Re: Any advice for ambitious newbie?

["Bruno Prior" <bruno@xxxxxxx>]

Mark,

Sorry for the delayed reply. Unfortunately, I don't get much time at
home
for this sort of thing. Plus, I sent it originally from the wrong
account
and it bounced.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark McCall" <mark@xxxxxxx>
To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, August 05, 2002 11:26 PM
Subject: Re: [ukha_d] Any advice for ambitious newbie?


> Lots of people here have good stable windows based HA systems with
uptimes
> in months rather than days or weeks.  While there is some Linux
HA
software,
> the vast majority is Windows and you'll be severely limiting your
choice
if
> you decide against it.

As I said originally, I don't want to rekindle the OS religious wars. I
have
my own personal reasons why I don't want to use Windows. I entirely
respect
other people's decision to use Windows, it's just not something I will
be
doing. For what it's worth, my antipathy towards Windows is not
primarily
due to its perceived instability, although it's interesting that this
is
what Windows users most often assume to be the reason. I don't suppose
anyone is going to suggest that you run a server on Windows 9x, but I
am
willing to take people's word for it that you can set up a stable
Windows
NT/2000/XP machine, although that is not our experience at work.

My main (closely related) objections to using Windows are (a)
Microsoft's
business practices, and (b) the closed-source nature of their software.
I
would not claim that linux is easier than Windows. But what I know is
that
when I have a problem with linux or any of the free (as in speach)
software
that runs on it, the tools and information are available to me to
investigate it to whatever extent I choose. With Windows, if you have a
problem and the answer isn't in the online documentation, you're pretty
well
stuffed. And as for their business practices, do I really need to go
into
detail? I had months of VBA code wrecked in a company-mandated upgrade
from
one version of Office to another, and I am not willing to put myself
through
that again. With Free Software, I choose what I want. With MS software,
they
try to limit that choice at every opportunity.

But as I say, use it if you want. I have no problem with people doing
things
their way. As long as people have no problems with me doing things my
way.

> A lot of are doing the same with collections regularly in the 100s
of
> gigabytes.

100s of Gb of MP3s? How much music do they possess? Using VBR at a
pretty
high quality setting, I can rip a CD into around 70Mb without any loss
of
quality discernible to me (but I'm not an audiophile). So my 35 Gb
represents around 500 CDs. I'm pretty keen on music, but 100s of Gb is
more
than I would know what to do with (or be able to afford).

> Have you seen the SliMP3, DDAR, Audiotron etc?

I'm sure they're good, but will they also function to playback video,
play
games, browse the web, read email, write letters etc? If I want a
computer
for these purposes in each room, why not get one box to do everything?
It
would certainly please my wife, who would rather I had no technology
visible, and certainly not a handful of boxes for each purpose. Plus
there's
the cost factor....

> Do yourself and buy a TiVo (or two if you want multi-channel
recording).

How do I watch what I have recorded on TiVo in the rooms where it isn't
located? Is it network-enabled? And can the storage be upped without
invalidating the warranty?

> How many CAT5s per room do you plan?

I know this goes against established practice in this group, but I was
only
planning on one run per workstation, plus a few extra scattered around
where
I think I might want cameras, WiFi access points, points to plug in
laptops
etc. This will probably mean 2 or 3 per room.

> It will be more expensive.  Have you considered hardwired
lighting systems
> instead of X10?

This seems to be the consensus view, which is good to know. No, I
haven't
considered hardwired lighting systems. I have no idea what that would
involve. Where would be a good place to find out about it?

Having said that, it seems to be quite a common view that X10, while
not
perfect, is currently the most cost-effective route for lighting. Is
that
fair?

> Personally those low-energy bulbs give off an awful light.

I agree. It's a toss-up between principles and utility. I suspect that
my
wife will ensure that utility wins.

> YES!  If there's one area you want a standalone, stable hardware
solution
> then it's security.

I've been trying to understand what Comfort gives me, from their
website,
but I don't really get it. A lot of what they do can be done just as
easily
by a server. Is the main advantage that this kit allows you to use
something
other than X10 to control those items where security is significant?
Their
website says that the home control functions (including garage door
mechanisms) work by sending a code "down the existing ring-main
circuits",
so it doesn't sound much more secure than X10 if it isn't X10.

> My garage doors are wired into Comfort and so can be opened by
phone
either
> internal or external to the house.

If this is X10, couldn't this be done as well through Misterhouse or
equivalent?

> I would not use X10 for anything this important! Get smoke detectors
that
> hardwire into your alarm panel.

As I say above, I am struggling to understand the difference between X10
and
the way that Comfort communicates with these sort of devices.

> To be honest I'm losing the will to live now and I'm only about half
way
> through your post :))))

Thanks for making it that far.

Cheers,

Bruno

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

For more information: http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx 
Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx 
Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx 
List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.