SirDandyIV

Thanks for the info. So, I want something with very low failure rates because I keep my PC online pretty much forever since I host servers and bots from it. The very last thing I want to happen is fluid to land on my Maximus VIII Formula and have it die and take all my other components with it. But. There is the other solution of having coolant with zero electrical conductivity. Or, well, close enough to zero that it really doesn't matter at all. EKWB's Cryofuel is apparently good for that, but I don't know if there is better. Distilled Water does have low conductivity, but then I need to deal with the problem of buildup in my loop, and so on. Something which can be avoided outright with some coolants. I was thinking that if I get a tachometer for my water flow and have it set up to turn the system off after it gets low enough, any spill in the loop wouldn't kill the PC if the electrical conductivity is low enough, and the PC would get turned off before it died. Maybe. I am not one to take chances.

Yeah, I think get a better HDD. Something from WD. They're usually pretty damn good. https://pcpartpicker.com/list/CHkMYr

So, I could look up and compare everything from scratch, or I could just come here and ask this question to save myself half the time. I am going to be setting up an open loop in the very near future, and so I ask thus: Who makes the best open loop parts for liquid cooling? So far I'm thinking it's EKWB. Who has the lowest failure rate? What is the best coolant/liquid to use? So far I am again thinking EKWB with their Cryofuel. Is reusing rigid tubing safe? So, if I fail at a bend, can I simply bend the tube again for a different segment. Is there a way to get coolant out of a loop without it being tedious? I really want to avoid needing to flip my incredibly heavy tower on it's back. Other questions will probably occur to me. Expect to be questioned. I have the Thermaltake Tower 900 so it'll probably be able to take anything and be fine. Thanks.

Hmm, yes. unRAID will run this type of system perfectly. Thank you, you probably just saved a few days of time with that comment.

There is very, very rarely a perfect solution to anything. Yes, you're correct. I could do that. But I specifically said Without VMs and I said that for one reason in particular. Complexity. I would much, much rather have something highly complex to set up and have it work flawlessly after that than something that will be annoying to set up and to maintain. 'Sides, who wants to stay with something simple? Not me, sadly.

Mmm. Finicky solutions. I'll take a look into unRAID. Thanks.

That will not solve the problem of 2 OSes. If I wanted a larger space I would have 3 monitors by now.

Honestly? Half of me wants to see it done because it has yet to be done and the other half knows that trying to fit 2/3 OSes on one screen would end badly at best. Yes, I know I can minimise things if I need to but I tend to work better if I have everything on my screen at once. It's part of the reason why I hate having to reboot every time there's something I can't solve on one of my OSes.

Stupid but possibly fun question time!! So, I've done my research and it seems that there is no way to have two or more operating systems running from one PC at the same time without some incredibly specialised hardware or Virtual Machines. And before someone tells me to use one at a time and switch between the two or use a VM, I like a challenge and am tired of rebooting my PC every time I need to do something on Ubuntu since I need full functionality. There are also some things that I just can't get on Ubuntu. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 drivers that aren't Open Source and/or inefficient are one of them to my knowledge. The same for Windows being Command Line shenanigans. And so my question is such: How can we, the stubborn people who refuse to accept defeat, run Windows, Linux/other OS at the same time with one rig. (There is a way, it's probably just incredibly finicky and/or requires additional hardware.) If there is anywhere on the internet that has a solution, it is here.

That's the trick. Just make it so obvious a def, blind, nerve dead person could still find it.

Sadly I am unable to tear the house of which I rent down and replace the materials as I somehow believe I'd be told not to do that. I fixed the microwave problem a while ago by simply not using one. I will admit I hadn't considered moving it higher. Probably due to the lack of high space.

And thus we reach the crux of the problem.

Yes, I am. Point being: Running everything from an cellular seems to be a better idea based upon nothing if not sheer speed for money.

You don't realise how much money I've invested into good wifi. Wifi adaptor helps not.

Dear lord. Wifi here is terrible. The lowest I've recorded is something akin to 30 kb/s whereas my iPhone gets something like 40-80 mb/s. I have to start this topic so the rest of the poor souls in my situation have somewhere to be sad that won't annoy the rest of the people with 'good' internet. I don't even know what that term means... 'Good Internet'... The one thing I've discovered to work is running everything from an iPhone but because that would probably rack up costs insanely fast... Ergo, we need a solution until we get blessed by the lords of fibre optics. That said: If someone can throw down some knowledge or a suggestion to keep us sane until we can join any sort of anything online quickly, you'll be eternally appreciated. -Dandy