Hard Drive Recommendation



Matt Silberstein
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig EIDE
drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on board.
So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive. Here are my
questions:

1) What brand should I get? Is anyone making particularly
better/faster drives today? (I know there is going to be smoke from
that. Sorry.)

2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller? That is, is
there some "sweet spot" of performance or something that I am missing.
I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.

3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
(http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
to move everything from my old drive, then tell the system to boot
from the new drive. Is that correct?

TIA.



--
Matt Silberstein

All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.

John R Weiss
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
The WD Raptor 10K RPM drives are about the fastest out there. Biggest is 74 GB,
but you could put in 2 if you really need the space, and use your old HD for
less-used data.

"Matt Silberstein" wrote...
>I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig EIDE
> drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on board.
> So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive. Here are my
> questions:
>
> 1) What brand should I get? Is anyone making particularly
> better/faster drives today? (I know there is going to be smoke from
> that. Sorry.)
>
> 2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller? That is, is
> there some "sweet spot" of performance or something that I am missing.
> I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
> price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.

lahuard@gmail.com
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
There are 15k rpm, but these are really expensive. Also, there are
super big 500g HD, but I dont know if they are avalible yet. Check
www.NewEgg.com and ^^^^ hes got it right too.

Rod Speed
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com>
wrote in message news:cbkeb1tk57uos8g1ri4qnhd6ab2pg9actv@4ax.com...

> I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig
> EIDE drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on
> board. So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive.

Yeah, makes a lot of sense interface and size wise.

> Here are my questions:

> 1) What brand should I get?

I like Samsungs myself, mainly because they are quieter than the rest.

> Is anyone making particularly better/faster drives today?

There isnt much in it speed wise and I bet you wouldnt be
able to pick it in a proper randomised double blind trial.

Better in the sense of quieter, yes, with the samsungs.

> (I know there is going to be smoke from that. Sorry.)

> 2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller?

No, its essentially about what is the best value $/GB.

> That is, is there some "sweet spot" of
> performance or something that I am missing.

Not really except that with a 160G you will need to
ensure that you do have the OS upgraded to support
it. You dont need to do that with a 120GB drive instead.

That support isnt hard with XP, just upgrade
to SP2 before adding the new drive.

> I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
> price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.

There isnt much in it, both of those are fine too.

> 3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
> (http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
> to move everything from my old drive, then tell the
> system to boot from the new drive. Is that correct?

I prefer to use Acronis True Image for that myself.
Its better to use a clone operation than an image
for that boot drive replacement situation.

You wont have anywhere to write the image file to
when replacing the 40G drive with a 160G drive.

> Matt Silberstein

> All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
> a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
> there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
> end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
> or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.

And they arent quite as stupid as a sheep.

Peter
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
> There are 15k rpm, but these are really expensive. Also, there are
> super big 500g HD, but I dont know if they are avalible yet. Check
> www.NewEgg.com and ^^^^ hes got it right too.

You are first to report 15k rpm SATA. Do you know the brand name?
Or you were thinking about SAS drive?

Matt Silberstein
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 17:03:12 -0700, in
comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage , "John R Weiss"
<jrweiss98155(at)@[NOSPAM].comcast(dot).net> in
<#i310SfdFHA.2420@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl> wrote:

>The WD Raptor 10K RPM drives are about the fastest out there. Biggest is 74 GB,
>but you could put in 2 if you really need the space, and use your old HD for
>less-used data.

I meant to say that the 10K seem blindingly fast, but above my price
range right now.

>"Matt Silberstein" wrote...
>>I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig EIDE
>> drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on board.
>> So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive. Here are my
>> questions:
>>
>> 1) What brand should I get? Is anyone making particularly
>> better/faster drives today? (I know there is going to be smoke from
>> that. Sorry.)
>>
>> 2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller? That is, is
>> there some "sweet spot" of performance or something that I am missing.
>> I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
>> price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.
>

--
Matt Silberstein

All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.

Matt Silberstein
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 10:31:13 +1000, in
comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage , "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
in <3hp5erFi5af7U1@individual.net> wrote:

>
>Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com>
>wrote in message news:cbkeb1tk57uos8g1ri4qnhd6ab2pg9actv@4ax.com...
>
[snip]

>> 3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
>> (http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
>> to move everything from my old drive, then tell the
>> system to boot from the new drive. Is that correct?
>
>I prefer to use Acronis True Image for that myself.
>Its better to use a clone operation than an image
>for that boot drive replacement situation.

I was hoping for a low/no cost solution. But it seems they have a
trial version. Is it crippleware or does it time out? I don't mind the
latter.

>You wont have anywhere to write the image file to
>when replacing the 40G drive with a 160G drive.

I get those confused. Yeah, I hoped that DrvImagerXP would clone.


--
Matt Silberstein

All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.

Jim Macklin
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
To keep it simple, what do you do with the computer and what
will you plan on doing in the future?
You can buy a SATA drive or drives and install them, leaving
the OS on the original EIDE drive. Then move the MY
Document folders and data to the SATA drives. That will
open up 20 to 30 GB on the boot drive. If your Dell has
SATA built-in it must be a 4700 or newer computer. How long
do you intend to keep it may be a factor in how much you
want to spend.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm



"Matt Silberstein"
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:cbkeb1tk57uos8g1ri4qnhd6ab2pg9actv@4ax.com...
|I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a
40 gig EIDE
| drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface
on board.
| So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive. Here
are my
| questions:
|
| 1) What brand should I get? Is anyone making particularly
| better/faster drives today? (I know there is going to be
smoke from
| that. Sorry.)
|
| 2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller?
That is, is
| there some "sweet spot" of performance or something that I
am missing.
| I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a
reasonable
| price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go
with them.
|
| 3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
|
(http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
| to move everything from my old drive, then tell the system
to boot
| from the new drive. Is that correct?
|
| TIA.
|
|
|
| --
| Matt Silberstein
|
| All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
| a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
| there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
| end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
| or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.

WeshaTheLeopard@gmail.com
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Here's my list of brands of 3.5" drives in order of decreasing quality,
according to my personal experience as a private consultant:

Seagate
Hitachi
Samsung
IBM
Maxtor
Western Digital

Then, you should worry not only about the speed but about cooling too,
as every 10 F of overhearting shorten the lifetime of the drive almost
twice.

Peter
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
> I was hoping for a low/no cost solution. But it seems they have a
> trial version. Is it crippleware or does it time out? I don't mind the
> latter.

It is "crippleware", otherwise they would not sell much.

> >You wont have anywhere to write the image file to
> >when replacing the 40G drive with a 160G drive.
>
> I get those confused. Yeah, I hoped that DrvImagerXP would clone.

No, it won't clone. But you can mount, say 160GB drive,
partition it 120/40, put image in 40GB partition, restore
image to 120GB partiton, etc.
Not sure what DriveImagerXP does when restoring 40GB
image to 120GB partition...

Peter
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
> Then, you should worry not only about the speed but about cooling too,
> as every 10 F of overhearting shorten the lifetime of the drive almost
> twice.

How do you define "overheating" in above context?

Peter
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
> Not sure what DriveImagerXP does when restoring 40GB
> image to 120GB partition...

Have found this comment:

*> I found on the site:
*>
*> http://home.carolina.rr.com/lexunfreeware/LexunFreeware.htm
*>
*> this:
*>
*> "DrvClonerXP and DrvImagerXP have had inconsistent results, and
therefore, I
*> have decided to discontinue their distribution and support. Many have
had
*> successful results with these programs, but many have had problems."
*>
*> PaulS

Nevertheless, WinPE (BartPE, UBCD4WIN or else) and
Ghost32.exe work fine for me ;-)

Matt Silberstein
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:46:14 -0500, in
comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage , "Jim Macklin"
<p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> in
<erzqEMgdFHA.3620@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl> wrote:

>To keep it simple, what do you do with the computer and what
>will you plan on doing in the future?
>You can buy a SATA drive or drives and install them, leaving
>the OS on the original EIDE drive. Then move the MY
>Document folders and data to the SATA drives. That will
>open up 20 to 30 GB on the boot drive. If your Dell has
>SATA built-in it must be a 4700 or newer computer. How long
>do you intend to keep it may be a factor in how much you
>want to spend.

It is our general purpose home/business computer. I think I would like
two more years out of it, other than the drive it meets all of our
current needs. I had not thought of keeping the current drive. And
just moving the data. That would probably do great. With a few
exceptions, there is little "data" in Program Files. I would like the
increased speed from the SATA drive though. I suppose it depends on
how much work I want to do. Divide a days work over the next two years
in delays.

What do you think of this drive?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16822148034


--
Matt Silberstein

All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.

Mike Painter
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Matt Silberstein wrote:
> I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig EIDE
> drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on board.
> So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive. Here are my
> questions:
http://www.hotdealsclub.com/ has 320 Gb Western digital for $140.00

More is better.

Other than the ill-fated kalok drives from many years ago all hard drives
are about the same in terms of reliability.
I'd buy on price and performance.

Rod Speed
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com>
wrote in message news:7hreb1941odlelhcuj1p5hqktih2nadvrk@4ax.com...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote

>>> 3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
>>> (http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
>>> to move everything from my old drive, then tell the
>>> system to boot from the new drive. Is that correct?

>> I prefer to use Acronis True Image for that myself.
>> Its better to use a clone operation than an image
>> for that boot drive replacement situation.

> I was hoping for a low/no cost solution.

Most of the hard drive manufacturers have one of those for that job.

> But it seems they have a trial version. Is it crippleware

Yes, that wont actually do the work. You can see what the
user interface is like etc, but it wont actually make the clone.

> or does it time out? I don't mind the latter.

Fraid not.

>> You wont have anywhere to write the image file to
>> when replacing the 40G drive with a 160G drive.

> I get those confused. Yeah, I hoped that DrvImagerXP would clone.

Nope, tho there is a DrvCloneXP available.

Guess the simplest approach would be to try it and only
bother to try anything else if it doesnt work properly.

You aint got much to lose unless it damages
the contents of the 40G drive in the process.

Rod Speed
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote
in message news:04veb11f0pho4mrpv8m6ts3sv40tspegue@4ax.com...
> Jim Macklin <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote

>> To keep it simple, what do you do with the computer
>> and what will you plan on doing in the future?

>> You can buy a SATA drive or drives and install them, leaving
>> the OS on the original EIDE drive. Then move the MY
>> Document folders and data to the SATA drives. That will
>> open up 20 to 30 GB on the boot drive. If your Dell has SATA
>> built-in it must be a 4700 or newer computer. How long do you
>> intend to keep it may be a factor in how much you want to spend.

> It is our general purpose home/business computer. I think I would like
> two more years out of it, other than the drive it meets all of our
> current needs. I had not thought of keeping the current drive. And
> just moving the data. That would probably do great. With a few
> exceptions, there is little "data" in Program Files. I would like the
> increased speed from the SATA drive though.

Yeah, its generally best to make the new drive the
boot drive, because its normally noticeaby faster.

> I suppose it depends on how much work I want to do.
> Divide a days work over the next two years in delays.

> What do you think of this drive?
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16822148034

Seagate Barracuda. Too noisy and gets too hot for my taste.

They do work fine tho and have the best warranty available currently.

Matt Silberstein
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 14:13:02 +1000, in
comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage , "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
in <3hpieoFi75ufU1@individual.net> wrote:

>
>Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote
>in message news:04veb11f0pho4mrpv8m6ts3sv40tspegue@4ax.com...
>> Jim Macklin <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote
>
>>> To keep it simple, what do you do with the computer
>>> and what will you plan on doing in the future?
>
>>> You can buy a SATA drive or drives and install them, leaving
>>> the OS on the original EIDE drive. Then move the MY
>>> Document folders and data to the SATA drives. That will
>>> open up 20 to 30 GB on the boot drive. If your Dell has SATA
>>> built-in it must be a 4700 or newer computer. How long do you
>>> intend to keep it may be a factor in how much you want to spend.
>
>> It is our general purpose home/business computer. I think I would like
>> two more years out of it, other than the drive it meets all of our
>> current needs. I had not thought of keeping the current drive. And
>> just moving the data. That would probably do great. With a few
>> exceptions, there is little "data" in Program Files. I would like the
>> increased speed from the SATA drive though.
>
>Yeah, its generally best to make the new drive the
>boot drive, because its normally noticeaby faster.
>
>> I suppose it depends on how much work I want to do.
>> Divide a days work over the next two years in delays.
>
>> What do you think of this drive?
> > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16822148034
>
>Seagate Barracuda. Too noisy and gets too hot for my taste.
>
>They do work fine tho and have the best warranty available currently.
>
I liked that warranty and the specs seem good. Noise I don't mind, but
heat is not a good thing. Well, at least I am in the right area.

Thanks to all.



--
Matt Silberstein

All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
<lahuard@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119313534.237855.241850@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> There are 15k rpm, but these are really expensive.

That's SCSI requiring an expensive controller in addition.

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3hp5erFi5af7U1@individual.net...
>
> Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote in message news:cbkeb1tk57uos8g1ri4qnhd6ab2pg9actv@4ax.com...
>
> > I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig
> > EIDE drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on
> > board. So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive.
>
> Yeah, makes a lot of sense interface and size wise.
>
> > Here are my questions:
>
> > 1) What brand should I get?
>
> I like Samsungs myself, mainly because they are quieter than the rest.


And lower performance. Use WD, Hitachi or Maxtor.

> > Is anyone making particularly better/faster drives today?
>
> There isnt much in it speed wise and I bet you wouldnt be
> able to pick it in a proper randomised double blind trial.
>
> Better in the sense of quieter, yes, with the samsungs.
>
> > (I know there is going to be smoke from that. Sorry.)
>
> > 2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller?
>
> No, its essentially about what is the best value $/GB.
>
> > That is, is there some "sweet spot" of
> > performance or something that I am missing.
>
> Not really except that with a 160G you will need to
> ensure that you do have the OS upgraded to support
> it. You dont need to do that with a 120GB drive instead.
>
> That support isnt hard with XP, just upgrade
> to SP2 before adding the new drive.
>
> > I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
> > price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.
>
> There isnt much in it, both of those are fine too.
>
> > 3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
> > (http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
> > to move everything from my old drive, then tell the
> > system to boot from the new drive. Is that correct?
>
> I prefer to use Acronis True Image for that myself.
> Its better to use a clone operation than an image
> for that boot drive replacement situation.
>
> You wont have anywhere to write the image file to
> when replacing the 40G drive with a 160G drive.

40g -> 160g is his direction/goal and that images is feasible.

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
<WeshaTheLeopard@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119318507.873691.249640@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Here's my list of brands of 3.5" drives in order of decreasing quality,
> according to my personal experience as a private consultant:
>
> Seagate
> Hitachi
> Samsung
> IBM
> Maxtor
> Western Digital

That list is pure bull.

> Then, you should worry not only about the speed but about cooling too,
> as every 10 F of overhearting shorten the lifetime of the drive almost
> twice.

That's not accurate without stating where that curve starts which is about
130-140F.

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:04veb11f0pho4mrpv8m6ts3sv40tspegue@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:46:14 -0500, in
> comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage , "Jim Macklin"
> <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> in
> <erzqEMgdFHA.3620@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl> wrote:
>
> >To keep it simple, what do you do with the computer and what
> >will you plan on doing in the future?
> >You can buy a SATA drive or drives and install them, leaving
> >the OS on the original EIDE drive. Then move the MY
> >Document folders and data to the SATA drives. That will
> >open up 20 to 30 GB on the boot drive. If your Dell has
> >SATA built-in it must be a 4700 or newer computer. How long
> >do you intend to keep it may be a factor in how much you
> >want to spend.
>
> It is our general purpose home/business computer. I think I would like
> two more years out of it, other than the drive it meets all of our
> current needs. I had not thought of keeping the current drive. And
> just moving the data. That would probably do great. With a few
> exceptions, there is little "data" in Program Files. I would like the
> increased speed from the SATA drive

SATA drives are not faster because of SATA. Late model fast SATA drives are
fast because they are 7200 RPM and have fast seeks.

For fast get WDC Raptors or Hitachi 7K500. though. I suppose it depends on

> how much work I want to do. Divide a days work over the next two years
> in delays.
>
> What do you think of this drive?
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16822148034


It's ok but get a Raptor or 7K500.

Odie Ferrous
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Ron Reaugh wrote:
>
> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3hp5erFi5af7U1@individual.net...
> >
> > Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com>
> > wrote in message news:cbkeb1tk57uos8g1ri4qnhd6ab2pg9actv@4ax.com...
> >
> > > I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig
> > > EIDE drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on
> > > board. So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive.
> >
> > Yeah, makes a lot of sense interface and size wise.
> >
> > > Here are my questions:
> >
> > > 1) What brand should I get?
> >
> > I like Samsungs myself, mainly because they are quieter than the rest.
>
> And lower performance. Use WD, Hitachi or Maxtor.


WD? Not too bad. Not the best.

Hitachi? You jest, surely?

Maxtor? Ditto above.

As was mentioned earlier in this thread, no-one is going to notice a
speed difference between *most* of the current mix of drives.

However, you have recommended the two ***worst*** drives on the market,
in terms of reliability. (Hitachi and Maxtor.)

Give me a Samsung above all those you recommended. When a Samsung
fails, it does it in style and is very difficult to recover, but lately
their quality has picked up substantially.

Seagate is what you want, although I did get in a couple last week for
recovery (the first Seagates for months.)


Odie
--
Retrodata
www.retrodata.co.uk
Globally Local Data Recovery Experts

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
"Odie Ferrous" <odie_ferrous@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:42B7B893.DDE00635@hotmail.com...
> Ron Reaugh wrote:
> > > I like Samsungs myself, mainly because they are quieter than the rest.
> >
> > And lower performance. Use WD, Hitachi or Maxtor.
>
>
> WD? Not too bad. Not the best.
>
> Hitachi? You jest, surely?
>
> Maxtor? Ditto above.
>
> As was mentioned earlier in this thread, no-one is going to notice a
> speed difference between *most* of the current mix of drives.
>
> However, you have recommended the two ***worst*** drives on the market,
> in terms of reliability. (Hitachi and Maxtor.)


Wacko.

> Give me a Samsung above all those you recommended. When a Samsung
> fails, it does it in style and is very difficult to recover, but lately
> their quality has picked up substantially.

Enough said.

Odie Ferrous
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Ron Reaugh wrote:
>
> "Odie Ferrous" <odie_ferrous@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:42B7B893.DDE00635@hotmail.com...
> > Ron Reaugh wrote:
> > > > I like Samsungs myself, mainly because they are quieter than the rest.
> > >
> > > And lower performance. Use WD, Hitachi or Maxtor.
> >
> >
> > WD? Not too bad. Not the best.
> >
> > Hitachi? You jest, surely?
> >
> > Maxtor? Ditto above.
> >
> > As was mentioned earlier in this thread, no-one is going to notice a
> > speed difference between *most* of the current mix of drives.
> >
> > However, you have recommended the two ***worst*** drives on the market,
> > in terms of reliability. (Hitachi and Maxtor.)
>
> Wacko.
>
> > Give me a Samsung above all those you recommended. When a Samsung
> > fails, it does it in style and is very difficult to recover, but lately
> > their quality has picked up substantially.
>
> Enough said.

You clearly have little real-world experience, then.

When you leave school and get out there in the big, bad world of IT,
you'll learn soon enough.


Odie
--
Retrodata
www.retrodata.co.uk
Globally Local Data Recovery Experts

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
"Odie Ferrous" <odie_ferrous@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:42B7BD18.65EFEB47@hotmail.com...
> Ron Reaugh wrote:
> >
> > "Odie Ferrous" <odie_ferrous@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:42B7B893.DDE00635@hotmail.com...
> > > Ron Reaugh wrote:
> > > > > I like Samsungs myself, mainly because they are quieter than the
rest.
> > > >
> > > > And lower performance. Use WD, Hitachi or Maxtor.
> > >
> > >
> > > WD? Not too bad. Not the best.
> > >
> > > Hitachi? You jest, surely?
> > >
> > > Maxtor? Ditto above.
> > >
> > > As was mentioned earlier in this thread, no-one is going to notice a
> > > speed difference between *most* of the current mix of drives.
> > >
> > > However, you have recommended the two ***worst*** drives on the
market,
> > > in terms of reliability. (Hitachi and Maxtor.)
> >
> > Wacko.
> >
> > > Give me a Samsung above all those you recommended. When a Samsung
> > > fails, it does it in style and is very difficult to recover, but
lately
> > > their quality has picked up substantially.
> >
> > Enough said.
>
> You clearly have little real-world experience, then.
>
> When you leave school and get out there in the big, bad world of IT,
> you'll learn soon enough.

Who is the wacko newbie?

Odie Ferrous
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Ron Reaugh wrote:
>
> Who is the wacko newbie?

If you have an identity problem, Ron, I suggest you sort it out
yourself.


Odie
--
Retrodata
www.retrodata.co.uk
Globally Local Data Recovery Experts

Neill Massello
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> 2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller? That is, is
> there some "sweet spot" of performance or something that I am missing.
> I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
> price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.

Within the same brand/generation/family of drives, there is generally no
difference in performance between models with different capacities.
These days, the (increasingly incremental) speed improvements come
mostly from increases in the "areal density" of data on the platters.
That goes up with each generation of drives; but within a single
generation, capacity differences come from the number of platters used,
not from the areal density of each platter.

The price per Gigabyte "sweet spot" usually comes just before the
highest capacity model in the same drive family. Most of the 160GB
models being sold now belong to the preceding generation of drives, so
you might be able to get one at a lower cost per gig than more recent
larger models.

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
"Odie Ferrous" <odie_ferrous@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:42B7C084.9841451A@hotmail.com...
> Ron Reaugh wrote:
> >
> > Who is the wacko newbie?
>
> If you have an identity problem, Ron, I suggest you sort it out
> yourself.

They always soon expose themselves.

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
"Neill Massello" <neillmassello@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1gyhe7q.asi0dg12a18t8N%neillmassello@earthlink.net...
> Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > 2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller? That is, is
> > there some "sweet spot" of performance or something that I am missing.
> > I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
> > price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.
>
> Within the same brand/generation/family of drives, there is generally no
> difference in performance between models with different capacities.

A small advantage goes to the larger ones as head switches cost less time
than adjacent track seeks.

Rod Speed
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Ron Reaugh <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:QINte.343017$cg1.189301@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> Rod Speed <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote
>> Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote

>>> I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig
>>> EIDE drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on
>>> board. So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive.

>> Yeah, makes a lot of sense interface and size wise.

>>> Here are my questions:

>>> 1) What brand should I get?

>> I like Samsungs myself, mainly because they are quieter than the rest.

> And lower performance.

Wrong. As always.

> Use WD, Hitachi or Maxtor.

No thanks.

>>> Is anyone making particularly better/faster drives today?

>> There isnt much in it speed wise and I bet you wouldnt be
>> able to pick it in a proper randomised double blind trial.

>> Better in the sense of quieter, yes, with the samsungs.

>>> (I know there is going to be smoke from that. Sorry.)

>>> 2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller?

>> No, its essentially about what is the best value $/GB.

>>> That is, is there some "sweet spot" of
>>> performance or something that I am missing.

>> Not really except that with a 160G you will need to
>> ensure that you do have the OS upgraded to support
>> it. You dont need to do that with a 120GB drive instead.

>> That support isnt hard with XP, just upgrade
>> to SP2 before adding the new drive.

>>> I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
>>> price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.

>> There isnt much in it, both of those are fine too.

>>> 3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
>>> (http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
>>> to move everything from my old drive, then tell the
>>> system to boot from the new drive. Is that correct?

>> I prefer to use Acronis True Image for that myself.
>> Its better to use a clone operation than an image
>> for that boot drive replacement situation.

>> You wont have anywhere to write the image file to
>> when replacing the 40G drive with a 160G drive.

> 40g -> 160g is his direction/goal and that images is feasible.

A real clone makes a lot more sense. There are free cloners around.

Rod Speed
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:an5fb15sc29dchvnopvetno85lj71fg898@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 14:13:02 +1000, in
> comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage , "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com>
> in <3hpieoFi75ufU1@individual.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote
>>in message news:04veb11f0pho4mrpv8m6ts3sv40tspegue@4ax.com...
>>> Jim Macklin <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> wrote
>>
>>>> To keep it simple, what do you do with the computer
>>>> and what will you plan on doing in the future?
>>
>>>> You can buy a SATA drive or drives and install them, leaving
>>>> the OS on the original EIDE drive. Then move the MY
>>>> Document folders and data to the SATA drives. That will
>>>> open up 20 to 30 GB on the boot drive. If your Dell has SATA
>>>> built-in it must be a 4700 or newer computer. How long do you
>>>> intend to keep it may be a factor in how much you want to spend.
>>
>>> It is our general purpose home/business computer. I think I would like
>>> two more years out of it, other than the drive it meets all of our
>>> current needs. I had not thought of keeping the current drive. And
>>> just moving the data. That would probably do great. With a few
>>> exceptions, there is little "data" in Program Files. I would like the
>>> increased speed from the SATA drive though.
>>
>>Yeah, its generally best to make the new drive the
>>boot drive, because its normally noticeaby faster.
>>
>>> I suppose it depends on how much work I want to do.
>>> Divide a days work over the next two years in delays.
>>
>>> What do you think of this drive?
>> > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16822148034
>>
>>Seagate Barracuda. Too noisy and gets too hot for my taste.
>>
>>They do work fine tho and have the best warranty available currently.

> I liked that warranty and the specs seem good. Noise I don't mind,
> but heat is not a good thing. Well, at least I am in the right area.

I should have said that the heat wont be a
problem with the way you cool your case.

I prefer to have no fans apart from the power supply
and cpu fans and deliberately choose those to be silent.

> Thanks to all.

No problem.

Rod Speed
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Ron Reaugh <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:6JNte.343018$cg1.274668@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> <WeshaTheLeopard@gmail.com> wrote

>> Here's my list of brands of 3.5" drives in order of decreasing quality,
>> according to my personal experience as a private consultant:

>> Seagate
>> Hitachi
>> Samsung
>> IBM
>> Maxtor
>> Western Digital

> That list is pure bull.

You'd be the expert on pure bull.

Never did realise that the IBM 75GXPs had a problem.

>> Then, you should worry not only about the speed
>> but about cooling too, as every 10 F of overhearting
>> shorten the lifetime of the drive almost twice.

> That's not accurate without stating where
> that curve starts which is about 130-140F.

Matt Silberstein
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 05:39:21 GMT, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage
, "Ron Reaugh" <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> in
<dKNte.997807$w62.159963@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> wrote:

>
>"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
>message news:04veb11f0pho4mrpv8m6ts3sv40tspegue@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:46:14 -0500, in
>> comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage , "Jim Macklin"
>> <p51mustang[threeX12]@xxxhotmail.calm> in
>> <erzqEMgdFHA.3620@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl> wrote:
>>
>> >To keep it simple, what do you do with the computer and what
>> >will you plan on doing in the future?
>> >You can buy a SATA drive or drives and install them, leaving
>> >the OS on the original EIDE drive. Then move the MY
>> >Document folders and data to the SATA drives. That will
>> >open up 20 to 30 GB on the boot drive. If your Dell has
>> >SATA built-in it must be a 4700 or newer computer. How long
>> >do you intend to keep it may be a factor in how much you
>> >want to spend.
>>
>> It is our general purpose home/business computer. I think I would like
>> two more years out of it, other than the drive it meets all of our
>> current needs. I had not thought of keeping the current drive. And
>> just moving the data. That would probably do great. With a few
>> exceptions, there is little "data" in Program Files. I would like the
>> increased speed from the SATA drive
>
>SATA drives are not faster because of SATA. Late model fast SATA drives are
>fast because they are 7200 RPM and have fast seeks.
>
>For fast get WDC Raptors or Hitachi 7K500. though. I suppose it depends on
>
>> how much work I want to do. Divide a days work over the next two years
>> in delays.
>>
>> What do you think of this drive?
>>
>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?item=N82E16822148034
>
>
>It's ok but get a Raptor

Does not seem to be optimized for my needs.

>or 7K500.
>
I think I am going to stay with a somewhat smaller drive.


--
Matt Silberstein

All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.

Peter
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
> >> It is our general purpose home/business computer. I think I would like
> >> two more years out of it, other than the drive it meets all of our
> >> current needs. I had not thought of keeping the current drive. And
> >> just moving the data. That would probably do great. With a few
> >> exceptions, there is little "data" in Program Files. I would like the
> >> increased speed from the SATA drive

> I think I am going to stay with a somewhat smaller drive.

Whatever drive you choose, don't forget that they tend to
fail. Think about backup. Or, do never put anything important
on that hard drive.

Matt Silberstein
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 08:53:51 -0400, in
comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage , "Peter" <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> in
<G5Ute.1747$X57.257523@news20.bellglobal.com> wrote:

>> >> It is our general purpose home/business computer. I think I would like
>> >> two more years out of it, other than the drive it meets all of our
>> >> current needs. I had not thought of keeping the current drive. And
>> >> just moving the data. That would probably do great. With a few
>> >> exceptions, there is little "data" in Program Files. I would like the
>> >> increased speed from the SATA drive
>
>> I think I am going to stay with a somewhat smaller drive.
>
>Whatever drive you choose, don't forget that they tend to
>fail. Think about backup. Or, do never put anything important
>on that hard drive.

I plan on using my current drive as the backup for now. Then, when the
10K drives come down a bit in price move to that as my primary and use
the old new drive as my backup.


--
Matt Silberstein

All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.

Eric Gisin
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
"Ron Reaugh" <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:1rPte.998274$w62.118069@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Odie Ferrous" <odie_ferrous@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:42B7C084.9841451A@hotmail.com...
> > Ron Reaugh wrote:
> > >
> > > Who is the wacko newbie?
> >
> > If you have an identity problem, Ron, I suggest you sort it out
> > yourself.
>
> They always soon expose themselves.
>
So Ron, were do you expose yourself?

Gale
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Matt, cut through all the bull and go to Best Buys, they had a Western
Digital 120gb ide disk for $39.99 after rebates. Can't beat the price, it's
3 times what you have now and will do you just fine.

"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:cbkeb1tk57uos8g1ri4qnhd6ab2pg9actv@4ax.com...
I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig EIDE
drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on board.
So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive. Here are my
questions:

1) What brand should I get? Is anyone making particularly
better/faster drives today? (I know there is going to be smoke from
that. Sorry.)

2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller? That is, is
there some "sweet spot" of performance or something that I am missing.
I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.

3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
(http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
to move everything from my old drive, then tell the system to boot
from the new drive. Is that correct?

TIA.



--
Matt Silberstein

All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.

J. Clarke
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Odie Ferrous wrote:

> Ron Reaugh wrote:
>>
>> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:3hp5erFi5af7U1@individual.net...
>> >
>> > Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com>
>> > wrote in message news:cbkeb1tk57uos8g1ri4qnhd6ab2pg9actv@4ax.com...
>> >
>> > > I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig
>> > > EIDE drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on
>> > > board. So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive.
>> >
>> > Yeah, makes a lot of sense interface and size wise.
>> >
>> > > Here are my questions:
>> >
>> > > 1) What brand should I get?
>> >
>> > I like Samsungs myself, mainly because they are quieter than the rest.
>>
>> And lower performance. Use WD, Hitachi or Maxtor.
>
>
> WD? Not too bad. Not the best.
>
> Hitachi? You jest, surely?
>
> Maxtor? Ditto above.
>
> As was mentioned earlier in this thread, no-one is going to notice a
> speed difference between *most* of the current mix of drives.
>
> However, you have recommended the two ***worst*** drives on the market,
> in terms of reliability. (Hitachi and Maxtor.)
>
> Give me a Samsung above all those you recommended. When a Samsung
> fails, it does it in style and is very difficult to recover, but lately
> their quality has picked up substantially.
>
> Seagate is what you want, although I did get in a couple last week for
> recovery (the first Seagates for months.)

I still think that you might be working from a skewed sample. What steps
have you taken to ensure that the sample you are seeing is random and
representative?

> Odie

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
Peter wrote:

>> There are 15k rpm, but these are really expensive. Also, there are
>> super big 500g HD, but I dont know if they are avalible yet. Check
>> www.NewEgg.com and ^^^^ hes got it right too.
>
> You are first to report 15k rpm SATA. Do you know the brand name?
> Or you were thinking about SAS drive?

15,000 RPM SCSI drives, which are not SAS but can be installed in SAS, are
commonplace. You can find small ones on ebay for 30 bucks.

One is not constrained to use consumer drives in personal machines you know.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:d99o3q01tj8@news4.newsguy.com...
> Odie Ferrous wrote:
>
> > Ron Reaugh wrote:
> >>
> >> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3hp5erFi5af7U1@individual.net...
> >> >
> >> > Matt Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com>
> >> > wrote in message news:cbkeb1tk57uos8g1ri4qnhd6ab2pg9actv@4ax.com...
> >> >
> >> > > I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig
> >> > > EIDE drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on
> >> > > board. So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive.
> >> >
> >> > Yeah, makes a lot of sense interface and size wise.
> >> >
> >> > > Here are my questions:
> >> >
> >> > > 1) What brand should I get?
> >> >
> >> > I like Samsungs myself, mainly because they are quieter than the
rest.
> >>
> >> And lower performance. Use WD, Hitachi or Maxtor.
> >
> >
> > WD? Not too bad. Not the best.
> >
> > Hitachi? You jest, surely?
> >
> > Maxtor? Ditto above.
> >
> > As was mentioned earlier in this thread, no-one is going to notice a
> > speed difference between *most* of the current mix of drives.
> >
> > However, you have recommended the two ***worst*** drives on the market,
> > in terms of reliability. (Hitachi and Maxtor.)
> >
> > Give me a Samsung above all those you recommended. When a Samsung
> > fails, it does it in style and is very difficult to recover, but lately
> > their quality has picked up substantially.
> >
> > Seagate is what you want, although I did get in a couple last week for
> > recovery (the first Seagates for months.)
>
> I still think that you might be working from a skewed sample. What steps
> have you taken to ensure that the sample you are seeing is random and
> representative?

Obviously none. For starters he'd need to know the sales volume in units to
his customer base. If you believe what he says then the reasonable
conclusion is that his customers are heavy Hitachi and Maxtor users.

Bob
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 18:14:38 GMT, "Gale" <nospamnot@spammernot.com>
wrote:

>I've done literally hundreds of rebates and have never had any problems. I
>would never use "having to send in a rebate" as a reason not to purchase
>something on sale.

Please do not top post - it is the sign of an amateur.

It has been a while since the last rebate fiasco, so maybe the govt
clamped down.


--

Map of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/vrwc.html

"Whatever crushes individuality is despotism."
--John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty"

Bob
07-10-2005, 12:56 AM
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 14:39:36 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:

>15,000 RPM SCSI drives, which are not SAS but can be installed in SAS, are
>commonplace. You can find small ones on ebay for 30 bucks.

>One is not constrained to use consumer drives in personal machines you know.

When are we gonna get afforable GB ram disks?


--

Map of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
http://home.houston.rr.com/rkba/vrwc.html

"Whatever crushes individuality is despotism."
--John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty"

Folkert Rienstra
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message news:d99o3p01tj6@news4.newsguy.com
> Peter wrote:
>
> > > There are 15k rpm, but these are really expensive. Also, there are
> > > super big 500g HD, but I dont know if they are available yet. Check
> > > www.NewEgg.com and ^^^^ hes got it right too.
> >
> > You are first to report 15k rpm SATA. Do you know the brand name?
> > Or you were thinking about a SAS drive?
>
> 15,000 RPM SCSI drives, which are not SAS

But a SAS drive may be mistaken for being a SATA drive, either by name
or by appearance.

> but can be installed in SAS,

Nonsense.
Not without some kind of bridge, which certainly won't be a very common
consumer issue.
SAS backplanes however may have the capability of accepting SATA
drives but these too won't likely be consumer items.

> are commonplace. You can find small ones on ebay for 30 bucks.

Which are old and SLOOOOOOW!!!!!

>
> One is not constrained to use consumer drives in personal machines you know.

Most SCSI controllers are actually designed for 'personal machines'.

Odie Ferrous
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
"J. Clarke" wrote:
>
> > Odie Ferrous wrote:



> > Seagate is what you want, although I did get in a couple last week for
> > recovery (the first Seagates for months.)
>
> I still think that you might be working from a skewed sample. What steps
> have you taken to ensure that the sample you are seeing is random and
> representative?

I freely admit I am working from a skewed sample; I see a fraction of
the volume of drives seen by companies such as OnTrack, Vogon, etc, so
all my data will be taken from a smaller pool, and hence less accurate.

Unfortunately, I cannot take the above steps to determine the randomness
of my sample; however, I can see no reason why I should be sent more of
one type of drive than another.

And it's not as if I service only the UK market - almost 50% of my
recovery work comes in from the USA and Europe.

I do see a lot of drives and for a while now, Seagate has been the one I
have seen least of.

About 18 months ago, I was seeing a lot of Samsung drives; I have had
very few of these in recently.

I still get Hitachi drives in, although because they are arriving in
ever decreasing volumes, I get the feeling that the majority of those
destined to fail have done so. Brand new Hitachi drives are appearing
to be substantially more reliable than those manufactured a couple of
years ago, although I would still be reluctant to touch one yet for my
own use.

Maxtors - and particularly those in drive enclosures (OneTouch
specifically) are still falling over. They appear to suffer more from
heat-induced problems than any other drive on the market.

The above are my own observations only, drawing from my own experience,
and not from any other source whatsoever.


Odie
--
Retrodata
www.retrodata.co.uk
Globally Local Data Recovery Experts

Bob I
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
All in due time.

Bob wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 14:39:36 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>>15,000 RPM SCSI drives, which are not SAS but can be installed in SAS, are
>>commonplace. You can find small ones on ebay for 30 bucks.
>
>
>>One is not constrained to use consumer drives in personal machines you know.
>
>
> When are we gonna get afforable GB ram disks?
>
>

cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:37:18 GMT, Matt Silberstein

>I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig EIDE
>drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on board.
>So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive. Here are my
>questions:

>1) What brand should I get? Is anyone making particularly
>better/faster drives today?

I'd look for 3+ year warranty, and go Seagate as they're 5 yrs

>2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller?

Yes; if your motherboard BIOS or if you run an OS that can't "see"
over 137G, then 120G is as high as you should go - else the "sweet
spot" is 200G and I'd go there.

The following OSs are 137G-OK:
- XP SP1
- XP SP2

The following OSs fail over 137G:
- MS-DOS
- Win9x, including DOS modes thereof
- NT up to and including XP Gold (i.e. pre-SP1)

I'm not sure if any versions of Win2000 are OK over 137G; I'd guess
some SP levels might be (current level is SP4), so you'd have to
confirm that via the MS web site.

>I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
>price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.

200G is currently sweet; over that, pricing gets hairy. It's cheaper
and faster to do a RAID 0 of 2 x 200G than 1 x 400G.

>3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
>(http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
>to move everything from my old drive, then tell the system to boot
>from the new drive. Is that correct?

Or BING from www.bootitng.com, or possibly the HD vendor's tools, if
they provide any for such purpose. I'm an OEM, so I get my HDs "raw";
if buying retail (fancy box, fancy price) you may have value added.



>------------------------ ---- --- -- - - - -
Forget http://cquirke.blogspot.com and check out a
better one at http://topicdrift.blogspot.com instead!
>------------------------ ---- --- -- - - - -

Bob Davis
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:cbkeb1tk57uos8g1ri4qnhd6ab2pg9actv@4ax.com...

> I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig EIDE
> drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on board.
> So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive. Here are my
> questions:
>
> 1) What brand should I get? Is anyone making particularly
> better/faster drives today? (I know there is going to be smoke from
> that. Sorry.)

No, and except for the Raptors (already mentioned here) the SATA's don't
perform any or much better than the older PATA drives, and although are
reportedly less expensive to produce are still generally more expensive.
From time to time a bargain surfaces on drives (usually PATA's), and you can
keep track of the sales on www.dealnews.com, among other deal sites. I've
seen drives <250gb, usually PATA, priced at around 30/gb, although most
involve mail-in rebates, a hassle some don't want to fool with.

> 3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
> (http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
> to move everything from my old drive, then tell the system to boot
> from the new drive. Is that correct?

I haven't heard of DrvImagerXP, but most (all?) drive mfr's offer cloning
software for that purpose that is on accompanying CD's (retail) or by
download from their sites. I would go with that option.

As for reliability, I haven't had a drive failure in years (KOW), and most
of my drives are WD's. I have five WD's (two are Raptors), one IBM, and one
Maxtor running on this machine (all but three in mobil racks, USB, or
firewire and used only sporadically). Cooling is important, and I always
have a fan blowing on the HD housing, which in addition to luck may be a
factor in my good fortune with drives.

Bob Davis
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
"cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org> wrote in
message news:karjb1dhm4jq959s15uo9gh1ne93er3rk3@4ax.com...

> The following OSs fail over 137G:
> - MS-DOS
> - Win9x, including DOS modes thereof
> - NT up to and including XP Gold (i.e. pre-SP1)

I ran two 100gb drives in a hardware RAID0 array in Win98SE for a year or
more without problems. SE saw the drive as 200gb and never burped. I never
came even close to filling it with data, nor was even 137gb approached, but
the full 200gb was recognized by the OS.

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
"Bob Davis" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:yAnue.50846$iU.43248@lakeread05...
>
> "cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org> wrote in
> message news:karjb1dhm4jq959s15uo9gh1ne93er3rk3@4ax.com...
>
> > The following OSs fail over 137G:
> > - MS-DOS
> > - Win9x, including DOS modes thereof
> > - NT up to and including XP Gold (i.e. pre-SP1)
>
> I ran two 100gb drives in a hardware RAID0 array in Win98SE for a year or
> more without problems. SE saw the drive as 200gb and never burped. I
never
> came even close to filling it with data, nor was even 137gb approached,
but
> the full 200gb was recognized by the OS.

Recognized in a single partition/drive letter?

J. Clarke
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
Bob Davis wrote:

>
> "cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org> wrote in
> message news:karjb1dhm4jq959s15uo9gh1ne93er3rk3@4ax.com...
>
>> The following OSs fail over 137G:
>> - MS-DOS
>> - Win9x, including DOS modes thereof
>> - NT up to and including XP Gold (i.e. pre-SP1)
>
> I ran two 100gb drives in a hardware RAID0 array in Win98SE for a year or
> more without problems. SE saw the drive as 200gb and never burped. I
> never came even close to filling it with data, nor was even 137gb
> approached, but the full 200gb was recognized by the OS.

That's an array. The 137 gig limit applies to single IDE drives and is the
result of the drivers not being able to handle the addressing mode used by
IDE drives larger than 137 gig.

--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Folkert Rienstra
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
"cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org> wrote in message news:karjb1dhm4jq959s15uo9gh1ne93er3rk3@4ax.com
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 23:37:18 GMT, Matt Silberstein
>
> > I have a Dell computer, running XP Pro SP2. It came with a 40 gig EIDE
> > drive which is almost filled. It also has a SATA interface on board.
> > So I figured I would jump to a 160 gig SATA drive. Here are my
> > questions:
>
> > 1) What brand should I get? Is anyone making particularly
> > better/faster drives today?
>
> I'd look for 3+ year warranty, and go Seagate as they're 5 yrs
>
> > 2) Is there any technical reason to go larger or smaller?
>
> Yes; if your motherboard BIOS or if you run an OS that can't "see"
> over 137G, then 120G is as high as you should go - else the "sweet
> spot" is 200G and I'd go there.
>
> The following OSs are 137G-OK:
> - XP SP1
> - XP SP2
>
> The following OSs fail over 137G:

> - MS-DOS

Doubtful.
As long as BIOS is 48-bit LBA compatible it should work.

> - Win9x, including DOS modes thereof

Not if you can get a 48-bit LBA compatible driver.

> - NT up to and including XP Gold (i.e. pre-SP1)

Probably the same as for Win9x.

>
> I'm not sure if any versions of Win2000 are OK over 137G; I'd guess
> some SP levels might be (current level is SP4), so you'd have to
> confirm that via the MS web site.
>
> > I just figured that 160 was sufficiently large and at a reasonable
> > price. But if 200 or 250 gig drives are better I will go with them.
>
> 200G is currently sweet; over that, pricing gets hairy. It's cheaper
> and faster to do a RAID 0 of 2 x 200G than 1 x 400G.
>
> > 3) I figured I would use DrvImagerXP
> > (http://www.softpedia.com/progDownload/DrvImagerXP-Download-1629.html)
> > to move everything from my old drive, then tell the system to boot
> > from the new drive. Is that correct?
>
> Or BING from www.bootitng.com, or possibly the HD vendor's tools, if
> they provide any for such purpose. I'm an OEM, so I get my HDs "raw";
> if buying retail (fancy box, fancy price) you may have value added.
>
>
>
> > ------------------------ ---- --- -- - - - -
> Forget http://cquirke.blogspot.com and check out a
> better one at http://topicdrift.blogspot.com instead!
> > ------------------------ ---- --- -- - - - -

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
"J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:d9d6rb029o5@news4.newsguy.com...
> Bob Davis wrote:
>
> >
> > "cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org> wrote
in
> > message news:karjb1dhm4jq959s15uo9gh1ne93er3rk3@4ax.com...
> >
> >> The following OSs fail over 137G:
> >> - MS-DOS
> >> - Win9x, including DOS modes thereof
> >> - NT up to and including XP Gold (i.e. pre-SP1)
> >
> > I ran two 100gb drives in a hardware RAID0 array in Win98SE for a year
or
> > more without problems. SE saw the drive as 200gb and never burped. I
> > never came even close to filling it with data, nor was even 137gb
> > approached, but the full 200gb was recognized by the OS.
>
> That's an array. The 137 gig limit applies to single IDE drives and is
the
> result of the drivers not being able to handle the addressing mode used by
> IDE drives larger than 137 gig.


Well, I'll bet that a single 200GB drive in W98se still works on that array
controller. So where exactly does that 137GB limit lie in W98SE.
Apparent;y it's not in the core of OS's FAT32 file system as a previous
poster claimed. Can one use a single 200GB drive on an Intel ICH5 or ICH6
with the latest Intel drivers in W98se?

Bob I
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
Ron Reaugh wrote:

> "J. Clarke" <jclarke.usenet@snet.net.invalid> wrote in message
> news:d9d6rb029o5@news4.newsguy.com...
>
>>Bob Davis wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org> wrote
>
> in
>
>>>message news:karjb1dhm4jq959s15uo9gh1ne93er3rk3@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>The following OSs fail over 137G:
>>>> - MS-DOS
>>>> - Win9x, including DOS modes thereof
>>>> - NT up to and including XP Gold (i.e. pre-SP1)
>>>
>>>I ran two 100gb drives in a hardware RAID0 array in Win98SE for a year
>
> or
>
>>>more without problems. SE saw the drive as 200gb and never burped. I
>>>never came even close to filling it with data, nor was even 137gb
>>>approached, but the full 200gb was recognized by the OS.
>>
>>That's an array. The 137 gig limit applies to single IDE drives and is
>
> the
>
>>result of the drivers not being able to handle the addressing mode used by
>>IDE drives larger than 137 gig.
>
>
>
> Well, I'll bet that a single 200GB drive in W98se still works on that array
> controller. So where exactly does that 137GB limit lie in W98SE.
> Apparent;y it's not in the core of OS's FAT32 file system as a previous
> poster claimed. Can one use a single 200GB drive on an Intel ICH5 or ICH6
> with the latest Intel drivers in W98se?
>

Dunno but 8 TB is a lot of space for a Win98 box!

The maximum possible number of clusters on a volume using the FAT32 file
system is 268,435,445. With a maximum of 32 KB per cluster with space
for the file allocation table (FAT), this equates to a maximum disk size
of approximately 8 terabytes (TB).

mgmawji@gmail.com
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
After the last few exchanges l am not sure to post here for this
particular thread.
Anyways, here goes

For the last 4 months having tested numerous SATA drives we found the
WD drives to come out on top, and we use these on our NAS appliances -
Model is WD2500SD this is the 250GB version. performance and
reliability has been good.
Hope this helps
Our NAS applaince is the NexonNAS 1000

Dawoodm
www.thenexon.com

mgmawji@gmail.com
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
After the last few exchanges l am not sure to post here for this
particular thread.
Anyways, here goes

For the last 4 months having tested numerous SATA drives we found the
WD drives to come out on top, and we use these on our NAS appliances -
Model is WD2500SD this is the 250GB version. performance and
reliability has been good.
Hope this helps
Our NAS applaince is the NexonNAS 1000

Dawoodm
www.thenexon.com

mgmawji@gmail.com
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
After the last few exchanges l am not sure to post here for this
particular thread.
Anyways, here goes

For the last 4 months having tested numerous SATA drives we found the
WD drives to come out on top, and we use these on our NAS appliances -
Model is WD2500SD this is the 250GB version. performance and
reliability has been good.
Hope this helps
Our NAS applaince is the NexonNAS 1000

Dawoodm
www.thenexon.com

Ron Reaugh
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
<mgmawji@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1119553648.065188.306670@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> After the last few exchanges l am not sure to post here for this
> particular thread.
> Anyways, here goes
>
> For the last 4 months having tested numerous SATA drives we found the
> WD drives to come out on top,


Describe "top" in detail please.

> and we use these on our NAS appliances -
> Model is WD2500SD this is the 250GB version. performance and
> reliability has been good.
> Hope this helps
> Our NAS applaince is the NexonNAS 1000
>
> Dawoodm
> www.thenexon.com
>

chrisv
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
Rod Reaugh wrote:

><mgmawji@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1119553648.065188.306670@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> After the last few exchanges l am not sure to post here for this
>> particular thread.
>> Anyways, here goes
>>
>> For the last 4 months having tested numerous SATA drives we found the
>> WD drives to come out on top,
>
>
>Describe "top" in detail please.

Still pulling for the Deskstars, Rod^Hn?

cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)
07-10-2005, 12:57 AM
On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 19:43:10 -0500, "Bob Davis" <nospam@nospam.net>
>"cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" <cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org>

>> The following OSs fail over 137G:
>> - MS-DOS
>> - Win9x, including DOS modes thereof
>> - NT up to and including XP Gold (i.e. pre-SP1)

>I ran two 100gb drives in a hardware RAID0 array in Win98SE for a year or
>more without problems. SE saw the drive as 200gb and never burped. I never
>came even close to filling it with data, nor was even 137gb approached, but
>the full 200gb was recognized by the OS.

That's very interesting, and surprising - though perhaps less so, if
never filled up. I use Win98SE DOS Mode as a side-boot for XP, and
I've had varying mileage there. Usually, everything works - F-Prot
for DOS scans everything even on F: (the last 2G on the HD), ScanDisk
is OK, etc. But sometimes, if E: is full (crossing the 137G?) I get
serious data corruption if I push my luck, e.g. dirs full of trash
names as arbitrary data is seen as the "dir", etc.

Also, on such full E:, I get F-Prot throwing "unable to read..."
errors when scanning from DOS mode.

I've also seen tragedies when > 137G HDs are used from XP Gold, i.e.
before SP1. Bonked partition tables, boot records, ugly stuff.

When you say RAID, do you mean RAID 0 as 200G, or RAID 1 mirroring so
that the same data's on both as 100G? Where do you find 100G HDs, are
they SCSI or something? I've only seen 80G and then 120G. Did you
have to use "special" drivers and partition types for the RAID? If
so, then perhaps that extended the OS's capabilities?



>------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -
The most accurate diagnostic instrument
in medicine is the Retrospectoscope
>------------ ----- ---- --- -- - - - -


Hard Drive Recommendation