Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (
More info?)
On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 04:48:04 +1000, Rod Speed wrote:
>>> Yes, as long as you arent prone to dropping things.
>
>> Unfortunately my record isn't that good
>
> Thats one big advantage with DVDs, they survive dropping much better.
Yes, dropped one a few days ago, but managed to trap it at the last minute
between a desk and my hand. Fortunately it showed no signs of any damage
at all. The fall wasn't that bad, but I wouldn't of been surprised to see
a minor scratch or two.
>>> That is close to what I do separately to using CDs and DVDs too,
>>> basically write the critical stuff that I cant afford to lose to other
>>> drives on the local network of PCs.
>
>> Yep, I do the same for stuff that is often updated, copy it across the
>> network on a daily basis to another computer for safe-keeping.
>
> Yeah, by far the best for a high level of backup so you dont lose much
> if something does die.
The most convenient and fastest as well. I learnt years ago to do this
when I unfortunately made a serious mistake and wiped the wrong hard disk
clean......
>>>> Apparently they are very reliable
>
>>> Dunno, you'll find virtually all of the hard drive manufacturers
>>> except samsung will only warranty externals for 1 year.
>
>> I don't know if this is true, but I heard that this was done simply to
>> reduce the massive numbers of warranties that hard disk manufacturers
>> have to get a tag on.
>
> The problem with that line is that some manufacturers have a different
> warranty for external drives and internal drives. Presumably they have
> noticed that they are getting a significantly higher return rate with
> the externals.
Ah, sorry, I missed the words "externals". However, it could be that the
higher number of returns for these is caused by people hoping for
replacements when they drop them
>> Hard disks are apparently so reliable these days that you can
>> realistically expect them to last for years. This could all be an
>> excuse of course, but I must confess, I haven't had all that many
>> failures myself.
>
> Yeah, I've only had one with IDE drives.
I've had two fail. I suspect that both may of been my fault though, I
didn't know anything about magnetic fields years ago and had the speaker
on top of my tower case. After seven or eight months, the first drive
starting developing random bad sectors all over the drive. It could very
well be related. The second was during a period where one of my RAM chips
blew and was corrupting all my data. I didn't know where the problem was
at first, and spent quite a while unplugging and re-plugging the HD cables
and power lead to ensure nothing was amiss there. After a bit of this, the
drive just refused to power-up again.
>> I brought my WD hard disk because it was backed by a three-year
>> warranty though just to be sure.
>
> Yeah, thats a real bonus with the samsungs, 3 years on everything, tho I
> buy them for their quietness.
Although Samsung have been around for a while now, I did originally shy
away from them because they were a relative newcomer to the field. I have
tended to like to stick to the more established drive manufacturers who
should have better support and drive construction technology in place.
That's my theory anyway, not sure about the practise
> And I havent chosen to buy seagate lately, with their new 5 year
> warrantys, essentially because they arent as quiet as the samsungs and
> get too hot for my taste too.
Yes, I've heard about the heat generated by the Seagate drives. That's put
me off buying any of theirs so far, although the 5-year warranty sounds
impressive. The noise has never really bothered me.
> I've come close tho, essentially because samsung is a tad slow with
> buyable drives over 160G and I've replaced the VCRs with a PC with
> multiple digital TV tuner cards and I have a real need for more drive
> space. So far I have decided to wait, essentially because the samsungs
> are much quieter.
That's interesting. How have you gone about setting up a PC as a VCR
recorder? Why have you gone for multiple cards? I've been wondering what
to do about VCR's for a long time now VHS is on the way out and DVD
recording isn't quite there yet.
>> So I can either begin replacing older CD's on a 1 to 1 basis from the
>> older ones I have, or I can replace the standard with DVD and do a copy
>> of the entire collection. It's a renewal I'm looking at now and I'm
>> wondering if I should go with DVD, or stick with CD for the foreseeable
>> future.
>
> I'd change to DVD now if you arent getting any CD failures.
I'm leaning in that direction myself now after posting to this forum.
> Basically DVDs are now mature enough, tho in my opinion thats only quite
> recently become true.
>
> I basically waited till dual layer became available, even tho I dont
> plan to use them much for a while, due to the fact that the media is
> currently rather poor value.
Why did you think that the availability of dual layer drives resulted in
DVD's reaching a more mature state?
>>>>> I currently use DVD+RW format most of the time with an ocassional
>>>>> use of DVD-R media so that if it turns out that one of the formats
>>>>> doesnt last as long as I would like, I will become aware of that
>>>>> while I still have at least one other format that hasnt yet started
>>>>> to show any sign of degradation.
>
>>>> Good idea. I'll go with DVD-R and DVD+R to ensure I have some
>>>> security against degradation. However, I find it unlikely that either
>>>> +R or -R will become unsupported, most likely they'll both be
>>>> supported under a new unified standard much like the old modem wars
>>>> between K56Flex and X2. These two were unified under V90 of course.
>
>>> I handle that differently, once a particular format is passing its
>>> useby date, I have always got the data that matters on more modern
>>> media. So I dont have anything on floppy now and dont usually bother
>>> to even install a floppy drive in a system I assemble anymore.
>
>> Well, I have old floppy's, but I never use them anymore, they were
>> pretty unreliable as a backup medium anyway.
>
> Yeah, thats the main reason I gave up on them. With my level of backup
> that was never more than a nuisance, but there isnt any point in
> bothering with that nuisance and there hasnt been any for a long time.
> Any system has to have a cdrom or dvd drive, so I dont bother with a
> floppy drive even tho they only cost peanuts.
Agreed. Not only were they slow and inefficient, but they weren't very
reliable at keeping their data either
>> Pendrives seem most likely to replace them I think.
>
> Dunno, I have basically replaced them with CDs.
I think the slightly more inconvenient writing procedure for CD's (i.e,
not random access) makes flash memory, i.e with pendrives a better
replacement for the floppy. There is packet writing for CD's of course,
but it never really took off in any big way, mainly I suspect because it
proved unreliable when writing Packet CD's on more than one system.
> But I dont have any independant PCs, they're all networked.
Same here, independent PC's are just a nuisance
> And when I want to give someone something thats too big for transfer
> over the web, CDs are more convenient than pen drives, just because they
> are so cheap that the cost of postage is trivial. I can send them for
> the letter rate.
Yep, I would agree that CD's are more convenient for this purpose.
However, if you personally want to transfer files yourself from system to
system, particularly if you don't control the system at one end, pendrives
have always seemed the best alternative to me.
>> However, I don't think I'd build a system without a floppy just yet, I
>> like the keep the option of having the device available, and there are
>> always annoying things that need a floppy to work or boot with (like
>> Dell drivers for example). Although you can probably get around it, I
>> think it's less hassle to keep it.
>
> I do have a floppy drive that I can plug in if its ever needed.
>
> Havent needed to for a long time, essentially I use Bart PE etc to get a
> driver into the system over the lan instead. That works even when the
> new system needs an obscure NIC driver to connect to the lan.
>
> I need the lan connection to install the various misc stuff anyway and
> have a folder of shortcuts on the main system so its completely trivial
> to configure a newly assembled system.
Sounds handy. I find that bootable CD's and CD-Bootable OS's like Knoppix
have made new system administrator pretty simple these days.
>>>> I suppose it would be more than a bit stupid to look at dual-layer
>>>> DVD's?
>
>>> I dont use them just because of the price, and because I dont need the
>>> higher capacity except for more convenience with copying commercially
>>> made DVDs.
>
>>> But since I never bother to watch anything more than once, life is
>>> something I dont care about as long as the life is better than months.
>
>> I have no real interest in copying DVD's, so I would probably use the
>> drive almost exclusively for backup purposes.
>
>> I heard that there were "rotting" problems with commercial dual-layer
>> DVD's, so it's probably tempting fate to buy a writing dual-layer drive
>> at the moment
The technology is too new to be considered reliable.
>
> I agree that the media isnt worth bothering with currently, even if you
> do copy commercial DVDs, two single layer DVDs makes more sense.
>
> But you get dual layer capable burners automatically now, I cant think
> of any of the DVD burners worth considering that doesnt have that now.
It would be worth getting a dual layer capable burner anyway for
future-compatibility. But for reliability reasons, I'm certainly sticking
to single layer DVD's for now
Regards,
Pan
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram