large external drive OK?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jo-Anne Naples
  • Start date Start date
Jo-Anne Naples said:
I have a 5-year-old Dell desktop computer running Windows XP SP3. I want to
buy my first external hard drive and have my eye on an Iomega 500 GB drive.
One of the reviewers of this drive at Amazon said that it wouldn't work
with her older computer, which is about the same age as mine. The reviewer
asked at a local computer store and was told that in general the large
external drives don't work with older computers. (My internal drive is only
50 GB, as I recall.)

Is that indeed the case?

Jo-Anne Naples later adds...
Thank you, Al! My Dell is a Dimension 8250, and it does have USB2 ports,
not USB1. I've used the front port for my camera, and it worked fine. My
mouse is plugged into one of the back ports; when I had to unplug it to
take the computer to the shop and then plugged it back into one of the USB
ports, > it didn't work. Changing to another port made it work OK again.
I've been told this is not unusual--that USB ports can be finicky.

A progammer friend recommended the Acronis program too. How would I do a
backup and read-back test before buying the software? I bought a 7-port >
USB hub (which I haven't used yet) and a couple USB flash drives (also not
yet used). If the flash drives work for simple backups, is it likely the
Acronis program would work too?

Thank you again!

Jo-Anne


Jo-Anne:
I'm virtually certain your Dell desktop machine supports large-capacity hard
drives, i.e., hard drives whose capacity is > 137 GB. It is true that some
PCs, even those that like yours that supported these large-capacity disks
did run into problems with hard drives > 300 GB, but they were relatively
few & far between. Actually the problems we usually ran into with > 300 GB
drives was more with the USB external enclosure rather than the PC itself.
All things considered I really don't think you'll have a problem with your
500 GB HDD from that angle.

Besides, your PC contains RDRAM (RAMBUS) memory. We've never worked with a
more stable problem-free RAM than RDRAM. In some ways it's a pity that type
of RAM disappeared from the market but because of pricing considerations and
some licensing problems it simply couldn't compete economically with the
type of RAM (primarily DDR RAM) that ultimately superseded it. I do hope
your PC is equipped with 512 MB of RDRAM which was pretty much the maximum
with those Dell machines. While RDRAM is still available from a few sources
it's generally quite expensive and in most instances it simply doesn't make
economic sense to purchase add'l RDRAM.
Anna
 
Thank you, Anna! Your information sounds rock-solid. I'm going to go ahead
with the 500GB Iomega drive. Yes, I have 512MB RAM.

Jo-Anne
 
Anna said:
Jo-Anne:
I'm virtually certain your Dell desktop machine supports large-capacity
hard drives, i.e., hard drives whose capacity is > 137 GB. It is true that
some PCs, even those that like yours that supported these large-capacity
disks did run into problems with hard drives > 300 GB, but they were
relatively few & far between. Actually the problems we usually ran into
with > 300 GB drives was more with the USB external enclosure rather than
the PC itself. All things considered I really don't think you'll have a
problem with your 500 GB HDD from that angle.

Besides, your PC contains RDRAM (RAMBUS) memory. We've never worked with a
more stable problem-free RAM than RDRAM. In some ways it's a pity that
type of RAM disappeared from the market but because of pricing
considerations and some licensing problems it simply couldn't compete
economically with the type of RAM (primarily DDR RAM) that ultimately
superseded it. I do hope your PC is equipped with 512 MB of RDRAM which
was pretty much the maximum with those Dell machines. While RDRAM is still
available from a few sources it's generally quite expensive and in most
instances it simply doesn't make economic sense to purchase add'l RDRAM.
Anna

ADDENDUM...
I meant to also comment on your apparent interest in a comprehensive backup
program such as the Acronis one your programmer friend recommended. While
the Acronis (True Image) program is a fine program and should certainly be
considered by you (there's a trial version available at the Acronis
website), our preference is for another program, the Casper 4 program.
There's a trial version also available from the developer's site -
http://www.fssdev.com/products/free/
The trial version is slightly crippled but it should give you a good idea of
how the program works. And if you want more info on our thoughts re this
matter I'll be glad to provide such.
Anna
 
Thank you yet again, Paul! I've been thinking along the same lines--that is,
having two external drives and alternately backing up to each (to date all
I've been able to do is back up my important data to CDs). I figured on
buying the first one and making sure it works OK, then finding another
one--maybe a different one.

One thing that bothers me about the Iomega I'm looking at is that it's very
cheap, which makes me wonder about details such as air movement. Some of the
reviewers said it ran hot; others said it didn't. The Iomega drive at Amazon
is B000HI9O5W, in case looking at the photo would help determine if it's
vented enough. The review that mentioned it not working with an older Dell
was by "Grandma Gloria," who gave it two stars (there are only six two-star
reviews, and hers is next to last). Her Dell is actually younger than mine.
I think this web address will work; I pasted it into another window and got
to the same place:
http://www.amazon.com/review/produc..._pr_hist_2?_encoding=UTF8&filterBy=addTwoStar

When you talk about 2.5" versus 3.5" drives, is that the difference between
desktop drives and portables? I was also looking at LaCie portable drives,
which claim to be particularly sturdy, albeit somewhat more expensive (don't
know about cooling); if I got one of them, I'd probably go with just 160GB:
B000J4HCAI at Amazon (and yes, it is USB-powered).

A friend has used the Western Digital Passport drives, which are also
portables and USB-powered: B0012GQZZU for the 320GB I've seen at Amazon.

If you have experience with particularly good external drives or
particularly bad ones, I'd be grateful for your suggestion(s).

Thank you!

Jo-Anne
 
Thank you, Anna! I would definitely like more info. I have to admit that
ease of use is something I appreciate--and Casper seems to offer that. Of
course, reliability is paramount. I read some reviews of Acronis in which
people said it corrupted their computers to the point where they had to
reinstall Windows. Of course, lots of others said it worked fine.

I don't mean to be intrusive, but it sounds like you're in a corporate
environment and have a good deal of expertise
with various drives and backup situations. I'm just a home and
small-business user; but after a nasty malware attack, I'm trying to get
more organized in dealing with the possibility of disk or software failures
that could leave me stranded.

So, yes, anything more you can tell me will be gratefully accepted!

Jo-Anne
 
I don't see why you would need TWO external drives for backup. One works
fine over here. I back up everything on my C: drive partition to an
external USB drive, and it only takes me 15-20 minutes to do so. That
includes all the programs and user data, so if anything goes wrong, I can
get it ALL back, no problemo.

There is no comparison with doing it this way, vs using CD's, or DVDs.
Egads, I hate to think how many that would take. And it's generally not
necessary. :-)
 
Hi, Bill,

The idea of using two drives is simply that one of them could crash and at
least I'd have one I could still use in an emergency. I've read quite a few
reviews of external drives that crashed after a week or a month or six
months, some without warning. I gather they're not quite as reliable as
internal drives.

Given how quickly you're backing up, I assume you're not cloning the
internal drive?

Thanks much!

Jo-Anne
 
Bill said:
I don't see why you would need TWO external drives for backup. One works
fine over here. I back up everything on my C: drive partition to an
external USB drive, and it only takes me 15-20 minutes to do so. That
includes all the programs and user data, so if anything goes wrong, I can
get it ALL back, no problemo.

There is no comparison with doing it this way, vs using CD's, or DVDs.
Egads, I hate to think how many that would take. And it's generally not
necessary. :-)
<<snipped>>

It always pays to back up redundantly, that is to 2 separate, or
independent, systems, devices, etc. A backup always implies that
there is an original and a copy. However, should the original be
damaged or corrupted and if the backup also becomes inaccessible,
then there is nothing. One of our normal operating configurations
consists of two computers, each mirroring the other, and an external
backup.
 
Jo-Anne Naples said:
Hi, Bill,

The idea of using two drives is simply that one of them could crash and at
least I'd have one I could still use in an emergency. I've read quite a
few
reviews of external drives that crashed after a week or a month or six
months, some without warning. I gather they're not quite as reliable as
internal drives.

Well, I haven't had a problem yet, with the standard ones I'm using. And
BTW, they are ONLY powered on when I make the backup.

I'm still using the older, standard, Western Digital, classic IDE type
drives, in a USB hard drive enclosure (USB2, of course).
Given how quickly you're backing up, I assume you're not cloning the
internal drive?

I *am* cloning my main C: partition of the internal drive, which holds all
of my programs and my data. (But I'm not cloning my music file and video
file partitions, however - that is true. But I have copies of them on
another HD).
 
GHalleck said:
<<snipped>>

It always pays to back up redundantly, that is to 2 separate, or
independent, systems, devices, etc. A backup always implies that
there is an original and a copy. However, should the original be
damaged or corrupted and if the backup also becomes inaccessible,
then there is nothing.

But it is extremely unlikely that BOTH hard drives would fail at the same
time. And I mean extremely. If only one drive fails, another drive can
be brought into service, and a backup made right then. And as I mentioned
to the OP, I'm using a standard IDE drive in an external HD enclosure that
is ONLY powered on when I make a backup.
 
Jo-Anne Naples said:
Thank you yet again, Paul! I've been thinking along the same lines--that is,
having two external drives and alternately backing up to each (to date all
I've been able to do is back up my important data to CDs). I figured on
buying the first one and making sure it works OK, then finding another
one--maybe a different one.

One thing that bothers me about the Iomega I'm looking at is that it's very
cheap, which makes me wonder about details such as air movement. Some of the
reviewers said it ran hot; others said it didn't. The Iomega drive at Amazon
is B000HI9O5W, in case looking at the photo would help determine if it's
vented enough. The review that mentioned it not working with an older Dell
was by "Grandma Gloria," who gave it two stars (there are only six two-star
reviews, and hers is next to last). Her Dell is actually younger than mine.
I think this web address will work; I pasted it into another window and got
to the same place:
http://www.amazon.com/review/produc..._pr_hist_2?_encoding=UTF8&filterBy=addTwoStar

When you talk about 2.5" versus 3.5" drives, is that the difference between
desktop drives and portables? I was also looking at LaCie portable drives,
which claim to be particularly sturdy, albeit somewhat more expensive (don't
know about cooling); if I got one of them, I'd probably go with just 160GB:
B000J4HCAI at Amazon (and yes, it is USB-powered).

A friend has used the Western Digital Passport drives, which are also
portables and USB-powered: B0012GQZZU for the 320GB I've seen at Amazon.

If you have experience with particularly good external drives or
particularly bad ones, I'd be grateful for your suggestion(s).

Thank you!

Jo-Anne

The Grandma Gloria review makes it sound like the drive wasn't partitioned
and formatted. Like perhaps it was showing up as a raw drive, and what
Grandma had to do, was go into Disk Management and prep the drive there.
Since the review says "gave me a message to 'Format drive'", that
makes it sound like the drive was recognized, but there was nothing
on it from the factory.

With respect to selecting hardware, I no longer have a big budget for
hardware here, and it has been some time since I've bought enclosures
and disks for external usage. (I just use internals now, and buy a couple
spares per year.) I generally go by the reviews, to form
an opinion about how good some of the products are. There have been
some 3.5" externals, that seemed to have poor reliability. Then,
looking at one particular 2.5" Passport, it seemed to be doing so
much better on reviews.

The 3.5" drive dissipates 12W or so at idle. There are some drives,
which are doing much better than that, but that is still a significant
amount of power being used.

The Passport, by comparison, is down around 2W. Which is why, if a
product cannot have cooling, you'd want a drive with a lower power,
as then the temperature wouldn't rise quite as much. So that is
the advantage of the 2.5".

To fix the 3.5" heating problem, spinning down the drive after
5 minutes of usage, will make a significant change in heating. But
if such a drive is used continuously, by some backup software
(say, to fill the entire 500GB, at a rate of 5MB/sec), then
the drive will be in a high power state the whole time. Which
means no relief from the heat.

Looking at the reviews here for a 2.5", this one isn't doing
so good, so far. Western Digital shot themselves in the foot,
by making drives in all different colors - so now there aren't a
lot of reviews in one place for us to look at.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16822136229
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=N82E16822136228

The drive inside the Passport, could be something like this. Their
Scorpio 2.5" drive. It is listed as 5400RPM, so the seek time
could be a bit slower, than the 7200RPM drives typically used in
the 3.5" enclosures. The Newegg advert doesn't mention the RPMs.
Seek time is important, if you're doing a search on the drive,
for example. The head flies around a lot during a search (at
least on my Win2K machine it does).

http://www.westerndigital.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=346&language=en#jump1515

In the electrical section, power is 2.5W during read/write and
2W when just spinning idle, for the Scorpio. And that might help
a bit with the lack of cooling.

I think as long as you have files on two drives, and the drive
mechanism has a warranty, that is sufficient protection from
the inevitable. Otherwise, you'll be building your own
externals :-)

Newegg has about 120 enclosures listed, that have fans. You could
use those for building your own enclosure. But to do that, you have
to know a bit about how to assemble them. (5 1/4" enclosures
are good for CD/DVD, while 3.5" are for stuff like hard drives.
You can use adapter kits, to house 3.5" drives in 5 1/4" enclosures.)
I like the ones with end-mounted 40mm fans, because I can replace the
fan if it wears out. (Remove four screws, and fit the new one.)
This is an example of one of the fan-equipped enclosures. This
one is big (because it is a 5 1/4"), but it does have the
advantage, that the power supply is built in. And that means
not having to worry about a wall wart. This one just uses an
AC line cord.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817392004

To mount a 3.5" drive in a 5.25" space, you use a kit like this.
At one time, these kits were bundled with the hard drive itself.
But not anymore. Now you have to buy them separately.

http://www.startech.com/item/BRACKET-Metal-35-to-525-Inch-Drive-Adapter-Bracket.aspx

Paul
 
Jo-Anne Naples said:
Thank you, Anna! I would definitely like more info. I have to admit that
ease of use is something I appreciate--and Casper seems to offer that. Of
course, reliability is paramount. I read some reviews of Acronis in which
people said it corrupted their computers to the point where they had to
reinstall Windows. Of course, lots of others said it worked fine.

I don't mean to be intrusive, but it sounds like you're in a corporate
environment and have a good deal of expertise
with various drives and backup situations. I'm just a home and
small-business user; but after a nasty malware attack, I'm trying to get
more organized in dealing with the possibility of disk or software
failures that could leave me stranded.

So, yes, anything more you can tell me will be gratefully accepted!

Jo-Anne


Jo-Anne:
Before we get to the Casper program I wanted to make a comment or two about
your plans to purchase a 500 GB HDD to be used as a USB device. (I think you
later said something about a 320 GB HDD so I'm unsure as to your precise
plans re an USB external HDD.)

In any event, since you have only a relatively small internal HDD in your
machine - I believe you had said it was about 50 GB - would it not be more
desirable to install the much larger HDD in your PC as your day-to-day
working HDD and use that smaller HDD as an external device for
backup/storage purposes? It's not a particularly difficult chore to install
a new internal HDD in place of an older, smaller drive. Would you be up to
this?

If you do go that route you would *first* clone the contents of your present
internal HDD to the new larger HDD in its USB enclosure and following the
disk-cloning operation remove the HDD from its USB enclosure and install it
in place of the present internal HDD. The formerly internal HDD would then
be installed as your USB external HDD.

Actually a more straightforward way to accomplish this would be to install
the new larger HDD as a *secondary* HDD in your system; clone the contents
of your present internal HDD to the secondary drive, and then connect the
new drive as your primary HDD (Primary Master). I really don't know how
familiar you are with the "innards" of your machine so you will have to make
the judgment as to how you wish to proceed.

BTW, I believe you've had some exchange of correspondence with one or more
responders to your query re whether you should purchase a 2 1/2" HDD for a
USB enclosure. My advice would be *not* to consider a 2 1/2" HDD as your USB
external HDD. There's really no advantage for you to do this in your
situation. Stick with a 3 1/2" HDD.

As regards the Casper disk-cloning program...

Here's a recent post I sent in response to a similar query as yours where
the inquirer was casting about for a comprehensive backup program.

You are certainly correct in your objective to backup your data to an
external hard drive. Not only is this a worthwhile objective, it really
should be your *primary*, if not exclusive objective (as opposed to
manipulating the partitions on your HDD in an effort to provide some sort of
data security). And when we use the term "data" in this context, consider
that this "data" includes *everything* on your day-to-day working HDD, i.e,
your XP operating system
(OS), all your programs/applications, as well as your user-created data. So
through a comprehensive backup of *all* the data on your working HDD you
can, in effect, have a copy of that HDD. A precise copy whereby should your
day-to-day HDD fail or your system becomes unbootable because of a corrupt
OS, you would have at hand the wherewithal to restore your system to a
bootable, functional state with a minimum of fuss. What better backup system
can one have?

You can achieve this through the use of a disk-cloning (or disk-imaging
program). A comprehensive backup program that you could use on a daily basis
should you want.

There are a number of disk-to-disk cloning programs available. The program
we greatly prefer as a disk-to-disk cloning program is the Casper 4
program - see http://www.fssdev.com

This program is extremely simple to use even for an inexperienced user,
reasonably quick in operation, and quite effective. There's virtually no
learning curve in undertaking the disk cloning process as one navigates
through the few
easy-to-understand screens with a final mouse-click on the button on the
screen which will trigger the disk-cloning process. After undertaking one or
two disk-cloning operations it should take the user no more than 20 seconds
or so to get to that point.

The significant advantage of the Casper 4.0 disk cloning program compared
with other disk cloning programs that we're familiar with is its ability to
create *incremental* disk clones following the creation of the original
(first) disk clone. Employing what Casper calls its "SmartClone" technology
the program can create subsequent disk clones of the source HDD usually at a
fraction of the time it takes to create a "full" disk clone. This results in
a decided incentive for the user to undertake frequent complete backups of
his or her system knowing that they can create "incremental" disk clones in
a relatively short period of time. Understand that this "incremental disk
clone" is a *complete* clone (copy) of the "source" HDD.

Following the first time you clone the contents of your internal (boot) HDD
to your USB external HDD (USBEHD), it would probably take no more than two
or three minutes to back up your system should you desire to do so on a
daily basis. And probably not much more than 4 or 5 minutes to back up your
system on a more-or-less weekly basis. Again, bear in mind that your USBEHD
would contain the *complete* contents of your internal HDD - a precise copy
of your internal HDD. While the USBEHD would not ordinarily be bootable in
an XP OS, it would be a simple matter to clone the contents of the USBEHD
back to a internal HDD should a restoration of the system be necessary.
Again, what better backup system can one have?

The Casper 4.0 program is also capable of scheduling the disk-cloning
process on a daily, weekly, or other time period selected by the user so
that should you prefer you could arrange for automatic backups at
pre-determined times.

There's a trial version available (see above link) although as I mentioned
it's somewhat crippled but it should give you a good idea as to how the
program works. And I can provide further details about using the program
should you (or anyone) be interested.

The downside to the Casper 4 program as compared with the Acronis and most
other disk-cloning programs is the cost of the program which comes to $49.95
for the program + $9.95 for the "Casper Startup Disk" (the program to create
the bootable CD containing the Casper program). So it's more expensive than
the others. But in our view, well worth the additional cost considering its
overall effectiveness and the fact that one will be using the program many,
many times over the weeks & months ahead. AFAIK, the program is available
only through download from the developer.

Another possible downside to the Casper 4 program (depending upon one's
interests) is that it's really not designed to create "generational" copies
of one's system. Some users like to maintain complete copies of their system
at various points in time. For example a user might (for one reason or
another) want to have available a backup of his or her system on June 1,
June 5, June 10, etc. etc. To that end a disk-imaging program (such as the
Acronis True Image program) is more practical for that user since to
accomplish that objective using a disk-cloning program such as Casper 4 the
user would obviously need a fair number of HDDs to serve as the recipients
of the clones at these various points in time. But based on our experience I
would say that the vast number of users (and I would assume you are one of
them) are basically interested in only
maintaining a *current* up-to-date copy of their system and have little or
no
interest in maintaining "generational" copies of such. But that could be an
important consideration for some users.

Anyway, all of the above is predicated on the basis that you're seeking a
reliable program to backup your *entire* day-to-day booting HDD, including
the XP OS, all your programs & applications, and your user-created data, in
short - everything that's on your "source" HDD. And you want an effective
simple-to-use program to do this on a systematic routine basis and do so
reasonably quickly. To that end we've found this Casper 4.0 program really
fills the bill. So I would suggest you take a look at it.
Anna
 
Thank you, Anna! You provided so much information that I've printed it off
and will read through it tonight. One thing you said that I hadn't realized
before (correct me if I'm wrong) is that all that differentiates an internal
hard drive from an external USB drive is the enclosure. If you remove the
drive from the USB enclosure, you can put it into the computer and run it
there. If that's the case, it would make sense that if my internal drive
failed, I could simply take the external drive out of its case and put it
into the computer, hook it up, and be ready to work again.

And if that's indeed true, then I should probably check my innards, as
someone else suggested earlier in this thread. I gather that if my computer
doesn't support 48 Bit LBA, I wouldn't be able to run a drive larger than
137GB internally. You indicated earlier that you were fairly sure I would be
able to run a large hard drive (presumably inside as well as externally). Do
you think I need to check to make sure?

Thank you again! I'm sure I'll have more questions after I read through
everything you've posted.

Jo-Anne
 
Jo-Anne Naples said:
Thank you, Anna! You provided so much information that I've printed it off
and will read through it tonight. One thing you said that I hadn't
realized before (correct me if I'm wrong) is that all that differentiates
an internal hard drive from an external USB drive is the enclosure. If you
remove the drive from the USB enclosure, you can put it into the computer
and run it there. If that's the case, it would make sense that if my
internal drive failed, I could simply take the external drive out of its
case and put it into the computer, hook it up, and be ready to work again.

And if that's indeed true, then I should probably check my innards, as
someone else suggested earlier in this thread. I gather that if my
computer doesn't support 48 Bit LBA, I wouldn't be able to run a drive
larger than 137GB internally. You indicated earlier that you were fairly
sure I would be able to run a large hard drive (presumably inside as well
as externally). Do you think I need to check to make sure?

Thank you again! I'm sure I'll have more questions after I read through
everything you've posted.

Jo-Anne


Jo-Anne:
First of all, with respect to the 48-bit LBA business...

As I believe I previously indicated I'm virtually certain your Dell desktop
PC supports large-drive capability, i.e., drives > 137 GB. So I really don't
think you'll have any problem on that end.

Again, as I previously mentioned we did run into problems with some USB
external enclosures that for one reason or another had problems detecting
very large hard drives that were installed in the enclosure - mainly drives
that were > 300 GB. That problem appears to be a thing of the past at least
as it pertains to USB enclosures produced over the past few years. It surely
won't be a problem should you opt to purchase a "one-piece" commercial USB
HDD device.

Of course, as you indicate there is an advantage of purchasing the
components separately - the USB enclosure and the HDD of your choice. You
are correct that you could easily transfer that HDD containing a cloned copy
of your internal HDD to your system should you want to replace the internal
HDD because the latter became defective or for whatever reason. Under those
circumstances your system would then be bootable & functional.

Theoretically you could do the same with the HDD in the commercial unit,
however, it frequently is difficult if not impossible to remove the HDD from
its enclosure without literally destroying the enclosure. And needless to
say this would invalidate the warranty should it still exist. As to
comparison cost, the commercial units have fallen so dramatically in price
over the past year or so. that the savings once engendered by purchasing
separate components rather than a commercial unit isn't a terribly
significant factor any more in most cases. But, of course, as we've
discussed you do get increased potential flexibility by using separate
components.
Anna
 
Thank you once again, Anna! I've gone through what you've said and will
start a new thread with my remaining questions. You've been incredibly
helpful!

Jo-Anne
 
Back
Top