Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 15:00:36 -0500 From: Laszlo Vagner <george@vagner.com> To: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Replacement hard drives, was: Re: Hard error?? Message-ID: <200302161500.36413.george@vagner.com> In-Reply-To: <3E4E98BC.700@mac.com> References: <F869P8TIyJMCULSSlTE0001416e@hotmail.com> <3E4E98BC.700@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
the new Seagate 120gb seems to be real quiet and stable for me
I cant even hear it running, they have a new motor design
and probably is the best bang for the buck right now about $140.00
I had bad luck with quantum, maxtor and IBM and WD but Seagate
seem to be very good for me right now.
I think there is a website called drivereview.com or something that can better
give you a hint.
On Saturday 15 February 2003 02:45 pm, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> Henrik W Lund wrote:
> [ ... ]
>
> > Anyway, it seems like I have just got to get myself a new drive. On that
> > note, has anybody got any idea what I should go for? Any vendors whose
> > drives do NOT cave in after half a year? ;)
>
> Your drive should still be under warrantee, then...?
>
> To answer your question: I've been fairly happy with Seagate over the
> years, and Maxtor has been okay. Seagate's flagship products tend to do
> well, at least if you've got an open budget available-- one main
> fileserver I run has four Seagate ST336752LC drives ("Cheetah X15
> 36LP"?) in a RAID-1,0. They rock. Maxtor has sometimes seemed to have
> better price/performance for their normal drives, which is useful when
> one's budget it more constrained.
>
> Avoid Quantum at all costs. While there was an educational benefit to
> learning how to coax more life from one of those famous 105MB's with
> stiction, newer Quantum drives are better in the sense that they hold
> more data, and worse in that they tend to fail more abruptly and more
> permanently.
>
> IBM and Fujitsu have both been having quality control issues recently,
> although the IBM UltraStar lineup used to be pretty good at one point.
> I'd also like to give a big thumbs up to recent the Western Digital
> series of SE drives with 8MB of cache. WD's previous SCSI drives, like
> the 10K 18GB Vantage were good, too.
>
> As for laptop drives, well, what you want is a single platter drive with
> low power consumption, hence low heat-- ie, ones for ultra-thin/light
> laptops, something like what Sony's got in their VAIO 505's; expect a
> slower spindle speed, though. Even so, laptops tend to take a beating,
> and even good laptop drives seem to have about a 25% mortality rate
> after 3 years, give or take.
>
> Anyone know of a laptop that takes SCA (80-pin SCSI) drives?
>
> Failing that, be nice once SATA + individual IDE channels per drive +
> RAID hardware + SCSI layers (TCQ/command protocol/iSCSI/etc) becomes
> more common. SATA for the cabling alone will do a world of good. While
> I'm thinking about it, a platform-spanning PCI-X version of a SATA/RAID
> card would remind me favorably of Adaptec's 2940 (U/UW/OF/etc) series.
>
> -Chuck
>
> Disclaimer: Any Clutch fans out there? Last night's show-- in the
> hinterlands of Brooklyn, New York; Lamours-- is responsible; any
> opinions represented above I may or may not agree with once I finish
> recovering. Very good show, finished very late. :-)
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200302161500.36413.george>