloner
6. Hard drive speed- 5,400 rpm
My evaluation of this computer is that it has a solid mid grade processor, a mid grade video card, the right amount of RAM, the RAM speed is most likely 1066 or 1333 which is mid grade, the hard drive size is pretty large. The hard drive speed is slow, but acceptable if you aren't a complete power user. This computer is mid grade all the way and a solid choice. It will probably run you about $450 as of late 2012.
Here are some basic things I look for:
1. Processor performance
Processors control how fast calculations are done. The faster the better, but there is a point where you can pay a whole lot for a negligible amount of performance increase.If you see a computer you are interested in, look up the processor model and do a find for it on this page. http://browser.primatelabs.com/processor-benchmarks
When looking for a decent computer, a basic user will want a processor with a score of at least 3000, such as most Intel i3 processors. I tend to recommend something at least in the 4000+ range because I don't want the reputation for recommending a computer people may find slow in a year. Intel i5 Processors generally fit this. I personally use a 2011 MacBook Pro with a quad core 2.3 GHz i7 processor with a geekbench score of 8540. I use it because I run Windows and Mac at the same time and need the extra resources so they both run smoothly. A regular user should be fine with an i5.
Additional remarks: I have worked ok running both Mac 10.8 and Windows XP on a 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo T9600 (Geekbench score of 3087), but have found myself frustrated with lag times with processors slower than that.
2. Video card/ graphics card performance
Video cards control the fluidity of the things on your screen and also do any graphics calculations if you do video or hard core photo editing. You will likly run into issues if your card scores under 250 in one of the graphs here http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/.
Check out your score http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html
or
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/common_gpus.html
Advanced: Just so you know, the cheap common integrated graphics cards are the...
Growing up, these were the speeds of integrated graphics cards (graphics cards we all hated but were all we could afford)
Mobile Intel 915GM/GMS 910GML Express Chipset F (score 76)
Intel Media Accelerator 3150 (score 73)--I bought a desktop computer with this video card because I liked the processor, but the computer couldn't play YouTube videos. I sold that computer and bought one with a dedicated video card.
Mobile Intel GMA X3100 (score 87)--found in the 2007 white MacBook Pro and several windows computers.
integrated GeForce 9400m (score 147)--2008-9 13" MacBook Pro had these
I mustered through with a x3100 and 9400m in college and wasn't happy with their performance. There was a lot of lag time and screen shadowing, but computers with better graphics cards were to expensive.
Intel Media Accelerator HD (score 236)--This was an update to the Intel media accelerator line, but still was considered poor
Some older dedicated graphics cards included...
Apple's NVidea GeForce 9600m 512MB (score 347)--found in the high end 2008-9 15 and 17" MacBook Pro
GeForce GT 330M (score 330) MacBook Pro 2010
I did see that several 2011 processors have Intel graphics built into them and their speed depends on the processor. I think a lot of the low end laptops and even $900 desktops use these integrated graphics, and I'm not impressed. In my mind, desktops should outperform laptops since they can use more power and have the inconvenience of not being mobile.
Do not purchase a computer with a non HD Intel graphics card. The general Intel HD graphics like the ones listed below (not the 3000 or 4000) cards are baseline basic.
Intel HD Celeron B810 (score 174)--tested 2011-10-18
Intel HD i5-2557M (score 224) --2011-06-21 *probably a common speed... for a desktop with Intel HD... and it's poor
Intel HD i7-2600S (score 297)-tested 2011-2-3
Intel HD (score 306)---not sure what this is since it isn't tied to a processor
Intel has significantly improved integrated cards out, but they aren't in all low end computers.
2011 Intel HD 3000 (score 326)-Used in the 2011 13" MacBook Pro
2012 Intel HD 4000 (score 498). This is used in the 2012 13" MacBook Pros and several Windows laptops.
Integrated graphics are generally criticized for poor performance, ghosting, and low frame rates when playing games. I wouldn't recommend anything slower than the Intel HD 3000. The 4000 seems fine for mid grade use.
Dedicated video cards will almost always have better performance than the Intel graphics made in that year. But watch out and run the score on the chart because some old 2009-2010 dedicated graphics cards are worse than the Intel HD 3000 and 4000. The Intel HD 3000 (circa 2011) is on par with and the Intel HD 4000 (circa 2012) is better than many of the dedicated video cards of 2010, when the the first gen i3, i5, and i7 processors came out. So you will see computers with i5 processors and poor video cards. Also, even in 2012, several laptops are not using the Intel 300 or 400 series. They're using general Intel HD graphics, which are below par. Newer dedicated graphics (2011-12) can be pretty great, and are generally worth some extra cash if you'll use your computer for video and larger programs. 256MB and 512MB are on the low-mid-range scale. 1-2GB videocards are in the mid-upper performance range. DDR5 is much better than DDR3. There are high end video cards like the 4GB DDR5 Quadro K5000M with a graphics benchmark score of 2,433, high for a laptop.
Just for perspective...
This is a computer with a slow i3 processor (Geekbench score under 4000), so I'd be hesitant to buy it. It may be ok for super basic stuff, but it may lag.
-2010 Toshiba Satellite core i3-m350 2.27GHz (geekbench 3531) NVidia GeForce GTS 350M 2781MB total: 1GB GDDR3 discrete memory + up to 1757MB shared memory w/NVIDIA® TurboCache™ technology (score 567)
Some fine cheap computers
-December 2009 Dell Studio 14 Core i5-520M (geekbench 4257) ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4530 512MB (DDR3?) (score 259 or 330) (Rated as a low end graphics adapter http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-4530.13972.0.html) Good school computer and you can play mid-level games on it. I bought this for my sister and she loves it. It can be bought with a backlit keyboard which my sister and I like. $389 on ebay.
Good mid grade options
-HP ENVY 15-1055SE Beats edition 1.6 GHz i7-720QM (Geekbench 4782) Mobility Radeon HD 4830 (Graphics 674) 1920x1080 screen :) $500 Great screen, good audio, backlit keyboard...
-late 2010 Dell Studio 16 i7 720QM 1.6GHz (Geekbench 4782) ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5730 - 1GB (video card score (score 694)--this slow i7 is slower than some newer i5s with faster clock speeds $510 ebay 12-12-12
Good mid-high options
-HP Envy 17 1012NR Mobility Radeon HD 5850 1GB DDR5 (graphics score 744) i5-3210M (geekbench 5769)-$630 ebay and comes with improved speakers. Increasing to an i7 for a real power user would be cool if you can afford even more and want to run virtual machines. Good speakers.
-2011 Samsung 7 series with an AMD Radeon HD 6490M with 512 MB DDR5 RAM (score 645).
This is 29% faster than the Intel 4000 series. i7-2675QM 2.2 GHz (geekbench 7461) $580 ebay +$30 VGA adapter = $610. Seems like a pretty good choice. It has better than average screen resolution for a 15".
-A 2011 MacBook Pro has the 6770M 1GB DDR5 (score 1,359, may be lower since graphics cards may be clocked down in Apple products, maybe to save on battery life)-This score is probably a 2 GB version
-The 2012 15" MacBook Pro has a 1GB GeForce GT 650M (score 1,247?)-comes in 1gb and 2gb
Top end computers (more for reference)
One of the laptops with the best hardware I've seen so far is the Dell Precision line targeting professionals who need high graphic performance such as when using Auto CAD in designing complex things and such. I don't know what's stopping gamers from getting their hands on this, other than it looks more utilitarian and probably doesn't have amazing speakers. 17" laptops tend to handle more powerful graphics cards and sometimes a second hard drive.
http://www.dell.com/us/enterprise/p/precision-m6700/pd
This computer has some pretty great specs and it can be bought used for $1,300-1,600.
Up to 16GB5 DDR3 SDRAM at 1866Mhz - 4 DIMMS
Up to 32GB5 DDR3 SDRAM at 1600Mhz - 4 DIMMS
Intel® CoreTM i7 (3940XM, 3920XM)..
Intel® CoreTM i7 (3520M, 3840QM, quad core 2.7 GHz 3820QM (Geekbench of 10,780),
Intel® CoreTM i5 (3360M, 3320M)
AMD FirePro M6000 Mobility Pro with 2GB GDDR5 dedicated memory (graphics 1,820)
NVIDIA Quadro K3000M with 2GB GDDR5 dedicated memory
NVIDIA Quadro K4000M with 4GB GDDR5 dedicated memory
NVIDIA Quadro K5000M with 4GB GDDR5 dedicated memory (graphics 2,433)
NVIDIA Quadro K3000M with 2GB GDDR5 dedicated memory
NVIDIA Quadro K4000M with 4GB GDDR5 dedicated memory
NVIDIA Quadro K5000M with 4GB GDDR5 dedicated memory (graphics 2,433)
Here are some computers that use the high end NVidia graphics
Another place to check out graphics card performance is the last column in http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html
--- Processors Celeron - dual core 2.4 GHz rvv 3915 1.2 dual core 1491 single coreIntel Celeron-900-2200MHz1752 Pentium |
Monday, October 22, 2012
Current thoughts about politics
Just to compare my thoughts now to my past and future.
I may be forgetting things. These are not my final thoughts, just what I'm thinking about right now at this moment after watching the 3rd presidential debate.
Military spending-We apparently spend more on military than the next ten countries combined. I think we could downsize and still be safe. Military movements should be a joint efforts from countries with an investment in the movement, and not just America.
Renewable energy-Renewable energy is great. How it becomes affordable is the question. Should the government spend money borrowed from other countries (and incurring interest on it) to subsidize companies which may or may not be shams? That is a democratic idea I believe. The alternative is to offer tax deductions for people who actually buy the renewable energy. I think both parties would do that.
Drilling for oil/mining coal - Ideally we drill and mine short term telling people that fuel prices will be low now, but price increases should be expected every year, so investments in renewable energy would make sense long run. (Or a tax on pollution should be implemented.) In the mean time private investments in renewable energy makes them more affordable and competitive with gas now. People will move to renewable energy if it becomes more affordable than dirty energy, but in the transition period, fuel should come down for a while, so go ahead and drill and burn, cleanly, but let people know we want to reduce our dependencies on these forms and invest in other forms of energy.
Abortion-I grew up in an environment where abortion was murder. Looking at a larger scope, unloved kids are more likely to become criminals. The morning after pill seems fine because it doesn't kill anything. The two pills for expelling the placenta a few weeks after is supposed to be a safe way for letting people not ready to have kids to not have them yet. The partial birth abortion seems kind of gross and apparently is dangerous with women going through this having potential issues with their next child. There will always be people who get pregnant and will want to have an abortion. If you make it illegal, and they are set on doing it to prevent embarrassment or keep going with their life as is, their options are limited to black market which is more dangerous. I think that we've come to a point where people should be educated by special interest groups (not only the government) into prevention and care.
Birth control-Is it the government's obligation to pay for this for people who make these choices? It should be made available, absolutely, but the cost to manufacture is tiny and the cost should come down so people should be able to pay out of pocket. $30 a month for birth control seems pretty fair. Male birth control may be interesting to pursue as well.
China-Yikes. I don't feel completely educated on this. China needs us to buy stuff from them to keep their economy going. They also do infringe on patents which hurts AMerican countries, especially pharmaceuticals, which causes pharmaceuticals to charge more in the US to recoup research (and probably unnessesary advertising) costs and make profits. How can the US control patent protection in other countries like China? It needs to happen. I am scared of an increase of cost of Chinese goods with there being more manufacturing jobs in the US when I don't want a manufacturing job (though management of one would be fine.)
Immigration-There is a lot of open land in some places in the US, like Nebraska and Texas. We don't want people to come over and freeload as we know happens now as people come to escape poverty.
Who should come over? The educated? The ones pursuing education but don't have it yet? Apparently California spends a massive amount on heath care for illegal immigrants. I don't like that. I think there is a raffle and also visas for education but I'm not sure. Generally speaking, I hate raffles. I need to learn more. Uneducated people have more kids than educated families. Generally speaking, they also have a higher percentage of lower performing people as well. There is always a star in the rough though, but at what cost? People should come over legally, not illegally, and someone should make reasonable means of doing that so that America has the resources in healthcare and education to meet the flow of immigrants.
Education - Well, short term, if everyone in the US has a college education, my college education won't separate me out from the rest of the people. In the larger scope, America needs more innovation coming from people with advanced degrees in science, medicine, and engineering. Something should be done to make eduction for economically valuable degrees a bigger draw. Theoretically the pay bump should be a factor, but costs for those degrees has also increased so doctors could still be paying off debt in their 40s (maybe not research because of research grants. Hmm.)
I think teaching is something I'd be interested in doing, if it paid similar per hour to what I'm making in IT. The thing is, there are a lot of people willing to do a good job at teaching for cheap pay for whatever reason. That leaves cities, many of which are in debt, more money to spend elsewhere. Certain student teacher ratios should probably be maintained and accreditation should be standardized. I've heard of private college scam schools. People should do more research before going into incredible debt. State schools are usually a good value. I don't know why people go to private schools without a good reputation.
Schools should have teachers that teach to the students, involve the parents, be adequately funded academically, and sports shouldn't be a massive amount of the budget. It should be primarily funded by donations, and parents when possible. Should there be a school sponsored football team if textbooks over a decade old are being used? Still have the football team, but find alternative ways of funding it. Funding may be more responsible that way. I'm not sure why vouchers are such a bad idea as long as the money follows the child. Everyone should be given access to good education. How can this be reasonable funded for families who choose to live far away from a school in very rural areas? That kind of hurts the kids, right? Government shouldn't be forced to spend 3x the cash on them because of poor family choices, right? Do they just do Internet learning? Probably not since Internet may not be offered in those areas. I don't know what's best.
National debt- I think that the debt should be under 5 trillion dollars in 5 years, down from the 10 Bush had and the current 16 trillion from Obama, otherwise interest payments will be stupid high. This hurts the value of the dollar.
Local jobs - Jobs created by the government is paid for by taxes, and government contracts have red tape which costs more than it's supposed to. In theory, private companies and citizens could do a lot of that stuff cheaper.
Healthcare - Socialized healthcare causes an increase in taxes. Look at Europe. Should it be tied to a job? I'm not sure because that hurts employers. Should there be caps? Let medical practices run crazy expensive procedures that may or may not work? What is the markup? I think there should be more doctors and nurse practitioners, clinics, and that people should shop for the best value instead of just doing copays and letting the insurance cover the rest.
I may be forgetting things. These are not my final thoughts, just what I'm thinking about right now at this moment after watching the 3rd presidential debate.
Military spending-We apparently spend more on military than the next ten countries combined. I think we could downsize and still be safe. Military movements should be a joint efforts from countries with an investment in the movement, and not just America.
Renewable energy-Renewable energy is great. How it becomes affordable is the question. Should the government spend money borrowed from other countries (and incurring interest on it) to subsidize companies which may or may not be shams? That is a democratic idea I believe. The alternative is to offer tax deductions for people who actually buy the renewable energy. I think both parties would do that.
Drilling for oil/mining coal - Ideally we drill and mine short term telling people that fuel prices will be low now, but price increases should be expected every year, so investments in renewable energy would make sense long run. (Or a tax on pollution should be implemented.) In the mean time private investments in renewable energy makes them more affordable and competitive with gas now. People will move to renewable energy if it becomes more affordable than dirty energy, but in the transition period, fuel should come down for a while, so go ahead and drill and burn, cleanly, but let people know we want to reduce our dependencies on these forms and invest in other forms of energy.
Abortion-I grew up in an environment where abortion was murder. Looking at a larger scope, unloved kids are more likely to become criminals. The morning after pill seems fine because it doesn't kill anything. The two pills for expelling the placenta a few weeks after is supposed to be a safe way for letting people not ready to have kids to not have them yet. The partial birth abortion seems kind of gross and apparently is dangerous with women going through this having potential issues with their next child. There will always be people who get pregnant and will want to have an abortion. If you make it illegal, and they are set on doing it to prevent embarrassment or keep going with their life as is, their options are limited to black market which is more dangerous. I think that we've come to a point where people should be educated by special interest groups (not only the government) into prevention and care.
Birth control-Is it the government's obligation to pay for this for people who make these choices? It should be made available, absolutely, but the cost to manufacture is tiny and the cost should come down so people should be able to pay out of pocket. $30 a month for birth control seems pretty fair. Male birth control may be interesting to pursue as well.
China-Yikes. I don't feel completely educated on this. China needs us to buy stuff from them to keep their economy going. They also do infringe on patents which hurts AMerican countries, especially pharmaceuticals, which causes pharmaceuticals to charge more in the US to recoup research (and probably unnessesary advertising) costs and make profits. How can the US control patent protection in other countries like China? It needs to happen. I am scared of an increase of cost of Chinese goods with there being more manufacturing jobs in the US when I don't want a manufacturing job (though management of one would be fine.)
Immigration-There is a lot of open land in some places in the US, like Nebraska and Texas. We don't want people to come over and freeload as we know happens now as people come to escape poverty.
Who should come over? The educated? The ones pursuing education but don't have it yet? Apparently California spends a massive amount on heath care for illegal immigrants. I don't like that. I think there is a raffle and also visas for education but I'm not sure. Generally speaking, I hate raffles. I need to learn more. Uneducated people have more kids than educated families. Generally speaking, they also have a higher percentage of lower performing people as well. There is always a star in the rough though, but at what cost? People should come over legally, not illegally, and someone should make reasonable means of doing that so that America has the resources in healthcare and education to meet the flow of immigrants.
Education - Well, short term, if everyone in the US has a college education, my college education won't separate me out from the rest of the people. In the larger scope, America needs more innovation coming from people with advanced degrees in science, medicine, and engineering. Something should be done to make eduction for economically valuable degrees a bigger draw. Theoretically the pay bump should be a factor, but costs for those degrees has also increased so doctors could still be paying off debt in their 40s (maybe not research because of research grants. Hmm.)
I think teaching is something I'd be interested in doing, if it paid similar per hour to what I'm making in IT. The thing is, there are a lot of people willing to do a good job at teaching for cheap pay for whatever reason. That leaves cities, many of which are in debt, more money to spend elsewhere. Certain student teacher ratios should probably be maintained and accreditation should be standardized. I've heard of private college scam schools. People should do more research before going into incredible debt. State schools are usually a good value. I don't know why people go to private schools without a good reputation.
Schools should have teachers that teach to the students, involve the parents, be adequately funded academically, and sports shouldn't be a massive amount of the budget. It should be primarily funded by donations, and parents when possible. Should there be a school sponsored football team if textbooks over a decade old are being used? Still have the football team, but find alternative ways of funding it. Funding may be more responsible that way. I'm not sure why vouchers are such a bad idea as long as the money follows the child. Everyone should be given access to good education. How can this be reasonable funded for families who choose to live far away from a school in very rural areas? That kind of hurts the kids, right? Government shouldn't be forced to spend 3x the cash on them because of poor family choices, right? Do they just do Internet learning? Probably not since Internet may not be offered in those areas. I don't know what's best.
National debt- I think that the debt should be under 5 trillion dollars in 5 years, down from the 10 Bush had and the current 16 trillion from Obama, otherwise interest payments will be stupid high. This hurts the value of the dollar.
Local jobs - Jobs created by the government is paid for by taxes, and government contracts have red tape which costs more than it's supposed to. In theory, private companies and citizens could do a lot of that stuff cheaper.
Healthcare - Socialized healthcare causes an increase in taxes. Look at Europe. Should it be tied to a job? I'm not sure because that hurts employers. Should there be caps? Let medical practices run crazy expensive procedures that may or may not work? What is the markup? I think there should be more doctors and nurse practitioners, clinics, and that people should shop for the best value instead of just doing copays and letting the insurance cover the rest.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
TriBling
I had a great experience with the creator of TriBling today (10/11/12). http://www.tribling.com/index.php/
A former marathoner turned mom, turned Ironman woman spent 1 year training for the Madison full Ironman triathlon and designed some really cool necklace pendants with waves (I think they look like water droplets or swimmer heads and an arm as it comes out of the water), a bike gear, and a shoe print for each of the events.
At the 2012 Chicago Triathlon, I briefly saw post card stock talking about them, and was like, eh, a jewelry ad and didn't look at the detail. A post race e-mail had a link that said, "Congratulations! You've earned yourself some trithalon bling!" and it had a blue hyperlink. I saw the really cool design, thought it had some meaning, some creativity, and would be a fun conversation starter. I then posted a link to it on Facebook and said that that was one piece of jewelry that I would actually wear. I actually started measuring my neck to see what size necklace I'd need.
It was $120ish for the small pendant (which I thought was just the right size), and two spare chains since the site said they would need to be replaced every so often and it was cheaper to order them together than to find replacement ones as needed. I thought that was a little much for jewelry (having never bought it before for myself) so I looked on eBay, Amazon, and google marketplace for a used one, but didn't come up with anything. I guessed it was a startup. I thought about asking for one as a gift, but didn't want to wait in case the company went under like a lot of small businesses do. I looked at the card that came in our race day packets and confirmed that it was a really cool design and saw somewhere that they were offering discounts for showing up at the booth. I hadn't seen them at the Triathlon Expo, but my roommate had. Anyway, thinking it was a startup got me a little worried that I'd loose the opportunity to have it, so not long after, I just went online and bought it. I was order 000008 which confirmed that it was a pretty new company.
I didn't see it charged on my Mint.com and thought that was odd, but assumed it would show up soon. That was August 17thish. October 11th, 2012, about two months later, I got a call from someone at TriBling saying, "Sorry to bother you, but I'm with TriBling. Our credit card processing on our site went down so you were never charged, so if I could have you mail a check or get your credit card information down now that would be great. Oh, and afterwards I want to get your feedback on your bling."
I actually told her my idea about using the edges of the bling for the water and shoe in addition to the gear instead of having just the gear 3D and the other edges smooth. She liked my idea saying she could incorporate waves on the side or something. I said it wold be really cool if I could have one if she ended up doing it. She said it may be a while since she has inventory and that she had a lot of requests for strictly running first. I agreed and said that that would expand her market quite a bit because a lot of people are scared of the swim.
I asked if I could get the discount they offered at the event since I didn't see the booth at the Chicago tri but was there. She said sure, she'd take $5 off. Then I got a pretty cool crash course into what she's going through. She wore her rubber necklace all triathlon training season and by the end it was looking rough with the chlorine, sweat, and stuff, and that, like a bike chain, it needs to be replaced. (A parallel which was on her website.. which didn't have the pages you could order from up anymore 10/11/12, probably they will come up once the billing process works again.)
Anyway, she has people who want to invest, but is doing all of it herself because she isn't sure she wants to share yet. She found a jeweler in Chicago who includes the silver, the wax mold, and hand finishing and she wants to keep it in the US instead of going overseas even though it would be cheaper. She's only been able to do small batches, so that is also why the price is high.
The cost of marketing is kind of much. Expos charge upper hundreds to in the thousands for a booth. Printing cards and fliers also costs money, between $.25-$.75 depending on the quantity. Also, to get them to place the fliers in bags, that can be a few hundred dollars as well. Then there is managing a website that isn't charging credit cards properly so only being able to sell inventory at events, also teaching college classes and being a mom.
I had fun talking to her!
March 2013 update: TriBling dropped their prices by about half since I bought my necklace. I paid over $100 including an extra rubber band and a silver band.
A former marathoner turned mom, turned Ironman woman spent 1 year training for the Madison full Ironman triathlon and designed some really cool necklace pendants with waves (I think they look like water droplets or swimmer heads and an arm as it comes out of the water), a bike gear, and a shoe print for each of the events.
At the 2012 Chicago Triathlon, I briefly saw post card stock talking about them, and was like, eh, a jewelry ad and didn't look at the detail. A post race e-mail had a link that said, "Congratulations! You've earned yourself some trithalon bling!" and it had a blue hyperlink. I saw the really cool design, thought it had some meaning, some creativity, and would be a fun conversation starter. I then posted a link to it on Facebook and said that that was one piece of jewelry that I would actually wear. I actually started measuring my neck to see what size necklace I'd need.
It was $120ish for the small pendant (which I thought was just the right size), and two spare chains since the site said they would need to be replaced every so often and it was cheaper to order them together than to find replacement ones as needed. I thought that was a little much for jewelry (having never bought it before for myself) so I looked on eBay, Amazon, and google marketplace for a used one, but didn't come up with anything. I guessed it was a startup. I thought about asking for one as a gift, but didn't want to wait in case the company went under like a lot of small businesses do. I looked at the card that came in our race day packets and confirmed that it was a really cool design and saw somewhere that they were offering discounts for showing up at the booth. I hadn't seen them at the Triathlon Expo, but my roommate had. Anyway, thinking it was a startup got me a little worried that I'd loose the opportunity to have it, so not long after, I just went online and bought it. I was order 000008 which confirmed that it was a pretty new company.
I didn't see it charged on my Mint.com and thought that was odd, but assumed it would show up soon. That was August 17thish. October 11th, 2012, about two months later, I got a call from someone at TriBling saying, "Sorry to bother you, but I'm with TriBling. Our credit card processing on our site went down so you were never charged, so if I could have you mail a check or get your credit card information down now that would be great. Oh, and afterwards I want to get your feedback on your bling."
I actually told her my idea about using the edges of the bling for the water and shoe in addition to the gear instead of having just the gear 3D and the other edges smooth. She liked my idea saying she could incorporate waves on the side or something. I said it wold be really cool if I could have one if she ended up doing it. She said it may be a while since she has inventory and that she had a lot of requests for strictly running first. I agreed and said that that would expand her market quite a bit because a lot of people are scared of the swim.
I asked if I could get the discount they offered at the event since I didn't see the booth at the Chicago tri but was there. She said sure, she'd take $5 off. Then I got a pretty cool crash course into what she's going through. She wore her rubber necklace all triathlon training season and by the end it was looking rough with the chlorine, sweat, and stuff, and that, like a bike chain, it needs to be replaced. (A parallel which was on her website.. which didn't have the pages you could order from up anymore 10/11/12, probably they will come up once the billing process works again.)
Anyway, she has people who want to invest, but is doing all of it herself because she isn't sure she wants to share yet. She found a jeweler in Chicago who includes the silver, the wax mold, and hand finishing and she wants to keep it in the US instead of going overseas even though it would be cheaper. She's only been able to do small batches, so that is also why the price is high.
The cost of marketing is kind of much. Expos charge upper hundreds to in the thousands for a booth. Printing cards and fliers also costs money, between $.25-$.75 depending on the quantity. Also, to get them to place the fliers in bags, that can be a few hundred dollars as well. Then there is managing a website that isn't charging credit cards properly so only being able to sell inventory at events, also teaching college classes and being a mom.
I had fun talking to her!
March 2013 update: TriBling dropped their prices by about half since I bought my necklace. I paid over $100 including an extra rubber band and a silver band.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)