Any good reason NOT to use RAID?

[Rod Speed]

[cut]
Raid0 is pointless though, like every one pointed out, no real
reason to run raid0, unless you really really need a gigantic
drive to store something like a raw film scan or NSA phone
call DB

Pointless even for that. And only fools do raw video anymore.

Only fools edit there own video or put out films, right?

Didnt say that. RAW video as opposed to avis etc.

If you are cutting a film you will have dozens of hours of
uncompressed MPEG

Thats not RAW.

or RAW film

Hardly anyone bothers with film anymore.

and you need to play with it to cut it together. You can
not compress video properly till you get it all cut up.

Wrong.

Hence RAID0 is useful if you need gigantic
disk size and have really big files.

Nope, non RAW video doesnt need the bandwidth.

Raid5 is very very slow for writing data to disk, at least on
slower PCs. And in many case you can get 2 larger disks
cheaper then 3 disks half that size. And you do not get easy
backup benefit of Raid1.

Just my 2 cents,

I wanna refund.

I'll get right on that

I agree, I have no idea what the OP's situation is, thus my post
asking to verify it. But my raw video argument for RAID0 holds
nonetheless

No it doesnt.

Average movie that you could print to film (as to be able to sell
it or play in a theater), will run in the 40-80GB range
uncompressed,

Only a fool has that RAW format on their hard drive today.

and don't forget 40 hours or so of crap footage that
you need to cut. For that situation RAID0 is useful.

Nope, not if you arent stupid enough to store it RAW.

You do not compress video before you print it to film!

Hardly anyone bothers with film anymore with personal desktop
systems.

Not, film, film quality footage witch can be digital but needs to be at
8 megapixels or more to look right on a large screen (theater screen).

Unlikely to be RAW, much more likely to be HDTV etc.

Yes I do!

No you dont!!

Why not, perhaps the OP is trying to brake into film business.

Unlikely. Even porn is usually pretty mediocre quality, DVD quality is fine.

You do not know that he or she isn't.

I do know that its unlikely.

And even if not, I simply pointed out that RAID0 is useful if you
need very large disk size, like 1 or 2 TB to cope with various things.
One of them would be film production.

Which its unlikely the OP was asking about if he didnt say.

And you can easily cut a studio quality film on a home computer.
You can even network few computers for distributed processing
and do it in under a day of CPU time.

Sure, but its unlikely the OP is planning to do that.

Why are you arguing about it,

I'm not, I'm just poking holes in the sillier of your claims.

you know I am right about this.

Not as far as the OP is concerned you aint.

You aint even right about HDTV editing either.

As well as I am right about usefulness of RAID1.

Nope. Few personal desktop systems need the instant
recovery that is about all that RAID1 has advantage wise.

 

[kony]

Only a fool has that RAW format on their hard drive today.

Once again Rod demonstrates he is clueless about anything
other than capturing from digital TV like a puppet led by
preset software settings.

Nope, not if you arent stupid enough to store it RAW.

It's the next best thing to lossless compression unless
you're unfortunate enough to have pre-compressed source, OR
fortunate enough to NEED the same final output format w/o
editing.

As for storage, Rod shows his ignorance again if thinking
long term storage formats equate to digital TV formats. The
compression rate is then TOO low. It is a compromise,
compression that degrades the video but needs less hardware
decompression to ease the burden on hardware manufacturers.

I never said it wasnt.

.... and less pertinent with modern CPUs having plenty of
processing power to do lossless if trying to preserve the
video. Lossless HD is still well below the ability of a
modern, single large drive.

 

[x0054]

[cut]

No you dont!!

Yes I do!!!

Unlikely. Even porn is usually pretty mediocre quality, DVD quality is
fine.

DVD quality is fine for porn, but if you are trying to get your film
bought by a distributing company to be shown in theaters it better be at
least 16mm quality.

I do know that its unlikely.

The OP makes no mention of what the RAID is for, he is simple asking for
"any _compelling_ reasons not to use RAID"!

Which its unlikely the OP was asking about if he didnt say.

That is exactly why, in my original response, I indicated that RAID0
isn't useful unless you are in such position as to require a gigantic
contiguous disk space. Then I gave 2 examples of situations that might
require to have such a large space. I did not say that OP is in such
situation, but simply indicated that even though most people have
dismissed RAID0 outright, there are certain situations that land them
selves to using RAID0. I did not mean to imply that most, or even 1% of
home users would find themselves in such situation.

Sure, but its unlikely the OP is planning to do that.

That's not the point. The point is that's it's possible, and it's a good
reason to use RAID0. The OP did not state what his needs were, and I did
not mean to imply that he does cut movies on the side. I simply gave an
example of legitimate use of RAID0.

I'm not, I'm just poking holes in the sillier of your claims.

So far you have not poked a single hole, as I never claimed that OP cuts
raw video, I just suggested that if he was to do so, RAID0 would be
useful. You did not question my conclusion, that being that RAID0 is
useful for editing raw video. Instead you attacked my premise - "some
people edit raw video." Thus the only thing you were able to do is point
out that not every one needs to edit raw video, but that in no way
changes or even casts shadow on my conclusion.

Not as far as the OP is concerned you aint.

You aint even right about HDTV editing either.

I do not remember talking about HDTV, but as we are on the subject,
which HDTV size are you talking about? 480i, 576i, 1080i, 480p, 720p or
1080p? There is a gigantic difference between 480i and 1080p. Standard
HDTV broadcast is running at 1080p about 10GB/hour, and that's
compressed. So even if you goal was only HD quality, you would still be
looking at close to 600GB of uncompressed vedio to sort through (300GB
compressed). If you plan to argue this one, please sight a number or 2
as appose to simply saying "no".

Nope. Few personal desktop systems need the instant
recovery that is about all that RAID1 has advantage wise.

Again, wrong here too. Most people simply do not remember to do backups.
So if you take that same example of home user, and average user will not
backup more then once a week, if that. Most never backup. Thus a home
user with RAID1 is better off then one that has a backup drive but
refreshes the backup only once a week or so. And, also, try to restore
from the same backup solution, it's a nightmare. Wile, with RAID1 it's
more or less idiot proof. If something happens to one disk, you'll get
an error message, but your computer would still be useable. And if you
really do not know how to press a button to rebuild an array after
replacing the bad drive, you can always take the computer to a local
shop and they will do it for you. Most users would do the same thing if
they need to restore from USB backup drive as well, and if it's network
drive by any chance, forget about it. Finally, RAID1 is cheaper then one
drive and one drive of same or larger size in USB or NAS enclosure.

- Bogdan

 

[Rod Speed]

[cut]

No you dont!!

Yes I do!!!

No you dont!!!

DVD quality is fine for porn, but if you are trying to
get your film bought by a distributing company to be
shown in theaters it better be at least 16mm quality.

Unlikely that the OP is planning to do that.

The OP makes no mention of what the RAID is for, he is
simple asking for "any _compelling_ reasons not to use RAID"!

Still unlikely that the OP is planning to do that level of video.

That is exactly why, in my original response, I indicated that RAID0
isn't useful unless you are in such position as to require a gigantic
contiguous disk space. Then I gave 2 examples of situations that might
require to have such a large space. I did not say that OP is in such
situation, but simply indicated that even though most people have
dismissed RAID0 outright, there are certain situations that land them
selves to using RAID0. I did not mean to imply that most, or even
1% of home users would find themselves in such situation.

Its a hell of a lot less than 1%

That's not the point.

Corse it is.

The point is that's it's possible, and it's a good reason to use
RAID0. The OP did not state what his needs were, and I did
not mean to imply that he does cut movies on the side. I
simply gave an example of legitimate use of RAID0.

That possibility is so obscure that only someone who
is pathetically anal would insist on going on about it.

Have you ever had it suggested that if your vacuum cleaner
ever fails, you should be able to zoom around on the floor
on your arse with no pants on instead of having it repaired ?

Not a great idea with some wooden floors tho.

So far you have not poked a single hole,

Fraid so.

as I never claimed that OP cuts raw video,

Never said you did.

I just suggested that if he was to do so, RAID0 would be useful.

You might as well have waffled on about what would be
handy if aliens come visiting and start kicking his PC etc.

You did not question my conclusion, that being that RAID0
is useful for editing raw video. Instead you attacked my premise -
"some people edit raw video." Thus the only thing you were able
to do is point out that not every one needs to edit raw video, but
that in no way changes or even casts shadow on my conclusion.

Pathetic, really.

I do not remember talking about HDTV,

I did.

but as we are on the subject, which HDTV size are you
talking about? 480i, 576i, 1080i, 480p, 720p or 1080p?

Irrelevant to that question of whether RAID0 is necessary.

There is a gigantic difference between 480i and 1080p.
Duh.

Standard HDTV broadcast is running at 1080p about 10GB/hour,
and that's compressed. So even if you goal was only HD quality,
you would still be looking at close to 600GB of uncompressed
vedio to sort through (300GB compressed).

Tad unlikely that the OP is going to do that either.

He may however choose to capture the transport stream
and do some very basic editing of it to get rid of ads etc.

If you plan to argue this one, please sight a
number or 2 as appose to simply saying "no".
no.

Again, wrong here too.
Nope.

Most people simply do not remember to do backups.

Most people dont have RAID1 too.

So if you take that same example of home user, and average user
will not backup more then once a week, if that. Most never backup.

Most dont have RAID1 either.

Thus a home user with RAID1 is better off then one that has a
backup drive but refreshes the backup only once a week or so.

And better off with a decent automated incremental backup done
at a much higher frequency than that than they would be with RAID1.

Because RAID1 is no substitute for proper backups.

And, also, try to restore from the same backup solution, it's a nightmare.

Nope. Completely routine, I do it all the time when working on systems which
have a serious problem, do a full image first before doing anything to them
and with a manual install with other than XP, often restore the original go get
some detail of the original install thats ****ed back again to check something.

Completely routine with something decent like True Image.

Wile, with RAID1 it's more or less idiot proof.

Like hell it is. They break and that level of user cant fix them when they do.

If something happens to one disk, you'll get an error
message, but your computer would still be useable.

And if a virus ****s their system over, or they do something
stupid, or the house burns down or the system gets stolen,
RAID1 is useless because both copys get ****ed over.

The only real advantage with RAID1 is as I said,
the restore time CAN be quicker, but isnt always.

And if you really do not know how to press a button to rebuild
an array after replacing the bad drive, you can always
take the computer to a local shop and they will do it for you.

True of proper backups too, and you are protected against a lot more too.

Most users would do the same thing if they need to restore from USB backup
drive as well, and if it's network drive by any chance, forget about it.

Mindlessly silly on that last.

Finally, RAID1 is cheaper then one drive and one
drive of same or larger size in USB or NAS enclosure.

Doesnt need to be the same size or larger.

And if the destination of the backups is on another drive on the
lan, the marginal cost of the extra space needed is cheapest of all.

Keep desperately digging, you'll be out in china any day now.

 

[Rod Speed]

Once again Rod demonstrates he is clueless
about anything other than capturing from digital
TV like a puppet led by preset software settings.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door.

It's the next best thing to lossless compression unless
you're unfortunate enough to have pre-compressed source,

Which is what it ALL is now with personal desktop systems, child.

OR fortunate enough to NEED the
same final output format w/o editing.

Even someone as stupid as you should be able to work out how
to transcode if someone was actually stupid enough to lend you
a seeing eye dog and a white cane. And even someone as stupid
as you should be able to watch the HD led and notice that it isnt
very active at all when trancoding either.

As for storage, Rod shows his ignorance again if thinking
long term storage formats equate to digital TV formats.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door.

So stupid that it didnt even notice the comments on DVDs in this thread.

The compression rate is then TOO low. It is a compromise,
compression that degrades the video but needs less hardware
decompression to ease the burden on hardware manufacturers.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a ****ing clue about anything at all, ever.

... and less pertinent with modern CPUs having plenty of processing
power to do lossless if trying to preserve the video. Lossless HD is
still well below the ability of a modern, single large drive.

What I said in different words.

 

[x0054]

[cut]

I know that **** all personal desktop systems
have anything to do with FILM anymore.

Yes, if you are involved with FILM, things are different, but the
OP is VERY unlikely to be asking about systems used for FILM.

Saying "no" isn't enough.

You get no say what so ever on that or anything else at all, ever.

Yes I do!

No you dont!!

Yes I do!!!

No you dont!!!

DVD quality is fine for porn, but if you are trying to
get your film bought by a distributing company to be
shown in theaters it better be at least 16mm quality.

Unlikely that the OP is planning to do that.

You do not know what the OP is planning.

Still unlikely that the OP is planning to do that level of video.

So, I never said he was.

Its a hell of a lot less than 1%

That's exactly what I said, you see it my way for once.

Corse it is.

"No". Sorry, had to quote you

That possibility is so obscure that only someone who
is pathetically anal would insist on going on about it.

Have you ever had it suggested that if your vacuum cleaner
ever fails, you should be able to zoom around on the floor
on your arse with no pants on instead of having it repaired ?

Not a great idea with some wooden floors tho.

"Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag" - As sad by
great Rod.

Fraid so.
"No".


Never said you did.

Yeah, but you argument is based on the fact the there is no chance the
OP would ever cut raw video. I never said he would, just gave a
hypothetical use for RAID0

You might as well have waffled on about what would be
handy if aliens come visiting and start kicking his PC etc.

I live in LA. I am not in the industry, but a lot of people I know are,
or trying to brake in. Though it may seem like such outrageously
unlikely possibility to you, it does not to me.

Pathetic, really.

I am sorry, I used some long words. I think google has excellent
dictionary.

I did.

You brought up a subject of which I did not speak, and then told me I am
wrong about that subject. Can you read mineds? Idiot.

Irrelevant to that question of whether RAID0 is necessary.

RAID0 is very necessary for editing 1080p (unless you have access to
some 1TB drives), it isn't for 480i. You would know that if you knew
anything about HD streams.

Tad unlikely that the OP is going to do that either.

Again, you have no clue what the OP is going to do, and he did not ask
you to plan his life for him.

He may however choose to capture the transport stream
and do some very basic editing of it to get rid of ads etc.

Less then 1% of users would do that. Sounds familiar

No!



Yes!


Most people dont have RAID1 too.

But if you have RAID1, you are not as reliant on backups.

Most dont have RAID1 either.

But can, just like backups.

And better off with a decent automated incremental backup done
at a much higher frequency than that than they would be with RAID1.

Because RAID1 is no substitute for proper backups.


Nope. Completely routine, I do it all the time when working on systems
which have a serious problem, do a full image first before doing
anything to them and with a manual install with other than XP, often
restore the original go get some detail of the original install thats
****ed back again to check something.

Completely routine with something decent like True Image.

Right.... I take it that server you run is windows.....

Like hell it is. They break and that level of user cant fix them when
they do.

Why not? In my server when a drive burns out on the RAID1 array I simply
need to unplug dead drive and plug in a fresh one. Don't even have to
power down. On my desktop if a drive burns out I'll have to take it out,
put in a new one and start the computer. That's all! If you have a
software RAID it is a bit more complicated, but Windows does not support
completely SW RAID anyway.

And if a virus ****s their system over, or they do something
stupid, or the house burns down or the system gets stolen,
RAID1 is useless because both copys get ****ed over.

What if the aliens lend and anal probe them? Sounds familiar?

The only real advantage with RAID1 is as I said,
the restore time CAN be quicker, but isnt always.

Try next to instantaneous. And RAID1 also gives you much faster read
speeds if you are into games. A well setups system can actually read 40
to 100% faster from RAID1 because the OS can read from both disks at the
same time. I get read speeds of about 50MB/s on my single drive and
about 80MB/s from the raid1 array from the same drives. Write speeds are
the same, but can be up to 10% slower, again depending on the quality of
your HW.

True of proper backups too, and you are protected against a lot more
too.

Yeah, I did not dispute that.

Mindlessly silly on that last.

Really, how so. Try restoring from network drive, and by that I mean
restoring your OS and not just your files.

Doesnt need to be the same size or larger.

And if the destination of the backups is on another drive on the
lan, the marginal cost of the extra space needed is cheapest of all.

So you are putting all you backups on the same drive. That's brilliant!

Keep desperately digging, you'll be out in china any day now.

I think it is evident to everyone reading this thread that you are an
idiot. And it is more evident that you have no clue about digital video
and the difference between lossless and lossy compressions. You defend
your point with simple "no" or 3 word equivalent of that.

Furthermore, judging by your description, it is also obvious that you do
not like RAID setup because you simply do not know how to set one up.
But that's ok, you are not a bad person just because you are stupid, God
probably likes you, she loves all of her slower children.

Good day sir,

- Bogdan

 

[Rod Speed]

[cut]
I know that **** all personal desktop systems
have anything to do with FILM anymore.

Yes, if you are involved with FILM, things are different, but the
OP is VERY unlikely to be asking about systems used for FILM.

Saying "no" isn't enough.

You get no say what so ever on that or anything else at all,
ever.

Yes I do!

No you dont!!

Yes I do!!!

No you dont!!!

Tell me how you would compress 30 hours of 8 megapixle video so
that it would fit on any single hard drive available today on
the market.

See above.

As I said RAID0 is commonly used in the movie
industry for the purposes described above.

Irrelevant to the OP's original question.

But in most situation RAID0 it's useless. I simple pointed out
that RAID0 isn't completely idiotic, but it simply became less
pertinent in the era of 500GB drives.

I never said it wasnt.

Why not, perhaps the OP is trying to brake into film business.

Unlikely. Even porn is usually pretty mediocre quality, DVD quality
is fine.

DVD quality is fine for porn, but if you are trying to
get your film bought by a distributing company to be
shown in theaters it better be at least 16mm quality.

Unlikely that the OP is planning to do that.

You do not know what the OP is planning.

That is why I used the word UNLIKELY.

So, I never said he was.

I never ever said you did.

That's exactly what I said,

Lying, as always.

you see it my way for once.

Only in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasyland.

"No". Sorry, had to quote you

Pathetic, really.

"Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag"
- As sad by great Rod.

Cant even manage its own lines.

"No".

Pathetic, really.

Yeah, but you argument is based on the fact the
there is no chance the OP would ever cut raw video.

Lying, again.

I never said he would,

Never said you did.

just gave a hypothetical use for RAID0

Fanciful, actually.

I live in LA.

Your problem. And you clearly dont 'live' at all.

I am not in the industry,

Your problem.

but a lot of people I know are, or trying to brake in.

Your problem.

Though it may seem like such outrageously
unlikely possibility to you, it does not to me.

Your problem.

I am sorry, I used some long words.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

I think

Not a shred of evidence that you are actually capable of thought.

google has excellent dictionary.

Try again in english.

You brought up a subject of which I did not speak,

Your problem.

and then told me I am wrong about that subject.

Lying, as always.

Can you read mineds?

Nope, no one can.

Idiot.
****wit.

RAID0 is very necessary for editing 1080p

Pig ignorant drivel.

(unless you have access to some 1TB drives),

More pig ignorant drivel. Ever heard of spanning, child ?

it isn't for 480i. You would know that
if you knew anything about HD streams.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

Again, you have no clue what the OP is going to do,

Again, the word UNLIKELY was used for a reason, child.

and he did not ask you to plan his life for him.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

Less then 1% of users would do that.

Wrong, as always.

Sounds familiar

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

No!

Pathetic, really.

Nope!!!

But if you have RAID1, you are not as reliant on backups.

Irrelevant. More have backups than have RAID1.

But can, just like backups.

Pathetic, really.

Right.... I take it that server you run is windows.....

You can take anything you like, anywhere you like, child.

Why not?

They dont know enough about their systems, stupid.

In my server when a drive burns out on the RAID1 array
I simply need to unplug dead drive and plug in a fresh one.

Nothing like that with most users.

And most dont get 'burns out' drives either.

Don't even have to power down.

Whoopy do.

On my desktop if a drive burns out I'll have to take
it out, put in a new one and start the computer.

Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it, child.

That's all!

Pity about the other situations, child!!!

If you have a software RAID it is a bit more complicated,
but Windows does not support completely SW RAID anyway.

Wrong, as always.

What if the aliens lend and anal probe them?

Lend what ?

Sounds familiar?

Nope, you're the one with the pathetic little homoerotic fantasys, child.

Try next to instantaneous.

Not necessarily.

And RAID1 also gives you much faster
read speeds if you are into games.

Pig ignorant lie.

A well setups system can actually read 40 to 100% faster from
RAID1 because the OS can read from both disks at the same time.

Pig ignorant lie.

I get read speeds of about 50MB/s on my single drive and
about 80MB/s from the raid1 array from the same drives.

Hope you didnt cream your jeans, child.

Write speeds are the same, but can be up to 10%
slower, again depending on the quality of your HW.
Yawn.

Yeah, I did not dispute that.

Never said you did.

Really, how so.

Because that is the way it is, child.

Try restoring from network drive, and by that
I mean restoring your OS and not just your files.

Do that routinely on the test system thanks, child.

So you are putting all you backups on the same drive.
Nope.

That's brilliant!

You're stupid!!!

I think

Not a shred of evidence that you are actually capable of thought, child.

it is evident to everyone reading this thread that you are an idiot.

You're the one that cant even manage to work out
how to restore an OS from a network drive, child.

And it is more evident that you have no clue about digital video

Odd, could have sworn I do it every day thanks, child.

and the difference between lossless and lossy compressions.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

You defend your point with simple "no" or 3 word equivalent of that.

Lying, as always.

Furthermore, judging by your description, it is also obvious that you do
not like RAID setup because you simply do not know how to set one up.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

But that's ok, you are not a bad person just because you are
stupid, God probably likes you, she loves all of her slower children.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

Good day sir,

Bad day, cur.

 

[x0054]

[cut]
I know that **** all personal desktop systems
have anything to do with FILM anymore.

Yes, if you are involved with FILM, things are different, but
the OP is VERY unlikely to be asking about systems used for
FILM.

Saying "no" isn't enough.

You get no say what so ever on that or anything else at all,
ever.

Yes I do!

No you dont!!

Yes I do!!!

No you dont!!!

Tell me how you would compress 30 hours of 8 megapixle video so
that it would fit on any single hard drive available today on
the market.

See above.

As I said RAID0 is commonly used in the movie
industry for the purposes described above.

Irrelevant to the OP's original question.

But in most situation RAID0 it's useless. I simple pointed
out that RAID0 isn't completely idiotic, but it simply became
less pertinent in the era of 500GB drives.

I never said it wasnt.

Why not, perhaps the OP is trying to brake into film business.

Unlikely. Even porn is usually pretty mediocre quality, DVD
quality is fine.

DVD quality is fine for porn, but if you are trying to
get your film bought by a distributing company to be
shown in theaters it better be at least 16mm quality.

Unlikely that the OP is planning to do that.

You do not know what the OP is planning.

That is why I used the word UNLIKELY.

So, I never said he was.

I never ever said you did.

That's exactly what I said,

Lying, as always.

you see it my way for once.

Only in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasyland.

"No". Sorry, had to quote you

Pathetic, really.

"Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag"
- As sad by great Rod.

Cant even manage its own lines.

"No".

Pathetic, really.

Yeah, but you argument is based on the fact the
there is no chance the OP would ever cut raw video.

Lying, again.

I never said he would,

Never said you did.

just gave a hypothetical use for RAID0

Fanciful, actually.

I live in LA.

Your problem. And you clearly dont 'live' at all.

I am not in the industry,

Your problem.

but a lot of people I know are, or trying to brake in.

Your problem.

Though it may seem like such outrageously
unlikely possibility to you, it does not to me.

Your problem.

I am sorry, I used some long words.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

I think

Not a shred of evidence that you are actually capable of thought.

google has excellent dictionary.

Try again in english.

You brought up a subject of which I did not speak,

Your problem.

and then told me I am wrong about that subject.

Lying, as always.

Can you read mineds?

Nope, no one can.

Idiot.
****wit.

RAID0 is very necessary for editing 1080p

Pig ignorant drivel.

(unless you have access to some 1TB drives),

More pig ignorant drivel. Ever heard of spanning, child ?

it isn't for 480i. You would know that
if you knew anything about HD streams.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

Again, you have no clue what the OP is going to do,

Again, the word UNLIKELY was used for a reason, child.

and he did not ask you to plan his life for him.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

Less then 1% of users would do that.

Wrong, as always.

Sounds familiar

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

No!

Pathetic, really.

Nope!!!

But if you have RAID1, you are not as reliant on backups.

Irrelevant. More have backups than have RAID1.

But can, just like backups.

Pathetic, really.

Right.... I take it that server you run is windows.....

You can take anything you like, anywhere you like, child.

Why not?

They dont know enough about their systems, stupid.

In my server when a drive burns out on the RAID1 array
I simply need to unplug dead drive and plug in a fresh one.

Nothing like that with most users.

And most dont get 'burns out' drives either.

Don't even have to power down.

Whoopy do.

On my desktop if a drive burns out I'll have to take
it out, put in a new one and start the computer.

Hardly the end of civilisation as we know it, child.

That's all!

Pity about the other situations, child!!!

If you have a software RAID it is a bit more complicated,
but Windows does not support completely SW RAID anyway.

Wrong, as always.

What if the aliens lend and anal probe them?

Lend what ?

Sounds familiar?

Nope, you're the one with the pathetic little homoerotic fantasys,
child.

Try next to instantaneous.

Not necessarily.

And RAID1 also gives you much faster
read speeds if you are into games.

Pig ignorant lie.

A well setups system can actually read 40 to 100% faster from
RAID1 because the OS can read from both disks at the same time.

Pig ignorant lie.

I get read speeds of about 50MB/s on my single drive and
about 80MB/s from the raid1 array from the same drives.

Hope you didnt cream your jeans, child.

Write speeds are the same, but can be up to 10%
slower, again depending on the quality of your HW.
Yawn.

Yeah, I did not dispute that.

Never said you did.

Really, how so.

Because that is the way it is, child.

Try restoring from network drive, and by that
I mean restoring your OS and not just your files.

Do that routinely on the test system thanks, child.

So you are putting all you backups on the same drive.
Nope.

That's brilliant!

You're stupid!!!

I think

Not a shred of evidence that you are actually capable of thought,
child.

it is evident to everyone reading this thread that you are an idiot.

You're the one that cant even manage to work out
how to restore an OS from a network drive, child.

And it is more evident that you have no clue about digital video

Odd, could have sworn I do it every day thanks, child.

and the difference between lossless and lossy compressions.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

You defend your point with simple "no" or 3 word equivalent of that.

Lying, as always.

Furthermore, judging by your description, it is also obvious that you
do not like RAID setup because you simply do not know how to set one
up.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

But that's ok, you are not a bad person just because you are
stupid, God probably likes you, she loves all of her slower children.

Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.

Good day sir,

Bad day, cur.

No.

- Bogdan