#Moving boxee mac#
#Moving boxee windows#

Instead, as the explorer addon crawled through his entire picture collection the 2 computers competed with each other and he ended up losing tons of personal pictures of which he had no backup. He accidentally opened the folder on 2 machines at the same time and this app started 'fixing' the pictures that had a bad date in the header of the pictures(year was 1970 or something). I can't find the link, but someone had some application that could fix certain picture corruption issues. The consequences could be disastrous for your data too. While you could disable the ones you can clearly identify are happening(such as thumbnail generation) there are so many that go in that you won't notice I would never ever make the assumption that you are capable of respecting the file locking issues yourself. all do things in the background that you sometimes don't even know are happening. For example, caching stuff for text searching, thumbnails, sound file information and tags, video file tags etc. Opening folders that contain sound files, picture files, media files, Office documents(if Office 2007 or newer is installed) and PDFs(if Adobe Acrobat is installed) and probably alot more stuff will trigger alot of things to start happening in the background.

#Moving boxee windows#

Windows XP(and even more so Vista, and even more than Vista with 7 and 8) does a lot(and I mean a whole lot) of stuff in the background.

If I had 10Gb/sec LAN hardware then things might be different though(but I'd have to test that before I'd actually consider making a switch).ĭon't fool yourself and think that YOU can respect the file locking issues. Since I can saturate 2xGb LAN ports simultaneously with my hardware with CIFS I don't know how NFS would provide any benefit at all that would make me consider going dual-protocol or even switching to NFS. I consider the protocols themselves to be roughly on par with each other and the implementation(and support on the desktop side) to be the more decisive factors.

Comparing speeds of CIFS versus NFS with my Gb LAN I have been able to be within 1MB/sec of each other, so I don't know why you'd be worried about 100Mbit/sec ethernet and saving a little overhead(if there is even any savings). CIFS used to be VERY chatty, but with v2.0(released with Windows Vista) a lot of the chattiness is gone. Samba(CIFS) is single threaded while NFS is multi-threaded.

#Moving boxee mac#

I haven't tried a Mac since I don't have one, but I believe CIFS is available and works fine on Apple stuff.ĪFAIK the lower overhead you are hoping to achieve is mostly with CPU resources and not network resources. I use it in Linux, Windows, and FreeBSD without issues. Making one protocol read-only and the other writable is about the only smart way to share the same data. But on my machines I use the writable share. It works for me with VLC when I've tested it. If it doesn't, I'm not going to cry about it. I have a read-only share of my movies/music/tv shows and if a friend wants to watch something he can easily log in without a password. Personally, I avoid using read-only directories except for public permissions folders. If you have 10000 pictures in a folder it may crash, give you 10000 error windows, or work perfectly. There are alot of programs and hardware out there that has issues when it tries to write an index file(thumbs.db in the windows world comes to mind) and your image viewer is trying to make one and the directory is read only. For most things, read-only sharing via NFS and CIFS works 'okay'.