Laptop and an expansion box questions??????

wrote:


You can also purchase a PCI or PCI Express sound card, like a SoundBlaster
brand product of some sort. Sometimes the results are a little better.
My motherboard sound is a bit flat and lifeless (bad drivers).

I want good sound but I'm not an audiofile. These options are open for
now. I'm NOT into games and probably never will be.

The plugin card may have a better noise floor for recording, but that
might only be apparent if you're working with classical music (with
quiet passages). I like my PCI sound card, a cheapie, because it's driver
is slightly better than the driver for the onboard sound. I've had
onboard sound before, with an "echo" added by the software for ambiance.
Even though the sound control panel specifies "no special effect", the
echo was still there. It's not necessarily that the hardware is superior -
a plugin card might be only marginally better than the onboard sound. But
sometimes, it's a driver issue, an issue that never gets fixed. You can
swap cards, until you get something that works.


2) 3D flat screen television system

A flat screen TV (without the 3D in the title), can be driven by
the video card, if the video card has the right connectors on it.

I don't know how a "3D flat screen" works. Shutter glasses ? Nvidia
had some scheme to do that, but it's a bit on the obscure side
(you may have trouble finding people who got it working, and
understand the requirements). It might involve double frame rate
output for example. You'll need to find an example of someone
doing such a setup, to understand the hardware requirements for it.

I'll have to do some research. What advantage is there to have a PC
control a TV?

Mixed media, allowing the computer to be the "mixer" or control center, and
allow the source to be a TV tuner live, TIVO style pre-recorded, DVD playback
from the optical drive on the computer, or perhaps playing Flash movie content
from YouTube.

You can also get boxes which sit remote from your computer, and they
can load files from the computer over some kind of network connection.
In some cases, they even accept a USB flash stick with content on it.
So it is also possible for a specialized box to sit next to the TV set,
complete with a handheld remote to control it.


For the OS, you might also want a version of Windows that bundles
Media Center (Windows 7 comes in several SKUs, some of which include
Media Center.) Some hardware devices are designed to work with
Media Center, which takes some of the pain out of setting them up.

Can you tell me, basically, what Media Center does? I have iy on my
laptop but don't yet understand it.

You could start with an article like this, but these articles aren't always
the most linearly written. I've never played with Media Center, so I can't
give any details there. Basically, one of those kinds of software, put a
thing on the computer screen that looks like a TV On Screen Display.
You navigate the menu, to get various TV functions. If you are holding a
Media Center remote control in your hand, the up and down channel buttons
can be forwarded to a TV tuner, and cause the TV tuner to change channels.
(Media Center can even send channel change commands to a set top box.)
This gives the impression you're using a regular TV remote, with some degree of
confirmation on the screen. But additional functions, such as scheduling
TV tuner recordings, are also supported.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_center

I've played with MythTV a couple times (a Linux freebie), but found the
experience a colossal PITA. The first time, it took me a week, to figure
out how to configure the thing (front ends and back ends), such that
my single TV tuner would be declared non-busy and I could actually use it.
The second time I set it up (after erasing the original hard drive with
the environment on it), I couldn't figure out the recipe needed. Suffice
to say, the same thing isn't going to happen with Media Center. You might
get stumped, if you mix too many TV tuner type devices together. There
are a large number of recording devices out there, and mixing all sorts
of that stuff together doesn't always work right. They even make
tuners that sit on your home network, and connect via TCP/IP.

"SiliconDust HDHomeRun Network-based Dual Digital HDTV Tuner Ethernet Interface"

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16815327005


6) ham radio

RS232 for control of some sort ? Some projects still require RS232,
whereas it won't be common as a built-in on the motherboard. I'm
using a couple USB to RS232 external adapters, but I don't really
like them. A cabling mess...

Do you have any experience with Ham Radio using computers?

None.


7) home conveniences

Like switching lights on remotely ? There will likely be an interface
module that plugs into one of your outlets. And some standard like USB,
for connecting the box to your computer.

I will probably consider this because I live in two locations and I think
it would benefit me if I could check in on the 'other' location from time
to time.

This is fine, as long as you ISP allows it. It depends on what their
definition of "you're running a server, sir" happens to be. The home
with the camera, fits the loose definition of a "server" device.
Client computers, connect to the server, to view the content. Your
ISP would definitely complain if you set up a home web server
(HTTP on port 80). If you pay for a business account, the rules
change, along with the price. For other services, it's less clear to me
whether they police that or not. And the fun part is, the ISP
Acceptable Usage policy, doesn't always spell out what ports
you can and cannot use, or what constitutes a server.

So, try it and see... :-) If it works for a minute and then stops,
you have your answer.


You can scale down your video card a bit.

What do you mean by 'scale down?'

I initially picked out a "3D gamer" card for you. Once you indicated
you did not play 3D games, then it was no longer necessary to be using
a 262 watt video card. A lower performance card, with the right set
of connectors on the faceplate, should be plenty to drive a TV set,
a 30" LCD monitor (the hi-res kind), and so on. The card provides
video playback acceleration, but that isn't needed if you already have
a powerful processor. Video cards are also capable of general purpose
computing (terms: GPGPU, CUDA, OpenCL), and there are a couple software
packages that attempt to offload part of the task to the video card.
But so far, the level of acceleration that results, isn't worth spending
more money on. "Demo programs" written by the video card companies, have
got 25x speedup on some tasks, but other things you might want to do,
are only 5x faster. In some cases, the "video card method", actually
ends up running slower than if done by your main processor. It isn't
a convincing reason, for everyone to have a 262 watt video card.

If, at some point, a piece of software is written, which does something
useful, and gets a decent scaleup using a video card, then it might
be worth upgrading the video card. But at this point, that would be
speculative. Stick with the thin, low power card for now. The main
justification for the 262 watt cards, is for gaming on hi-res monitors.
For example, the current generation of cards, are playing with the
idea of driving anywhere from three to six monitors with the same card.
(They need gimmicks like this, to justify faster and faster cards.)


I'm planning on getting the largest and best monitor I can get when I'm
ready.

A 30" computer monitor, with 2560 x 1600 resolution, is about the sweet
spot in terms of resolution. You can get bigger TV sets, but the resolution
might only be 1920 x 1080. The 30" computer monitors have the most pixels.

With a lower power video card, you can move down a bit in terms
of power supply capacity. I picked this example, because it shows
"modular cabling". Since you're going to be inside the computer
case a lot,

No doubt!!!

a modular cabling supply allows unused cables to be
unplugged at the power supply end. The main 20+4 and ATX12V 2x2
or 2x4 splittable connectors, are permanently affixed to the supply
(as you'll always need them). The peripheral cabling, whether PCI Express,
SATA power for hard drive, or Molex power for hard drive, can be
unplugged when you aren't using them. Modular supplies are fine,
unless the connectors aren't properly keyed, and there is a
danger of plugging a cable into the wrong "hole". Some people
have had expensive kit burned, by stupid connector choices
by the manufacturer of the modular ATX supply.

I won't use a power supply that is under powered. I think that extra
capacity is a smart thing to do. What is your opinion?

There is no problem there. You can bump up the capacity if you want.
You can probably find a modular supply with higher power numbers.

At one time, power supplies had a "minimum load" spec, which made
bumping up the supply too much, a problem. But I'm not aware of
them having minimum load specs now, so go crazy if you like.
I probably wouldn't go over 1200 watts, just to avoid problems
with the wall outlet :-)

My current power supply is "UPS friendly", and won't fight
with my UPS. But some of the newer Active PFC supplies, would
cause me to have to buy another UPS.

Should I assume that your opinion is that everyone should use a backup
power supply? BTW, one of the better know manufacturers is about three
miles from where I live and I used to work with the current president of
the company. Doesn't mean a damn thin - just curiosity. I think the
Company is APC.

Whether you need a UPS, depends purely on how well your electrical supply
works.

Years ago, my house was "serially connected" to some transmission lines
running through the city. There was no redundancy, and between thunder
storms, switching transients (when the power company is reconfiguring stuff),
I was getting two outages a day. My work office was on the same power system,
and the company bought everyone in the office a UPS, because of the downtime
the one second outages was causing. Servers were taking 10 or 15 minutes to come
back up, and all the home directories were on them. So the boss decided,
just put UPSes on everything.

I'd already come to that conclusion, before working there. Our power
company sucks, in terms of "doing it right".

Paul

....
What is a benchmarking web page?
....
What's the difference between SATA and ESATA?
....

Often answers to these types of questions
can be found via the Wikipedia site ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benchmark_(computing)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SATA

Using the search box at the top of the Wikipedia page
should help to find things or lead you to other search
terms ....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page


--
Stanley C. Kitching
Human Being
Phoenix, Arizona

wrote:


OK, if these components become obsolete, do you think I can count on
being able to upgrade the rig (especially the processor)?


Well, with LGA1366 or LGA1156, you'll be in a better position than
I am with LGA775.


I don't have money to burn, but I'm retired (because of the head pain)
and my wife knows that computers are my 'hobby.' It's about all I can
do. So, at least for this first time, I think I can get away with the
'best'. After that, we'll see.


What's the difference between SATA and ESATA?

To start with, we'll talk about SATA. That is the standard for inside
the computer case. Hard drives have moved from the old IDE ribbon cable,
to a thinner data cable. It runs serially, but at extremely high speeds.
Standard rates 150MB/sec, 300MB/sec, 600MB/sec. The fastest regular hard
drive is around 125MB/sec because of the head to platter interface, so
none of those cabling rates are a limitation for sustained transfers. The
Solid State Drive (SSD) with flash memory chips inside, can go at up to
355MB/sec currently, making better usage of the fastest cable rates.
This is a lot faster than the old ribbon cable, which ran at 100MB/sec
or 133MB/sec.

The SATA internal data connector, is only rated for a small number of plug-in
attempts. (I'd have to look up the number, to get it right, but it might be
50 or less insertions.)

They also decided it would be nice, if the same cabling and interface standards
could be used for external disks. It would allow the same performance, as
if the disk was inside the computer. You provide an enclosure with its own
power supply, then run an ESATA cable between the enclosure and the back
of the computer. If your computer has an ESATA connector in the I/O plate
area, then you're all set.

When they designed the ESATA connector, they added metal to it, such that
it can stand 5000 insertions without failure. It's a more rugged connector.

In terms of electrical differences, there is a slight difference in cable
signal voltages. The purpose of that, is to allow an ESATA cable to be two
meters long (six feet). If your computer were to use a regular SATA electrical
interface (some cheap expansion cards do that), then you may still be able to
get an external connection to work with one meter of cable. If your ESATA
didn't seem to work smooth, you might change to a shorter ESATA cable, with
less high frequency attenuation.


But why do I need a computer at all? The AV Receiver can do what's
necessary, won't it?

Many devices can be a "control center" for you. Many stand alone devices
can provide entertainment functions (i.e. rent your TIVO). There are
always multiple ways to organize your "toys" and your content. A computer
allows a "computer centric" way to do it. Some people, for example, may
connect the computer to their HDTV, to play back movie content (sending
the movie audio to their HDTV or home theater setup), and then later
decide to play a 3D game on the same screen. Some people own console
gaming platforms, and have other "toys" plugged into the HDTV, like their
XBOX.

Years ago, when I got started with computers, the joke was, computers were for
"organizing recipe cards". Those 3" x 5" cards your wife would keep in a box,
with tasty recipes recorded on them. A cynic would say, nothing has changed,
and that is still all a computer is good for.

You can probably find equivalent functions for a lot of things the computer
does, in standalone boxes, like your TIVO example. A computer allows you to
do email, web browsing and the like, and that is a communications function.
But other platforms are also doing some of those things, witness the iPad,
smart phones, netbooks and the like. So a desktop computer isn't essential
for that either.

I suppose video editing would be an example of a unique function that
can't be done well otherwise. Or perhaps desktop publishing.

I like the computer, because I can plug things in and add functionality to
it. It I did it "TIVO style", it might cost me more money, because each
box would have its own enclosure, power supply, cabling and so on. I might not
be able to upgrade my "black box" style solution, without completely replacing
it. If you can handle plug-in cards, and do the research to figure out what is
needed, the computer is like a "LEGO set", and allows you to "build solutions".

That isn't a very strong endorsement of the computer. I guess it's all a
matter of what you're used to.


In case I haven't mentioned it yet, I do regular incremental backups on a
LaCie USB2 external drive. Unfortunately, I can't remember which RAID
configuration it has - but if one drive goes bad, the other will carry
on. As you can tell. I'm not really into RAID yet. Don't understand the
positives and negatives of each RAID type yet.

The positives of certain RAID types, such as RAID 1 or RAID 5, is
as you noted, redundancy. RAID allows maintenance on your storage
subsystem, to be delayed to a more convenient time. RAID does not
remove the need for backups. RAID is also complicated, and many times
people will show up here saying "what should I do - how do I fix this ?"
with their RAID. To be a competent RAID owner, you need to practice
fixing the RAID array, when there are no important files on it. You
"break" the RAID on purpose, and try to "fix" it. Once you've learned
how to use the interfaces (BIOS level or RAID management OS level),
and see what functions erase data, then you'll be more prepared when
a drive fails. But having backups on a separate drive is still necessary,
because *all* the drives can fail at the same time. If your power supply
puts out +15V on the +12V rail (overvoltage), all four drives in your
RAID could be ruined at the same instant. That is why external USB drives,
with their own power supply, are of value. A backup copy, on a disconnected
drive stored away from the computer, reduces the risk of losing the data.

Then the question would be, "how is RAID getting me further ahead ?".
In a work environment, RAID allows the storage server to continue working,
even when it is "partially broken". So there is no downtime during the
8AM-4PM shift. For a home user, a RAID is a "more immediate backup", so
might result in less data loss, for the single drive failure case. A
person might not be religiously making backups every day, and a RAID 1
is making identical copies all the time. So there may be less data loss
or disruption, than if you were putting backups on an external disk.

But that is also balanced by the complexity. Like, which drive do I
change out on my RAID 5 ? What do I do to rebuild the array and not
lose any data ? RAID requires more of an investment in time, to
train yourself and become familiar with how to use the controls.

I don't see 32 bit versus 64 bit integer operations making much difference.

I'll check this out on the Photoshop groups to see if anyone out there
has any measureable experience on this matter.

I'd like to see some runs of PSBench, to see how Photoshop has changed
for better or worse. It's pretty hard to find good benchmark results
like that, all on one website (Tomshardware doesn't use PSBench). On the
one hand, when Adobe writes that software, they place a priority on
"filter quality", so they don't necessarily take shortcuts to make things
faster. With a decent processor, the only time you're going to see a delay
in Photoshop, is if you're doing batch processing of yards-wide posters.
(You used to be able to script Photoshop, and have it do the same ops to
a set of photos. I used that, when scanning documents and post-processing
them.)


Gotcha!! BTW, do the other guys in this group (and you) communicate
offline about threads such as mine? Just curious. No disrespect to the
others who are attempting to help me - but again, your responses are very
clear, complete and in logical order. Thank you!!

You'll notice my email address is bogus. I think one person on USENET
has my real email address, and I've changed ISPs since then (to save a few
bucks). I can't say how much email others are doing. (I do so little
email, that my email setup is on another computer, and I only boot
that machine once every couple months.)

I think I got tired of email, after thousands and thousands of useless
messages at work. (Like the president of my company, telling all the
employees what a hero he was :-) ) Email was only a source of stress
for me. A never ending tap, you couldn't shut off.

If you join an enthusiast forum on some web site, they have a "PM" function
for private conversations. So there are better ways than USENET, in that
regard.

Paul

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 21:12:06 -0600, "peter" wrote:
Peter, I'm going to look up all the components you suggested. But I have
a question: I was told that if I got a waorkstation box, I would be sure
to have plenty of room to work with inside and also more slots in case I
need them. Does this make sense? Also, somewhere in this thread, I
think I remember someone suggesting that I get a 1200W power supply -
again, to cover anything I might want in the future that I don't see now.

One more (off the thread) subject: Only on this group, when I 'Get New
Headers', it takes about 75 seconds to 'Update the Folder.' This doesn't
happen on any other group. I am using Forte Agent, Windows 7 and get my
news from Giganews. I have never had this happen to me before.
Thanks......

snipofunneededtext

Maybe it's because it has to work through all the unneeded text in
your posts.




s

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 18:14:21 -0700, Steve wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 21:12:06 -0600, "peter" wrote:
Peter, I'm going to look up all the components you suggested. But I have
a question: I was told that if I got a waorkstation box, I would be sure
to have plenty of room to work with inside and also more slots in case I
need them. Does this make sense? Also, somewhere in this thread, I
think I remember someone suggesting that I get a 1200W power supply -
again, to cover anything I might want in the future that I don't see now.

One more (off the thread) subject: Only on this group, when I 'Get New
Headers', it takes about 75 seconds to 'Update the Folder.' This doesn't
happen on any other group. I am using Forte Agent, Windows 7 and get my
news from Giganews. I have never had this happen to me before.
Thanks......

snipofunneededtext

Maybe it's because it has to work through all the unneeded text in
your posts.



Are you being funny?

s

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 18:14:21 -0700, Steve wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 21:12:06 -0600, "peter" wrote:
Peter, I'm going to look up all the components you suggested. But I have
a question: I was told that if I got a waorkstation box, I would be sure
to have plenty of room to work with inside and also more slots in case I
need them. Does this make sense? Also, somewhere in this thread, I
think I remember someone suggesting that I get a 1200W power supply -
again, to cover anything I might want in the future that I don't see now.

One more (off the thread) subject: Only on this group, when I 'Get New
Headers', it takes about 75 seconds to 'Update the Folder.' This doesn't
happen on any other group. I am using Forte Agent, Windows 7 and get my
news from Giganews. I have never had this happen to me before.
Thanks......

snipofunneededtext

Maybe it's because it has to work through all the unneeded text in
your posts.


Well, in any case, I temporarily switched from 'Watched' View to "All
Messages' view then back again. Now it woks fine.



s

wrote:


Paul, do you put together PCs? At what approximate cost (for instance,
Peter's recommendations in his next post on this thread)? I'm thinking
it might help a lot if someone else puts together a system for me and I
learn by 'tinkering' with the finished rig.

Bob


I put computers together for myself. I'm not a system builder if
that's what you're thinking. I'm a hobbyist like yourself,
but I also have a background in engineering.

I second Peter's suggestion to go and look at a monitor, before
you buy it. In fact, that is the thing I spend the most time
doing - I'm very careful before buying a monitor.

For example, I've visited a couple places like Best Buy in town,
and could see *nothing* worth buying. All total crap. It can
actually be hard to find a place that has quality equipment
on display for you to look at.

If you have an Apple store handy, you can have a look at their 30"
monitor, and see what the ergonomics are like. You have to sit back
from the screen a bit, to use a screen that big. The resolution on
one of those would be something like 2560 x 1600, and if you don't
set it up right, the print is going to be pretty tiny. (You need
a video card with dual link DVI to drive something with that many
pixels. Not all cards have dual link DVI on all DVI connectors.
VGA would not be a very good choice for a high quality screen.
And I don't know if the latest HDMI can drive something
like that at native resolution or not.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hdmi

"HDMI 1.3 increased that to 340 MHz, which allows for higher
resolution (such as WQXGA, 2560×1600) across a single digital link."

Dell makes screens like that, but where are you going to look at them ?

And I recommend looking at text on the LCD, before you buy it. At
one of the computer shops, I put an MSWord document on all the
monitors that were fed by their distribution amplifier, so I could
evaluate text quality. Normally, all they show is some movie playing
on all the screens, and that doesn't test the display at all. By using
text as a test, I was able to see one particular monitor was better
than the others. And after two weeks of evaluating stuff at
various stores, that is the one I bought (and am still using
six years later). The monitor is a bit washed out now, and isn't
as good as the day I got it. It has a reflective front surface,
but is also easy to clean, so I never have to worry about ruining
this screen with cleaning products.

Paul

Paul nospam needed.com wrote:

PeoplesChoice Chicago.net wrote:

I'm thinking it might help a lot if someone else puts together
a system for me and I learn by 'tinkering' with the finished
rig.

That is a good idea. A hand me down from a relative or friend
might work for that. Or maybe you can find an inexpensive OEM
computer that can be upgraded. It just has to be upgradable.

I put computers together for myself. I'm not a system builder if
that's what you're thinking. I'm a hobbyist like yourself, but I
also have a background in engineering.

I second Peter's suggestion to go and look at a monitor, before
you buy it. In fact, that is the thing I spend the most time
doing - I'm very careful before buying a monitor.

For example, I've visited a couple places like Best Buy in town,
and could see *nothing* worth buying. All total crap. It can
actually be hard to find a place that has quality equipment on
display for you to look at.

Or configured properly. I have seen monitor flicker many times in
retail stores, because they did not have the refresh rate set
higher than the default 60 Hz. Apparently whoever sets it up does
not bother to configure anything.

On 14 Jul 2010 05:21:49 GMT, John Doe wrote:

Paul nospam needed.com wrote:

PeoplesChoice Chicago.net wrote:

I'm thinking it might help a lot if someone else puts together
a system for me and I learn by 'tinkering' with the finished
rig.

That is a good idea. A hand me down from a relative or friend
might work for that. Or maybe you can find an inexpensive OEM
computer that can be upgraded. It just has to be upgradable.

I put computers together for myself. I'm not a system builder if
that's what you're thinking. I'm a hobbyist like yourself, but I
also have a background in engineering.

I second Peter's suggestion to go and look at a monitor, before
you buy it. In fact, that is the thing I spend the most time
doing - I'm very careful before buying a monitor.

For example, I've visited a couple places like Best Buy in town,
and could see *nothing* worth buying. All total crap. It can
actually be hard to find a place that has quality equipment on
display for you to look at.

Or configured properly. I have seen monitor flicker many times in
retail stores, because they did not have the refresh rate set
higher than the default 60 Hz. Apparently whoever sets it up does
not bother to configure anything.


Thanks - good information!!!!!

On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 00:33:46 -0400, Paul wrote:

wrote:


Paul, do you put together PCs? At what approximate cost (for instance,
Peter's recommendations in his next post on this thread)? I'm thinking
it might help a lot if someone else puts together a system for me and I
learn by 'tinkering' with the finished rig.

Bob


I put computers together for myself. I'm not a system builder if
that's what you're thinking. I'm a hobbyist like yourself,
but I also have a background in engineering.

I have a couple of degrees in Engineering myself - one of them
Electronics. So I take it that you wouldn't consider buiding this unit
for me......


I second Peter's suggestion to go and look at a monitor, before
you buy it. In fact, that is the thing I spend the most time
doing - I'm very careful before buying a monitor.

For example, I've visited a couple places like Best Buy in town,
and could see *nothing* worth buying. All total crap. It can
actually be hard to find a place that has quality equipment
on display for you to look at.

If you have an Apple store handy,

I'll find one!

you can have a look at their 30"
monitor, and see what the ergonomics are like. You have to sit back
from the screen a bit, to use a screen that big. The resolution on
one of those would be something like 2560 x 1600, and if you don't
set it up right, the print is going to be pretty tiny. (You need
a video card with dual link DVI to drive something with that many
pixels. Not all cards have dual link DVI on all DVI connectors.
VGA would not be a very good choice for a high quality screen.
And I don't know if the latest HDMI can drive something
like that at native resolution or not.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hdmi

"HDMI 1.3 increased that to 340 MHz, which allows for higher
resolution (such as WQXGA, 2560×1600) across a single digital link."

Dell makes screens like that, but where are you going to look at them ?

And I recommend looking at text on the LCD, before you buy it. At
one of the computer shops, I put an MSWord document on all the
monitors that were fed by their distribution amplifier, so I could
evaluate text quality. Normally, all they show is some movie playing
on all the screens, and that doesn't test the display at all. By using
text as a test, I was able to see one particular monitor was better
than the others. And after two weeks of evaluating stuff at
various stores, that is the one I bought (and am still using
six years later). The monitor is a bit washed out now, and isn't
as good as the day I got it. It has a reflective front surface,
but is also easy to clean, so I never have to worry about ruining
this screen with cleaning products.

I'll be sure to look at monitors in a store - especially an Apple store.
I think I can find one.

Bob


Paul