Previous 1 227 228 229 230 231 Next 3,649 Replies Latest reply: Feb 16, 2015 3:15 AM by petermac87 Go to original post Branched to a new discussion.
  • Csound1 Level 8 Level 8 (41,750 points)

    Yeah, er......not sure about that.

  • Matt Schultz Level 1 Level 1 (55 points)

    peter_watt wrote:

     

    If you calculate how much CO2 and methane would be produced by 300 million humans waiting ten minutes for itunes to churn you might find the carbon footprint of a modern data farm favourably comparable.

    That's not only conjecture/speculation not allowed by these forums but wildly incorrect & illogical conjecture.

     

    To make your argument even more obtuse and silly, you seem to be indicating that no one would be breathing for those ten minutes if only they didn't use iTunes. Quite ridiculous.

  • Matt Schultz Level 1 Level 1 (55 points)

    gumsie wrote:

     

    Yeah, er......not sure about that. Data centres are my field and I can tell you they waste massive amounts of energy. Truly massive amounts on necessary evils like physical and virtual security before you even begin to consider other factors.

    Agreed. It's more than simply the PR of "green" data centers where operating power only is calculated.

     

    Add up all of the energy and resources required to manufacture all the machines in those buildings; the energy for the freight required to ship from China to North Carolina; to construct and maintain the buildings; to manufacture and ship the camera equipment; to secure the software; fence and guard the perimeter; to get the employees back and forth; to build, ship, install and service the air conditioning equipment; and all the other myriad tasks needed to go from ground zero to full cloud services and the continued maintenance of those services. Massive amounts of energy consumed.

     

    All to cover the 1/4" between those devices...

  • Csound1 Level 8 Level 8 (41,750 points)

    I am curious to know how much extra energy is involved in getting all the 'over the wire' users back and forth to the places that allow them to plug in as compared to doing it in the location that they need or want to be

     

    Would you have any idea?

  • gumsie Level 4 Level 4 (2,150 points)

    Whilst I'm aware that these are again, necessary evils to prevent data loss I think It's a good idea to field as much info as possible so that we can see the whole picture.

    In the vast majority of cases I think that people will sync when necessary without making a special trip home just for that one purpose, not every time there is a small change like iCloud does.

     

    A 500KVA transformer based UPS whilst idling might consume 36KW. These will in 90% of installs will be paralleled, probably 4 units but up to 8. So that's 144KW per set. 2 of these sets will very likely feed a downstream static switch, that in turn feeds a bank of servers, (that will have again multiple redundancies).

    288KW with no load on them.

    (This set will make up only a fraction of a large data centre).

     

    I'll forget cooling requirements, security guards, IT staff, losses through cable and switchgear and other factors.

     

    What I'm saying is that there is a price to pay for this 'always on' that we enjoy. Just don't lets pretend that we're Ok because we're using green power.

     

    Matt I agree with you.

  • peter_watt Level 3 Level 3 (905 points)

    Matt Schultz wrote:

     

    peter_watt wrote:

     

    If you calculate how much CO2 and methane would be produced by 300 million humans waiting ten minutes for itunes to churn you might find the carbon footprint of a modern data farm favourably comparable.

    That's not only conjecture/speculation not allowed by these forums but wildly incorrect & illogical conjecture.

     

    To make your argument even more obtuse and silly, you seem to be indicating that no one would be breathing for those ten minutes if only they didn't use iTunes. Quite ridiculous.

    You brought in the green argument with a one sided speculation about energy and data farms with no evidence. At least I opened up the possibility for you to do some actual research and calculation.  If I am wildly incorrect prove it.

     

    If they didn't use itunes and waste ten minutes of their life they would be doing productive work.

     

    Speculation is only banned about Apple, not about abstract arguments introduced in a similarly conjectural way.

     

    And I didn't attack you perconally, why did you attack me?

     

    And you have no sense of humour. Do I have to put a pathetic wink emoticon to get you to chill a bit?

  • TopSteve Level 1 Level 1 (65 points)

    Csound1 wrote:

     

    I am curious to know how much extra energy is involved in getting all the 'over the wire' users back and forth to the places that allow them to plug in as compared to doing it in the location that they need or want to be

     

    Would you have any idea?

    "extra"?  If I'm not at home then my home I don't need my computers at home to have the data there in sync with my iPhone, until I get home.  So I don't need to make a "extra" journey and there for I don't use any "extra" energy.

  • Csound1 Level 8 Level 8 (41,750 points)

    Some of us require our data to be a little more up to date than you do.

  • Matt Schultz Level 1 Level 1 (55 points)

    peter_watt wrote:

     

    If they didn't use itunes and waste ten minutes of their life they would be doing productive work.

    Yes, I see what you mean. If everybody would just listen to you they would be so much more productive. Everyone - back to work!

     

    Now why would you think that someone using iTunes is wasting their life away? If everyone took your advice, Apple would lose billions of dollars.

     

    Over the course of many years of syncing handhelds with client machines, I cannot recall ever spending 10 minutes on such an activity. This morning I updated 3 apps and sync'd my iPhone to my Macbook Air = about 2 to 2-1/2 minutes, tops. Included pulling the USB cable out of my briefcase & waking the Air up.

     

    How does this take 10 minutes? And more importantly, who cares?

  • peter_watt Level 3 Level 3 (905 points)

    You seem to.

  • Matt Schultz Level 1 Level 1 (55 points)

    Csound1 wrote:

     

    I am curious to know how much extra energy is involved in getting all the 'over the wire' users back and forth to the places that allow them to plug in as compared to doing it in the location that they need or want to be

     

    Would you have any idea?

    There's a description in the term "USB local sync" - it's the local part. Wherever you are, you're local.

  • Csound1 Level 8 Level 8 (41,750 points)

    There's a description in the term "USB local sync" - it's the local part. Wherever you are, you're local.

    Local to what? the data source?

     

    'Sync' requires 2 devices, I prefer to carry just the one and let the new data appear on it wherever I am, whenever it is available.

     

    If you don't require timely data updates then a piece of cable would be fine. Just need to find a reliable method.

     

    Maybe Apple will bring it back.

  • Capt Billy Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Hi, just signing onto this thread.

     

    We live on a sailboat. We rarely have internet and generally have it only in some internet cafe ashore. We rarely take our MacBook ashore for many reasons. So we do a ot with our phones. I have a new MacBook Air (yes, I got my old macbook wet!!) It has Mavericks on it. So far everything is great... except I need Icloud to sync contacts etc with the iphone.

     

    Tonight I have internet on the boat and thought I would try an icloud back up and sync... 6 hours is what was forcasted for time to do the iphone part. We generate all of our own power on board using solar  and wind. I can't leave the phone running for 6 hours... then another 6 for the laptop...

     

    So, has anyone worked out a direct, wired or bluetooth or LAN backup/sync for this kind of user.

     

    For those of you in the US, you don't know how lucky you are. in the rest of the world, the internet *****. Very low bandwidth and very sketchy connections.

  • jayv. Level 4 Level 4 (1,230 points)

    For those of you in the US, you don't know how lucky you are. in the rest of the world, the internet *****. Very low bandwidth and very sketchy connections.

    U.S. Is actually pretty low on the list when it comes to bandwith and speed, europe and asia do much better.

     

     

    So, has anyone worked out a direct, wired or bluetooth or LAN backup/sync for this kind of user.

    There have been several suggestions and recommendations in this thread, I'm afraid you'll have to wade through all 229 pages to see all of them, including the copius amounts of trolling.

  • Skakagrall Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    There have been several suggestions and recommendations in this thread, I'm afraid you'll have to wade through all 229 pages to see all of them, including the copius amounts of trolling.

     

    The options we have discussed are:

     

    1. OSX server — a kind of 'sledgehammer to crack a nut' solution, if you are only going to sync Contacts and Calendars.

    2. Baikal server — better scaled but lacking good documentation.

    3. SyncMate 5 beta — a workable solution if you can batch your contacts in groups of less than 500 and sync them individually.

     

    plus:

     

    4. A future solution that the ever-watchful monitors do not allow us to mention here.

     

    "iCloud is not an option". That what the discussion says, so by definition iCloud is off topic. I recommend ignoring the two or three individuals who have been trying (largely unsuccessfully) to disrupt the technical discussion here.