J
John Doe
Paul said:
What is your point?
What is your point?
R
Rod Speed
John Doe said:
The technology is completely different.
Yep.
P
Paul
John said:
Since both SSD and Hard Drives are firmware/CPU based,
they are both untrustworthy.
And you cannot really estimate when they'll fall over
or why.
For example, some bugs are related to how many times
the device has been power cycled. Some users will see
an early failure (because they power cycle the PC a lot).
Others will see the device last a long time (since they
don't power off).
Companies will not always admit why their product failed.
In the case of Seagate, occasionally a company engineer
will make an unofficial statement about why some failures
are occurring. Due to the prototype nature of the SSD
market, the early SSD failures involved a lot of ass covering,
as no maker attempting to capture mindshare, would want
to admit why their product is failing. So you can't always
get a nice neatly laid out report as to what to expect
from SSDs.
So my point is, no matter what the track record is to date,
the same fault modes can exist on SSDs, as on hard drives.
Both have rudimentary firmware, with no attempt to automatically
recover from bad situations.
Firmware flaws would have no representation in SMART. So it's
not like you can be warned there is a bug in the firmware.
And the device is most likely to "disappear", when you first
turn it on in the morning. When the SSD "internally boots".
If a brand new SSD comes out today, I could pick one up
assuming the SSD market is mature and every SSD maker
knows what they're doing. Only to lose all my data a
month later. And then reports come out that it is a
firmware issue. Whether it happens regularly, is not the
issue. It's the possibility that it can happen that counts.
And the track record of firmware issues on hard drives,
should attest to how often these mistakes make it into
the field.
(Repairing a bricked Seagate ST3500320AS using a TTL serial cable...
An example of a model with a firmware problem.)
http://www.overclock.net/t/457286/seagate-bricked-firmware-drive-fix-with-pics
(Firmware update if you catch it before it bricks)
http://knowledge.seagate.com/articles/en_US/FAQ/207951en
Paul
K
kathy
The drive woul dneed to be SATA. Sorry, I forgot to mention it.
K
kathy
No!!!! My mistake. I mean PATA. The old one with the 40 or 80 way
connector.
K
kathy
Thank you for the info. (Including the scepticism about manufacturers)
I appreciate it.
J
John Doe
The argument was that SSD is more prone to failure than HDD.
J
John Doe
A regular troll...
--
--
C
Charlie Hoffpauir
As does my heart (one attack so far) and yet I continue to rely on it.
P
Paul
kathy said:
Based on the prices and capacities on Newegg (320GB 2.5" PATA for $399),
I would say forget about this (PATA laptop drive) approach. There is
another way.
*******
I use one of these to connect SATA hard drives to an IDE cable
on the computer. The jumper on the adapter, indicates whether the drive
is master or slave. I jumper to Master and stick it on the end
of my IDE cable, as usually I'm only working on a single SATA
drive this way at one time. (My IDE cable happens to support HPA.)
The worst part of this adapter, is you have to be very careful
installing or removing the IDE side, as the pins can get bent
in the process. This has power connectors, to connect your
existing supply, to the SATA drive. Inspect the pictures of
the product, to see how it would connect to your system. The
easy part, is how smoothly this plugs into the back of a SATA drive.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16812200156
That would increase the number of drive models you could connect.
$80 gets you a 1TB 7200RPM 2.5" SATA. Then you use the StarTech
adapter, so it'll connect to your IDE cable.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA54G1R09153
It's a 512e drive, so you can use it with WinXP without a problem.
http://www.hgst.com/tech/techlib.nsf/techdocs/FF05B02FBBBF9E8288257AAF00686AD6/$file/TS7K1000_ds.pdf
I would put a lot more care into selecting a drive, than just
picking the first one I could see.
When securing it mechanically, you need to make sure there is
room for the StarTech adapter. In an Antec Sonata, with outward
facing drive bays in the bottom, the adapter
would hit the computer side cover. Only mounting the drives
in the regular orientation would work. I've even used that
StarTech adapter, while a SATA drive sat open in a USB to IDE
enclosure. My StarTech adapter has been through hell and it
still works
Paul
R
Rod Speed
Paul said:
You can actually with some faults that show
evidence of a problem in the SMART stats.
Those arent bugs.
Those arent bugs.
Doesn't matter what they admit, with plenty
of failures the reason for them is obvious.
But the technology is so different that you
don't often see the same fault modes.
It's a hell of a lot better than rudimentary.
The whole point of remapped sectors with hard drives and spare
cells with SSDs is to recover automatically from bad situations.
Sure, but that is only a minor cause of HDD and SSD failure now.
F
Flasherly
SSDs may not arguably have that "last gasp" plattered drives variously
exhibit, such as through diagnostics or other portends of aberrant
behavior. Roughly five years already on popularly consumed SSDs,
though, there's hasn't been a widespread plague from reports of SSDs
literally falling out of the sky.
Performance benefits all but negating other considerations, all but
raw, ponderous bulk storage, that is, where plattered drives are no
less sensible. Data not being constantly churned over in less than
industrial fashion, say, average Joe's desktop archives. Perhaps a
plattered performance hit, at half and less SSD transfer rates, isn't
really so much a hit, after all, while data predominately just sits
there doing not much.
Besides, nor really such a bad idea, an indicated course and plattered
drive, dare we say, should a SSD "just up and take leave."
Small-sized SSD drives aren't, really, such an imposition
provisionally for and a part of plattered-drive backup stratagems. Of
course market aims would be to replace HDDs with NAND, especially if
your SSD costs $1500 over a competitor's $80 3T plattered drive. As,
inevitably, would such pied-piper logic appeal to a marketable
segment: If it's all that great at, say, at 60G and $40 for a SSD to
most common ends at maximum performance benefits, then it's going to
be exponentially that much better just to spend $1500 for a 3T HDD.
Probably.
And, if not, should be worth at least something to brag about or
fondle during wee late hours.
S
Shadow
If you really mean 250Mb, that would be an old-oh-so-old
motherboard (circa 1993-1994). Probably not worth spending money on.
OTOH, if it's a 250Gb drive, there is a good chance the MB
will have SATA connectors. So maybe it's just a matter of buying SATA
power/data cables and a SATA HD. Check the SATA specs, some of the
earlier chipsets had problems with fast and large drives.
The motherboard make/model/chipset would help us. CPU-Z will
get you the info
http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html
Use the zip version. Unzip it to a folder and click on the 32
bit executable. Select the "mainboard" tab.
HTH
[]'s
J
John Doe
Regular troll...
--
--
R
Rod Speed
John Doe said:
Your sig is sposed to be last with a line with just -- on it in front of it,
****wit child.