this is consolidated: youtube, bandcamp, blogspot. i've shut down the delicious link dump, as it's superfluous after the move to blogspot and it was pushing ads in the feed (gross). i'm on the brink of closing down soundcloud, i just need to clear it out first. it's full of spam, because you have to pay to turn the comments off. facebook uses a proprietary feed algorithm, so they've been excluded by choice (that's just another reason to not use facebook). i would also like to add disqus, but they don't support this, either. i'm going to keep an eye out for a comment system that allows for rss and i'll no doubt use it exclusively if it presents itself. in the mean time, this is as much as i can put together in one place.
http://www.rssmix.com/u/8219212/rss.xml
Monday, January 2, 2017
even realizing what's going to push me...
i have to think i'll *start* by dual-booting 32/64 bit xp, and only move to 64 bit very slowly.
there's no use in getting too far ahead. what can i say about this very moment?
i did a huge amount of walking on saturday on no sleep while battling what seems like the flu. there was a delay before it knocked me out, but i spent the whole day sleeping.
i'm going to spend the night filing, which includes installing the new drive. i've got vlogs for the next month uploaded and have to do write-ups for them, as well. then i'll finish cleaning when the sun comes up, get in the shower at the end of it and then get back to what i was doing either tonight or tomorrow.
how much longer to finish posting 2014-2016? i don't know.
i have to think i'll *start* by dual-booting 32/64 bit xp, and only move to 64 bit very slowly.
there's no use in getting too far ahead. what can i say about this very moment?
i did a huge amount of walking on saturday on no sleep while battling what seems like the flu. there was a delay before it knocked me out, but i spent the whole day sleeping.
i'm going to spend the night filing, which includes installing the new drive. i've got vlogs for the next month uploaded and have to do write-ups for them, as well. then i'll finish cleaning when the sun comes up, get in the shower at the end of it and then get back to what i was doing either tonight or tomorrow.
how much longer to finish posting 2014-2016? i don't know.
as mentioned elsewhere, the only wall i've had to scale or think i will
ever need to scale is in ram. the newer vst sample plugin libraries want
16+ gb of ram, and i'd need to get to 64-bit to do it. that's a
potential driver nightmare. it's likely workable, i just don't want to
do it until i have to.
i'd have to reimage, to start with. it took a long time to build that image, and i don't want to even think about it. but, i'd certainly use 64-bit xp, fwiw. there's no benefit in upgrading; i just keep the machine offline.
what i'm wondering in the short-run is if i can convert one of these 250 gb drives into a pagefile. it would not be as fast, of course. but, it might potentially let me run a sampler.
this is entirely theoretical, right now: i haven't *actually* had an issue with a sampler that i can't resolve with the existing set-up. it's just that i see where the push factor is, and what's going to eventually force me to upgrade, one day. i'm going to eventually need more ram and have no choice...
i'd have to reimage, to start with. it took a long time to build that image, and i don't want to even think about it. but, i'd certainly use 64-bit xp, fwiw. there's no benefit in upgrading; i just keep the machine offline.
what i'm wondering in the short-run is if i can convert one of these 250 gb drives into a pagefile. it would not be as fast, of course. but, it might potentially let me run a sampler.
this is entirely theoretical, right now: i haven't *actually* had an issue with a sampler that i can't resolve with the existing set-up. it's just that i see where the push factor is, and what's going to eventually force me to upgrade, one day. i'm going to eventually need more ram and have no choice...
actually, you know what? this is a moot point.
i'm not replacing my system partition; that is, my C: drive will remain on an older drive.
the new drive will neither launch the os, nor launch programs, nor do anything else that would be faster over ssd. it will simply store data.
i really just needed a lot more space.
there are currently 3 250 gb hdds in there. i bought it with four. it's split into a lot of partitions, including a 50 gb C: drive. one of the drives is solely for music, and that won't change. what i'm going to do is combine a lot of the smaller partitions together into a larger "discography" partition that will utilize the entire 2 TB drive. this will include things like wavs for burning cds and isos for burning dvds and blu-rays, as well as all of my source material, organized in iso files. so, it's all data storage.
as i move things to the new drive, it will open up space on the old drives. so, the remaining partitions (the virtual machine partition, the temp partition, the install script partition) will be able to grow. extra temp space will be useful, but it's otherwise not going to be much of a change.
again: i didn't buy this to increase speed. the machine is already blazing fast, because it's very well maintained (software. not hardware.). i bought it because i needed more storage space. and, that's the only change i'm expecting - more storage space.
i'm not replacing my system partition; that is, my C: drive will remain on an older drive.
the new drive will neither launch the os, nor launch programs, nor do anything else that would be faster over ssd. it will simply store data.
i really just needed a lot more space.
there are currently 3 250 gb hdds in there. i bought it with four. it's split into a lot of partitions, including a 50 gb C: drive. one of the drives is solely for music, and that won't change. what i'm going to do is combine a lot of the smaller partitions together into a larger "discography" partition that will utilize the entire 2 TB drive. this will include things like wavs for burning cds and isos for burning dvds and blu-rays, as well as all of my source material, organized in iso files. so, it's all data storage.
as i move things to the new drive, it will open up space on the old drives. so, the remaining partitions (the virtual machine partition, the temp partition, the install script partition) will be able to grow. extra temp space will be useful, but it's otherwise not going to be much of a change.
again: i didn't buy this to increase speed. the machine is already blazing fast, because it's very well maintained (software. not hardware.). i bought it because i needed more storage space. and, that's the only change i'm expecting - more storage space.
so, why is my machine such a fast boot and yours so slow?
well, it's 32-bit. my hardware specs are pretty much maxed for 32-bit. but if you're running 64-bit then yours might be better. if you have an old machine, you know it. it's probably not why.
the reason is probably that i keep my software footprint to a bare minimum. i run regular scripts to clear out caches. nothing loads on start-up - not even backup services. and, the machine has xp on it.
so, i'm not disputing the premise. but, if i got a 25% increase in speed from an ssd, that would take my start-up time from ten seconds to 7.5 seconds. it would take my cubase launch time from 20 seconds to 15 seconds.
it hardly seems like it's worth the price, and the associated risk of using volatile storage on a system with very, very high data transfer rates.
what i needed was a lot of safe, permanent storage space. integrity. longevity. size. speed was not in the list of things that are of concern to me.
well, it's 32-bit. my hardware specs are pretty much maxed for 32-bit. but if you're running 64-bit then yours might be better. if you have an old machine, you know it. it's probably not why.
the reason is probably that i keep my software footprint to a bare minimum. i run regular scripts to clear out caches. nothing loads on start-up - not even backup services. and, the machine has xp on it.
so, i'm not disputing the premise. but, if i got a 25% increase in speed from an ssd, that would take my start-up time from ten seconds to 7.5 seconds. it would take my cubase launch time from 20 seconds to 15 seconds.
it hardly seems like it's worth the price, and the associated risk of using volatile storage on a system with very, very high data transfer rates.
what i needed was a lot of safe, permanent storage space. integrity. longevity. size. speed was not in the list of things that are of concern to me.
fwiw, my machine boots in seconds, anyways. it's about a ten second
boot-up. you read through reviews of ssds and it's things like:
outlook launches in less than 30 seconds
dude. i don't run outlook, but it would be launching in less than 30 seconds on my machine, trust me. cubase takes about 20 seconds to launch.
if your machine takes more than 30 seconds to launch fucking outlook, you need more than a solid state drive. you need ram. you need a faster cpu. and you probably need a fucking reinstall of your os, too.
thirty seconds to launch outlook. jesus. what is it, 1998?
outlook launches in less than 30 seconds
dude. i don't run outlook, but it would be launching in less than 30 seconds on my machine, trust me. cubase takes about 20 seconds to launch.
if your machine takes more than 30 seconds to launch fucking outlook, you need more than a solid state drive. you need ram. you need a faster cpu. and you probably need a fucking reinstall of your os, too.
thirty seconds to launch outlook. jesus. what is it, 1998?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)