If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 06:23:15 GMT
John H. wrote: On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:56:40 +1100, "Rod Speed" wrote: The fool that 'designed' the 180GXP to do it so noisily that the user wonders if its normal should have been taken out the back and shot. It would be the firmware that's doing it. An upgrade should be able to'fix' the problem...someday. The 7K250 is only 2.6 bels for one disk (but I'm so confused - the specs don't say if that's power or pressure ) compared to your Samsung's 2.7 bels. It's faster too. Might not be a bad drive to buy. I've decided I don't want to buy another ATA drive. Maybe by spring time I've be able to buy a BTX case and MB and all SATA drives, including a writable SATA DVD/CD drive (strange there aren't any SATA optical drives on the market yet). Nothing strange about it--most of the SATA host adapters currently on the market don't support ATAPI devices, nor do most of the bridge chips, and the ones that do are only guaranteed to work with the same brand host adapter chip. There's no real benefit to SATA for opticals anyway--their bandwidth doesn't come close to filling a parallel ATA pipe and the drives don't generally get hot-swapped so the only gain would be the longer cable. -- -- --John Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 17:53:21 +1100, "Rod Speed"
wrote: John H wrote in message .. . Rod Speed wrote The fool that 'designed' the 180GXP to do it so noisily that the user wonders if its normal should have been taken out the back and shot. It would be the firmware that's doing it. Duh. An upgrade should be able to 'fix' the problem...someday. They mostly dont bother with that sort of thing. The 7K250 is only 2.6 bels for one disk (but I'm so confused - the specs don't say if that's power or pressure ) compared to your Samsung's 2.7 bels. And even you should have been able to grasp that that sort of measurement doesnt even register those sorts of irritating but relatively rare noises. It's faster too. Bet you'd never be able to pick it in a proper double blind trial without being allowed to use a benchmark. True. I got that 7K250 drive as a replacement for a 60GXP that broke down. In the benchmarks the 7K250 is a lot faster, but I can't say I really notice the difference between those drives. BTW I got a 60GB version of the 7K250. But officially there is no 60GB version of this drive. (guess they don't want people to destroy their 60GB disks so that they get a bigger and faster drive in return :-)) You'd certainly be able to pick that terminal stupidity with the deliberate head activity tho. No doubt about that :-) Might not be a bad drive to buy. Dont care for Hitachi's warranty policys myself. What's wrong with it? Seems just as good or better than the competition. And when they've never had the balls to fess up to what the problem was with the infamous GXP drives, That was IBM :-) they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine as far as I am concerned. I'll buy drives manufacturered by operations with a clue myself. IBM hasn't been the only company which has had a bad model once. (Problem with the 75GXP is that it also happened to be an extremely popular model) I've decided I don't want to buy another ATA drive. The main problem currently is that there are few native SATA drives buyable. Most are bridged drives. Why would you care if a drive is native SATA? I see bridged drives which are faster in every way then native drives. So I couldn't care less about native SATA drives. The actual performance is what I find interesting. Not how it is designed internally. Maybe by spring time I've be able to buy a BTX case and MB and all SATA drives, including a writable SATA DVD/CD drive (strange there aren't any SATA optical drives on the market yet). Nothing strange about that. Why not? The advantages for SATA optical drives are the same as for harddisks. I think there would be a market for it by now? Marc |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:43:40 GMT
John H. wrote: On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:13:55 -0500, "J.Clarke" wrote: (strange there aren't any SATA optical drives on the market yet). Nothing strange about it--most of the SATA host adapters currently on the market don't support ATAPI devices, nor do most of the bridge chips, and the ones that do are only guaranteed to work with the same brand host adapter chip. Philips demoed one over a year ago saying "We are very proud to be at the leading edge of the Serial ATA transition, and helping demonstrate the interface_s outstanding functionality, reliability and performance with our latest DVD+RW drive." So much for leading edge - we're still waiting for a Philips SATA DVD drive. And Phillips is probably waiting for everybody to start using the host adapter chip that is compatible with the bridge chip they used in their demo. There's no real benefit to SATA for opticals anyway--their bandwidth doesn't come close to filling a parallel ATA pipe and the drives don't generally get hot-swapped so the only gain would be the longer cable. SATA is the *replacement* for ATA. That's reason enough. Mice and keyboards don't need the bandwidth of USB either. When it replaces ATA then it will be the replacement for ATA. That's not going to happen until somebody starts producing southbridge chips with built in SATA and no PATA. And I suspect that that won't happen until there is serial ATAPI standard agreed upon. -- -- --John Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"John H." wrote in message On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 21:54:51 +0100, "Folkert Rienstra" wrote: "Marc de Vries" wrote in message On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:21:20 GMT, John H. wrote: On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 11:20:05 +0100, Marc de Vries wrote: At the moment the 7K250 is easily the fastest 7200 rpm disk that you can buy. It also very quiet. (Quite a large difference to my DiamonMax Plus9 disks) What kind of sound does it make when moving the heads to prevent heat buildup? Anything like the 1-2 second sound every 10 minutes for the 180GXP? Don't know. I haven't heard that sound on my disk yet. (Installed it about two weeks ago) You would have been very much aware of it the first day if the 7K250 was making the same sound as the 180GXP. Like I said, for the 180GXP it's a (very audible) 1 or 2 second sound every 10 minutes. I know that 180GXP sound. (I also owned one of those) It's a good thing I knew the 180GXP makes strange noise before I bought one, or I would have been very worried when I first heard it :-) But my 7K250 hasn't make any noise like that. Maybe it still moves the heads to prevent heat buildup, but if so, it does it without making noise now. Of course it does. And they always have been. I don't get the point of your two posts. Not even one? :-( Are you saying the 180GXP sounds isn't to prevent heat build-up? Yes. If not, what's the drive doing for that 1-2 seconds, No one seems to know exactly but the most probable is running S.M.A.R.T. tests for internal logging. and why don't other drives need to do it? That depends on what you call "need". This is good to know. Maybe IBM/Hitachi drives are worth buying again. The 7K250 is certainly my first choice at the moment. Marc |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Marc de Vries wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote John H wrote Rod Speed wrote The fool that 'designed' the 180GXP to do it so noisily that the user wonders if its normal should have been taken out the back and shot. It would be the firmware that's doing it. Duh. An upgrade should be able to 'fix' the problem...someday. They mostly dont bother with that sort of thing. The 7K250 is only 2.6 bels for one disk (but I'm so confused - the specs don't say if that's power or pressure ) compared to your Samsung's 2.7 bels. And even you should have been able to grasp that that sort of measurement doesnt even register those sorts of irritating but relatively rare noises. It's faster too. Bet you'd never be able to pick it in a proper double blind trial without being allowed to use a benchmark. True. I got that 7K250 drive as a replacement for a 60GXP that broke down. In the benchmarks the 7K250 is a lot faster, but I can't say I really notice the difference between those drives. BTW I got a 60GB version of the 7K250. But officially there is no 60GB version of this drive. (guess they don't want people to destroy their 60GB disks so that they get a bigger and faster drive in return :-)) Yeah, that sort of deliberate short stroking has been around for quite a while now from some manufacturers. While I can see that thats likely why they do it, to stop people deliberately killing their drives to get a bigger replacement, I think it would be a better policy to not short stroke the drive as a sort of bonus for those who have been ****ed around by a drive failure. You'd certainly be able to pick that terminal stupidity with the deliberate head activity tho. No doubt about that :-) Might not be a bad drive to buy. Dont care for Hitachi's warranty policys myself. What's wrong with it? They dont cross ship the replacement. Thats much more convenient for the user who isnt then without a drive for any time at all, and if the drive isnt completely dead they may be able to copy stuff from the original drive too. And can use the shipping container the replacement showed up in to send the failed drive back in. Seems just as good or better than the competition. Fraid not. They can be surprisingly slow to send out the replacement too. And when they've never had the balls to fess up to what the problem was with the infamous GXP drives, That was IBM :-) Its only the OWNERSHIP that changed. The same monkeys are largely involved in the design and manufacture of the drives. they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine as far as I am concerned. I'll buy drives manufacturered by operations with a clue myself. IBM hasn't been the only company which has had a bad model once. Sure, but thats not the problem. The problem was that IBM kept denying that there ever was a problem with those drives. Let alone actually fessing up to what the problem actually was. I find it VERY hard to believe that IBM never did manage to work out what the problem was, and if they didnt, I wont be touching any of the drives made by an operation that incompetant. (Problem with the 75GXP is that it also happened to be an extremely popular model) The problem was that IBM never did admit that there was any problem with that model. And kept shipping the suckers another 75GXP when the first one was RMAed, which went on to fail itself quite a bit of the time. Utterly obscene. I've decided I don't want to buy another ATA drive. The main problem currently is that there are few native SATA drives buyable. Most are bridged drives. Why would you care if a drive is native SATA? Basically just a cleaner design. And thats got to be visible in the price once the volume gets up to pata shipping levels. I see bridged drives which are faster in every way then native drives. Bull****. Drives are still doing what the physics allows. The interface is irrelevant on speed with current drives. So I couldn't care less about native SATA drives. The actual performance is what I find interesting. You dont get any better performance with mechanically identical drives which only differ in the interface used. One advantage with sata drives is the cleaner cabling. One risk currently is that the technology isnt as mature. Not how it is designed internally. Thats what matters performance wise with hard drives. Particuarly the basics physics of rpm, platter sizes, numbers of platters etc for a particular capacity. Maybe by spring time I've be able to buy a BTX case and MB and all SATA drives, including a writable SATA DVD/CD drive (strange there aren't any SATA optical drives on the market yet). Nothing strange about that. Why not? Optical drives dont even get within a bulls roar of exploiting what the pata interface can do. The only real advantage is a cleaner cabling system. That can be handy with bigger cases and optical drives. And the main downside is that there are few motherboards with that many sata ports currently, not enough to be able to handle the 4 drives of any type many want to have. The advantages for SATA optical drives are the same as for harddisks. Nope, they dont get anywhere near wringing out the pata interfaces now. I think there would be a market for it by now? Nope, because there arent many motherboard with JUST sata ports. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"J.Clarke" wrote in message d
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 06:23:15 GMT John H. wrote: On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:56:40 +1100, "Rod Speed" wrote: The fool that 'designed' the 180GXP to do it so noisily that the user wonders if its normal should have been taken out the back and shot. It would be the firmware that's doing it. An upgrade should be able to'fix' the problem...someday. The 7K250 is only 2.6 bels for one disk (but I'm so confused - the specs don't say if that's power or pressure ) compared to your Samsung's 2.7 bels. It's faster too. Might not be a bad drive to buy. I've decided I don't want to buy another ATA drive. Maybe by spring time I've be able to buy a BTX case and MB and all SATA drives, including a writable SATA DVD/CD drive (strange there aren't any SATA optical drives on the market yet). Nothing strange about it--most of the SATA host adapters currently on the market don't support ATAPI devices, Which is a pure software matter (driver), not hardware. nor do most of the bridge chips, and the ones that do are only guaranteed to work with the same brand host adapter chip. There's no real benefit to SATA for opticals anyway--their bandwidth doesn't come close to filling a parallel ATA pipe and the drives don't generally get hot-swapped so the only gain would be the longer cable. -- |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Marc de Vries wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote Marc de Vries wrote Rod Speed wrote John H wrote Rod Speed wrote The fool that 'designed' the 180GXP to do it so noisily that the user wonders if its normal should have been taken out the back and shot. It would be the firmware that's doing it. Duh. An upgrade should be able to 'fix' the problem...someday. They mostly dont bother with that sort of thing. The 7K250 is only 2.6 bels for one disk (but I'm so confused - the specs don't say if that's power or pressure ) compared to your Samsung's 2.7 bels. And even you should have been able to grasp that that sort of measurement doesnt even register those sorts of irritating but relatively rare noises. It's faster too. Bet you'd never be able to pick it in a proper double blind trial without being allowed to use a benchmark. True. I got that 7K250 drive as a replacement for a 60GXP that broke down. In the benchmarks the 7K250 is a lot faster, but I can't say I really notice the difference between those drives. BTW I got a 60GB version of the 7K250. But officially there is no 60GB version of this drive. (guess they don't want people to destroy their 60GB disks so that they get a bigger and faster drive in return :-)) Yeah, that sort of deliberate short stroking has been around for quite a while now from some manufacturers. While I can see that thats likely why they do it, to stop people deliberately killing their drives to get a bigger replacement, I think it would be a better policy to not short stroke the drive as a sort of bonus for those who have been ****ed around by a drive failure. Yeah. Luckily it was just my system disk and I had moved most data to some new disks on a raid5 controller I bought the week before. But it still costs a lot of time. Yeah, drive failure is a real pain in the arse, even if you are religiously backed up, with all except real hot swap raid5 etc which very few can justify for personal desktop systems. You'd certainly be able to pick that terminal stupidity with the deliberate head activity tho. No doubt about that :-) Might not be a bad drive to buy. Dont care for Hitachi's warranty policys myself. What's wrong with it? They dont cross ship the replacement. Thats much more convenient for the user who isnt then without a drive for any time at all, and if the drive isnt completely dead they may be able to copy stuff from the original drive too. Their policy is that they don't do that. And thats one of the reasons they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine and I choose to use drive manufacturers with a clue on that stuff. And can use the shipping container the replacement showed up in to send the failed drive back in. Luckily, in Europe, they don't make such a fuss about the shipping container as in the US. Its always been a terminal stupidity when cross shipping fixes that problem completely. I would certainly want cross shipment there too. But the competition doesn't cross ship here either. Bull****. But that might be different in the US too? And in plenty of other places too. Seems just as good or better than the competition. Fraid not. They can be surprisingly slow to send out the replacement too. Took about a week before I had the replacement. Plenty have had to wait a lot longer than that, reported in here alone. That's about the same as I heard from other companies. Not relevant with a cross ship. Luckily I had a spare drive lying around, so it didn't really bother me much. Yeah, I have full spare PCs so its really just a nuisance. Its just another example of a terminal stupidity in the way they operate tho. I've always been into dealing with operations that have got their act into gear on the detail. Thats why I dont bother with Maxtor. We have to ship the drive to Singapore using a receipted delivery system if the seller of the drive has gone bust, and thats not cheap at all. Bugger that. They can shove their drives where the sun dont shine too. And when they've never had the balls to fess up to what the problem was with the infamous GXP drives, That was IBM :-) Its only the OWNERSHIP that changed. The same monkeys are largely involved in the design and manufacture of the drives. Relax Rod, I know. That's why I put the smiley there. Duh. they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine as far as I am concerned. I'll buy drives manufacturered by operations with a clue myself. IBM hasn't been the only company which has had a bad model once. Sure, but thats not the problem. The problem was that IBM kept denying that there ever was a problem with those drives. Let alone actually fessing up to what the problem actually was. I find it VERY hard to believe that IBM never did manage to work out what the problem was, and if they didnt, I wont be touching any of the drives made by an operation that incompetant. I find that hard to believe too. Especially since it seems the internet community had found a likely reason. Nope. Seems like only a later production batch failed. Wrong. All those review sites had early models and they still work fine. Wrong. Plenty of those died too. My 75GXP still works fine too, There's only ever been a single drive model where every single copy failed in the field, made by that Indian operation. but that was also an early model. Thats irrelevant to failure rates. But there are lots of reasons (valid reasons from their standpoint) why they will never admit that. Then they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine. (Problem with the 75GXP is that it also happened to be an extremely popular model) The problem was that IBM never did admit that there was any problem with that model. And kept shipping the suckers another 75GXP when the first one was RMAed, which went on to fail itself quite a bit of the time. Utterly obscene. True. Although I have heard some people who said they didn't want a 75GXP anymore, that got a new model. Sure, but most were told to like it or lump it and what appears to have happened is that even those stupids eventually managed to work out that it made a lot more sense to ship a different model instead. Pity it took so long for them to come to their senses on that. No wonder that operation went bust. I've decided I don't want to buy another ATA drive. The main problem currently is that there are few native SATA drives buyable. Most are bridged drives. Why would you care if a drive is native SATA? Basically just a cleaner design. And thats got to be visible in the price once the volume gets up to pata shipping levels. Eventually that will be the case. But if right now a cleaner design means a more expensive harddisk without any performance gain, Wrong. what do yuo expect the customers will do? Most wont be silly enough to bother with sata for quite a while. I see bridged drives which are faster in every way then native drives. Bull****. Drives are still doing what the physics allows. The interface is irrelevant on speed with current drives. Since when is the truth bull****? When it aint 'the truth' and is actually just bull****. So I couldn't care less about native SATA drives. The actual performance is what I find interesting. You dont get any better performance with mechanically identical drives which only differ in the interface used. Ah, now I see what you shouted bull****. You didn't understand what I meant. Wrong. Again. I was comparing harddisks that you can buy in stores. So was I. There aint a single one where the sata interface adds a damned thing to the performance, because the pata version isnt pushing the pata interface. (difficult to compare performance otherwise) Duh. And of those, the bridged models are faster than the native models that another manufacturer makes. Wrong again. But of course, if the drive is mechanically identical And they always are currently with drives from a particular manufacturer in sata and pata format. and only the interface is different, then bridges can never be faster. And sata cant be faster than pata either. One advantage with sata drives is the cleaner cabling. That's why I bought an sata raid5 controller. Yep, there are a few situations where the cleaner cabling system is more convenient. Longer cables can be an advantage too, Thats what I meant, both thinner and longer legally. although most people will not have had much problems with that. Yep. The main problem is usually with the optical drives on length and they arent mostly sata for other reasons yet. One risk currently is that the technology isnt as mature. Not how it is designed internally. Thats what matters performance wise with hard drives. Particuarly the basics physics of rpm, platter sizes, numbers of platters etc for a particular capacity. Of course all of that matters for the person designing a new disk. And it matters to me as hardware enthousiast, but it does not matter to me as buyer. I just want a fast and silent disk for a good price. No need for sata then. And in making that choice I don't care if they used pixie dust, or GMR heads or native sata or whatever. Or sata either. And that can mean that right now a bridged sata drive from manufacturer A is faster cheaper and just as silent as a native sata drive from manufacturer B. And I will buy from A. Just as true of pata. In 6 months it might be the other way around. If I need a new disk then, I will make a new choice, based on the actual performace of the models that are available then. Just as true of the interface too. Particularly when currently there arent that many systems that have just sata ports. Maybe by spring time I've be able to buy a BTX case and MB and all SATA drives, including a writable SATA DVD/CD drive (strange there aren't any SATA optical drives on the market yet). Nothing strange about that. Why not? Optical drives dont even get within a bulls roar of exploiting what the pata interface can do. Current harddisks don't need the higher bandwith of SATA either. Although there are some other features of SATA that can be interesting. Not with optical drives. There isnt formal ATAPI support with sata yet. The only real advantage is a cleaner cabling system. That can be handy with bigger cases and optical drives. That is usually the main reason people buy sata harddisks too. Nope. Its mostly stupids buying the latest thing because its the latest thing. If that generates a big enough market for harddisks, then why not for optical drives. Mainly because ATAPI isnt formally part of sata yet. And the main downside is that there are few motherboards with that many sata ports currently, not enough to be able to handle the 4 drives of any type many want to have. That could well be a reason. Yeah, that clearly cripples the market for sata optical drives currently. The advantages for SATA optical drives are the same as for harddisks. Nope, they dont get anywhere near wringing out the pata interfaces now. So which advantages are there for harddisk that optical drives cannot use? Its more the other way, lack of ATAPI currently, and a perception of not much of a market while most motherboards cant have purely sata drives. - longer cables. Just as usefull for optical drives as for harddisks More useful in fact with all cables going from the drive to the motherboard directly. Pity that few motherboards currently have enough sata connectors tho. - cleaner cables. Just as usefull for optical drives - faster. Not important for optical drives, but not really important for harddisks either. Even with two modern disks on 1 pata cable you won't find a slowdown. Unless you use the most extreme worst case scenario you can design in a benchmark. Yep, but hard drives are close to needing that than optical drives. Which is why ATAPI isnt in sata yet. But in that case you are usually also hitting the limit of the 33Mhz/32bit PCI interface. Nope, because most hard drives dont use that. - there are features like tagged command queueing in sata which is mainly important for harddisks, but support for that isn't common in harddisks yet. You dont need sata for that, its been available in pata for years now. And is hardly used at all. - there are also some other features in sata that make a sata Maxtor Diamondmax9 clearly faster then a pata Maxtor Diamondmax 9 which uses a mechanical identical drive. Bull****. But that same advantage is not visible with the Baracuda V. More bull****. So I don't know what is causing that. Its a fantasy. http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2...o/index.x?pg=6 Please add the other advantages you see, because this list doesn't seem to warrant the lack of optical sata drives imo. Lack of ATAPI does. And the lack of enough sata ports too. I think there would be a market for it by now? Nope, because there arent many motherboard with JUST sata ports. What about the reason that others have offered that lost of sata adapters just don't have support for sata atapi devices in their software? Yep, another important factor. You know anything more about that? What is there to know ? atapi isnt part of sata yet. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Marc de Vries" wrote in message news
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 00:51:43 +0100, "Folkert Rienstra" wrote: snip I've decided I don't want to buy another ATA drive. Maybe by spring time I've be able to buy a BTX case and MB and all SATA drives, including a writable SATA DVD/CD drive (strange there aren't any SATA optical drives on the market yet). Nothing strange about it--most of the SATA host adapters currently on the market don't support ATAPI devices, Which is a pure software matter (driver), not hardware. Does it matter what causes it? As long as this software matter isn't fixed optical drive manufacturers won't use SATA. And rightly so. I think that John just took the usual failure of add-on/add-in PCI hostbus ATA controllers to support ATAPI devices and extended it to the add-on/add-in PCI hostbus SATA controllers. PC chipset native controllers never had problems with ATAPI, only the Promises and Highpoints of the busisness have those problems. Actually, it would surprise me very much that the Intel ICH SATA driver will not support ATAPI. But does anybody know why this is not supported in the software? Sheer stupidity. Afaik atapi is supported in the sata standards. It can't have been all that difficult or costly to add support in the software in the first place? Marc |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 07:05:42 +1100, "Rod Speed"
wrote: snip Thats much more convenient for the user who isnt then without a drive for any time at all, and if the drive isnt completely dead they may be able to copy stuff from the original drive too. Their policy is that they don't do that. And thats one of the reasons they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine and I choose to use drive manufacturers with a clue on that stuff. That must make your choose of drive manufacturers very small. Maxtor and WD have the same policy. And can use the shipping container the replacement showed up in to send the failed drive back in. Luckily, in Europe, they don't make such a fuss about the shipping container as in the US. Its always been a terminal stupidity when cross shipping fixes that problem completely. It's the same with almost any component in your PC. Having such a negative fixation on IBM/Hitachi when they do the same as the rest of the industry is pretty stupid too. I would certainly want cross shipment there too. But the competition doesn't cross ship here either. Bull****. Is it? And why do you think so? Do you live in the Netherlands? Do you know the policy for Maxtor and WD here? But that might be different in the US too? And in plenty of other places too. Seems just as good or better than the competition. Fraid not. They can be surprisingly slow to send out the replacement too. Took about a week before I had the replacement. Plenty have had to wait a lot longer than that, reported in here alone. Well, this is not the only hardware group on the internet. Maybe the people in the Netherlands are just more efficient in these matters? That's about the same as I heard from other companies. Not relevant with a cross ship. Not relevant since they don't cross ship either. Luckily I had a spare drive lying around, so it didn't really bother me much. Yeah, I have full spare PCs so its really just a nuisance. Its just another example of a terminal stupidity in the way they operate tho. I've always been into dealing with operations that have got their act into gear on the detail. Thats why I dont bother with Maxtor. We have to ship the drive to Singapore using a receipted delivery system if the seller of the drive has gone bust, and thats not cheap at all. Bugger that. They can shove their drives where the sun dont shine too. So IBM/Hitachi stinks because they don't cross ship, Maxtor too. That means you won't like WD and Seagate either. No we have had all the major players in the harddisk market. Which harddisks do you use? And when they've never had the balls to fess up to what the problem was with the infamous GXP drives, That was IBM :-) Its only the OWNERSHIP that changed. The same monkeys are largely involved in the design and manufacture of the drives. Relax Rod, I know. That's why I put the smiley there. Duh. Oh boy. Don't you know why people use smileys? they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine as far as I am concerned. I'll buy drives manufacturered by operations with a clue myself. IBM hasn't been the only company which has had a bad model once. Sure, but thats not the problem. The problem was that IBM kept denying that there ever was a problem with those drives. Let alone actually fessing up to what the problem actually was. I find it VERY hard to believe that IBM never did manage to work out what the problem was, and if they didnt, I wont be touching any of the drives made by an operation that incompetant. I find that hard to believe too. Especially since it seems the internet community had found a likely reason. Nope. Yes Seems like only a later production batch failed. Wrong. Not wrong All those review sites had early models and they still work fine. Wrong. Plenty of those died too. Not wrong. My 75GXP still works fine too, There's only ever been a single drive model where every single copy failed in the field, made by that Indian operation. Really? Which model might that have been then, since that description does not fit the 75GXP. but that was also an early model. Thats irrelevant to failure rates. It isn't. But there are lots of reasons (valid reasons from their standpoint) why they will never admit that. Then they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine. (Problem with the 75GXP is that it also happened to be an extremely popular model) The problem was that IBM never did admit that there was any problem with that model. And kept shipping the suckers another 75GXP when the first one was RMAed, which went on to fail itself quite a bit of the time. Utterly obscene. True. Although I have heard some people who said they didn't want a 75GXP anymore, that got a new model. Sure, but most were told to like it or lump it and what appears to have happened is that even those stupids eventually managed to work out that it made a lot more sense to ship a different model instead. Pity it took so long for them to come to their senses on that. They people that were told to lump it were probably people like you who can't discuss things like this in a normal way. This like you have shown above that you can't act like a grown up and continue this discussion in a normal way. No wonder that operation went bust. it didn't. I've decided I don't want to buy another ATA drive. The main problem currently is that there are few native SATA drives buyable. Most are bridged drives. Why would you care if a drive is native SATA? Basically just a cleaner design. And thats got to be visible in the price once the volume gets up to pata shipping levels. Eventually that will be the case. But if right now a cleaner design means a more expensive harddisk without any performance gain, Wrong. not wrong. what do yuo expect the customers will do? Most wont be silly enough to bother with sata for quite a while. Guess dutch costumers are silly then, because lot of hem already bother with sata. The US is walking behind in this? I see bridged drives which are faster in every way then native drives. Bull****. Drives are still doing what the physics allows. The interface is irrelevant on speed with current drives. Since when is the truth bull****? When it aint 'the truth' and is actually just bull****. Too bad for you that it is the truth in this case. But I've realised that you are not interested in facts. So I won't bother you with them again. So I couldn't care less about native SATA drives. The actual performance is what I find interesting. You dont get any better performance with mechanically identical drives which only differ in the interface used. Ah, now I see what you shouted bull****. You didn't understand what I meant. Wrong. Again. I see no indication that I am. Then again you could be just a Troll and now very well what I mean. I was comparing harddisks that you can buy in stores. So was I. There aint a single one where the sata interface adds a damned thing to the performance, because the pata version isnt pushing the pata interface. I've given a link to a test on tech-report that shows without a doubt that it does. But again facts don't interest you. You'd rather live in the little fantasy world in your head where that doesn't happen. (difficult to compare performance otherwise) Duh. And of those, the bridged models are faster than the native models that another manufacturer makes. Wrong again. Not wrong. Just lookat the tests on dozens of review sites, or test them yourself. The facts are there, for people that open their eyes. But of course, if the drive is mechanically identical And they always are currently with drives from a particular manufacturer in sata and pata format. and only the interface is different, then bridges can never be faster. And sata cant be faster than pata either. Open your eyes Rod. There IS a difference. You might not know WHY, and I don't know either. But the fact is that there is a very clear difference in those tests. One advantage with sata drives is the cleaner cabling. That's why I bought an sata raid5 controller. Yep, there are a few situations where the cleaner cabling system is more convenient. Longer cables can be an advantage too, Thats what I meant, both thinner and longer legally. although most people will not have had much problems with that. Yep. The main problem is usually with the optical drives on length and they arent mostly sata for other reasons yet. One risk currently is that the technology isnt as mature. Not how it is designed internally. Thats what matters performance wise with hard drives. Particuarly the basics physics of rpm, platter sizes, numbers of platters etc for a particular capacity. Of course all of that matters for the person designing a new disk. And it matters to me as hardware enthousiast, but it does not matter to me as buyer. I just want a fast and silent disk for a good price. No need for sata then. And in making that choice I don't care if they used pixie dust, or GMR heads or native sata or whatever. Or sata either. And that can mean that right now a bridged sata drive from manufacturer A is faster cheaper and just as silent as a native sata drive from manufacturer B. And I will buy from A. Just as true of pata. Of course. But the fact is that when I choose my new drives the SATA version was clearly faster then the PATA version. So the choice was easy. In 6 months it might be the other way around. If I need a new disk then, I will make a new choice, based on the actual performace of the models that are available then. Just as true of the interface too. Particularly when currently there arent that many systems that have just sata ports. Most new systems have them now. But in my case I needed to buy a raid5 controller anyway, so that wasn't an easy. (unless it would be much more expensive, which it wasn't) Maybe by spring time I've be able to buy a BTX case and MB and all SATA drives, including a writable SATA DVD/CD drive (strange there aren't any SATA optical drives on the market yet). Nothing strange about that. Why not? Optical drives dont even get within a bulls roar of exploiting what the pata interface can do. Current harddisks don't need the higher bandwith of SATA either. Although there are some other features of SATA that can be interesting. Not with optical drives. There isnt formal ATAPI support with sata yet. Wrong. There is aparantly formal atapi support with sata. But there are serious issues with using atapi devices with sata bridges. Those have also been raised with the T13 group: http://www.t13.org/docs2003/e03131r0.pdf Once again the standards on this are not good enough to prevent issues like this. The only real advantage is a cleaner cabling system. That can be handy with bigger cases and optical drives. That is usually the main reason people buy sata harddisks too. Nope. Its mostly stupids buying the latest thing because its the latest thing. In your case, that yould probably be the reason yes. If that generates a big enough market for harddisks, then why not for optical drives. Mainly because ATAPI isnt formally part of sata yet. That's not what T13 says. And the main downside is that there are few motherboards with that many sata ports currently, not enough to be able to handle the 4 drives of any type many want to have. That could well be a reason. Yeah, that clearly cripples the market for sata optical drives currently. I see no reason what that "clearly" cripples the market. Shouting something like that is easy. Now try to support that claim. The advantages for SATA optical drives are the same as for harddisks. Nope, they dont get anywhere near wringing out the pata interfaces now. So which advantages are there for harddisk that optical drives cannot use? Its more the other way, lack of ATAPI currently, and a perception of not much of a market while most motherboards cant have purely sata drives. - longer cables. Just as usefull for optical drives as for harddisks More useful in fact with all cables going from the drive to the motherboard directly. Pity that few motherboards currently have enough sata connectors tho. A pity yes. Especially since those longer cables are needed for people that want to place a optical drive in the top 5,25" bay of their bigtower case. - cleaner cables. Just as usefull for optical drives - faster. Not important for optical drives, but not really important for harddisks either. Even with two modern disks on 1 pata cable you won't find a slowdown. Unless you use the most extreme worst case scenario you can design in a benchmark. Yep, but hard drives are close to needing that than optical drives. Which is why ATAPI isnt in sata yet. But in that case you are usually also hitting the limit of the 33Mhz/32bit PCI interface. Nope, because most hard drives dont use that. That is only true when they are connected directly to the southbridge without using pci in between. This NOT the case for the majority of motherboards. - there are features like tagged command queueing in sata which is mainly important for harddisks, but support for that isn't common in harddisks yet. You dont need sata for that, its been available in pata for years now. And is hardly used at all. - there are also some other features in sata that make a sata Maxtor Diamondmax9 clearly faster then a pata Maxtor Diamondmax 9 which uses a mechanical identical drive. Bull****. I know realises that this is your standards answer when you are confronted with facts you don't like. But that same advantage is not visible with the Baracuda V. More bull****. again that your standard answer So I don't know what is causing that. Its a fantasy. You are calling the people from tech-report liars? Give me one reason why I should not believe their test, but should believe a person in a newsgroup who can only answer with the word bull****. Especially since this results can also be seen in other tests on other sites. But don't let that bother you. Just call them all liars too. http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2...o/index.x?pg=6 Please add the other advantages you see, because this list doesn't seem to warrant the lack of optical sata drives imo. Lack of ATAPI does. And the lack of enough sata ports too. I think there would be a market for it by now? Nope, because there arent many motherboard with JUST sata ports. What about the reason that others have offered that lost of sata adapters just don't have support for sata atapi devices in their software? Yep, another important factor. You know anything more about that? What is there to know ? atapi isnt part of sata yet. I suggest you read the specs on sata again. But that advice will probably fall on deaf ears. You are clearly not capable of discussing these matters as a civilized person, but instead start acting like a 5 year old kid. I am not going to waste my time on people that behave like that. You can continu this thread without me. Marc |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Marc de Vries wrote in message ... Rod Speed wrote Thats much more convenient for the user who isnt then without a drive for any time at all, and if the drive isnt completely dead they may be able to copy stuff from the original drive too. Their policy is that they don't do that. And thats one of the reasons they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine and I choose to use drive manufacturers with a clue on that stuff. That must make your choose of drive manufacturers very small. Nope, just excludes IBM/Hitachi. Maxtor and WD have the same policy. Completely wrong. And can use the shipping container the replacement showed up in to send the failed drive back in. Luckily, in Europe, they don't make such a fuss about the shipping container as in the US. Its always been a terminal stupidity when cross shipping fixes that problem completely. It's the same with almost any component in your PC. Having such a negative fixation on IBM/Hitachi when they do the same as the rest of the industry is pretty stupid too. I would certainly want cross shipment there too. But the competition doesn't cross ship here either. Bull****. Is it? And why do you think so? Do you live in the Netherlands? Do you know the policy for Maxtor and WD here? But that might be different in the US too? And in plenty of other places too. Seems just as good or better than the competition. Fraid not. They can be surprisingly slow to send out the replacement too. Took about a week before I had the replacement. Plenty have had to wait a lot longer than that, reported in here alone. Well, this is not the only hardware group on the internet. Maybe the people in the Netherlands are just more efficient in these matters? That's about the same as I heard from other companies. Not relevant with a cross ship. Not relevant since they don't cross ship either. Luckily I had a spare drive lying around, so it didn't really bother me much. Yeah, I have full spare PCs so its really just a nuisance. Its just another example of a terminal stupidity in the way they operate tho. I've always been into dealing with operations that have got their act into gear on the detail. Thats why I dont bother with Maxtor. We have to ship the drive to Singapore using a receipted delivery system if the seller of the drive has gone bust, and thats not cheap at all. Bugger that. They can shove their drives where the sun dont shine too. So IBM/Hitachi stinks because they don't cross ship, Maxtor too. That means you won't like WD and Seagate either. No we have had all the major players in the harddisk market. Which harddisks do you use? And when they've never had the balls to fess up to what the problem was with the infamous GXP drives, That was IBM :-) Its only the OWNERSHIP that changed. The same monkeys are largely involved in the design and manufacture of the drives. Relax Rod, I know. That's why I put the smiley there. Duh. Oh boy. Don't you know why people use smileys? they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine as far as I am concerned. I'll buy drives manufacturered by operations with a clue myself. IBM hasn't been the only company which has had a bad model once. Sure, but thats not the problem. The problem was that IBM kept denying that there ever was a problem with those drives. Let alone actually fessing up to what the problem actually was. I find it VERY hard to believe that IBM never did manage to work out what the problem was, and if they didnt, I wont be touching any of the drives made by an operation that incompetant. I find that hard to believe too. Especially since it seems the internet community had found a likely reason. Nope. Yes Seems like only a later production batch failed. Wrong. Not wrong All those review sites had early models and they still work fine. Wrong. Plenty of those died too. Not wrong. My 75GXP still works fine too, There's only ever been a single drive model where every single copy failed in the field, made by that Indian operation. Really? Which model might that have been then, since that description does not fit the 75GXP. but that was also an early model. Thats irrelevant to failure rates. It isn't. But there are lots of reasons (valid reasons from their standpoint) why they will never admit that. Then they can take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine. (Problem with the 75GXP is that it also happened to be an extremely popular model) The problem was that IBM never did admit that there was any problem with that model. And kept shipping the suckers another 75GXP when the first one was RMAed, which went on to fail itself quite a bit of the time. Utterly obscene. True. Although I have heard some people who said they didn't want a 75GXP anymore, that got a new model. Sure, but most were told to like it or lump it and what appears to have happened is that even those stupids eventually managed to work out that it made a lot more sense to ship a different model instead. Pity it took so long for them to come to their senses on that. They people that were told to lump it were probably people like you who can't discuss things like this in a normal way. This like you have shown above that you can't act like a grown up and continue this discussion in a normal way. No wonder that operation went bust. it didn't. I've decided I don't want to buy another ATA drive. The main problem currently is that there are few native SATA drives buyable. Most are bridged drives. Why would you care if a drive is native SATA? Basically just a cleaner design. And thats got to be visible in the price once the volume gets up to pata shipping levels. Eventually that will be the case. But if right now a cleaner design means a more expensive harddisk without any performance gain, Wrong. not wrong. what do yuo expect the customers will do? Most wont be silly enough to bother with sata for quite a while. Guess dutch costumers are silly then, because lot of hem already bother with sata. The US is walking behind in this? I see bridged drives which are faster in every way then native drives. Bull****. Drives are still doing what the physics allows. The interface is irrelevant on speed with current drives. Since when is the truth bull****? When it aint 'the truth' and is actually just bull****. Too bad for you that it is the truth in this case. But I've realised that you are not interested in facts. So I won't bother you with them again. So I couldn't care less about native SATA drives. The actual performance is what I find interesting. You dont get any better performance with mechanically identical drives which only differ in the interface used. Ah, now I see what you shouted bull****. You didn't understand what I meant. Wrong. Again. I see no indication that I am. Then again you could be just a Troll and now very well what I mean. I was comparing harddisks that you can buy in stores. So was I. There aint a single one where the sata interface adds a damned thing to the performance, because the pata version isnt pushing the pata interface. I've given a link to a test on tech-report that shows without a doubt that it does. But again facts don't interest you. You'd rather live in the little fantasy world in your head where that doesn't happen. (difficult to compare performance otherwise) Duh. And of those, the bridged models are faster than the native models that another manfacturer makes. Wrong again. Not wrong. Just look at the tests on dozens of review sites, or test them yourself. The facts are there, for people that open their eyes. But of course, if the drive is mechanically identical And they always are currently with drives from a particular manufacturer in sata and pata format. and only the interface is different, then bridges can never be faster. And sata cant be faster than pata either. Open your eyes Rod. There IS a difference. You might not know WHY, and I don't know either. But the fact is that there is a very clear difference in those tests. One advantage with sata drives is the cleaner cabling. That's why I bought an sata raid5 controller. Yep, there are a few situations where the cleaner cabling system is more convenient. Longer cables can be an advantage too, Thats what I meant, both thinner and longer legally. although most people will not have had much problems with that. Yep. The main problem is usually with the optical drives on length and they arent mostly sata for other reasons yet. One risk currently is that the technology isnt as mature. Not how it is designed internally. Thats what matters performance wise with hard drives. Particuarly the basics physics of rpm, platter sizes, numbers of platters etc for a particular capacity. Of course all of that matters for the person designing a new disk. And it matters to me as hardware enthousiast, but it does not matter to me as buyer. I just want a fast and silent disk for a good price. No need for sata then. And in making that choice I don't care if they used pixie dust, or GMR heads or native sata or whatever. Or sata either. And that can mean that right now a bridged sata drive from manufacturer A is faster cheaper and just as silent as a native sata drive from manufacturer B. And I will buy from A. Just as true of pata. Of course. But the fact is that when I choose my new drives the SATA version was clearly faster then the PATA version. So the choice was easy. In 6 months it might be the other way around. If I need a new disk then, I will make a new choice, based on the actual performace of the models that are available then. Just as true of the interface too. Particularly when currently there arent that many systems that have just sata ports. Most new systems have them now. But in my case I needed to buy a raid5 controller anyway, so that wasn't an easy. (unless it would be much more expensive, which it wasn't) Maybe by spring time I've be able to buy a BTX case and MB and all SATA drives, including a writable SATA DVD/CD drive (strange there aren't any SATA optical drives on the market yet). Nothing strange about that. Why not? Optical drives dont even get within a bulls roar of exploiting what the pata interface can do. Current harddisks don't need the higher bandwith of SATA either. Although there are some other features of SATA that can be interesting. Not with optical drives. There isnt formal ATAPI support with sata yet. Wrong. There is aparantly formal atapi support with sata. But there are serious issues with using atapi devices with sata bridges. Those have also been raised with the T13 group: http://www.t13.org/docs2003/e03131r0.pdf Once again the standards on this are not good enough to prevent issues like this. The only real advantage is a cleaner cabling system. That can be handy with bigger cases and optical drives. That is usually the main reason people buy sata harddisks too. Nope. Its mostly stupids buying the latest thing because its the latest thing. In your case, that yould probably be the reason yes. If that generates a big enough market for harddisks, then why not for optical drives. Mainly because ATAPI isnt formally part of sata yet. That's not what T13 says. And the main downside is that there are few motherboards with that many sata ports currently, not enough to be able to handle the 4 drives of any type many want to have. That could well be a reason. Yeah, that clearly cripples the market for sata optical drives currently. I see no reason what that "clearly" cripples the market. Shouting something like that is easy. Now try to support that claim. The advantages for SATA optical drives are the same as for harddisks. Nope, they dont get anywhere near wringing out the pata interfaces now. So which advantages are there for harddisk that optical drives cannot use? Its more the other way, lack of ATAPI currently, and a perception of not much of a market while most motherboards cant have purely sata drives. - longer cables. Just as usefull for optical drives as for harddisks More useful in fact with all cables going from the drive to the motherboard directly. Pity that few motherboards currently have enough sata connectors tho. A pity yes. Especially since those longer cables are needed for people that want to place a optical drive in the top 5,25" bay of their bigtower case. - cleaner cables. Just as usefull for optical drives - faster. Not important for optical drives, but not really important for harddisks either. Even with two modern disks on 1 pata cable you won't find a slowdown. Unless you use the most extreme worst case scenario you can design in a benchmark. Yep, but hard drives are close to needing that than optical drives. Which is why ATAPI isnt in sata yet. But in that case you are usually also hitting the limit of the 33Mhz/32bit PCI interface. Nope, because most hard drives dont use that. That is only true when they are connected directly to the southbridge without using pci in between. This NOT the case for the majority of motherboards. - there are features like tagged command queueing in sata which is mainly important for harddisks, but support for that isn't common in harddisks yet. You dont need sata for that, its been available in pata for years now. And is hardly used at all. - there are also some other features in sata that make a sata Maxtor Diamondmax9 clearly faster then a pata Maxtor Diamondmax 9 which uses a mechanical identical drive. Bull****. I know realises that this is your standards answer when you are confronted with facts you don't like. But that same advantage is not visible with the Baracuda V. More bull****. again that your standard answer So I don't know what is causing that. Its a fantasy. You are calling the people from tech-report liars? Give me one reason why I should not believe their test, but should believe a person in a newsgroup who can only answer with the word bull****. Especially since this results can also be seen in other tests on other sites. But don't let that bother you. Just call them all liars too. http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2...o/index.x?pg=6 Please add the other advantages you see, because this list doesn't seem to warrant the lack of optical sata drives imo. Lack of ATAPI does. And the lack of enough sata ports too. I think there would be a market for it by now? Nope, because there arent many motherboard with JUST sata ports. What about the reason that others have offered that lost of sata adapters just don't have support for sata atapi devices in their software? Yep, another important factor. You know anything more about that? What is there to know ? atapi isnt part of sata yet. I suggest you read the specs on sata again. But that advice will probably fall on deaf ears. You are clearly not capable of discussing these matters as a civilized person, but instead start acting like a 5 year old kid. I am not going to waste my time on people that behave like that. You can continu this thread without me. Marc |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
(",) Hello, I Have Good News! | [email protected] | General | 3 | January 28th 05 09:34 PM |
Anyone know a good deal on a good mp3 player? | travel | General | 1 | November 30th 04 11:51 PM |
BENQ 19 inch LCD T904 Any Good? | peter | Ati Videocards | 1 | November 4th 04 09:46 PM |
My good old 9700 Pro... | D. Sutton | Ati Videocards | 18 | June 20th 04 01:16 PM |
UT2004 - Looking Good and how it compared to HALO | Darthy | Ati Videocards | 7 | February 13th 04 10:24 AM |