Internet Explorer 9 vs Firefox 4

Okay,

I know I said I was going to review a motherboard in my next post, but the battle of the Fiery Fox vs the Redmond Rascal is too exciting to wait.

So, I've upgraded both IE9 and Firefox 4 to see what the buzz is all about.  Over the past few years, I have been more of an IE user due to the speed of the browser and the integration with some Microsoft owned services such as SharePoint.  I did have Firefox installed and used it mainly on my Macbook and love many of the features and customizations it offers.  So this review is very conflicted but honest.

Both FireFox and IE sport a new minimalistic look and feel that gives the user more real-estate for browsing.  On top of the extra screen space (especially when you are using a 13" laptop screen), the speed of both browsers is impressive.  Keeping with the honest theme, it is difficult to determine a winner based on real estate and speed alone since both seem to have the same drank from the same Koolaid.  Based on my eye, it looks like IE may have a slight advantage in the real estate arena as the toolbar is not a big as Firefox's (sometimes size always doesn't matter).  This gives the user a little bit more screen space for browsing though to be honest, is only a minimal difference.

Talking about the tool bars, the layouts for both IE and Firefox are very similar, almost like they were trying to copy each other ;).  Right down to the right click on the tool bars to enable additional bars/views, both browsers seem to sport the same advantages over their previous versions.  To be honest, at this time I am having a difficult time trying to outline a difference between these browsers and provide a recommendation for which on to use.

From a corporate stand point, I can see IE still leading the pact as integration with such Microsoft services as SharePoint is key in many organizations.  If your corporation hasn't drank the MS Koolaid, then this may not be an issue (lucky you).

From a portability standpoint, Firefox wins as it is available for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux (other OSes as well but I can't recall).  Since I have been using a Mac system over the past few months, being able to use the same browser on any OS is a nice advantage.  I can have the same look and feel on any system and don't need to remember how each works. 

So...  If I had to choose between IE9 or FireFox 4, what would it be?  Well, here are my thoughts:

IE 9:
- If my work was using MS applications and services, such as SharePoint, I would pick IE 9 due to it's tight integration with these applications.

FireFox 4:
- For all systems out side of work, I would go with FireFox.  Simply because it's a product that I can use across multiple platforms and the look and feel are the same (no learning curve).

My choice - FireFox...  Yes I've switched from a long time IE fan to Firefox 4.  This is the best browser I have used in years and love the speed and look.  Sorry Microsoft, Firefox had me at "http://"

Final thought...  The Browser War is very similar to the Tablet War... 

- Firefox is like the iPad...  It is for people that want to have fun and be able to do work on the same device. 
- Internet Explorer is like the Blackberry Playbook...  It is more for the corporate user that is strictly business and doesn't care about playing games and cool multimedia applications. 

Firefox and iPad may not be the best association (open versus closed systems), but you should get the point ;)

Soon to come... ASUS M4A89GTD PRO/USB3 Review...

I just received a nice new motherboard from Wintronic Computers in Burlington, Ontario.  It's the ASUS M4A89GTD PRO/USB3.  I plan to put this baby through some tests and will be posting my results over the next few days!

Thanks Wintronics!!!

UPDATED: Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra 2 + Time Machine Backup

Evening everyone!

Over the past week I have really enjoyed playing around with my new Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra 2!  This NAS is one of the best I have every used and have recently enabled Time Machine backups with it.

I have a Macbook Pro 13" with a 160GB Intel X25-M SSD and 500GB HD in it.  I recently enabled the Time Machine feature on my ReadyNAS and very quickly was able to specify how much space I would like to reserve for these backups (unlike the Seagate BlackArmor where I had to repartition my hard drive to allocate space).  Once I enabled the feature, I was able to quickly tell Time Machine of my Macbook to use the ReadyNAS to backup and watched as 90+ GB was transferred over in about 30minutes (don't have the exact time - sorry).   Very impressed!

One issue I have run into with the ReadyNAS is OS X doesn't seem to like to connect to the NAS unless you use the AFP protocol.  I have 2 SHARED entries showing up on my Mac:

SHARED
- NAS (AFP)
- NAS

If I try to click on NAS, I get "Connection Failed" and can not specify a username/password for it to connect with.  If I click on NAS (AFP), I have full access and everything works fine.  Still need to spend some time investigating this issue more, but wanted to be upfront with the only issue I am having.

Anyways, if you are looking for a good 2 drive NAS that will work with Time Machine (quickly) , look at the Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra 2!

UPDATE:

Well, I guess I'm a bit of a moron, or as Charlie Sheen would say, I'm WINNING!  I had disabled CIFS on the ReadyNAS thinking it wasn't overly important and didn't realize that will kill access to all Windows and Mac OS X systems (not using AFP).  So, after enabling CIFS on the ReadyNAS, OS X now sees the device (NAS (CIFS)) and works fine that way.

Final hurdle is trying to get all my shares showing up when I click on NAS on OS X.  I only see the ReadyNAS and my user folder when I click on it.  Any ideas??

Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra 2 Reviewed

Today I'm going to provide a review on the Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra 2 that I received a few weeks back.  My review has been delayed due to some hard drive failures that occurred shortly after receiving the device, but I'm pleased to say I have found some replacements and have been able to get this baby purring!

First off, here is the configuration I'm using:

ReadyNAS Ultra 2
2x 2TB Seagate S2000DL003 SATA 3 5,900 RPM drives
1 Gigabit Network Connection

So I've set this system up using pretty much the defaults and started copying over some files and was absolutely shocked at the speeds.  Below are my test results (used same testing strategy as I did with the Seagate BlackArmor NAS110).

ReadyNAS Ultra 2 -> MacBook Pro = 43MB/sec (Activity Monitor)
MacBook Pro -> ReadyNAS Ultra 2 = 46MB/sec (Activity Monitor)

ReadyNAS Ultra 2 -> Windows 7 = 47MB/Sec (Windows File Copy)
Windows 7 -> ReadyNAS Ultra 2 = 45MB/sec (Windows File Copy)

Windows 7 -> MacBook Pro = 41MB/sec (Activity Monitor)
MacBook Pro -> Windows 7 = 33MB/sec (Activity Monitor)

I ran my file copies 3 times for each of the scenarios listed above and can say I am extremely impressed.

On top of the amazing file copy speeds, the ReadyNAS Ultra 2 offers some pretty nice add-ons that increase the value of this device.  On top of the stock add-ons, there are a large number of community add-ons that are absolutely sweet!

So, if you are looking for a NAS and want to have a 2 drive configuration (for redundancy), I can say based on my experience so far (comparing with a D-Link DNS-323), the Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra 2 is a great option!  Now, if you are looking for a NAS that has the ability to do more than just store files (run applications such as SABnzbd and Sickbeard), the Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra 2 is a definite must!!

Netgear, you have one nice little box! ;)

Where did February go??

Howdy!

Well, it's been quite some time since I have posted here.  I honestly don't know where February went!  Has anyone seen it?

Things have obviously been very busy lately and I apologize for not being around to answer tweets and emails.  I'm hoping to restart posting and am looking to start with a review of the Netgear ReadyNAS Ultra 2.  I was lucky to receive one of these units and wanted to compare them to the Seagate BlackArmor NAS 110 I reviewed a few months back.

Now I know that this is not an apple to apple comparison, as the ReadyNAS and NAS 110 are in two completely different leagues, but figure these are all I have to work with (for now - hint hint vendors!!).


Just shortly after I started setting up the ReadyNAS, one of the hard drives that came with it failed (funny, it is a Seagate - how did they know?).  I am going to have to get some replacement drives before I can continue my tests, but do want to say that so far I've seen an average of about 40MBps when copying files from my Windows 7 system (Gigabit network) to the NAS. 

Once I get a new pair of hard drives, I will set them up and start further testing.  Stay tuned!

Latest MacBook Pro Update - 2nd Hard Drive

Well, after waiting over a week for my 2nd Hard Drive Caddy to arrive, I'm happy to say it's finally here!

I spent about 20 minutes and was able to quickly install my 500GB 5400 RPM drive in it, and swapped out the Superdrive for it.

First impressions, awesome!!!  Having this additional space is perfect.  I still have the speed of the SSD as my OS drive and am storing movies, pictures, music, and downloads on the 500GB.

Heat doesn't seem to be an issue (yet), but I'm curious now how the battery will survive.  I'll have to play around and see how it goes.

Latest iPad 2 Rumor - No Retina Display

CNET has reported today that the iPad 2 may not actually include the Retina Display that iPhone 4 users have grown to love.  In their article, Latest rumor: iPad 2 won't feature Retina display,  CNET mentions that:

'However, the well-sourced Gruber says that is not happening. "I asked around, and according to my sources, it is too good to be true: the iPad 2 does not have a Retina display. I believe the iPad 2's display will remain at 1024?768.'

Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20028878-37.html#ixzz1BVkHRuGH

Playboy on iPad

Afterdawn just published an article called iPad, say hello to Playboy.  Though there is already an iPad Playboy application, it doesn't include any nudity and is heavily censored.  In Afterdawn's article, they state Hugh Hefner tweeted the following today:

"Big news! Playboy--both old & new--will be available on iPad beginning in March. The IPad Version of Playboy will include the whole magazine from the first issue to the latest and Playboy on iPad will be uncensored."

That will definitely be an app to get, but for those of us with small children that hog the iPad, restrictions at the application level will be a most.

Thanks for nothing Google AdSense

Well, after weeks of playing around with the Monetize feature on this blog, Google has denied me an AdSense account as my site doesn't meet their expectations:

We're unable to approve your AdSense application at this time
because we feel that your site does not comply with Google AdSense
policies or webmaster quality guidelines. It's our goal to provide our
advertisers sites that offer rich and meaningful content, receive organic
traffic, and allow us to serve well-targeted ads to users. We believe that
currently your site does not fulfill this criteria.

I'm not overly heart broken as I wasn't planning on retiring on the $0.33/day I was seeing from their advertisements.

Either way, I will still continue posting as I always do and maybe some day my site will be worthy enough of the great Google to have their advertisements displayed once again on my site (if I want them too).

Seagate BlackArmor NAS 110... Time Machine = Good, Network Transfer Speed = BAD

I recently bought a Seagate BlackArmor NAS 110 1TB Network Attached Storage device as it has full support for Time Machine backups over the network.

Installation was simple, just hook the box up to my Gigabit Router, plug in the power and pop in the CD in your SuperDrive.  The application that installs finds the NAS quickly and lets you mount your shares from it and also allows for management of the system.  The web management interface is fairly straight forward and I was able to start building my shares quickly.  Once I had those setup, I went to Time Machine and clicked on "Select Drive".  Guess what, nothing listed :(

After spending some time researching (should have just gone to Seagate's support site first), I found out that the firmware the unit ships with does not include support for Time Machine.  You need to download and install firmware version 1000.1081 to enable that feature.  So after about 10 minutes of updating the firmware (yeah it takes a while) and enabling Time Machine support in the admin interface, I was able to see the network drive pop up in Time Machine.  At this point, I was fairly happy with my investment as I can just sit back and let Time Machine do it's thing (and it didn't cost me $300+ for a Time Capsule).

Now on the the bad news.  Seeing that I don't really need 1TB to backup my 160GB SSD, I decided to move some of my music and movies from my Windows 7 machine over to the NAS 110.  I selected about 400GB and told it to copy over and I'm sorry to say, was NOT impressed with the copy speed.  Windows 7 reported approximately 11.1MB/sec and that it would take 24 hours to complete.  Now I know what some of you will say, 11.1MB/sec is not bad.  Yeah, I can agree with that if I was getting that when copying between other systems on my 1000MB network.  I typically see anywhere from 20 - 40 MB/sec when copying from my Windows 7 system to my MacBook Pro or my HTPC.  So I started looking online to see if other people are reporting the same problems and guess what, they are (really should have researched better).  There seems to be some known issues with this unit and D-Link routers (I use a Cisco E3000 router) and a number of people complaining on the Seagate forums about horrible speed.

I did some tests using a 700MB file and ran copies between the NAS and my MacBook Pro and Windows 7 system.  Here are the results:

NAS 110 -> MacBook Pro = 39MB/sec (Activity Monitor)
MacBook Pro -> NAS 110 = 18MB/sec (Activity Monitor)

NAS 110 -> Windows 7 = 16MB/Sec (Windows File Copy)
Windows 7 -> NAS 110 = 13MB/sec (Windows File Copy)

Windows 7 -> MacBook Pro = 42MB/sec (Activity Monitor)
MacBook Pro -> Windows 7 = 31MB/sec (Activiy Monitor)

So at this time, I'm torn as to what to do with this device.  Some people in the forums have suggested putting a 1000MB switch in between the router and computers to speed up network performance.  I'm considering trying this to see if that helps, but seeing that other machines are copying at a much faster rate, I'm not sure it will.

Either way, I will do my due diligence and pick up a switch to see.  If that doesn't help, I'll likely have to live with the sub-par performance as I don't want to spend $300+ on a Time Capsule.

UPDATE:

Well, I decided to try removing my router from the picture (as many people on the forums have suggested) and just ran a network cable from the NAS to my Windows 7 machine.  EXACT SAME RESULTS!  I even used a brand new CAT 6 cable and nothing changed :(

I'm going to try some Windows 7 tweaks as I am seeing better performance from my MacBook to the NAS, so maybe that will help. 

Until then, my recommendation on the Seagate BlackArmor NAS 110 is this...  If you want a cheap solution for Time Machine, buy it.  If you are looking for a NAS that will be quick to copy files to and from over a Gigabit network, look elsewhere.