Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Seagate Rolls Out 400 GB SATA Drives

Posted by simoniker on from the rather-significant dept.

SenorCitizen writes "Seagate is the first hdd manufacturer to announce 400 GB 3.5" hard drives. The 7200.8 is SATA native and comes with buffer sizes up to 16 MB. Seagate also announced a 2.5" portable external hard drive with 100 GB, and an external USB2 pocket hard drive with 5 GB. Get leeching!"

12 of 418 comments (clear)

  1. Ooops... by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 4, Informative

    2.5" portable external hard drive with 100 MB

    Wouldn't that 100GB?

    --

    "Bah!" - Dogbert
  2. IBM already ships 400GB SATA disks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Seagate is not the first with 400GB disks,
    IBM announced them a copule months ago and already ships them.

    1. Re:IBM already ships 400GB SATA disks by foidulus · · Score: 4, Informative

      IBM announced them a copule months ago and already ships them.
      Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that IBM sold most of it's hard drive business to Hitachi(IBM still holds 30% IIRC) and that the drives that are shipping from IBM's former hd unit are now all labeled under the hitachi name?

    2. Re:IBM already ships 400GB SATA disks by afidel · · Score: 4, Informative

      Uh, the difference of native SATA vs EIDE with a SATA bridge chip has nothing to do with what you posted. Btw native SATA will be cheaper than even normal EIDE because the electronics are actually simpler. Chances are all of the SATA drives you have at this point are EIDE with the bridge chip since this is one of the first drives with a native chip (Raptor 10K was the first AFAIK).

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    3. Re:IBM already ships 400GB SATA disks by forevermore · · Score: 4, Informative
      IBM announced them a copule months ago and already ships them.

      That would be Hitachi (others pointed that out). On that note, the Hitachi drives come with a warning that they should not be left on for more than 24 hours (ie. not for use in servers). What good is a 400G drive if you can't use it in a server? Very few applications (if any) call for that much space in a desktop system.

      --
      Do you really need reason for beer? Wingman Brewers
  3. No problem by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Informative

    Get multiple drives and RAID them together. A 2-disc RAID-1 is quite reliable, but you can go for more if you are really concerned. Also, go SCSI instead of IDE. SCSI drives tend to be engineered to a higher standard, and are generally warenteed longer to boot.

    However, don't bitch about the price. You WILL pay more for less storage, that's the cost of reliability.

  4. Except for Hitachi by UserChrisCanter4 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hitachi has had 400GB drives (SATA) for a few months now link
    It looks like the only thing unique here is the "highest areal density", meaning (I assume) that Hitachi is using a four platter system, where Seagate's only has three.

    Also, I wonder what problems might arise from 16MB caches on normal desktop machines. One of the issues I seem to recall with larger cache drives is the risk of filesystem corruption. If power is lost while data is sitting in cache, waiting for a write, then you could potentially royally screw up your file or filesystem. Hence, the only 16MB cache drives I've seen are notebook drives (almost always gonna have a battery) and SCSI drives (likely in a server or workstation, which will most likely have a UPS). Before you go countering that these aren't meant for desktop use, keep in mind that DV video, digital photgraphy, and music are all things that home users like the idea of, and they are also the things much more likely to consume massive amounts of storage capacity.

  5. Re:What's the maximum partition size in WinXP/Win2 by dougnaka · · Score: 4, Informative
    "The maximum size of an NTFS partition is 16 EB"
    EB = Exabytes = BIGGG
    I believe the problem you ran into is only during installs, and is similar to WinNT4's 4GB max boot partition. You can simply put the drive in another Win2K box that's already installed, format the full 160GB and use it nuts. Just be aware of NTFS versions that differ in Win2K/WinXP... I think XP has a newer version, and 2k can't use it, but could be wrong..

    --
    My Linux Command of the Day site : LCOD
  6. Re:What's the maximum partition size in WinXP/Win2 by Tranzig · · Score: 5, Informative

    The default windows 2000 install does not support harddisk sizes over 128gb. SP3 enables the support for 48bit LBA, thus solving this problem.
    Here's the related MSKB article.

  7. Re:USB pen distros by wo1verin3 · · Score: 5, Informative

    My IBM ThinkPad already allows me to boot from a USB Memory key.. and the ThinkPad is almost 2 years old.

  8. Re:USB pen distros by Sielle · · Score: 5, Informative

    Most current BIOS's will already support booting off of USB drives.

  9. Re:Just out of curiosity... by bhtooefr · · Score: 4, Informative

    It only applies to bulk hard drives in media processing devices (TiVos, DVD recorders, MP3 jukeboxes (set-top or portable), etc.), and it goes (basically) to the French **AA.

    I found this out by RYourFA.