In the field vs. offline processing computers
Posted 25 March 2013 - 08:18 PM
I assume that many folks have 'field computers' that are different from their 'normal use computers'. Do you find yourself having to duplicate a bunch of software with single use license structures? I haven't (yet) gotten deeply into any astronomy software and am not sure about the mix of freeware/shareware/license stuff that I will run into. And I'm not sure how much of the 'offline processing work' that I will occasionally find necessary to use in my 'field computer'.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 08:25 PM
Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:15 PM
I think most software packages allow installation on two computers (and even more) at one time, with the warning that them may not be in use simultaneously.
Posted 26 March 2013 - 12:41 AM
I use a 15.6" ASUS for acquisition and then a 17" ASUS for controlling that from inside the motorhome using wireless netword and Remote Destop. The 17" ASUS with HD screen does a pretty good job of processing because it has 1900 x 1080p resolution.
Posted 26 March 2013 - 02:13 AM
I find processing on the desktop to be more convenient when it comes down to it, not to mention it is pretty fast.
Posted 26 March 2013 - 08:08 AM
Posted 26 March 2013 - 09:32 AM
Posted 26 March 2013 - 09:46 AM
Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:45 AM
My field computer lives in my OBS. It's an old Dell with Vista Home Premium sp2. Surprisingly, it's well behaved with various softwares. It had been my house box until this last year when it got retired by a new Dell 64 bit W7, which is what I now process on. So software migration was towards the new box.
And I agree, there appears to be few restrictions on "fair use" of the various softwares. Also, processing in the home is a lot more handy than in the OBS.
Good luck on whatever you decide.
Posted 26 March 2013 - 11:24 PM
Posted 27 March 2013 - 12:46 AM
Your if your Dell D630 is running XP x86 (32bit) then you could pull out 1 gig of that ram and use it in another box as 32bit Windows (all versions) can only use 3GB ram so the rest goes to waste.
I have an old voting booth I picked up and mounted a 22" screen in the top section and a motherboard with an Athlon X2 5000+ in it and 3GB ram powered by a 1U server case power supply, it makes a nice big platform for playing around in my backyard, but I process things on my desktop which is Win8 x64 with 16GB ram and a 6 Core CPU... works great other than a few apps such a my copy of AstroArt 3 will not install on Win 8, no issue's with "the field box" being it's XP so everything runs on it. My biggest issue was storage because even once processed I don't like to throw out my original files which can be several GB in a night (I am learning so probably way to much) but I have a homeserver that can store 16TB of data so I am covered there... I think 2 machines for this hobby is ideal because XP seems most compatible with hardware and drives and is just right for that stuff and Win7/8 are nice all around O.S.'s which usually have the horse power to do the heavy lifting post processing can sometimes require.
that's just my opinion... I could be wrong.
Posted 27 March 2013 - 10:15 PM
Hello. Not a bad idea but I'll leave the 4gb in for now, until I get Win7 installed and see it handles the available RAM. Each system is different on how much RAM is made available to the OS and it's all dependent on the enabled devices and the particular chipset of the system. I've seen XP 32 systems with only 3gb available on others with over 3.5gb available. So ... I'll see how 7 handles the 630 ... One thing about 7 that I really like is its stability and speed compared to XP. Since I also use the laptop when we're in RV parks or areas where WiFi is available, I keep an updated AV and firewall solution running and 7 handles those applications much better than XP. Thanks.
Posted 27 March 2013 - 10:56 PM