RAID Trust Issues — Windows Or a Cheap Controller?

Posted by Soulskill on Sunday July 5, 2009 @07:12AM from the why-buy-the-mirrored-cow dept.

NicApicella writes "My new system has two sparklin' SATA drives which I would like to mirror. After having been burned by a not-so-cheap, dedicated RAID controller, I have been pointed to software RAID solutions. I now stand in front of two choices for setting up my RAID: a Windows 7 RC software RAID or a hardware RAID done by the cheap integrated RAID controller of my motherboard. Based on past experiences, I have decided that only my data is worth saving — that's why the RAID should mirror two disks (FAT32) that are not the boot disk (i.e. do not contain an OS or any fancy stuff). Of course, such a setup should secure my data; should a drive crash, I want the system up and running in no time. Even more importantly, I want any drive and its data to be as safe and portable as possible (that's the reason for choosing FAT32), even if the OS or the controller screw up big time. So, which should I choose? Who should I trust more, Microsoft's Windows 7 or possibly the cheapest RAID controller on the market? Are there other cheap solutions?"

1 of 564 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Re:You are asking the wrong question. by jon3k · 2009-07-06 04:08 · Score: 0, Flamebait

I think we have a language barrier here. Most home users don't NEED RAID. That's a fact. I can prove it because most home users don't have RAID setups. If home users NEEDED RAID then logic would dictate that most home users would HAVE RAID. Again, for the final time I will repeat my first quote.

MOST home users don't NEED RAID.

Get it?