|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
wylde
Joined: 14 Apr 2003
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 20, 2004 10:13 pm Post subject: Splitting Files |
 |
|
| anyone have a link for a good file splitter? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wylde
Joined: 14 Apr 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| this is an easy thing to do.. i just tried 2 different programs and 1 didnt install and the other, crashed the puter when i tried to run a split file... there must be a bunch of you guys doing this all the time.. recommend a program and i'll find it then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wylde
Joined: 14 Apr 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 2:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
1 more time...
i have tried 10 different file splitters, why wont the split files run? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Until you tell us what you are trying to do, no one can help you do anything. Splitting text files is different from music files which are different from video files which are different than databases which are different from blah blah blah. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wylde
Joined: 14 Apr 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 2:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
thanks gord...
they be movie files.. i havent bothered splitting files before...
if they dont fit on a cd, they stay on my hdd.
i now realize a movie splitter is needed.
i have virtual dub... i didnt even think about it, i just used it to see if movies that i took off winmx were the real deal.
i'll give that a shot.
unless ya can tell me the name of a simple program that will just chop the file in 2 or 3 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why do you burn things to CD? In terms of storage, it's cheaper to just buy hard drives, and more convenient too.
A 200 gig drive will cost about 150,000W, or 750 Won per gigabyte, or about 450 Won per CD sized equal. The only way to beat that with CDs is to buy blank CDs WITHOUT cases AND to completely max every CD so that no space remains unused.
Plus it will last far longer than most CDRs anyway.
Hell, buy two and you've got automatic backups. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wylde
Joined: 14 Apr 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 2:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gord wrote: |
Why do you burn things to CD? In terms of storage, it's cheaper to just buy hard drives, and more convenient too.
A 200 gig drive will cost about 150,000W, or 750 Won per gigabyte, or about 450 Won per CD sized equal. The only way to beat that with CDs is to buy blank CDs WITHOUT cases AND to completely max every CD so that no space remains unused.
Plus it will last far longer than most CDRs anyway.
Hell, buy two and you've got automatic backups. |
apparently the biggest hdd made for the raid system (to date) is only 120gb. from what i understand, if i were to replace a hdd i already have with a bigger 1 the unit that was replaced will be usless as there are no free ide sockets left on this.
it is only a raid hdd that can be used with the raid system?
besides.. i have had hdd crash before and i have lost a swag of stuff... it would be good to have some stuff i have on disk too.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Raid Arrays don't care what size the hard drive is. Whoever told you there was a size limit lied to you. There are also no RAID drives. You just use standard hard drives, be they IDE, SATA, or SCSI.
If you actually spent money and didn't buy the cheapest motherboard on the shelf, you probably already have a a RAID option on your motherboard for automatic backups. You just plug in the two drives, set the BIOS up to to say "ok, this drive is to mirror this drive", and you're off to the races.
If you did decide to go cheap and bought a motherboard that doesn't have built in RAID, you can pick up a RAID controller card and you're in business.
Plus most motherboards these days have SATA jacks on them. You could quite easily just pick up a couple of SATA drives and not have to worry about running out of IDE drive spaces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the_beaver
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Or get a firewire or USB 2.0 portable hard drive case. Slip drives in and out of there all day long. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wylde
Joined: 14 Apr 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gord wrote: |
Raid Arrays don't care what size the hard drive is. Whoever told you there was a size limit lied to you. There are also no RAID drives. You just use standard hard drives, be they IDE, SATA, or SCSI.
If you actually spent money and didn't buy the cheapest motherboard on the shelf, you probably already have a a RAID option on your motherboard for automatic backups. You just plug in the two drives, set the BIOS up to to say "ok, this drive is to mirror this drive", and you're off to the races.
If you did decide to go cheap and bought a motherboard that doesn't have built in RAID, you can pick up a RAID controller card and you're in business.
Plus most motherboards these days have SATA jacks on them. You could quite easily just pick up a couple of SATA drives and not have to worry about running out of IDE drive spaces. |
ms9077c+ m/b
the guy said i can buy a card for about 30,000 or near that and put at least 4 more drives in my my box.. he did say that the biggest hdd for raid was currently 120gb.. (from what i could gather)
he did say something about sata drives but they were more expensive.
we spoke about this before a little.. all i have is what you told me and what this guy told me in very broken english.
if you know that motherboard and ya have a sec.. what, in your opinion, would be the most cost effective to go about increasing storage? i say cost effective because... i am not really sure where this will be going in the future. i have had lots of tech heads waste my money & until i work out for myself which option is best, the least money outlayed is best i figure. dont get me wrong, i dont mind spending a few bucks... just i dont want to spend them now and have to do it again in the future.
thanks.
Last edited by wylde on Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:45 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wylde
Joined: 14 Apr 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| the_beaver wrote: |
| Or get a firewire or USB 2.0 portable hard drive case. Slip drives in and out of there all day long. |
i want to keep all drives accessable. that will be the shot when there is absolutely no space left in this toy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wylde
Joined: 14 Apr 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 4:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| it would still be nice to know how to split files... i have split a file using virtualdub and it is playable but the sucker wont burn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wylde
Joined: 14 Apr 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 4:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| fug |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gord
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wylde wrote: |
| ms9077c+ m/b |
Appears to be a generic motherboard with no bells and whistles, with a few restrictions like a 533FSB and whatnot.
| Quote: |
| the guy said i can buy a card for about 30,000 or near that and put at least 4 more drives in my my box.. he did say that the biggest hdd for raid was currently 120gb.. (from what i could gather) |
He may have been talking about mirroring your current drive. Or he may have been running a pirate copy of XP and didn't upgrade to get past the 137MB limit, thus may be thinking it is a hard-set limit. I've got a RAID running of a pair of 160s with no problems. I'm paranoid about dataloss, so everything of any value is backed up at least twice.
| Quote: |
| he did say something about sata drives but they were more expensive. |
SATA is slightly more expensive. Historically they were 20,000 more per drive, but recently they have become equal or near equal amongst most models.
| Quote: |
| if you know that motherboard and ya have a sec.. what, in your opinion, would be the most cost effective to go about increasing storage? i say cost effective because... i am not really sure where this will be going in the future. i have had lots of tech heads waste my money & until i work out for myself which option is best, the least money outlayed is best i figure. dont get me wrong, i dont mind spending a few bucks... just i dont want to spend them now and have to do it again in the future. |
Personally, I would go with a RAID array. If you go for a 200x2, you're looking at around 350,000 Won including the card. Or basically 1,750 Won a gigabyte. And that's for absolute, guaranteed storage. Or about 1000 Won per CD.
To burn 200 Gigs worth of storage space, it's going to take you days, and then you're always flipping through CDs trying to find what you want.
To me, it's worth it because it's all in one place, it's more reliable, easier to use, and far, far faster. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Pink
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Location: China
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2004 4:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Actually Gord the cheapest backup IMO is DVD+R.
4.7GIG for like 1500-2000 and you don't have to worry about "crashes" or "mechanical" problems.
Okay, the costs of DVD+R RECORDERS might be where you say, Yes MR. PINK but these are expensive, and unless you are burning say 10 disks a week for a year, it just doesn't pay off in the long run....
True, but what if the DVD+R comes with your computer?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
