"it's pretty much impossible for reasonable abuse... of the system
case to damage the drive once it's installed."
I agree. The case takes all the shock by bending and deforming.
"IBM uses a system that actually moves the heads off the platters when the
drive is spun down..."
All modern drives have this feature. The heads do not lift far, but they pull
up off the platters due to spring action. All modern drives require power to
put the heads on the platters. If there is no power, there is no contact.
Apparently some marketing literature has implied that this is new with IBM
drives.
"those IBM drives have their heads parked off the surface of the disk
when powered off..."
All modern drives have this feature. This allows them to have a much higher
shock rating when off then when operating.
"... by far the most common reason [for drive failure] was due to
overclocking."
Interesting. I have no experience with overclocking.
"... I've had about 3 drives of each company fail..."
Western Digital had a very bad run of drives about 3 years ago. They
acknowledged this. Since then, their drives have been excellent. I have 3
WD400BB 40 GB drives spinning next to me as I write this.
Great photo!! (Be sure to click on it to see the higher-res copy.)
It amazes me that there are so many galaxies that each of us could own one.
If we each owned a galaxy, then each of us would own more stars than there are
people on Earth.
There's plenty of energy in the universe, it's just not always where you need
it.
Good point. You could probably drop a computer case out a window, and not subject the hard drives to a lot of acceleration (Gs). The reason is that the case flexes, and takes all the stress.
"I've got to wonder if the problem isn't the drives necessarily, but bad
handling..."
Bad handling is DEFINITELY an issue. Many people buy OEM bare drives that come
from the manufacturer in bulk packaging. The people who package them and send
them to you obviously have no computer knowledge, or thay wouldn't be working
in a shipping department. (Computer knowledge means never having to say "Paper
or plastic?")
Studies have been done of the acceleration (deceleration) caused by hitting a
drive on a hard counter. A small bump of a metal drive on a hard counter can
be 70 Gs. When you think about it, it makes sense. The drive is traveling at
perhaps 1 foot per second, and then it comes to a complete stop in less than a
thousandth of an inch.
The solution is to buy retail-boxed drives. Wait for a sale if the price is a
problem.
The damage done by a bump is usually not evident for months until the drive
fails. Apparently a drive will get a small mechanical irregularity, and then
slowly chew on itself until failure.
By far the most common cause of drive failure is vibration or movement
of the case while the drive is running. If you put a tower case on the floor,
and the floor moves a little every time someone walks near, expect problems.
If you put a case on a concrete floor, but it is often knocked during the day,
expect failure. If a computer is on a table that moves a little while you are
working, it may not last long. This failure mode is dependent on how much
movement about the axis actually happens, of course.
Drives are built to handle a lot of Gs when they are not powered, but when
they are running they are very vulnerable.
Inadequate power is also a reason for drive failure. Put a drive on its own
power supply connector.
I've had good luck with considerable quantities of Western Digital drives.
Good support, also. I've had bad luck with Quantum, Seagate, and Maxtor.
Whew! I didn't realize I knew much about this until I started typing.
"... the poor performance of Windows XP was a surprise. Windows 2000
actually did better than XP!"
This has been happening since the days of the VAX minicomputers, and probably
before. Hardware manufacturers want slow, poor performing software, because
that makes users buy more hardware. Most of Microsoft's sales are to hardware
manufacturers, not to users.
Thanks again. "Life with QMail" is astonishingly well-written.
However, open source software suffers from a high implementation cost. For example, here is a statement from "Life with QMail":
"For example, to run rblsmtpd under tcpserver, try something like: [script]"
I'm guessing that it would take maybe 50 hours to get started with QMail and EzMLM. So, realistically, it is a $3,000 package, or some amount like that.
Thanks again for the help. You've provided what's usually missing: top level help. I can handle the details once I choose what area needs to be handled.
The author of the review says, "Managing Mailing Lists is still
relevant despite its age." Translation: This book may be useless if you
are picking a mailing list manager now.
What is the best mailing list software? What is the best open source mailing
list software, if the answer is different?
Most of the Vietnamese were poor farmers. They had no money. The average
yearly income in Vietnam NOW is less than $300 per year.
Sure, maybe some of them shook their fists while standing in the rice paddies.
That hardly qualifies as threatening the United States. Some of them had guns.
They threatened other Vietnamese. They did not threaten the United States.
If there were 10,000 Vietnamese who actually had the money to threaten the
U.S., and they actually wanted to do so, then the number of people who were
killed who did not threaten the U.S. should be reduced to 1,990,000 people.
That doesn't change the main point. The U.S. government killed people for no
reason then, and has continued to kill and to cause conditions that bring
about death. Yes, there is always a "reason". The question is, can the U.S.
find some way to live in the world without killing?
This killing thing is nothing new. It has been happening all the time. The
only difference is that it happened inside the U.S. this time, after many,
many years of Arabs saying they would retaliate.
It was a well-planned attack, with very well-written training manuals. Who
trained Osama bin Laden? The CIA. See the 1998 MSNBC article, "Bin Laden comes
home to roost" linked in the second line of What should be the Response to Violence?
The U.S. government killed an estimated 2,100,000 people in Vietnam and an
estimated 150,000 people in Iraq. The U.S. has bombed 14 countries in 30
years, killing a roughly estimated 3,000,000 people. None of the people who
were killed in any way directly threatened the U.S. These people had mothers
and fathers, wives and families and friends.
The U.S. is the world's largest weapons dealer. The U.S. sells weapons to
both the Israelis and the Arabs.
Did you know that both George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have run oil businesses?
Did you know that oil companies want to build a pipeline across
Afghanistan? Do a search for the word "route". This is an official oil
company document.
AC, you are being manipulated. I'm guessing you don't think that only American
lives are valuable.
The standard general answer to this question is that Brazilian women won't
have sex with a man unless they are in love. However, they sometimes fall in
love very quickly.
The specific answer is no. My problem is staying out of women's pants, not
getting in.
They say that the internet takes people away from real interaction, but I have
found it to be the opposite.
For example, I met a Brazilian woman in a chat room, and, after months of
sending hundreds of e-mail messages and then talking on the telephone, I went
to Brazil and lived with her family while she taught me Portuguese.
Without e-mail, I would have had much less connection with Brazilians.
What is scary about this U.S. government talk of not allowing secure
encryption is that it is working so well. Even the intelligent, educated
people who comment on Slashdot (Don't joke about this, it's the truth.) are
being led completely away from the real issue.
The real issue is that they are trying to get you to accept that you
have no right to privacy.
The really important matter is that the U.S. government is trying to get
you to accept the principle that it can spy on you. They know they will lose
the encryption battle.
Do you ever have the right to privacy? If there is a single case in
which you have the right to privacy, then you have the right to encryption,
because you need it for that case.
"The U.S. government has three separate, very large agencies that function
as global secret police: The FBI, the CIA, and the NSA. The first two are
authorized to kill other people. These agencies are secret in two senses:
Their activities are hidden from the people of the U.S., even though the U.S.
is a democracy. They also have secret budgets. These agencies function
everywhere in the world, including inside the U.S."
It has somehow been established that U.S. citizens will accept that they
cannot be told about either the activities or the budget of the secret
"national security" agencies. Clearly, if they did know, and if they had a
chance to vote, most citizens of the U.S. would vote against many of the
activities. However, U.S. citizens are not allowed to have enough information
to make an informed decision about the secret agencies.
My best guess is that the secret agencies of the U.S. government are not acting for the good of the country. Also read the article Friendly Dictators which is linked there.
The book, The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict, linked there is excellent also. It is a quick read, and very valuable.
The real problem seems to be the secret agencies of the U.S. government, not the military. As I mentioned above, I've tried to gather information and links together to support this observation: What should be the Response to
Violence?.
Slashdot Mirror
Osama bin Laden will surely bid on this.
ABC News article: "Abu Sayyaf
"it's pretty much impossible for reasonable abuse
I agree. The case takes all the shock by bending and deforming.
"IBM uses a system that actually moves the heads off the platters when the drive is spun down..."
All modern drives have this feature. The heads do not lift far, but they pull up off the platters due to spring action. All modern drives require power to put the heads on the platters. If there is no power, there is no contact. Apparently some marketing literature has implied that this is new with IBM drives.
ABC News article: "Abu Sayyaf
You are correct. It was not my intention to imply that there are no drives that are badly designed. Definitely some drives fail because of bad design.
"those IBM drives have their heads parked off the surface of the disk when powered off..."
All modern drives have this feature. This allows them to have a much higher shock rating when off then when operating.
"... by far the most common reason [for drive failure] was due to overclocking."
Interesting. I have no experience with overclocking.
"... I've had about 3 drives of each company fail..."
Western Digital had a very bad run of drives about 3 years ago. They acknowledged this. Since then, their drives have been excellent. I have 3 WD400BB 40 GB drives spinning next to me as I write this.
ABC News article: "Abu Sayyaf
Great photo!! (Be sure to click on it to see the higher-res copy.)
It amazes me that there are so many galaxies that each of us could own one. If we each owned a galaxy, then each of us would own more stars than there are people on Earth.
There's plenty of energy in the universe, it's just not always where you need it.
ABC News article: "Abu Sayyaf
Good point. You could probably drop a computer case out a window, and not subject the hard drives to a lot of acceleration (Gs). The reason is that the case flexes, and takes all the stress.
Definitely. The best solution may be to use those removeable drive drawers that have 2 fans. Heat is an issue with any electronics.
"I've got to wonder if the problem isn't the drives necessarily, but bad handling..."
Bad handling is DEFINITELY an issue. Many people buy OEM bare drives that come from the manufacturer in bulk packaging. The people who package them and send them to you obviously have no computer knowledge, or thay wouldn't be working in a shipping department. (Computer knowledge means never having to say "Paper or plastic?")
Studies have been done of the acceleration (deceleration) caused by hitting a drive on a hard counter. A small bump of a metal drive on a hard counter can be 70 Gs. When you think about it, it makes sense. The drive is traveling at perhaps 1 foot per second, and then it comes to a complete stop in less than a thousandth of an inch.
The solution is to buy retail-boxed drives. Wait for a sale if the price is a problem.
The damage done by a bump is usually not evident for months until the drive fails. Apparently a drive will get a small mechanical irregularity, and then slowly chew on itself until failure.
By far the most common cause of drive failure is vibration or movement of the case while the drive is running. If you put a tower case on the floor, and the floor moves a little every time someone walks near, expect problems. If you put a case on a concrete floor, but it is often knocked during the day, expect failure. If a computer is on a table that moves a little while you are working, it may not last long. This failure mode is dependent on how much movement about the axis actually happens, of course.
Drives are built to handle a lot of Gs when they are not powered, but when they are running they are very vulnerable.
Inadequate power is also a reason for drive failure. Put a drive on its own power supply connector.
I've had good luck with considerable quantities of Western Digital drives. Good support, also. I've had bad luck with Quantum, Seagate, and Maxtor.
Whew! I didn't realize I knew much about this until I started typing.
Secrecy destroys democracy: What should be the Response to Violence?
"... as a prophead trapped in a code monkey's job..."
This is a grown man calling himself a "monkey".
And Slashdot is news for "Nerds".
A lot of people who should like themselves don't.
MODERATORS: I suggest you moderate the parent comment UP.
Microsoft probably slowed pipes in Windows XP (eXtra Pain) to accomplish some purpose. Here are some quotes from the parent comment:
'Many "enterprise" systems still use pipes on windows. Database systems in particular...'
"I doubt SQL Server uses them (especially if they're degrading this quickly) but many of MS's competitors still do (Including IBM's DB2)."
Of course, long-time Slashdot readers will find it hard to believe that Microsoft would do something against the common good. *grin*
Also, the point is not that this test shows the overall superiority of Linux. It shows an example of the code quality of Linux.
Secrecy destroys democracy: What should be the Response to Violence?
Yes, it is off-topic, but here is an answer:
XP stands for eXtra Pain.
"... the poor performance of Windows XP was a surprise. Windows 2000 actually did better than XP!"
This has been happening since the days of the VAX minicomputers, and probably before. Hardware manufacturers want slow, poor performing software, because that makes users buy more hardware. Most of Microsoft's sales are to hardware manufacturers, not to users.
Secrecy destroys democracy: What should be the Response to Violence?
Thanks again. "Life with QMail" is astonishingly well-written.
However, open source software suffers from a high implementation cost. For example, here is a statement from "Life with QMail":
"For example, to run rblsmtpd under tcpserver, try something like: [script]"
I'm guessing that it would take maybe 50 hours to get started with QMail and EzMLM. So, realistically, it is a $3,000 package, or some amount like that.
Thanks again for the help. You've provided what's usually missing: top level help. I can handle the details once I choose what area needs to be handled.
Thanks for the great answer. I was impressed with the QMail web site.
Some of the posts have said that QMail is difficult to configure. It that true?
What would you recommend, Exim or EZMLM?
The author of the review says, "Managing Mailing Lists is still relevant despite its age." Translation: This book may be useless if you are picking a mailing list manager now.
What is the best mailing list software? What is the best open source mailing list software, if the answer is different?
What should be the Response to Violence?
Most of the Vietnamese were poor farmers. They had no money. The average yearly income in Vietnam NOW is less than $300 per year.
Sure, maybe some of them shook their fists while standing in the rice paddies. That hardly qualifies as threatening the United States. Some of them had guns. They threatened other Vietnamese. They did not threaten the United States.
If there were 10,000 Vietnamese who actually had the money to threaten the U.S., and they actually wanted to do so, then the number of people who were killed who did not threaten the U.S. should be reduced to 1,990,000 people. That doesn't change the main point. The U.S. government killed people for no reason then, and has continued to kill and to cause conditions that bring about death. Yes, there is always a "reason". The question is, can the U.S. find some way to live in the world without killing?
AC, you haven't been paying attention.
This killing thing is nothing new. It has been happening all the time. The only difference is that it happened inside the U.S. this time, after many, many years of Arabs saying they would retaliate.
It was a well-planned attack, with very well-written training manuals. Who trained Osama bin Laden? The CIA. See the 1998 MSNBC article, "Bin Laden comes home to roost" linked in the second line of What should be the Response to Violence?
The U.S. government killed an estimated 2,100,000 people in Vietnam and an estimated 150,000 people in Iraq. The U.S. has bombed 14 countries in 30 years, killing a roughly estimated 3,000,000 people. None of the people who were killed in any way directly threatened the U.S. These people had mothers and fathers, wives and families and friends.
The U.S. is the world's largest weapons dealer. The U.S. sells weapons to both the Israelis and the Arabs.
Did you know that both George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have run oil businesses? Did you know that oil companies want to build a pipeline across Afghanistan? Do a search for the word "route". This is an official oil company document.
AC, you are being manipulated. I'm guessing you don't think that only American lives are valuable.
The standard general answer to this question is that Brazilian women won't have sex with a man unless they are in love. However, they sometimes fall in love very quickly.
The specific answer is no. My problem is staying out of women's pants, not getting in.
They say that the internet takes people away from real interaction, but I have found it to be the opposite.
For example, I met a Brazilian woman in a chat room, and, after months of sending hundreds of e-mail messages and then talking on the telephone, I went to Brazil and lived with her family while she taught me Portuguese.
Without e-mail, I would have had much less connection with Brazilians.
What should be the Response to Violence?
What is scary about this U.S. government talk of not allowing secure encryption is that it is working so well. Even the intelligent, educated people who comment on Slashdot (Don't joke about this, it's the truth.) are being led completely away from the real issue.
The real issue is that they are trying to get you to accept that you have no right to privacy.
The really important matter is that the U.S. government is trying to get you to accept the principle that it can spy on you. They know they will lose the encryption battle.
Do you ever have the right to privacy? If there is a single case in which you have the right to privacy, then you have the right to encryption, because you need it for that case.
From the article, What should be the Response to Violence? :
"The U.S. government has three separate, very large agencies that function as global secret police: The FBI, the CIA, and the NSA. The first two are authorized to kill other people. These agencies are secret in two senses: Their activities are hidden from the people of the U.S., even though the U.S. is a democracy. They also have secret budgets. These agencies function everywhere in the world, including inside the U.S."
It has somehow been established that U.S. citizens will accept that they cannot be told about either the activities or the budget of the secret "national security" agencies. Clearly, if they did know, and if they had a chance to vote, most citizens of the U.S. would vote against many of the activities. However, U.S. citizens are not allowed to have enough information to make an informed decision about the secret agencies.
Have a look at the article: What should be the Response to Violence? .
My best guess is that the secret agencies of the U.S. government are not acting for the good of the country. Also read the article Friendly Dictators which is linked there.
The book, The Origin of the Palestine-Israel Conflict, linked there is excellent also. It is a quick read, and very valuable.
bin Laden is powerless without support. He has that support because of socially backward actions by people in the U.S. government.
Thanks for the link. Someone sent the letter to me as email, but the link is better.
The real problem seems to be the secret agencies of the U.S. government, not the military. As I mentioned above, I've tried to gather information and links together to support this observation: What should be the Response to Violence?
Or, you could find out how the terrorists get money and cut them off.
Or, you could know the mother of their leader and get her to tell him to back off.
Or, you could be so well regarded that, when the terrorist looks for helpers, they say, you're crazy!
Or...
Yo, AC. I'm definitely against giving away any freedom.