Seagate 7200.11 turds

[PCBONEZ]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

makes me wonder about space you have..i mean 27 boards...you mentioned many hdds too...

I probably have somewhere between 50 and 75 motherboards right now.

My shop is maybe 700 sq ft plus a ~200 sq ft store room to the side. I have about 40 feet of work bench out there with various projects going on and I'll 'float' from one project to another. If there is a short hold-up (need to order some part) I'll just cover the work and leave it sit until the new part gets here. I'm the only one that works out there so I can do that.
There's another room in the house devoted to things like major recaps of boards or PSU's.
Actual office is in yet another room.

When I need something I try to buy in bulk and then sell off the surplus to cut my costs. For instance I bought two of those Tually boards to test and make sure they'll do what I want. (Which in their case was correctly support via BIOS 1.4 PIII-S and 48-bit addressing [drives over 120GB].) They do so I bought a case of 25. In the end I'll probably use 3, keep 3 for spares, sell the others. I should either break or make a profit and the boards I keep for me will effectively be free.

I also have a bad habit of buying things that are broken just for the experience and challenge of getting them working again.
I rarely profit from that but I enjoy it.

.

[PCBONEZ]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

PCBONEZ; Why don't you just run RAID1 and do backups if you are so afraid of your data?
I'm running RAID5 and have had 2 harddrive failures in the last year but still no dataloss so no problem really...?

Already is RAID 1.
That <120Gb -IS- the back-up [to] system.

Save one oldie each system is using RAID 1 as well.
.

[zandrax]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

~~ Begin Rant ~~

Cars went faster faster until it got to a point in the late '60's where more speed didn't make any difference to people because what was available was enough to meet any realistic day to day need.
- I'm there with PC's. Over the next ~10 years my needs in a computer aren't likely to change anymore than my needs in a car will. The level I'm at does the job quite nicely. I -am- switching to Linux but if anything that will require LESS of a computer.

I'm happy for you: I realized a few months ago my actual needs wouldn't be easily satisfied by my old gears and I suspect my future need wouldn't easily satisfied by my actual computer. Only time will show which prediction is correct.

As drives go, since the combination of UDMA/100 + 7200 RPM drives have been fast enough that I don't even notice their interaction with what I'm doing during 'normal use'. Their function is invisible to me.
['Normal use' excludes maintenance procedures.]

I did notice it during an old experiment: I imaged an old Windows 98 partition and restored it on a drive faster than the original one (a Seagate Barracuda 7200.8 vs a Samsung PL40: both are 7200 rpm, both support ATA100, 250 GB vs 40, peak transfert rate 65 MB vs 30). On the same ATA66 controller, windows loading time improved by about 20% and the system was smoother.

Bottleneck:
What bottleneck,,, that I can physically perceive?

Bandwith and access time.

Capacity:
I have 10+ years worth of everything I care to save and it's <120Gb.
It wouldn't be too hard to clip that down another 30-40 GB by getting rid of some back-ups of CDs that should be on CDs instead anyway.

Ten years ago I used to cope with a 4 GB drive: since I bought my first CD-RW drive, I saved most of its content on cds every three months because the available space was too little.
My last school exam required about 4 GB of working files (dozens of pretty big images) and I was forced to backup it on an external drive and on dvds because I couldn't leave them for long on my partly filled 120 Gb drive. And I won't free a significant space by deleting old backupped files since the majority of them is already on the external drive and I don't want to lose more content that I already lost (explanation below).

My future needs in a PC are the same as they are today.
I research. I read. I write. I store information for later reference.
Other than a PVR for the wife I don't intend to expand on that.
My [real] needs today could easily be meet by a P3.

My actual needs are different from 10 years ago: I used to barely surf and check for emails once a week (internet access was extremely expensive at the time), now I'm connected 16 hours a day; I had one email account, a new mail twice a week, while now I have 8 accounts and near 100 new mails a day (spam excluded); I enjoyed cleaning old audio tapes (so acquisition at cd quality, cleaning from noise and hiss, equalization, tracks division, cd burn: since I was space limited, I saved only the final result and not all intermediate steps. Some cds are now unreadeable, the tapes are further damaged or not anymore in my hands so their content is lost), now I would enjoy editing SD tapes from my MiniDV camera but I'm again space limited ...
Moreover I used to play a lot of then new games, now I have barely the time for a Solitaire ; I virtualize a lot for testing purposes, ten years ago I never did that; I used to program in Pascal, now I suck in writing C programs :P
In short: my needs changed a lot in past 10 years, why should I suppose they wouldn't change significantly in next 10 years?

It's less of a hassle than having PRM drives lose my data and having to reinstall OS's and software.
You folks keep telling me that doesn't happen but that's contrary to what I see going on,,, even right here in this forum.

Don't get me wrong: I think expecting Average Joe's needs won't change in next 10 years is optimistic at least, unrealistic at most. Mine did change and I expect they will in future, if yours won't then I'm again happy for you.
You have to prove PMR is intrinsically unsafe, suspect alone aren't enough: this is what Wizard, i4004, Per, Kikko and others are saying. There is no conspiration against you or against old drives, only the consideration new drives are falling for the same reasons old drives did (corrupted firmware, head crashes, voltage spikes, etc.).
BTW, the 5 PCI slots was referred to the 5 ide raid controllers: if you don't need an additional controller, forget that part.

-HOME- computers with Terabyte drives, 4 core CPU's, 4+ GB RAM.
These things are appropriate to enthusiasts, software engineers, artists maybe, or in servers, but one that's only used for Jack/Jane to do homework and for Mom/Dad to email, shop, pay bills, do office work, and/or run the small business with....
.... Just SILLY. A waste!

I agree but this is unrelated to the old vs new drives speech: 10 years ago a low end Celeron with 64 MB of ram was perfectly fine for surfing, emails, office apps and little more, now a cheap dual core is enough too. Simply people doesn't realize how many computational power they need.

I think the PC industry has gotten so focused on faster faster faster that they aren't 'thinking' about where they are going. Also that they haven't realized there is a point where there is no PRACTICAL advantage [to the average person] in upgrading, so they won't.
-
That happens at some point in nearly every industry and I think the PC industry (hardware and software) is at the brink of it.
.. They just don't know it yet.

~ I hereby end my rant! -> The crowd cheers!!! [Or continues snoring.]
.

Ranting stresses your heart, so don't rage too often.
I partly agree on your speech: most processors nowadays are powerful enough for the Average Joe, I can agree, but speed isn't the only parameter. In last 5 years computer have become quieter, cheaper, less power hungry (at a degree): people buy notebooks because they are as powerful as their old dasktops (if not more) and are "better" (slimmer, portable, more comfortable, etc). Thinking about cars, nowaday cars are as powerful as 30 years ago but acceleration is higher, breaks are better, suspensions are more efficient, trims are more comfortable and quiter, mileage is higher, etc.

Zandrax

[i4004]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

My shop is maybe 700 sq ft plus a ~200 sq ft store room to the side. I have about 40 feet of work bench out there with various projects going on and I'll 'float' from one project to another. If there is a short hold-up (need to order some part) I'll just cover the work and leave it sit until the new part gets here. I'm the only one that works out there so I can do that.
There's another room in the house devoted to things like major recaps of boards or PSU's.
Actual office is in yet another room.

pretty good.

now I would enjoy editing SD tapes from my MiniDV camera but I'm again space limited ...

one of the reasons i dislike hdds is they're relatively expensive(tough combo; expensive and unreliable).... but surely you could buy one more usb tray and 320gb hdd.
that would suffice for that task.

In short: my needs changed a lot in past 10 years, why should I suppose they wouldn't change significantly in next 10 years?

well, yours might, but his, mine and for other non-programming folks needs really don't change much...
tendency in programming seems to indeed be to need more power, as bloated languages are becoming popular (java, .net etc.)

[PCBONEZ]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

Passionate Ranting doesn't necessitate Anger.

No, cars today aren't as powerful as they were in the '60's. [At least not here.]
It only seems that way because they changed how they calculate horse power sometime in the '70's to make the smogged out dog-cars look better on paper.
-
There were common cars that could pull 11's right out of the factory back then.
AC Cobra (all be it an enthusiasts car) could go from zero to 100 mph to zero in 1100 feet. Same engine (427 Ford Side Oiler) was available in the same 'trim' in several models of general production cars. 427 Chevy and 426 Hemi were also available to the general public about then. These were big bore, short stroke, high RPM engines designed specifically for racing being sold in factory cars to any one that wanted one. Horse power 'out of the box' was commonly 450-600 HP,,, and that's using the old HP equation which isn't a bogus inflation.
- Ain't no factory cars like that anymore.
Heck I haven't seen a new car that can properly even break the tires loose in 20+ years.
[And their tires are easier to break loose.]
Maybe a little chirp, if the road is wet...

Was that excessive for most people?
Yes, that was my point. [Any why they died out.]
I see computer equipment going down the same path right now.

~~

And like you brought up.
The automotive industry stopped working on faster and focused on better.

That is what hard drive companies should be doing.
Stop trying to make them bigger (because no one 'really' NEEDS that) and focus on making them BETTER.

.

[i4004]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

>changed how they calculate horse power

how were they calculating?

those cars had manual gearbox?
perhaps that's why didn+t sold well?
heh

i see some had 3-gear transm.
seems too lil for such cars...

[acstech]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

Pcbonez, I think that we're seeing an example of what you're talking about with how netbooks took off. Are they the fastest thing around? No. But they do what most people want, have good battery life, and are quite portable.

Hard drive companies should be focusing on medium capacities (IMO 250-500GB would be fine) and high reliability. The speed of modern drives is adequate for most purposes, just make it last forever and I'll be happy.

[i4004]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

>have good battery life

mhm..i would say that's their biggest problem...
after a year or two you're left with battery that lasts, what, 1, or 1.5hr...
that's nothing...no autonomy

[acstech]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

Depends which one you get.

[PCBONEZ]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

>changed how they calculate horse power

how were they calculating?

those cars had manual gearbox?
perhaps that's why didn+t sold well?
heh

i see some had 3-gear transm.
seems too lil for such cars...

Before 1972 the way they measured took into account the power losses due to transmission and rear end ect. [Brake Horse Power]
After '72 those losses weren't subtracted. [SAE Horse Power]
- That's only how the US did it. Not sure about elsewhere.

Brake Horse Power gets confused with British Horse Power a lot because they are both written BHP. British Horse Power is only a unit of measure. Brake Horse Power and SAE Horse Power imply how it's measured.
- Been a LONG time since I looked that that stuff.
.

[Per Hansson]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

It's illegal to use the "HP" acronym in the EU as of 2009 for commercial purposes for exactly the reasons you give
The value used now is Kw (Kilowatt)

1 kW = 1,3596216 hp
1 hp = 0,73549875 kW

BHP = Horse power directly at the crankshaft, without transmission, generator waterpump and tires etc
WHP = Wheel Horse power, what you will get at a dyno test from the wheels of the car, usually ca 10% less than BHP

[PCBONEZ]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

I actually saw a study, the results of which went something like this.
A horse's burst HP can be up around 10 but their sustained HP is less than 1.

I question it's validity however because they didn't mention what kind of horse was used in testing.

[gdement]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

It's illegal to use the "HP" acronym in the EU as of 2009 for commercial purposes for exactly the reasons you give
The value used now is Kw (Kilowatt)

I don't understand the point. They're both units of power, changing to kW just makes the number different.
At least BHP and WHP imply something about where it's measured.

[PCBONEZ]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

Because British Horse Power [BHP] and Brake Horse Power [BHP] get confused and advertisers have played on that to misrepresent their products.

[willawake]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

HP or kW are related to rpm. so marine engines are rated so many HP or kW at continuous rpm and then so many at max rpm

i remember one yacht advertised at 40hp and i found that was at max rpm so i reported the 35hp or so at continuous rpm and the buyer thought he was being cheated. where the HELL did the other 5hp go?

i dunno about car engines though. if the eu want kW then they must also specify how it is measured, as indicated by previous posters. probably it measured at max rpm.

[i4004]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

>Before 1972 the way they measured took into account the power losses due to transmission and rear end ect. [Brake Horse Power]
After '72 those losses weren't subtracted. [SAE Horse Power]
- That's only how the US did it. Not sure about elsewhere.

but were they ever measuring power on the wheels?
if not then all those numbers are really irrelevant...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbbDKzm9XyI
cars are more powerfull now, it's just that factories are not selling them...then again i think those muscle cars had real short production runs, so...

i mean
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IOpu...eature=related
you didn't have 1700hp cars in those days...

[gg1978]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

I believe the difference between SAE Gross ( pre 1972) and SAE net, (post 1972) is just that Gross was power with no water pump, alternator, power steering, and factory exhaust system. SAE net requires the alternator, waterpump, exhaust, etc...

Then again, those 450-600 HP cars probably got what, maybe 10 to 13 miles per gallon, and required 93+ octane gas, with tetraethyl lead to run properly?


As for power expressed via kW or HP, they both express the same thing, power is simply torque expressed as a function of RPM.

for HP it's RPM*torque in (ft-lbs)/ 5252

If you're interested in kW calculated from N-m, i'm sure wikipedia has the conversion factors

[PCBONEZ]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

HEY!!!! - GET BACK ON THE SUBJECT...
This is "General Computer Discussion" area.
I didn't mean to cause a hard left turn with a simple analogy.

I brought up cars as an EXAMPLE of how a technology based industry take things too far to the point where people don't need what they are selling anymore.

I could say the same thing about the power and size of microwave ovens perhaps.
... or MS Vista.

.

[Per Hansson]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

... or MS Vista.

.

Way to bring it back on track

No really, where where we?

[willawake]

Re: Seagate 7200.11 turds

bring back the Seahate you thread derailers