Picking the right motherboard for your graphics card can be really tricky.  Read More

The Big Brands - Which Is Best - Part 2

Ok so in the first installment of this little mini series we discussed the hardware of the big brands.  Well now let's talk about software. 

I could be wrong, but from what I have seen, all of the big brands come with various types of software already installed.  Anti virus programs are common in all of them, which usually is Norton or McAffee (and if you have looked at some of my past blog posts you know how I feel about those two).  Some will have Microsoft Works, some kind of DVD burning/watching software, Adobe and other programs. 

They all also like to include specialized programs.  For instance, Gateway likes to install a program called Big Fix, while Dell machines have something similar called Dell Online Support.  Both of these programs are constantly connected to the Internet and are designed to deliver all of your software and hardware updates.  They also like to send you messages and sometimes will do other little things.  HP, Sony, Acer and Lenovo also have programs like these, I just can't remember what they are called. 

HP also likes to install a program called HP Organizer, which despite it's name, is not easy to navigate, use, or even look at. 

Regardless of which big brand you have or are thinking of getting, it's going to come with all kinds of software already installed, some of which you will use, most of which you won't.  To go along with that, half of the software they install is also configured to start up when you boot your computer.  This of course causes Windows to boot much slower as it has to start up all these programs.  It doesn't matter if you have the latest, fastest, Core 2 Duo with 2gb of fast memory and a large fast hard drive.  If the amount of programs running next to your system clock extends half way across your screen when you expand it, then your computer is going to be impaired. 

So when it comes to deciding which of the big brands is best, we don't get a lot of help for any of them when it comes to their software.  Every single one of them installs a vast amount of software that isn't necessary to operate the machine.  So in that regard they all fail.

If you know how to do it, I highly recommend formatting the hard drive of your newly purchased big name brand computer.  All of them come with the OEM Windows key on the side or back.  Use that key to reinstall your operating system, and then use the net to get the software you really want. 

What's funny about all of this is, I am not exactly free of the same faults with the new computers I build for people.  When a customer purchases a new system from me, it comes with an assortment of software to insure that their computer will be able to perform all the basic functions that they need to do.  Here is a list of what I pre-install on my customers machines.

Windows or Linux - With all the latest critical updates
Hardware Drivers - All the latest directly from the manufacturers website
Anti Virus Program - Customers choice but usually Avast or AVG
Office Suite - Sometimes Microsoft Office (if the customer wants to pay for it), but usually OpenOffice
Adobe Reader - The latest version from the Adobe website
DVD/CD Software - Whatever came with their burner, usually Nero 7 Essentials
Adobe Flash Player - Because its pretty much a requirement for web browsing
Java Runtime Environment - Another requirement for web browsing
Anti Spyware - Customers choice but usually Spbot and Ad-Aware combined

I set up all the programs so that only the absolute essentials start up when the OS starts like Avast.  Otherwise everything else only starts when the customer initiates it from the desktop.  By doing this the customer is ensured that when they boot their computer for the first time, that it will boot quickly and be ready to go with most all basic computer tasks.

As for the big brands I personally feel that they all fail in this department.  In an effort to make sure that the customer has everything they need, that have over done it and the end result is a computer that runs slower and takes forever to boot up. 

Again, if you purchase a new computer from a big brand, the very first thing you should do with it before anything else is format the hard drive and re-install the operating system, hardware drivers, and software from scratch to ensure that you have a computer that runs and performs the way you want it to and not they way the big brand thinks you want it to.  This is especially true for machines running Vista with only 1gb of memory. 

If any of you know of big brands that ship computers with minimal software, please let us know. 

In part 3 we will be discussing support and customer service in which we will really need some input from all of you.  I have dealt with a few of them when it comes to customer support, but only a few.  As I am writing this part, I am still compiling information for part 3, so it should be a good one.   

     April 2005, Microsoft releases Windows XP Professional x64 Edition.  Most assumed this was to go along with the mass production of 64bit processors from AMD and Intel.  It has been nearly 3 years since the release of XP x64 Edition and a year since the release of Vista x64 Editions.  So where is the support?

Read More

 Well just in case you didn't notice, all of my old blog posts have been re-posted today.  This is because something went screwy with my Eggxpert account and for some reason, all of my most recent blog post going back to mid December were not showing on the site.  They were search-able if you knew what to look for, but they were not appearing on the main blog page or on my own blog page. 

So I put in a request to fix the bug and as it turns out, it was only with my account that this problem was happening.  However the Eggxpert staff worked really hard on my behalf and after a week or so of working on it they got the problem sorted out.  The only thing is that we had to delete my old blog and basically start over new again.  To preserve all of my previous work and to ensure that people would still be able to read what I have done, I reposted all of my previous articles.  So I apologize that my old posts are currently dominating the main blog page here on Eggxpert.  It was necessary however to get things moving along again. 

Moving on, I am finally going to get to work on parts 2 and 3 of "The Big Brands - Which Is Best?" as well as give you all some other articles to ponder over.  Enjoy

Rj

Blog Archive Repost

Christmas at a geeks house.

Published 03 January 08 02:51 PM | RjBass  Edit

Well kids, I'm back from my long holiday vacation and I'm finally writing my first new blog post in weeks.  I know I have some other topics that I need to get back to, but over the vacation I came up with the idea for this post. 

Christmas came and went this year just like it normally does.  My boys, ages 9 and nearly 12 made out their Christmas list starting back in October and on December 25th they were finally allowed to see what they got.  Opening their presents I started thinking "this is not your typical kids Christmas".  You see, my boys, like me, are geeks.  They have both built their own computers and are really into various computer hardware aspects.  So unlike many kids who often put allot of toys on their lists, my kids had computer components on theirs. 

Read More 

Blog Archive Repost

Protect Your Systems – Originally posted on 10 December 2007 

 Ok, so I have started writing part 2 of the Big Name Brands 3 part series, but then this idea  hit me. 

     So virus protection, and cleaning your systems of dust and dirt, I've covered those topics already.  But as I am sitting here in my kitchen in Kansas City, freezing rain is falling outside.  The Governor has already issued a state of emergency for Missouri (and for those of you wondering, their are two Kansas City's, with the bigger and better one located in Missouri) to prepare for what they are thinking will be hundreds of thousands without power come Tuesday evening. 

Read More

Blog Archive Repost

The big brands!!! Which is best? Part 1 - Hardware

Published 07 December 07 10:17 AM | RjBass  Edit

Here we have an interesting topic.  The big name brands, and which one is best.  I am very anxious to hear peoples opinions on this one, and while were at it, I'll give you mine. 

Read More

Blog Archive Repost

The perfect workstation!!!

Published 01 December 07 11:26 PM | RjBass  Edit

Small business, it usually means small budget.  So how do you get the most out of your small business network and workstations with the small budget? 

Well for those of you paying attention, I already covered the server a few blog entries ago.  So now let's talk about the workstations or desktops. 

Read More

Blog Archive Repost

The big switch!!!!

Published 30 November 07 11:37 PM | RjBass  Edit

So when will it be for you? 

Don't know what I'm talking about?

The big switch to Windows Vista.

Ok, it's a well known fact, Vista is not that great of an operating system, or at least not yet.  Yes it does have some very good potential, but for the moment, it's just not there yet. 

Read More

Blog Archive Repost

Windows, OS X, or Linux? That is the question.

Published 28 November 07 08:46 AM | RjBass  Edit

Hmmmm, where do I start with this one?  This is a topic that always turns into a big debate.  It's a topic that I have wanted to write about for some time now, but until Eggxpert came along, didn't have the place to write it. 

Well first things first.  I come from an IBM family.  My father, stepfather, and stepmother were all career IBM employees in Boca Raton Florida until IBM started to crash in the late 80's and early 90's.  Why do I share that with you all?  Well because sometime in 1981 we received our first home computer or PC.  It was an old IBM 5150.  And the reason why I tell you that, is because prior to 1981, all home computers as well as some other computer devices were all referred to as PC's, or Personal Computers.  It didn't matter if they were made by Tandy, IBM, Apple, Commodore or whomever, they were all PC's.  That is how I still feel all computers bought and purchased by individuals for home and office use should be called today.  From Apples/Macs to Linux based machines to machines running Windows, to me they are all PC's.  I just needed to get that out of the way so as not to lead to any confusion later in this blog post.  What's actually really funny about that though is that when IBM released the 5150 in 1981, it became so popular that it fully adopted the "PC" name and most of the rest of the computer world started to manufacture hardware and software that was IBM Compatible or PC Compatible after it's release and huge public support.  However Apple (having released it first computer to the public in 1977) continued to build machines that were not IBM compatible.  Many years later, PC's were still supposedly IBM compatible, but mostly were running hardware not even manufactured by IBM, while Apple was fitting it's PC's with hardware like the IBM PowerPC processor, but yet were not IBM compatible.  I just think that is rather ironic. 

So anyways, enough with the history lesson and onto the real topic.   

Today we have few choices in PC operating systems.  We have Windows which typically runs on IBM Compatible machines, OS X which runs on Apple/Mac machines (which are now actually IBM Compatible and can run Windows) and Linux which from what I have seen, can run on just about anything you put it in.  Their are a few others out there, but for the sake of the mainstream market, we will just stick with the big three. 

So which one of these operating systems is better, and which one should you choose?  Well we can break down the pros and con's of all three and still not be any further along then where we are right now.  In reality it all boils down to what you the reader truly prefer.  By all rights they are all fantastic operating systems, but with each having it's own flaws.

The true fact of the matter is, business's.  Big business, small business, about 90% of all business's connected to the computer world are running Microsoft/Windows based software.  Many of these businesses don't want to use Microsoft software anymore, but they are stuck with it.  When you have a small business with a limited budget needing to use specific types of software, and that software will only run on a Windows based server, with Windows based workstations, well then that business is stuck using Windows.  New business's that are just starting up are the lucky ones because they have the option from the start to get their business going with something other then Windows.  They can dive head first into the Linux server based world or Apple server based world and from the start up have a smooth operating business.  But most don't do that.  Why?  Because it all stems back to what we know.  I don't know about all of you, but where I grew up in South Florida, IBM donated thousands of computers to local schools.  It was to help educate it's future work force.  Around the globe in the early 80's IBM aggressively promoted it's PC's to the market, converting much of the market to IBM compatible computers.  In 1985 when Windows was first released to the world, it was released solely for IBM compatible computers.  So for almost 23 years we have been bombarded with IBM compatible computers running Windows based software.  Windows is what people really know.  It's what they are comfortable with.  If you were to take a larger start up business with 150 employees and you get a new server and new workstations for all the employees, it is much easier and cheaper to do it with Windows because the chances are that most of the employees are at least semi familiar with Windows based operating systems.  When it comes to a new start up business, cheaper and easier almost always rules over what is better.  So then what you have are another 150 people working on a Windows based network with Windows based workstations.  Those same 150 people are more likely to go out and pick up a new Windows based PC as opposed to a Mac or Linux based PC because they want something familiar to them. 

In reality, a smarter new business would take a look at the big picture.  Let's look at a small business.  ABC Company is just starting up with 10 employees.  Instead of going with a Windows based server, they go with a Linux based server and Linux based workstations.  The hardware cost about the same, while the software is potentially thousands of dollars cheaper.  The money saved on the software is rolled over into training for it's ten employees.  In the future when it's time to upgrade, ABC Company saves serious money because Linux based servers and workstations are almost always a bit cheaper, and OpenSource software is almost certainly cheaper.  So in this case, for the adventurous types, Linux wins. 

I would go into Apple based servers and workstations, but truth be told, Apple servers and workstations can actually cost more then their Windows based counterparts as Apple hardware is almost always really expensive, and then you have to deal with training all the employees who are only Windows smart and not OS X smart.  The higher start up cost for a Apple based network with training could be more profitable in the end though, as it is more likely that the OS X based employees will be happier in the end with their computers and thus increase productivity resulting in more money earned.  But that is purely speculation. 

Now let's take a look at existing business's.  Most existing business's are running networks using Windows based servers and work stations.  These same business's, while sick of paying the price premiums for Windows based software, are usually stuck in that environment. 

I am the IT Admin for a small business that currently has 10 employees.  Recently when it was time for me to build them a new server, we talked about getting away from Microsoft based software and move over to something cheaper.  We knew that doing so would create some problems with the employees having to learn new software.  But just to give it a shot we loaded OpenOffice on a couple machines.  Yes it worked, but the employees didn't like it.  They liked the features and ease of use with Microsoft Office better.  However, with the huge price difference, we could live with the grumbling.  So I researched it more.  I started looking into the server based software that the company absolutely has to have in order to run their business properly.  In particular they have two very specific programs that are an absolute must have.  I contacted the makers of those two programs.  I won't post all the details from their responses, but basically both were the same.  Here is a snippet from one response.

"What if I do not want a Windows Server?

Due to the nature of the **** program, a Windows server is not required to house our software.  Novell and Linux servers could house the software.  Here are your considerations before choosing Novell or Linux as the storage choice.  You are not able to run our software from either Novell or Linux servers.  The software is stored there, not run from there.  Live updates to our software must occur from a Windows workstation and update across the network.  The **** E-mail Service tool runs using .NET programming and will not run on Novell or Linux.  **** must run on a Windows server.

At no time do we recommend using a removable storage device to house our program.  This is mostly because of access rights and permission setting abilities. Removable storage includes thumb drives, snap drives or flash drives.  At this time, MAC/APPLE servers are not supported as a housing solution. 

Do we recommend an operating OS?

Yes. Due to advances in security and file access protocols in Windows, we recommend Windows Server 2003.  Our software will run on Windows NT and Windows 2000.  If you are going to be hosting **** or Web services, we recommend Windows Small Business Server 2003."

-End Quote

The response that I received from the other program was extremely similar.  Since both programs require at least a Windows based workstation to update across the network, and since all workstations are usually busy doing the work required from the employees, the option of using a Linux based server just didn't seem logical and the software can't even be stored on a Apple/Mac server.  So it was at that point that we decided to bite the bullet and stick with the Windows based server and workstations. 

The business world for the most part shapes the home end user world, and with most business going with Windows based networks, that tends to lead to more Windows based home end users.  You really have to give it to IBM and Microsoft, their enormous marketing campaigns and excellent products in the mid 80's eventually worked them up to the business standard world wide in modern times, even if Windows operating systems are not technically the best anymore.  An example of what I am talking about there goes back again to the small business that I am the IT admin for.  The average age of the 10 employees in that office is 46 with the youngest person being 33 and the oldest person being 69.  Just three weeks ago I got an order for a new home computer from one of the employees.  They specifically told me they wanted Windows on the machine and not Linux.  They didn't even consider a Mac.  This person happened to be 44 years old and had been using Windows based products for the last 15 years.  They wanted a machine for home use that worked like their office machine.  Whats more, this person has three kids.  Those three kids are now going to grow up with a PC running Windows based software.  Now kids are really smart, we all know this.  So theirs really nothing stopping one of those kids from exploring Linux or OS X in the future, but chances are, they won't.  People like what they know.  There has been and always will be a fear of the unknown. 

So because of the business world, we now have the majority of PC users running Windows based software, and this is a trend that will most likely continue in the foreseeable future. 

But not everybody is willing to stick with Windows.  There are still plenty of people who grew up on Mac's and stuck with them even when Mac's were not exactly top of the line systems.  They obviously got their revenge, as now Apple is one of the top computer makers in the world.  More people are using Macs and Apple based computers then ever before.  A strong marketing campaign, specifically against Microsoft along with some of the best rated products in recent history like the iPod have catapulted Apple right back to the near top.  A position they haven't held since the late 70's and early 80's.  There are a few reasons for this.  Newer more modern Apple computers are now running hardware that is Intel based.  Many of the latest Macs can actually run Windows and Linux as well.  Some will say the reason for the Macs rise to recent fame is due mostly to the iPod.  However I tend to think otherwise.  The iPod can work with any type of PC.  You don't have to have a Mac to use one.  But when people purchase a product that they really like, they then like to look at other products from the same product maker.  And when they look at a Mac, they like what they see, and what they see is OS X.  OS X is a near perfect operating system.  It's really easy to use, it looks great, and it's not as vulnerable to viruses and malware like a Windows based machine.  What are it's problems then?  Well like all of the operating systems there are a few.  OS X doesnt do games very well.  It also doesn't do Microsoft Office products very well.  Well actually it runs OS X based Microsoft Office based products just fine, but then the Microsoft Office based products open up the Mac to multiple viruses making the OS X based machine more unstable.  Many working office products also won't run on a Mac either.  As I pointed out above in the quote from a software maker, their software won't run on a Mac, and that is a well known issue with Mac's.  And like all the other PC makers, with Apples rise to the top, also came problems.  Their being sued for different reasons, several of their Mac laptop and desktop models have had numerous issues etc.. etc...  It really just comes with the territory. 

But in OS X's favor, those who work in the graphics industry, mainly working with programs like Adobe Photoshop, Mac's are the king.  For whatever reason, Adobe products just run way better on a Mac.  When combining the power of Adobe CS3 with OS X and a Core 2 Duo Mac, what you have is a power house graphics producing computer that really can't be beat when compared to a similar computer with similar specs, but running Windows. 

Another issue with OS X is the hardware you have to have to run it on.  OS X as most of us know will only run on a Mac.  While the actual hardware that makes up a Mac isn't bad, it is really expensive.  A Mac running OS X Leopard that cost $1000 from the Apple store is expensive when compared to a similar model (hardware wise) running Windows from Dell or HP.  The Dell or HP computer with the same hardware specs can cost sometimes hundreds less then it's Mac counterpart.  While cost is not that big of a deal to some, the majority of PC users dont have $1000 to spend on a PC, and for this reason alone you will see them looking at a Windows based machine. 

Now if we dig even further into the cost of systems, by far the cheapest OS today is Linux.  In most cases Linux is FREE.  Yes that's right, FREE!!!

I have Linux.  I use Linux.  I love Linux.  It is a great OS.  I use Ubuntu.  It's free, it does what it is supposed to do.  It looks similar to Windows and it doesn't have near the amount of virus problems that Windows does. 

So here we have a free OS that works great, with less viruses, but yet people still choose Windows.  Why?  Well Linux may look like Windows, but it certainly doesn't operate like Windows.  Theres allot of programs for Linux that need to be installed using the command line and for those thinking that their old Dos expertise will do the trick, it won't.  The command line in Linux uses different commands then good old Dos.  The other problem with Linux is similar to the problem with OS X being that many programs that work in Windows don't work in Linux.  While more and more programs are starting to be written for Linux and it is improving every day, it still isn't up to the level that Windows is at. 

But for those who absolutely refuse to use Windows based products, and are not afraid of learning something new, and don't want to spend serious money to do so, Linux is a great solution. 

So going almost all the way back to the beginning of this post, here we have three great operating systems.  They all have their advantages, and all have their problems. 

I recommend any of the three depending on what you want to do with your computer.  If you need to, take a look at all three, try them out for awhile (I don't know if you will be able to do that with OS X though) and see which one you prefer, as ultimately it's not about what I or anybody else says, it's about what you want.    

Blog Archive Repost

Build your own laptop........almost.

Published 26 November 07 09:35 AM | RjBass  Edit

So last night I was cruising around the internet looking up info on whitebooks.  A whitebook is basically a barebones/build it yourself laptop.  Back in 2003 and 2004 whitebooks were supposed to be the next big thing in PC's.  But where are they now? 

Over the last year laptops have overcome their desktop counterparts as the top selling PC.  People love the fact that they don't have to be chained to their desk.  With their wireless capabilities, and now with several cellular companies offering cellular broadband, there is almost no place you can't go with a laptop while maintaining a broadband internet connection.  Some RV and camping parks are even going so far as to offer their visitors free wi-fi via their transmitters mounted on trees.  Yellowstone park is even doing this.  So now while you are roasting marshmallows around the camp fire you can look up the best smores recipes. 

In 2003 and 2004 when the laptop market really started to rise, company's like Asus and MSI started to manufacture barebone laptops or whitebooks for the average end user.  These laptops were basically just the chassis with the lcd screen, keyboard, touch pad and a few onboard connections like wan, modem, usb ports etc..  The video chip set was also usually included.  Intel made a huge push for this with their Centrino line. 

A quick scan of the internet today will reveal a couple whitebooks available, all from Asus and Compal.  The MSI whitebooks seem to be non existent.  The few places that sell these whitebooks to the average consumer are not exactly well known online retailers.  Another quick scan of Newegg will reveal none of the Asus, Compal, or MSI whitebooks at all.  Likewise you also won't find them on TigerDirect.  I did find one on ZipZoomFly, but it was a lower end Compal that once fitted with all the necessary hardware would easily cost over $1000.

One reason why whitebooks were supposed to be the next big thing was for cost savings.  You could fit your whitebook with exactly the items you wanted, and could leave out the items you didn't need.  As we should all know by now, any new laptop purchase from any one of the big retailers will give you a laptop with highly bloated software that you didn't ask for. 

You can build your own desktop these days to your imaginations limit.  Desktops can be so highly customed that nearly nothing is impossible to achieve, depending on how big your pocket book is.  So after years and years of laptops being on the market, why are we still waiting for do it your self laptops?  Why are low cost high quality chassis not readily available?   

I don't want a laptop from Dell, HP, Gateway or whomever.  I want to build my own.  I want to get on Newegg, pick out my chassis and all other necessary hardware.  I want to build a small machine that I can take on the road to check my email.  I want to install only the software and hardware that I want, not what Dell or HP tell me I want.  I don't want to have to talk to some guy in India to have to get warranty support.  I want to be able to fix it myself, right now. 

This was supposed to be the next big thing in 2004.  But here we are only three years later and building your own laptop still seems to be a thing of the future.  Sure we can get on our favorite online retailer and get the small things like memory, hard drives, and optical drives.  The more adventurous can even change out their CPU.  But none of the user replaceable options are any good if it voids the warranty. 

Compal, Asus, MSI and others pretty much all make the laptops that you purchase from the big name PC makers.  You don't really think Dell makes it's own laptops do you?  Compal, while not really known in the end user consumer world, is the 2nd largest laptop maker in the world.  It would make sense for these company's to produce barebone kits for the do it yourself guy, and they do.  They saw the market out there for this sort of sale.  Intel saw it too.  But apparently the big online retailers don't think their is a market for them, or maybe they do see the market, but the barebones systems are just not available to them either.

In my business it would be highly beneficial to me and my customers if I could build my own laptops and sell them directly to my customers.  Yes they might be more expensive then the Dell and HP counterparts, but the convenience to the end customer, as well as the reliability of my business would be the biggest benefits to the end customer.  When they had a problem with their custom built laptop, they wouldn't have to call India.  They would call me.  And then they wouldn't have to worry about shipping the laptop anywhere, or waiting three weeks for some stranger tech guy to come calling to service it for them. 

Whitebooks, or barebone laptops seem to me to really be a hot ticket item all the way around.  I am going to continue to research this topic for you all.  I am going to find the best chassis available (if any), provide you links, hardware reviews etc....  I really think do it yourself laptops should be in the mainstream market.  So if the price is right, the hardware is available, and it is feasible to do so, hopefully soon, all of us system builders will be building our own laptops for our customers, and for our selves.  It's about time we did.    

Blog Archive Repost

Are we getting paranoid?

Published 20 November 07 01:01 AM | RjBass  Edit

So the other day I was at a customers house trying to help her set up her new DSL service.  She had just gotten the basic tier DSL service from AT&T for only $10 a month, which was $15 cheaper then the dial up service from Compuserve that she was using before. 

Not long after helping her get it started up I received an email from her saying she was thinking about going back to dial up and Compuserve because Yahoo (the main mail provider being used by AT&T) was not doing what she wanted it to do. 

When she was using Compuserve and she received an email with pictures in the body, she would copy those images and paste them into a new email that she would then send out to her friends and family.  Compuserve allowed her to do the copy and paste just fine.  However in Yahoo, you can't do a copy and paste with images.  The images just won't send like that. 

So I said, "well why don't you just forward the email?".  And she replied with "I don't forward any emails because most of my friends and family won't open forwarded emails because of viruses". 

I then said, "well then download the pictures and send them as an email attachment" with which she gave me another reply that was very similar to her last reply.  She then went on to tell me that she won't even open emails that have attachments in them in fear of viruses.   

I then said, "well ok, how about you download the pictures to your computer and then just insert them into your email using an email client like Outlook Express?".  She had a couple reasons for not wanting to do this like not wanting to fill up her 150gb hard drive that was only 15% full, and also not wanting to use any types of email clients.  She only wanted to use Yahoo web mail. 

So at this point I was pretty stumped.  While I eventually found a way for her to do what she wanted (all be it a rather weird way around the issues), it left me wondering if our fear of viruses has taken us to the point that we can't even enjoy the internet anymore. 

Now before the Linux and Mac *** start to scream their war cries, let's just understand that a 55 year old woman who has been using nothing but Windows for the last several years is not about to learn a whole new OS.  If she can't deal with the fact that she lost one little feature but gained many new features and wants to switch her service back to slow dial up because of it, well then the chances of getting her to appreciate OS X or Ubuntu are zero to none. 

So now where were we?  Ohh yes, have we become so fearful of viruses and spyware that we are not even able to enjoy the internet like it should be enjoyed? 

The customer explained to me how so many of her friends and family have had horrible experiences opening the wrong files and emails, getting viruses and basically having to start over with their computers.  Now I know nearly everybody has made those types of mistakes once in the past.  The smart ones learn from their mistakes and move on, hopefully to never repeat the same mistake.  The not so smart ones tend to repeat the same mistakes over and over again, never learning from the past. 

The answer to these peoples problems is all in some decent anti virus protection.  But to some people, who have had the virus via email problem, and have gotten decent virus protection, it still isn't enough.  They have closed them selves off to some of the many cool features of the internet. 

These same people obviously have never had to work in an environment where email attachments are common practice and a necessity for business. 

Email attachments and forwards are not something to fear.  Just be smart about it.  If you don't know who sent you the email, then don't open it.  And seriously, if somebody, even somebody you know sends you an unsolicited .exe file, DON"T OPEN IT. 

But otherwise, it's pretty normal to accept these incoming emails and to enjoy the internet.  If your anti virus protection is doing it's job then you shouldn't have anything to fear.  Just back up your data every once in awhile and in the event that a computer catastrophe does happen, then don't worry about it.  Your still alive aren't ya? 

Small Business Server for a true Small Business

Published 13 November 07 08:52 AM | RjBass  Edit

So about two months ago, the owner of a small business came to me and asked if he could get a server for his business that wouldn't cost him an arm and a leg.  Having only built desktops in the past, I wasn't really sure, but told him I would l check it out and get back to him.  This very same business already has a Windows Small Business Server, however it is easily over 4 years old and is running a Pentium 4 processor with 1gb of memory (upgraded from 512mb) and a 120gb hard drive (upgraded from a 80gb). 

I asked him what he was looking for in a new SBS and he told me he needed something faster.  His business had grown just slightly and as a result, when users were accessing the same program on the server they would see some serious slow downs.  Their hard drive was also nearly full, so at a minimum he would need a larger hard drive. He also wanted something that would be upgradeable.  Their old server could only handle a very small selection of upgrades, and after having it for over 4 years, it could not be upgraded enough to keep them happy for another 4 years to come.  So longevity was an issue as well.  Implementation into their current system along with ease of use was also an issue.  Their old server uses Windows Small Business Server 2003, and the owner has become very used to working with it.  So he wanted the new server to run the same software, but with a fresh new install.   

He went on to tell me that power consumption was an issue.  Between the server, desktops, and laptops they could have as many as 13 systems on and online at any given time.  Aside from the laptops, the desktops and the server could consume a large amount of power for a small business on a tight budget, so a server that would provide greater performance with lower power consumption was preferred (as is usually the case).

So I went to work looking to find the products that would satisfy his need for better performance without drawing to much power, and keeping within his $4,000 budget..........Yes that's right, $4,000 for a server installed.

Being that I had never built a server before, I wasn't sure where to start.  But just to get some ideas, I started with Dell.  Their old server was a Dell PowerEdge SC420, so I went to the Dell website and checked out some of their current SBS offerings.  Currently Dell offers the same server with more modern upgrades to include a dual core Intel Pentium E2140 for about $1,200.  Not knowing what that same server with the Intel P4 cost four years ago, I assumed it was somewhere between $800 and $1,000.  Being that their new budget was $4,000, they were obviously looking for something a bit better if not bigger.  So looking on at the Dell site I saw their SC840 which comes standard with an Intel Xeon Dual Core processor, 1gb of memory and a 120gb hard drive starting at $1,000.  While this server offers better performance with the dual core Xeon CPU, the rest of the specs were pretty much even with their current configuration.  So I looked on and I found the new T105.  This server like many of Dells desktops and laptops is a semi custom built machine.  So I customized it with some more robust specs.  I added a 2.0ghz AMD Opteron Dual Core processor, 4gb DDR2 667 memory, one 80gb Hard Drive for the OS and one 500gb hard drive for the file server, DVD burner and gigabit lan, and Windows SBS 2003 with 10 user licenses.  The cost for this machine is hovering right around $2,800 installed.  Now this server meets all of the owners requirements, except for one thing, upgrade ability.  As I have already learned, after 4 years I am not so sure that getting upgrades from Dell will be such an easy task.   However looking at the business's current server, it is obvious that Dell's servers are built to last.  I really loved that fact that the T105 uses the AMD Opteron processor.  While the Opterons are by far not the fastest or most powerful server processors, they do, in my opinion, offer much better power consumption ratings making their performance per $$ slightly better. 

That being the case, I then set out to see if I could design a server, based off of those same specs in the T105 but with better upgrade ability options in the future. 

Building a computer can be a daunting task for those who don't have any experience or proper education.  Building a server that needs to meet the demands of a business can be even more daunting, even if the designer has computer building experience.  This is why many system builders won't build servers.  Why spend the time and effort, and risk their reputation on a server when they can get a big name server from Dell or HP.  If the server fails then all the blame can be given to the server manufacturer.  But while that may be a good way to go for the short run, in the long term (4+ years) it can lead to higher replacement and upgrade costs.  While that may not really be an issue for larger corporations, for a small business on a tight budget, that can nearly make or break the business.  And in today's uncertain economic times, that is a risk that many small business's are not willing to take. 

Fortunately for those who have experience, education, and the gonads to give it a try, we have retailers like Newegg with their advanced search functions that can really assist in helping a system builder design a system or a server to the exact specifications requested from the buyer.   

Now if you read through all that and your hungry for more, let's get to the good stuff.  Here is the system I designed and why I did it this way. 

The new small business server specs (with all parts ordered from Newegg):

AMD Opteron Santa Rosa 2212 2.0ghz Dual Core Socket F Processor (Link) - $179.99 + Shipping

4gb Kingston DDR2 667 Registered Server Memory (Link) - $44.99 (each) + Shipping

ASUS KFN5-D SLI Dual 1207 NVIDIA nForce Professional 3600 Extended ATX Server Motherboard (Link) - $299.99 + Shipping

MSI RX1550-TD128EH Radeon X1550 128MB 64-bit GDDR2 PCI Express x16 Video Card (Link) - $28.99 + Shipping

Western Digital Caviar WD800JD 80gb 7200RPM 8mb Cache Sata Hard Drive OEM (for the OS and Programs) (Link) - $42.99 + Shipping

Western Digital Caviar WD5000AAJS 500gb 7200RPM 8mb Cache Sata Hard Drive OEM (for data) (Link) - $99.99 with Free Shipping

COOLER MASTER eXtreme Power RP-550-PCAR ATX from factor 12V V2.01 550W Power Supply (Link) - $69.99 + Shipping

Hec 69R5BB Black Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case - Retail (Link) - $64.99 + Shipping

Super Talent Internal All In One USB/Memory Card Reader Retail (Link) - $7.99 + Shipping 

Microsoft Windows Small Business Server 2003 R2 Standard Edition with 5cal (Link) - $439.99 + Shipping

Microsoft Windows Small Business Server 2003 5 Cal Addition (Link) - $429.99 + Shipping

Plus other small pieces like the Opteron Cooling fan and heat sink in the 3.5 pitch mount for the motherboard, a P4 to P8 CPU power adaptor for the power supply and motherboard.

Based on those specs, I was able to assemble a new server that met all the specs of the Dell T105 and then some.  The system I designed features the dual socket F configuration.  While the system I built only has one dual core processor, it is capable of taking two in the future.  Not only that, but this motherboard is also capable of taking the new Opteron Barcelona Quad Core processors, meaning that future upgrades could see two dual core processors or up to two quad core processors without having to change out any of the other important hardware.  As is the single dual core Opteron is already a huge improvement over their old single core Pentium 4 processor.  So this leaves the business with PLENTY of room to upgrade their cpu/cpu's.  And before anybody ask, while the motherboard can take two processors, it only requires one to operate.  This kept the initial cost of the hardware down to start them off while again providing much improved performance over their old Pentium 4 configuration. 

The system I designed also comes with the 4gb of DDR2 667 memory which is 3gb more then their old system.  However the motherboard can take up to 32gb which again leaves plenty of room to grow.  With the current prices and popularity of DDR2 memory, I think it is safe to say that it will continue to be around for a few years, so I am not worried about availability in the future. 

If four or five years in the future the business wants to completely upgrade their server to a whole new system with the latest technology of the time, they will be able to do so without having to purchase a whole new system like company's such as Dell and HP practically require.  While there is no guarantee that I will still be in this business 4 or 5 years down the road, the system I designed can be worked on by just about any system builder, meaning that even if I am not around, nearly any other builder with the proper knowledge can step in and take over where I left off. 

So going back to the system specs, I designed a new system exceeding the specs of the Dell T105 that meets the small business's needs in regards to current requirements with more options to upgrade in the future.  With the above specs I listed, the system cost a few hundred dollars less then the T105 with the shipping (at $2,800 the Dell system at their price also comes with a Dell technician coming in to set it up).  So remember the business owner has a budget of $4,000.  Well obviously some of the extra money will go to me to come in and setup the new server on their old network as I don't do this stuff for free.  But why would the business be willing to pay more overall for their server and for me to build it and come in and set it up instead of just having Dell do it?  Well being that I have been their IT admin for the last two years, I know their current network configuration and server like the back of my hand.  While the Dell technician will most likely do a fantastic job of getting the server in place and ready to roll, will he ghost over their old hard drive with all their data?  Will he or she be able to set up their new server on the network with the exact shared drive letter configurations?  Well maybe he can.  But when you take a stranger and bring him into the mix to set this up after having never even seen the network in the past and not knowing the people working on it daily, chances are he or she will get some stuff wrong. The small business knows that if I build it, and I come in and deploy it on the network on a weekend, they will return to work on a Monday and the only thing that will be different is the performance and speed as I will set it up exactly like their last system.    

But in the end, the cost of the server, for me to build it, and for me to deploy it onto their network still does not equal $4,000.  If $4,000 is the business's budget and they want the most bang for their buck, I am sure there are couple other things I can add to their network that would really help increase performance. 

Their current network consist of eight desktops (soon to be 10) that connect at 108mbps through the LAN.  The Lan is setup with 3 network switches, one wireless router and their DSL modem.  Two of the switches, and the router have transfer speeds of 108mbps, while the third switch is a newer Netgear that has gigabit network speeds.  The new server motherboard has dual gigabit LAN ports.  So in an effort to increase network speeds between the 8 desktops and the server I also got them a new D-Link wireless router with gigabit lan and 108mbps WAN (Link), eight Encore gigabit PCI network cards (Link), and two more Trendnet gigabit network switches (Link).

Along with some new ethernet cables, all the new server hardware, and the network hardware came to about $2,250 with shipping and before the mail in rebates (which there were a few). 

So now the small business will not only get a new, more powerful and faster small business server, but also a gigabit internal network.  They will also have their high speed copy machine/printer added to the network for their larger print jobs.  To install the whole thing, server, gigabit network and the copy machine, total cost will come in at $3,850.  $150 less then the budget called for. 

Now I know some of you will scream at me for doing so much while charging so little, so I should make it clear that my work in the IT industry is only part time work.  My fiance has the big career job while I spend most of my time at home taking care of the kids, being involved with their school, coaching soccer etc...  I don't work in this industry to support the family.  I do it because I love the work and if I don't I get pretty bored during the school days.  So in a effort to keep me busy with new clients, I do most of my work for non profit small business's, schools, churches, and lower income families.  So I don't charge them nearly as much as another IT pro would charge a for profit business that's turning a decent profit. 

So that being the case, I just helped a great not for profit business step into a nice new server with a much faster network etc.. and came in just under budget.  Maybe that extra budget money will come back to me in the form of a bonus, and if it does it will leave me just as fast as a contribution to another not for profit organization like the Salvation Army for the holiday season. 

Anyways, so for you IT guys who have to work under a very tight budget but want the best for your customers, what I have just shown you is one way to make it happen at a very reasonable cost. 

If any of you have some things you would like to add, problems with my configuration, charges etc... please comment as I am always open to discussion. 

Blog archive repost

 What are dual core processors?

Published 25 October 07 09:03 PM | RjBass  Edit

Back in the early spring I wrote a piece for my own website giving a very simple explanation as to what dual core processors are.  I wrote it for many of my customers who were not so computer savvy and really didn't understand what the differences between a single core and a dual core were.  While my piece may not be as accurate as I would like, it does help break things down in more simple terms that even noobs can understand.  I hope you like.

What are dual core processor’s?

Dual Core processor’s for dummies, explained.

When talking to a customer about building a new computer, the question often comes up "What’s the difference between a single core and a dual core processor?". Lately the talk in geek circles has been about multiple core processor’s and which is the best. But to the average consumer, that geek speak tends to fly way over their head and they are left right back at the beginning not knowing any more then they did when they started.

So with the help of Wikipedia (the best free online encyclopedia on the net) I hope to be able to break down for you in simple terms what a dual core processor really is.

To put it very very simply, a dual core processor is basically two micro processors in one package. Since the first PC was introduced to the public all those years ago, it has been driven by one very important piece, the Central Processing Unit or CPU. Since the beginning they always contained one single microprocessor . Then in 2003 AMD introduced the dual core Operton processor for servers. The geek world exploded and the computer world started to shift. By 2005 everything you heard about processors was usually about dual core technology. Today a new home desktop or laptop with a dual core processor can be purchased for hundreds less then when they were first introduced.

But what does a dual core processor do for you? Is it even worth it, or is it just a bunch of hoopla designed to sell more products? Well yes and no. While dual core processor technology has the potential to do great things, the software companies have been slow to write new programs that can utilize dual core technology to it’s fullest (to explain that further would mean to have to use a whole bunch of geek speak that would either loose you or bore you in less then one paragraph). It’s not that they don’t want to utilize this new technology, but the process for which they have to write the programs is much more detailed and time tasking.

What this means is that, when you open up Outlook 2003 on your computer, you may not see any serious improved response times as Outlook 2003 even with it’s current updates is not a program that has been written for a dual core system.

So how will a dual core processor benefit you?

From Wikipedia.com

"As of September 2006, with the typical mix of mass-market applications the main benefit to an ordinary user from a multi-core CPU will be improved multitasking performance, which may apply more often than expected. Ordinary users are already running many threads; operating systems utilize multiple threads, as well as antivirus programs and other 'background processes' including audio and video controls. The largest boost in performance will likely be noticed in improved response time while running CPU-intensive processes, like antivirus scans, defragmenting, ripping/burning media (requiring file conversion), or searching for folders. Example: if the automatic virus scan initiates while a movie is being watched, the movie is far less likely to lag, as the antivirus program will be assigned to a different processor than the processor running the movie playback."

Does that make any sense to you? What that one paragraph is really saying, that while just running a single program like Outlook 2003 may not see the benefits of a dual core processor, running Outlook 2003 with virus scanning turned on, playing music, and browsing the internet all at the same time will. Like the paragraph from Wikipedia said, most modern computers tend to use multiple programs at one time regardless if the user knows it or not. Don’t believe me? Take a look down at the bottom right of your screen next to your system clock. How many little icons are next to the clock? Each one of those little icons represents a program running on your system. The more of those little icons you see, in combination with what ever you currently see right now (most likely Internet Explorer or Firefox), the more processing power it is using. The more microprocessors you have then the more information you can handle at one time, thus making your programs run a bit faster and better.

Which processors are dual core processors?

When shopping for a computer one thing that always stands out on the info sheet is the processor. Chances are it is manufactured by Intel or AMD. You see various models from the Pentium to the Athlon to the Celeron, to the Core 2 Duo. What’s the difference in all of those brands and how do you know which one is a dual core? Well with the ever constantly changing world of computers, the list I am going to give you now will most likely be outdated with in a few months, but regardless I’ll give it a shot.

Note – This list does not contain every processor known, just the most popular consumer products that you are most likely to see when shopping around).

Single Core Processors:

Intel Celeron (Entry Level)

AMD Sempron (Entry Level)

Intel Pentium 4 (Probably the most well known single core processor ever)

AMD Athlon (Considered by many to be the best single core processor on the market)

Dual Core Processors:

Intel Pentium D

AMD Athlon X2

Intel Core 2 Duo (Considered by most to be the best dual core processor on the market)

AMD Athlon FX

AMD Turion X2 (For laptops)

Intel Centrino Duo (For laptops)

Each of the above processors comes in multiple speeds and models. There are also the Core 2 Extremes and other processors made for high end gamers and computer enthusiast.

One thing you will almost always see is the GHZ speed or Gigahertz speed of the processor. I will admit it, anymore today the GHZ speed of a processor is mostly a gimmick to help sell the processor. While in the past (prior to 2003) the GHZ speed was important to determine how fast and how well the processor would work, today the speed is not nearly as important as how much information the processor can handle at once. This is usually measured in the form of the L2 cache and other geek terms. But without a standardized way of measuring a processors ability in simple terms that the average consumer can understand, we are all still stuck with displaying the obsolete GHZ speed. However that may actually be changing very soon.

While for the past few years the GHZ speeds really didn’t matter, Intel and AMD are both attempting to push their new model processors as far as they can, thus increasing the GHZ speeds enough so that it actually does make a bit of a difference. However these new processors won’t really be available until Q4 07 at the earliest. As it is, for top of the line processors like the Core 2 Duo and the Athlon FX, ghz speeds are usually a lot slower, usually in the 1.8 to 2.8 ghz range. This is because to push them any faster would require much more power and thus generate a lot more heat causing the system to actually run slower (because heat is not a good friend of a computer or electronics in general).

Before I leave you I should also note that geek circles are now all buzzing about Quad Core. Yup you guessed it, 4 microprocessors on one dye. It’s basically the same thing as dual core but with more microprocessors.

If you would like more information about dual core processors and what exactly all the specific details are, I suggest the page from Wikipedia.com. A quick search on Google will also bring you tons of information that if you are truly interested, you could spend days reading. Trust me when I tell you, that what I have explained here is just the very basics.

------------------------------------------------------

Ya so obviously since I wrote that piece, Quad Cores were introduced, and GHZ speeds really did start to matter again.  All the same though, the basic gist of the idea is still there.  So if you know somebody who doesn't really get the whole dual core/quad core processor thing, point them this way. 

If something I wrote is wrong, please comment about it.  I obviously am not the brightest when it comes to this stuff and thus anything you can add that is more accurate would not only benefit me but others as well. 

Anti Virus programs - Which one to use?

Published 24 October 07 05:48 PM | RjBass  Edit

Many anti virus programs work well while many are horrible. 

One thing I learned a few years ago is that popular programs like Norton and Mcafee tend to not be nearly as effective as they claim to be for several reasons. 

Since big box manufacturers like Dell, HP, Gateway and others all send out their machines with Norton or Mcafee already installed, it makes them pretty much the two most popular anti virus programs on the market. 

Look at Windows.  Why are most viruses written for Windows?  Some say it is because it is much easier to write a virus for Microsoft software then say something like Linux or OS X.  Others say (and this is where I agree) that more viruses are written for Windows because the majority of computer users are running Windows and other Microsoft based software.  If the programmers write their viruses to work on Windows they then stand the chance of infecting many more machines. 

The same goes for anti virus programs.  If the majority of computer users are using Norton or Mcafee, then the programmers will make viruses that specifically will get around Norton and Mcafee or be written in such a way that even if Norton or Mcafee detects the virus, they still can't get rid of it. 

That alone in my opinion is enough for me to stay away from the big name anti virus programs.  Smaller less known anti virus programs like AVG and Avast stand a much better chance of finding and removing viruses simply because the virus programmers don't consider those programs to be to much of a threat and therefore don't try to program around them. 

Then you have the case of system resources.  Norton, Mcafee and others hog enormous amounts of system resources.  While this may be ok if your running a Core 2 Duo with 2 gigs of memory, the average computer owner most likely still has a single core Celeron and 512mb of memory or even less.  In that case, Norton and Mcafee will seriously tax the system and you will wind up with a frustrated end user with a slow system. 

Smaller less known anti virus programs like AVG and Avast provide many of the same benefits of the larger programs, but leave much less of a footprint on the system resources. 

You also have the cost benefit.  Chances are, your average Joe who purchases the $400 low end Dell system complete with the flat screen monitor for Christmas, is not exactly the big spender when it comes to computers or electronics in general.  I am not sure what the cost is anymore, but last I checked, Norton and Mcafee were  somewhere between $30 to $50 a year.

Now if you can get an anti virus program that works just as well, if not better then the pay per use programs, uses less system resources, and is FREE, then why not use it?  Why do many people, even knowing about the free programs not use them?  Because people don't trust free programs.  For whatever reason, it has been lodged in our heads that free also means crappy. 

As a system builder and technician, I see many different types of infections, from viruses to spyware/adware etc...  The majority of the problems come from users who let their subscription to whatever they were using expire.  Even if Norton or Mcafee are your brands of choice, the software won't do you any good if you don't keep the programs up to date. 

With every new system that I sell, I offer the customer their choice of anti virus program.  I usually encourage them to get Avast, not only because it's free, but also for the screen saver scan function, and the boot scan function.  To be fair I also turn them onto AVG (another free program), and other less popular pay per year programs like CA, Trend-Mirco etc...   

In the end it all depends on the end user and what they most feel comfortable trusting the valuable data to. Everybody has their own opinion as to what anti virus program works the best, and to each his own.  My experiences have shown me what to trust and that's what I went with. 

When you choose an anti virus program, research as many as you can, look for reviews, customer comments etc.... and pick the program that you feel will work best on your system.