| Author |
Message |
Hugh Candlin
Guest
|
 Posted:
Tue Nov 09, 2004 10:41 am Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:llpto0hcgo4qkbfjl1lpd8528elard46gf@4ax.com...
| Quote: | I see various upgrade dealers offering 300gb hard disks. Does anyone
know if these are as reliable as the smaller drives? At 300gb, is this
pushing the technology to less reliability?
|
As far as I know they are not, based upon an article which I read,
which reported problems with the heads sticking to the surface
of the platters. I also know that Maxtor has been having issues
the last couple of years with drive failures.
You'd be well advised to shop carefully for the longest warranty
that you can find, and use a credit card to get the free warranty
extension offered by the credit card company.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kenny
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 09, 2004 1:53 pm Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
<dold@XReXXRelia.usenet.us.com> wrote in message
news:cmp07n$u5e$2@blue.rahul.net...
| Quote: | Kenny <ohmygodtheykilledme@southpark.com> wrote:
2021
Bobby MaCallister "Do any of you know if these are as reliable as the
smaller drives? At 100,0000,000 goooglebytes, is this pushing the
technology
to less reliability?"
That would be a Googolbyte. Not a Google(tm) byte.
--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5
|
notice I said goooglebyte not googlebyte - 3 o's so it's a tm issue, but
your correction is correct in that 'googol' defines a number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joe Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 09, 2004 3:34 pm Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
Top Spin wrote:
| Quote: | I see various upgrade dealers offering 300gb hard disks. Does anyone
know if these are as reliable as the smaller drives? At 300gb, is this
pushing the technology to less reliability?
|
You could check the various hardware review sites for their ratings
on reliablity.
http://www.google.com/search?q=300gb+disk+drive+review
-Joe |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eric R.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 09, 2004 6:55 pm Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
"Randy S." <rswitt@ATgmail.com> wrote in message news:<cmnqin$l4o$1@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu>...
| Quote: | Is
there some specific technological limit that hard drive technology is
reaching?
|
There are design issues which occasionally face the "bigger and
faster" mode we're in with computer technology. Heat, for example, has
become a huge consideration in CPU design. Dealing with issues like
increasing heat does require new (and potentially unreliable) designs
that could lead to problems at some point.
Personally, I don't think we're going to be able to advance at the
current rate forever. Eventually we'll come up against some real walls
unless some major breakthroughs are made.
-Eric |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Platt
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 10, 2004 12:57 am Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
| Quote: | There are design issues which occasionally face the "bigger and
faster" mode we're in with computer technology. Heat, for example, has
become a huge consideration in CPU design. Dealing with issues like
increasing heat does require new (and potentially unreliable) designs
that could lead to problems at some point.
Personally, I don't think we're going to be able to advance at the
current rate forever. Eventually we'll come up against some real walls
unless some major breakthroughs are made.
|
According to an article I read not all that long ago, the hard drive
industry is already aware of one such limitation which will affect the
current hard drive technology.
The recording density of the media is getting so high, that the size
of each bit's magnetic "domain" on the platter is becoming extremely
small. As the domains shrink, they become increasingly vulnerable to
thermal instability... that is, the orientation of the recorded
magnetic fields can "flip" as a result of the randomizing effect of
temperature. The smaller the bit domains, the sooner that the data in
that bit will be altered by thermal randomness.
According to what little I know about it, the industry is probably
going to have to switch to a different recording approach - different
magnetic material structures, "patterned" media, perpendicular rather
than longitudinal domains and recording, very different head
structures, and so forth.
Then, of course, there is a problem documented in Hal Draper's
research paper "MS Fnd in a Lbry", for which no solution is as yet
known.
--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Randy S.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:02 am Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
| Quote: | Is
there some specific technological limit that hard drive technology is
reaching?
There are design issues which occasionally face the "bigger and
faster" mode we're in with computer technology. Heat, for example, has
become a huge consideration in CPU design. Dealing with issues like
increasing heat does require new (and potentially unreliable) designs
that could lead to problems at some point.
Personally, I don't think we're going to be able to advance at the
current rate forever. Eventually we'll come up against some real walls
unless some major breakthroughs are made.
|
Eric, you are absolutely correct, and I would in no way attempt to say that
hard drive technology won't, at some point, hit the type of limits that you
(and Dave) bring up. However these are not the type of limits that are
encountered because of percentage increases in capacity (like from 150 GB to
300 GB), they are the type of limits you encounter when scaling up in orders
of magnitude (like from 100 GB to 1 TB or 10 TB). At some point researchers
will hit theoretical limits based on areal density and electrical
stabilities, etc., as well as physical limits based on centripetal forces
and engineering practicalities, but we're far from that yet.
If I had to make an educated guess based on an engineering background, I'd
say that somewhere between the 1 TB and 10 TB range HDD technology will have
to give way to some type of solid state or optical technology, the failure
rates and physical limitations of rotating media won't be able to hold up.
Solid-state electronic memory (like that in today's USB flash memory, but
obviously much larger capacities) will probably serve as an intermediary
step until 3D optical storage becomes feasible. I wouldn't think that it'll
take more than 15-20 yrs before we reach that point.
Of course we might end up going another way entirely, those just seem the
most feasible right now. Organic based (possibly DNA based?) solutions are
certainly a possibility, and even quantum storage if you really want to get
way out.
I personally don't think IBM got out of the HDD manufacturing market because
of bad press from their "Deathstar" drives, I think every manufacturer has
had a model or run of drives that had less than advertised MTBF rates.
IBM's always been on the bleeding edge of storage research (i.e. developing
tech that won't hit the streets for 5-10 yrs from now), and I think they saw
the writing on the wall and decided to start investing R&D more heavily into
alternative storage techniques. Don't be surprised if IBM gets the first
patents on large solid state or 3-D optical storage 5 yrs from now! If
there's one thing that IBM knows how to do, it's get patents!
Randy S. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie A Rhorer
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 16, 2004 6:03 am Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
IBM already has several such patents, and has had for quite some years.
As always, cost is the major limitation to bringing a new technology to
market. Until one does reach the theroetical limits of a technology, it is
usually cheaper to simply improve the existing technology rather than bring
in a new one.
"Randy S." <rswitt@ATgmail.com> wrote in message
news:cmrujl$m24$1@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu...
| Quote: | Is
there some specific technological limit that hard drive technology is
reaching?
There are design issues which occasionally face the "bigger and
faster" mode we're in with computer technology. Heat, for example, has
become a huge consideration in CPU design. Dealing with issues like
increasing heat does require new (and potentially unreliable) designs
that could lead to problems at some point.
Personally, I don't think we're going to be able to advance at the
current rate forever. Eventually we'll come up against some real walls
unless some major breakthroughs are made.
Eric, you are absolutely correct, and I would in no way attempt to say
that
hard drive technology won't, at some point, hit the type of limits that
you
(and Dave) bring up. However these are not the type of limits that are
encountered because of percentage increases in capacity (like from 150 GB
to
300 GB), they are the type of limits you encounter when scaling up in
orders
of magnitude (like from 100 GB to 1 TB or 10 TB). At some point
researchers
will hit theoretical limits based on areal density and electrical
stabilities, etc., as well as physical limits based on centripetal forces
and engineering practicalities, but we're far from that yet.
If I had to make an educated guess based on an engineering background, I'd
say that somewhere between the 1 TB and 10 TB range HDD technology will
have
to give way to some type of solid state or optical technology, the failure
rates and physical limitations of rotating media won't be able to hold up.
Solid-state electronic memory (like that in today's USB flash memory, but
obviously much larger capacities) will probably serve as an intermediary
step until 3D optical storage becomes feasible. I wouldn't think that
it'll
take more than 15-20 yrs before we reach that point.
Of course we might end up going another way entirely, those just seem the
most feasible right now. Organic based (possibly DNA based?) solutions
are
certainly a possibility, and even quantum storage if you really want to
get
way out.
I personally don't think IBM got out of the HDD manufacturing market
because
of bad press from their "Deathstar" drives, I think every manufacturer has
had a model or run of drives that had less than advertised MTBF rates.
IBM's always been on the bleeding edge of storage research (i.e.
developing
tech that won't hit the streets for 5-10 yrs from now), and I think they
saw
the writing on the wall and decided to start investing R&D more heavily
into
alternative storage techniques. Don't be surprised if IBM gets the first
patents on large solid state or 3-D optical storage 5 yrs from now! If
there's one thing that IBM knows how to do, it's get patents!
Randy S.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Platt
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 16, 2004 6:03 am Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
In article <6mcmd.32333$SS3.8711@fe2.texas.rr.com>,
Leslie A Rhorer <lrhorer@satx.rr.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Please elucidate. What was the problem detailed in Hal Draper's paper?
|
Ah, thank you. I was afraid that nobody was going to respond to that
narrative hook.
The "paper" is actually a science-fiction story from some decades ago,
written as a series of research articles filed by some intersteller
anthropologists. They'd discovered the remains of a high-technology
civilization which had collapsed some thousands of years earlier. The
civilization had developed a whole series of increasingly-powerful
forms of information storage, all the way up to incredibly high
information densities (I remember the phrase "nudged quanta", as a way
of storing multiple bits of information per quark, or something like
that). They got to the point of being able to encode all of their
(massive) civilization's data and information bases into a very small
device... something on the order of a shoebox.
They then began having a bit of trouble keeping it organized...
multiple levels of index, shortcut, abstraction, and so forth proved
necessary, and soon outgrew the size of the data library itself.
Then, suddenly, the data indices were corrupted by a hardware error,
and they lost access to all of their information. Civilization
crashed before they had time to restore the older-generation backups
or regain access to the primary data, and the species went extinct.
The report from the anthropologists was beamed back to their home
base, and filed... and it's obvious that *their* information
management system was about to go >>SPLUT<< as well.
Anybody out there having difficulty keeping track of their CD-ROMs and
backups? :-)
--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie A Rhorer
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 16, 2004 6:03 am Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
Please elucidate. What was the problem detailed in Hal Draper's paper?
"Dave Platt" <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote in message
news:10p289867el80ef@corp.supernews.com...
| Quote: | There are design issues which occasionally face the "bigger and
faster" mode we're in with computer technology. Heat, for example, has
become a huge consideration in CPU design. Dealing with issues like
increasing heat does require new (and potentially unreliable) designs
that could lead to problems at some point.
Personally, I don't think we're going to be able to advance at the
current rate forever. Eventually we'll come up against some real walls
unless some major breakthroughs are made.
According to an article I read not all that long ago, the hard drive
industry is already aware of one such limitation which will affect the
current hard drive technology.
The recording density of the media is getting so high, that the size
of each bit's magnetic "domain" on the platter is becoming extremely
small. As the domains shrink, they become increasingly vulnerable to
thermal instability... that is, the orientation of the recorded
magnetic fields can "flip" as a result of the randomizing effect of
temperature. The smaller the bit domains, the sooner that the data in
that bit will be altered by thermal randomness.
According to what little I know about it, the industry is probably
going to have to switch to a different recording approach - different
magnetic material structures, "patterned" media, perpendicular rather
than longitudinal domains and recording, very different head
structures, and so forth.
Then, of course, there is a problem documented in Hal Draper's
research paper "MS Fnd in a Lbry", for which no solution is as yet
known.
--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Randy S.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 16, 2004 6:03 am Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
Leslie A Rhorer wrote:
| Quote: | IBM already has several such patents, and has had for quite some years.
As always, cost is the major limitation to bringing a new technology to
market. Until one does reach the theroetical limits of a technology, it is
usually cheaper to simply improve the existing technology rather than bring
in a new one.
|
I can believe that. They probably have patents on the basic
research/conceptual parts. I would bet that the next wave of patents
will be engineering/manufacturing related that will bring the costs
close to the level of current HDD technology. Probably the most
error-prone part in current computers is this last remaining moving part
(other than the optical drive I guess), I won't be sorry to see it get
replaced!
Randy S. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joe Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 16, 2004 12:01 pm Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
Leslie A Rhorer wrote:
| Quote: | Please elucidate. What was the problem detailed in Hal Draper's paper?
Then, of course, there is a problem documented in Hal Draper's
research paper "MS Fnd in a Lbry", for which no solution is as yet
known.
|
http://www.google.com/search?q=MS+Fnd+in+a+Lbry
The thing I remember is them using "notched electrons".
-Joe |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frater Mus
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie A Rhorer
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 20, 2004 10:01 pm Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
There is one moving part you overlooked, and sadly it is by far the most
error prone component: the user.
"Randy S." <rswittNO@SPAMgmail.com> wrote in message
news:cnbn27$r42$1@spnode25.nerdc.ufl.edu...
| Quote: | Leslie A Rhorer wrote:
IBM already has several such patents, and has had for quite some
years. As always, cost is the major limitation to bringing a new
technology to market. Until one does reach the theroetical limits of a
technology, it is usually cheaper to simply improve the existing
technology rather than bring in a new one.
I can believe that. They probably have patents on the basic
research/conceptual parts. I would bet that the next wave of patents will
be engineering/manufacturing related that will bring the costs close to
the level of current HDD technology. Probably the most error-prone part
in current computers is this last remaining moving part (other than the
optical drive I guess), I won't be sorry to see it get replaced!
Randy S. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Randy S.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 21, 2004 1:07 am Post subject:
Re: Reliability of large (300gb) hard disks |
|
|
Leslie A Rhorer wrote:
| Quote: | There is one moving part you overlooked, and sadly it is by far the most
error prone component: the user.
|
I don't consider that "part" of the computer ;-). Hardware reliability
is bad enough as it is, without having to factor in random idiots!
Randy S. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in