True.
It really depends on a lot of “what ifs”.
I’ve been through the cabling thing in multiple places since 1996…
Today I run cable as-needed. If wi-fi gets it done, I’m not putting in the effort for cable.
If wifi isn’t getting it done, I’ll run a single cable for the location with issues, and drop in a gigabit switch (if needed).
The days of running cable “just in case” are in the past, for me.
I have 53 nearby wireless networks. Lots of interference.
Channel scan charts just look like a bunch of color mixed together.
I used to modify my access points to use non-standard channels to help.
Still, other than copying media files, it’s fine.
I certainly wouldn’t remove existing cables, that’s effort for little to no gain.
Surprisingly, there’s very little anymore that exposes the bandwidth difference between wireless and wired, and I run a media server at home.
I see the performance difference when copying files, but that’s about it.
I have multiple local devices streaming video (over wifi), while the devices that really need a wired connection get one via a single cable and small switches.
For example there’s a cat5e running to a 5 port gigabit switch behind the TV. So the TV gets a drop and anything else I may need there (Apple TV, dedicated media PC, etc) can use the switch.
Currently have 3 of these switches, with about 10 devices directly wired, but only 3 runs from the primary switch.
NAS sits next to my server, so they’re on the same switch with just patch cables. Pretty much everything else get wifi if it supports it.
Don’t buy any kind of drive from aliexpress.
Shop here: https://diskprices.com/ and even then pay attention to the source.
You have backups or replicants of your data, right?
What’s more important is redundancy, as all drives fail.
What’s your replication/redundancy/backup plan look like? That’s more important than “which drive” (other than SMR/CMR), as even enterprise drives fail.
I’ve had consumer drives running 24/7 for 10 years.
Drives are a lot more robust than most people think, but they still fail at seemingly random times, so having backup is crucial.
I have an (old) NAS that frankly I don’t trust to not die. Then again, anything can die, so it’s just one component of my local data replication.
I also have my server which is authoritative for all data, which is then duplicated (on schedules) to the NAS and 2 external drives, so I have 3 local copies.
All of these drives are 5+ years old except the primary data drive which is 2.
I like your point about power monitoring - that would be an interesting secondary method for alerting to a possible breach, if you have a consistent power-use profile.
Are you me?
This is the exact argument I make about updating.
Without knowing, you’re just trading known risks for unknown risks.
Known risks can be managed.
My opinion of the constant update cycle today: it rationalizes management’s liability offloading while also justifying staffing requirements and therefore budget.
Liability and risk are related, but very different things.