Mac. Hard drive. help? I dunno. is this possible?

Page 1 of 2 [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

gramirez
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Nov 2008
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,880
Location: Barrington, Illinois

21 Dec 2008, 1:48 pm

I have a Mac with (2) 2 GB SCSI hard drives. OS X 10.3 requires a minimum of 3 GB for installation. Is it possible to get some sort of RAID software config to "pool" these two drives together, to make one single 4 GB volume?

If not, I need a bigger SCSI drive.


_________________
Reality is a nice place but I wouldn't want to live there


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,765
Location: Room 101

21 Dec 2008, 2:03 pm

Why are you still on 10.3? It's not even supported any more. A 2GB hard drive is pretty small- are you trying to put it on an ancient computer or something? If the hardware is that limited, you best bet is some Linux distro or other.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


DeLoreanDude
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,708
Location: FL

21 Dec 2008, 2:20 pm

Update your OS, update your HDs. Get a 1TB, they are only about £70.



alex
Developer
Developer

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,110
Location: Beverly Hills, CA

21 Dec 2008, 2:30 pm

yo DeLoreanDude, he says they're SCSI!! !

it must be an ancient mother f****r



DeLoreanDude
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2008
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,708
Location: FL

21 Dec 2008, 2:31 pm

alex wrote:
yo DeLoreanDude, he says they're SCSI!! !

it must be an ancient mother f****


Indeed! He'll need a whole new machiene!



steveos87
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 79
Location: New Hampshire

21 Dec 2008, 3:53 pm

It's not unusual for users to be on vintage releases of OSes. The vast majority of computers and IT systems are normally a version or two behind the most latest release. 10.3 is actually five years old, just like XP users in the Windows world. I was on 10.4 before I went onto XP but I was going to wait till 10.6 to go onto 10.5, just an old rule I learned in the real people in the real IT world. Can't believe you people are picking on him - you people don't live in the realistic world! Not everyone can have the luxury to go to the latest and greatest OS!



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,765
Location: Room 101

21 Dec 2008, 4:15 pm

steveos87 wrote:
It's not unusual for users to be on vintage releases of OSes. The vast majority of computers and IT systems are normally a version or two behind the most latest release. 10.3 is actually five years old, just like XP users in the Windows world. I was on 10.4 before I went onto XP but I was going to wait till 10.6 to go onto 10.5, just an old rule I learned in the real people in the real IT world. Can't believe you people are picking on him - you people don't live in the realistic world! Not everyone can have the luxury to go to the latest and greatest OS!

The difference between staying on XP and staying on 10.3 is that subsequent releases of OSX are better rather than worse, and this has not always been the case with Windows, although Vista is not horrible- I'm in it right now, actually.

Hey, I get to move to the latest and greatest OS every 6 months, and it doesn't cost me a dime. :D Gotta love Ubuntu's fast release cycles.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


gramirez
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Nov 2008
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,880
Location: Barrington, Illinois

21 Dec 2008, 4:45 pm

Yes, it's a 1995 computer. Only computer I know of with 6 PCI slots. Not even the latest Mac Pro has 6.

None of the above are an option. Either there is a way to pool the drives together, or get a 4 GB SCSI drive.


Thank you all for being so incredibly helpful...


_________________
Reality is a nice place but I wouldn't want to live there


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,765
Location: Room 101

21 Dec 2008, 5:03 pm

Sorry, gramirez. I don't know anything about the old-school Macs.

Can you really install OSX on a 1995 computer? I'd be pretty impressed with you if you managed to pull that one off.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,532
Location: Alberta Canada

21 Dec 2008, 5:11 pm

I dont know if its possible gramirez, but look up LVM (logical volume management). Its a Linux thing, but perhaps its possible.

Quote:
LVM stands for logical volume management. Its a method of grouping partitions or entire hard disks into logical volumes


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


steveos87
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 79
Location: New Hampshire

21 Dec 2008, 5:12 pm

Orwell wrote:
steveos87 wrote:
It's not unusual for users to be on vintage releases of OSes. The vast majority of computers and IT systems are normally a version or two behind the most latest release. 10.3 is actually five years old, just like XP users in the Windows world. I was on 10.4 before I went onto XP but I was going to wait till 10.6 to go onto 10.5, just an old rule I learned in the real people in the real IT world. Can't believe you people are picking on him - you people don't live in the realistic world! Not everyone can have the luxury to go to the latest and greatest OS!

The difference between staying on XP and staying on 10.3 is that subsequent releases of OSX are better rather than worse, and this has not always been the case with Windows, although Vista is not horrible- I'm in it right now, actually.

Hey, I get to move to the latest and greatest OS every 6 months, and it doesn't cost me a dime. :D Gotta love Ubuntu's fast release cycles.


But in the real world, people are hesitant to change, which requires time reteaching in which wastes time. I am going to do a CBA to see if 10.5 is worth the upgrade. Mostly costs of upgrading and the costs of reteaching and benefits of bloatware. I am getting pretty sick your obsession of Ubuntu. That and Apple loves progressiveness. The real world doesn't like change, and it can take up to months just trying to know how it works in upgrades. Never mind that Firefox is killing support for V.2 really quickly, which I don't like. I don't know anything about V.3, and I, like the real people, are afraid to know what is different and how to make it look like V2 but thats beside the point.

I can name servers, switches, desktops, that are still in use in more than ten years that are beyond support cycles. VAXes are still in use. (Remember Wang, I know some shops still use Wang.) Sun servers that dates from the mid nineties are still in use. Catalyst switches that use the archaic CatOS still in use. NT 4 desktops that are still used to this day. Um, the 1981 IBM PC for the NOAA/NWS reporting (although they are supposed to be now regular PCs by now) Definity and Meridian switches that came before VOIP, some that date into the early 90s - still in use. I can go on and on and on... I assume Orwell, since you were born close to the 1990s decade, you probably wouldn't know half of what I am talking about. People use old technology, and upgrading would require ridiculous money to forklift the technology to handle the new ones.

My point is 10.3 isn't that old, by my standards - maybe not yours because you like change. But then again its my PDD/NOS inside me that is also the reason why I don't like change ether. :-/



gramirez
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Nov 2008
Age: 25
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,880
Location: Barrington, Illinois

21 Dec 2008, 5:39 pm

Orwell wrote:
Sorry, gramirez. I don't know anything about the old-school Macs.

Can you really install OSX on a 1995 computer? I'd be pretty impressed with you if you managed to pull that one off.

http://eshop.macsales.com/OSXCenter/XPo ... mework.cfm


_________________
Reality is a nice place but I wouldn't want to live there


Keith
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,595
Location: East Sussex, UK

21 Dec 2008, 5:45 pm

DeLoreanDude wrote:
Update your OS, update your HDs. Get a 1TB, they are only about £70.


Only if that's plus VAT and part of a bulk buy. Individually they are around £100 GBP SCSI are rare, faster and ideal for RAID. Best option?

Get a bigger hard drive. SCSI shouldn't be too expensive for a decent size. I can't remember how large they are at the moment



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,532
Location: Alberta Canada

21 Dec 2008, 5:49 pm

steveos87 wrote:
and I, like the real people, are afraid to know what is different


I don't appreciate being called a doppelgänger by the likes of you because I am in the portion of computer aficionados that enjoy innovation. I'm a real person, and so is Orwell.

To be excited and fresh in the face of things that you love is the sign of youth, and those that putter and mutter only with things past will soon become disenfranchised members of society. Like the unfortunate senior citizens of Japan, that cannot even read modern Japanese, you will find yourself locked into an increasingly hostile and alien world.

This is the fate of all elderly people in modern society, and irrelevancy, boredom and lack of stimulation is probably a huge factor in their deaths. For a young man like you to be showing signs of hidebound-ism is not good. But that is your business. Just don't castigate others for their progressive interests.


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,765
Location: Room 101

21 Dec 2008, 5:59 pm

steveos87 wrote:
But in the real world, people are hesitant to change, which requires time reteaching in which wastes time.

Meh, usually the new versions are close enough to the old ones that I'm not disoriented.

Quote:
I am going to do a CBA to see if 10.5 is worth the upgrade. Mostly costs of upgrading and the costs of reteaching and benefits of bloatware.

It's not. 10.6 is coming out next spring-ish, and it's basically a faster, more stable and less bloated version of 10.5. If you aren't already on Leopard, you're better off skipping it and waiting for Snow Leopard.

Quote:
I am getting pretty sick your obsession of Ubuntu.

Weren't you going to block me or something? I did give you the link to Lau's instructions for doing so if you really wanted to. I'm an Aspie, I have my obsessions, get over it or block me if it's that much of a problem for you.

Quote:
Never mind that Firefox is killing support for V.2 really quickly, which I don't like. I don't know anything about V.3, and I, like the real people, are afraid to know what is different and how to make it look like V2 but thats beside the point.

They're not making any profit off of it, so you can hardly expect them to sit around catering to your refusal to upgrade for the next 10 years. Especially since the newer, better version is also free to download. V.3 mostly is just faster and more stable, the interface is more or less the same. At least, I didn't notice any major difference.

Gramirez, I'm sorry for derailing your thread and for not having any useful advice to give you. I'll try to keep any future arguments out of your threads.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH