Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Maxtor's ATA-133 Does 160GB 221

Posted by CmdrTaco from the 160-scoops-of-yum dept.
B. Galliart writes "ExtremeTech has an article about Maxtor's two new bleeding edge ATA-133 drive models coming out later this month. The most interesting of these is the 160 Gigabyte DiamondMax Plus D540X (priced around $400) which uses Maxtor's purposed "BigDrive" 48-bit address space instead of the common E/IDE 28-bit address space thus getting pass the 137GB barrier. The drive should be useable on existing computers due to a bundled Promise Technologies ATA-133 PCI card."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Maxtor's ATA-133 Does 160GB More

Maxtor's ATA-133 Does 160GB

Comments Filter:

  • It's the rotation speed that counts (Score:5, Informative)

    by Drashcan ( 113359 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @03:27AM (#2284966)
    For most of the applications the rotation speed is more important than the ATA standard. This determines the access time.
    I prefer an ATA-66 @ 7200 rpm above an ATA-100 @ 5400

    • Re:It's the rotation speed that counts (Score:4, Informative)

      by raynet ( 51803 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @04:22AM (#2285083) Homepage
      High rotation speed might also be bad. I've noticed that none of my 5400 rpm hdd have crashed (IBM Deskstars and Maxtors) but my 3 IBM Deskstars running at 7200 rpms have all crashed, mostly on spin-up problems.

      • Re:It's the rotation speed that counts (Score:4, Informative)

        by ostiguy ( 63618 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @06:36AM (#2285311)
        7200 rpm is not high rotation speed - 10k rpm scsi drives are in there 3rd generation, and a few 15k rpm drives have been out for a few months now. The IBM 60gxp series is simply dead in the water, read the forums at www.storagereview.com for more info.

        ostiguy
      • Agreed. Being a very poor computer person, I tend to keep drives around for a very long time, as I cannot afford new ones. Every 7200rpm drive I have had has died within 2 years, while all my 5400(and lower) drives are still in working order, some of them dating back to 1991.
        My computer(yes I only have one *sigh*) was dropped down the stairs with a 5400rpm 6 gig and a 7200rpm 20 gig in a moving accident. Guess which drive survived without -any- problems? I for one will never buy another high-rpm drive until they have proven them reliable.
        • I for one will never buy another high-rpm drive until they have proven them reliable.

          I've never had issues with a 7200 RPM drive, but there are some applications where they definitely don't work well. If you don't have good heat dissapation in your case, don't get a 7200 RPM drive. They produce much more heat than a 5400 RPM drive. 7200 RPM drives are known to not work well in a TiVo. The heat they put out tends to cause severe stutter problems, among other things.
          • Personally I just bought a couple of the 5400 ATA100 drives and a cheap Maxtor/Promise ATA100 PCI card, soldered a half-dozen spots and flashed a BIOS and now I've got a couple striped drives on a FastTrack 100 RAID card.

            I use it for video capture and the write speeds are fantastic. And that I needed it for. My write speeds on those two drives striped easily twice what a single drive with their capacity would get.
            • I use it for video capture and the write speeds are fantastic.

              Are you using Firewire/DV? I bought into the FastTrak nonsense when I started doing DV work three years ago, but recently discovered that one of those 5400rpm Maxtor 80-gig drives on an ATA-66 interface (on a P2 400Mhz machine) will easily keep up with the 3.6mb/s requirement. I'm not certain about analog vidcap with other cards, but there seems to be no need for RAID-0 whatsoever with MiniDV.
              • Nope, I'm still stuck in the Dark Ages of analog. It's nice to be able to capture at pretty much any resolution that I want to without worrying about dropping frames. There's just something about having that buffer that tells me that it's not my storage medium that is slowing me down.

    • Re:It's the rotation speed that counts (Score:4, Informative)

      by Jeff Probst ( 459812 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @04:39AM (#2285112) Homepage Journal
      it is not the rotation speed that counts. rotation speed accounts for access time, but nothing more.
      cluster density is another kettle of fish, if a drive can pack twice the amount of information in half the space, you should get twice the sustained transfer rate, all things being equal.
      speed is access time.
    • a good overview of rotation speed vs data density is available from tom's hardware [tomshardware.com]:
      There are basically two ways to increase the performance of hard drives: increase the rotation speed or increase the data density. Increasing the rotation speed definitely enables better sequential performance, but only if you adjust the read/write mechanism accordingly.
      I dont want to take away all of tom's message, so read it further for a reasonable overview of the issues involved.
    • I've had Seagate 27/30Gb 7200 RPM drives die too. On the other hand my 6 year old 7200 RPM SCSI drives are still going... It probably has little to do with the rotational speed and everything to do with quality of manufacturing.

  • Cool !!! (Score:3, Informative)

    by Betcour ( 50623 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @03:36AM (#2284989)
    With 8 of those drives (which would fit into a regular PC with RAID controler) you could finally reach a Terabyte. Gee, now no point in compressing those CDs into MP3, might as well keep them in clean WAVE files :)

    • I still compress my MP3s(using Razorlame, 256 ABR) because:

      • What if you want to share a tune with a friend? Even on broadband, it's nice to transfer a 12 MB MP3 instead of a 75 MB .WAV
      • What if you want to backup to CD-R? It is easier with fewer discs. Granted, it's smarter (for people like me that buy all their music) to just duplicate the original audio CD

      Since we are on the topic, a quick plug for awesome info on MP3 ripping and encoding: www.r3mix.net [r3mix.net]

      P.S. WTF are safety links supposed to do!? They just make Slashdot (even more) ugly.

      • P.S. WTF are safety links supposed to do!? They just make Slashdot (even more) ugly.
        They're supposed to stop the uninitiated from blindly clicking on a link like this [gotse.cx].
      • the reason to keep them in wav format is so that they sound better (granted still not the best format for listening but a lot better than mp3's quality) besides if a friend wants an mp3 off of you, they just have to chill for a min or two while you make the mp3 for them at their settings not the ones that you chose.
      • >P.S. WTF are safety links supposed to do!? They just make Slashdot (even more) ugly

        go visit your preferences page here and turn them off if you think they are so ugly. You are posting as a registered user, dont complain about something you can control. thx
    • > Gee, now no point in compressing those CDs
      > into MP3, might as well keep them in clean
      > WAVE files :)

      or maybe even UUencoded...

    • I just bought a bunch of 80gb 7200rpm drives for a RAID! Of course, I only paid $189 for them which makes them about the same price per meg as the 160gb drive. On the other hand, my max capacity would have been much higher.

  • I didn't know (Score:5, Interesting)

    by samael ( 12612 ) <Andrew@Ducker.org.uk> on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @03:39AM (#2284992) Homepage
    I didn't know that there was a problem with drives over 137GB in IDE. Is there an extension planned? Or are we doomed to proprietary extensions from here on out?

    • Re:I didn't know (Score:3, Interesting)

      by jtdubs ( 61885 )
      I would assume that once we make the move to Serial ATA, if that ever happens, it would be as simple as upping the clocking on the serial line to add more bits to the address space and hence maximum addressable size.

      So, once that happens I would expect a clocking standard that would give us more than the 28 bits of addressing we have now.

      Justin Dubs

      • Re:I didn't know (Score:2, Interesting)

        by imroy ( 755 )
        So, once that happens I would expect a clocking standard that would give us more than the 28 bits of addressing we have now.

        We already have that. It's called ATAPI. It's already used by non-harddisk IDE devices like CDROM, DVD, and CDR/RW drives, removable drives (Zip, Jaz, Orb, LS-120...), and tape drives. From what I understand, ATAPI uses SCSI-II commands sent over the physical IDE channel. So you don't get over the mater-slave limitation of IDE, but you get more reasonable block addressing. BTW, this is the reason you almost must use the ide-scsi driver to use CDR/RW drives under Linux. I've also found that my DVD drive works much better with the SCSI CDROM and ide-scsi drivers than the IDE CDROM driver.

        This was bound to happen soon. You can only go so far with 28 bits, or whatever the original IDE has. LBA gave us some time, but harddisks must now go to ATAPI.

        • >This was bound to happen soon. You can only go
          >so far with 28 bits, or whatever the original
          >IDE has. LBA gave us some time, but harddisks
          >must now go to ATAPI.

          Er ... check my other post in the thread. You don't have to go to ATAPI at all - ATA-6 has specs for LBA-48. I know this because I spent some time recently implementing them in a driver for the company I work at.
        • Do you know the reasoning for some of the newer CD-RW (e.g. Plextor's 24x) to switch to ATA/33?
          I think I saw one other (Ricoh?) also do the same.
    • "Extended" LBA commands are part of the ATA-6 standard (or proposed standard, or whatever it's marked as today). They give 48-bit address spaces. I suspect Maxtor is using this; if not, hopefully it will be soon.

      Hope that's helpful.
    • problem with drives over 137GB in IDE

      On a somewhat similar note, I just purchased an 7200rpm 80gb WD drive to replace my ailing 12gb Bigfoot. For some reason, Win2k would not let me format any partition on it greater than 30gb or so. I'm stuck with dividing it into 3 partitions. I can't seem to find any documentation on it, so would anyone have any clue as to why this so?

  • That New Tech Smell (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Nater ( 15229 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @03:39AM (#2284995) Homepage
    It's gone. That glowing feeling I normally get when I realize that a hard drive twice as big as my current one will cost half as much because one four times as big is now on the market... just isn't there today. The handful of comments that are already on this story are saying that it's not time for regular mundane tech stories, and to a degree. But a part of me is glad that life is moving on, and that the horrifing news is no longer supplanting the mundane news. In time, we'll all have that glowing feeling produced by Moore's law. People have died and property has been destroyed, and I'm sad about that just like many other people. On the other hand, terrorism only fails by failing to induce terror, so I say bring on the 160GB hard drives and 2Ghz processors and the 1 cubic centimeter webservers.

  • Two things (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by Elbereth ( 58257 )
    First of all, terrorism thrives on fear, panic, and extremist reactions (such as turning into a police state). The most effective action you can take is to return to normalcy... and resist the urge to take extremeist actions.

    Second, this is totally inappropriate, because no EIDE hard drive has yet impressed me with it's ability to go faster than UltraDMA/33.

  • new poll: (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by perrin5 ( 38802 )
    I am:

    1) Upset about the fact that _Slashdot_ is running stories about technology instead of the "attack on america"

    2) Upset that slashdot stopped reporting important news about technology to talk about the "attack on america"

    3) Upset because my whole world view came crashing down around my head this morning

    5) Batman

    4) Cowboy Neil

    I fall under the other category.

    Where's the "upset at GW Bush for being such a terrible speaker" option?

  • Back to work (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tm2b ( 42473 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @03:48AM (#2285020) Journal
    A lot of people are saying that it's not appropriate to go back to tech stories, in the face of what happened yesterday.

    But one thing to consider is that terrorism seeks to disrupt our lives as much as possible.

    Even not knowing who "they" are, we can best combat them by going back to "life as usual," while never forgetting what has happened. It's not insensitivity, it's showing strength in the face of a threat.

    IMHO, of course.

    • Re:Back to work (Score:4, Insightful)

      by mgblst ( 80109 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @04:26AM (#2285088) Homepage
      Some people will never be happy that we go back to talking about tech. Others think that slashdot took too long, or should never have gone there in the first place. This is the bane of a public forum.

      Slashdot was a very useful site in the crisis, and kept going when other sites did not. For myself, it was the second source i heard about the tragedy, the first being an ICQ message that didnt make much sense at the time.

      time to live on..

  • Back to Business (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by KurdtX ( 207196 )
    Guess what? Except for a very unfortunate few (I mean this with respect) the world did not end yesterday. I'm actually half way welling up in tears right now, but I am willing to get on with my life to prove that these terror attacks did not get to me. Thank you Slashdot for leading the way. I'm seeing reports on CNN of other world markets opening down today, and that's exactly the point of these attacts: to cripple Capitalism and America. All of you who want to wage war perhaps should consider a show of resolve rather than a show of agression. And I'm an American, born & raised.
    • Absolutely, Cant let those people ruin all our lives. Just look today; oil, gas, and gold all gone crazy. We gotta keep it together or else we will all come apart. Peace, Po

  • Of course we need news like this (Score:5, Insightful)

    by frog51 ( 51816 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @03:53AM (#2285032) Homepage Journal
    If we want to hear more about the terrorism we can go to cnn.com etc, but most of what the media is saying today has zero information content - they keep showing the vids, 'experts' keep coming up with ideas and theories, but until there is some identification of the group involved it has no impact on my day to day business, which keeps going as usual. It hasn't changed anything in Scotland, aside from our car park security guard checking a little more carefully.
    Granted, I keep checking back to see updates on casualties and it is a relief every time more survivors are rescued, but I do that through other sites.

    Slashdot - news for nerds - HD specs definitely come into that category. On with the day.
    • I just wanted to completely agree with this post. I lost friends and aquiantances yesterday, and am having trouble getting on with things. Everywhere I turn, I am reminded of how horrible what happened was, and I am susepted to "theories" about what happened and why. Getting a little other news is quite nice. Helpful even.

      I was shocked by the amount of attention Slashdot gave the horror yesterday, and it leads me to say something some Slashdotters might gasp at -- I am very pleased with how the Slashdot editors handled this event.

      Cmdr: Thank you for your support. I tend to disagree with Jon Katz, but everything he spoke of in his account yesterday struck home. The effort Hemos and Timothy put into gatherring information and posting all the relevent material was quite helpful, especially when I couldn't get through to anyone in the City and had to occupy myself some way.

      It's time for other news. Yesterday's news was overshadowed completely (and for good reason). It's time to take a few steps, albeit possibly tiny ones, forward. I'm shook up, but saturated. Other things to consider only help.

    • Re:Of course we need news like this (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Syberghost ( 10557 ) <.syberghost. .at. .syberghost.com.> on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @09:56AM (#2286013)
      If we want to hear more about the terrorism we can go to cnn.com

      Unless you want what you hear to be accurate.

      They spent an hour yesterday reporting a "CNN Exclusive: the US Bombs Afghanistan". It was an exclusive, all right; exclusively in CNN's heads. Afghanistan was bombing Afghanistan, like they do approximately daily.

      They were reporting the Camp David attack that didn't happen, the George Washington Bridge bombing that didn't happen, the State Department carbomb, etc. etc.

  • Great turnaround (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Diabolical ( 2110 )
    <OT>
    However i'm horrified about the recent happenings in NYC and DC i think it is a good idea to go on with our lives... not as if nothing happened... but to show people that we cannot be stopped by terrorism, how terrible the attacks have been..
    </OT>

    So... Does this mean ATAPI is becomming a better technology than SCSI? I fitted my most important machines with SCSI material because i always felt that that was the better choice. But with recent technological advancements (ATAPI RAID etc..) i am beginning to think it would be best to stick with the cheaper ATAPI.

    Am i right or wrong?
    • With SCSI depending on a few thing but for the most part you can use more devices per connector 4 vs. 2 and the devices still can communicate with each other faster cause they can do it directly rather than wait for the CPU... and yes DMA does the same thing but i have had problems with it in NT (non-existent) and under win2k

    • Re:Great turnaround (Score:4, Informative)

      by chill ( 34294 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @06:04AM (#2285251) Journal
      ATAPI still has a limit of 2 devices (master/slave) per controller. Ultra-SCSI is 15, not including LUNs.

      ATAPI devices are still limited to hard drives and CD-ROMs (via a hack). SCSI handles scanners, tape drives and other devices as well -- it is much more generic.

      ATAPI still causes performance degredation when you are accessing the master and slave on the same channel at the same time. SCSI does not.

      • Re:Great turnaround (Score:2, Informative)

        by GigsVT ( 208848 )
        The 3ware ATA RAID controller cards do not put drives into master/slave config, they only support one drive per IDE channel.

        Available in up to 8 ports per card, 3 cards per computer.
      • I work at a midsized .com that survived the crash and is actually growing quite nicely. One of our databases crashed a few days ago and we've been working on a long recovery ever since. My boss was concentrating highly on the recovery of the database; and didn't say a word about the tragedy. "How," I wondered, "could someone be so unfeeling? Who is going to be looking at our database right now??"
        Only do I find out after the database is recovered that my boss's oldest brother was on route to DC and grounded in Cleveland and he hadn't heard from his brother..and was doing whatever it took to keep his sanity; in this case, concentrating on his business.

        The lesson? This effects everyone, from the lowest tech to the CEO, and everyone is going to deal with it differently, but bottom line, EVERYONE cares about this.
    • ATAPI is like a Ford Escort
      SCSI is like a Ford Mustang

      The mustang will always be nicer, but much more pricy than the Escort. (not that the local cops will actually pull you over for having SCSI as the local cops here have pulled over ppl for having mustangs just so they can look at it) As the Escort gets better so will the Mustang and in the end it will be the better performer.
  • Hard drive technology is getting silly. 160GB? How many people can actually use that much space? How many people that have that much data actually put it on IDE drives? My machines have 20 and 13 GB drives and I don't have any space shortages.

    What I do have is speed shortages. Same old worn out technology. Mechanical storage devices... moving parts... fragmentation headaches... ugh!!! We need *new* technology.

    In the mean time, how about making 10KRPM IDE drives, or 15KRPM. I always wonder why SCSI drives are always faster internally, because I'm pretty damn sure it has nothing to do with them being SCSI. Why not just slap an IDE controller on that new Cheetah and see what happens?

    • It allows new Kinds of Technology (Score:5, Insightful)

      by samael ( 12612 ) <Andrew@Ducker.org.uk> on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @04:58AM (#2285143) Homepage
      It allows me to (for instance) do high-quality digital video editing work, keeping multiple copies of everything I do.

      I allows larger organisations to keep massive streaming video collections. If CNN want to keep hold of all the footage they produce in a day, they can now do it on a couple of Hard Drives, rather than the massive clusters they needed before.

      It means I can take my Tivo and tell it to hit every news program, all the cartoon channel and anything with the word "Trek" in it, then come back and throw away what I don't want later.

      It's not going to affect how many Word Documents I store, but it could mean that I can store every phone conversation I ever have, just in case anyone points the finger at tech-support.
    • ???

      I need such a harddisk in my next TiVO, VCR-Replacement, whatever system. You can store over 200 movies on a single disk, instead of using 50 tapes, so I think this _is_ smth. useful.

      For all those whining, that there are no EIDE 15Krpm drive available, I have the following question:
      What for? Faster access times? You gotta be kidding, if I want smth. it's probably a high sustained data rate and thats mainly affected by the density the data is packed on the physical disks within the HDD.

      Access time is important for db-boxes, not for my home entertainment super-station.

      JK
    • You know who you sound like?

      "64K ought to be enough for anybody"

    • The reason is simple; when space becomes available people think of applications to use that space. Any MP3 junkie will probably be able to happily fill a few GB with music, and it seems that video on disk is becoming more and more commonplace; see below for reasons why I'm a disk junkie)

      As far as high speed is concerned, I'm not sure its truly necessary; what does appear to be a prerequisite is the ability to smoothly stream the data from the drive, and this can normally be met by the various caches in the system.

      My Linux file server has just acquired an 80GB disk drive, and that just supports four people.

      Some of that is because I'm a Unix software developer working on a mixture of projects involving GUI and Oracle, so I have a very complete RH and Oracle installation on my system. That alone seems to be about 6GB.

      My TiVo hopefully will have a pair of 80GB drives, as soon as I read up on how to upgrade a two drive unit.

      In addition to the above:

      I've joined the digital photography world, and with 3-6 megapixel cameras on the market, single shot JPEG files are round about 1MB a pop.

      My system also has complete Windows and Linux CD images, so remote machines can upgrade without having to find the damn disk. In addition to that I archive all Windows drivers I use - trying to locate the right floppy or CD at the right time is always impossible.

      Anyway, with your who needs more disk space shot, you join a famous crowd -
      BillG: Noone will need more than 640K RAM
      IBM: Only about 5 computers in the world will be sold.
    • Hard drive technology is getting silly. 160GB? How many people can actually use that much space? How many people that have that much data actually put it on IDE drives?

      I remember, not that long ago (early 90's) someone saying the same thing about a 330MB IDE drive... times sure change.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:*groan* This is getting silly (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Try video editing. I just dumped a 90-minute Hi8 tape over IEEE-1394 into a 19GB file.

      ac.uk
    • Hard drive technology is getting silly. 160GB? How many people can actually use that much space?

      I do. Do you know how much space Radio Synthesis Imaging takes to analyse? The 2 people I work with and I have very very nearly filled our 2 35 gig drives. And I have only been working on my project for a year. I still have 3 months left on this project, and have only completed 2/3 of all my data reduction. Unless physics buy us a new disk (not likely, given the current university funding situation in Australia), we will run out in a couple of weeks.

      How many people that have that much data actually put it on IDE drives? My machines have 20 and 13 GB drives and I don't have any space shortages.

      You dont? My desktop has 13 gigs, and is nearly full (uni work, some of my CD's as mp3 format, data files), and my laptop has 20gigs and is nearly full (more data, more mp3's, a build of mozilla and X). As for our data disks - they are on commodity hardware running SunOS i86pc, since speed does not matter when the programs we run are limited by the 100Mbit ethernet and the CPU speeds on the ultra10, so IDE makes sense.

      What I do have is speed shortages. Same old worn out technology. Mechanical storage devices... moving parts... fragmentation headaches... ugh!!! We need *new* technology.

      You care to invent some for us?

      In the mean time, how about making 10KRPM IDE drives, or 15KRPM. I always wonder why SCSI drives are always faster internally, because I'm pretty damn sure it has nothing to do with them being SCSI. Why not just slap an IDE controller on that new Cheetah and see what happens?

      Ever noticed that SCSI cabling is complex? Need to terminate the cables, need to be under a certain length, need to be this thick fat expensive stuff? It is all related to the bandwidth it is required to handle. I'm pretty sure there is a bit of physics holding back anything better, at least for now....

      TimC.
    • But I need all this space to store my MP3s, warez, pirated movies, and porn. Also think of the number of linux distros you could put on here. For the next step in storage lets try storing data as waves in murcury, or what about as strands of RNA and just read the encoding from there.
  • Get them now.

    Tasty 160Gb with no built in copy protection governors? They'll be quite a bit more on the black market in a few years. Get em while you can. ;-)

    -Kasreyn
  • ... on my Palm 3?

    :p

    Michel
  • I think /. is right to start to move on. This even will not be forgotten anytime soon, and will continue to get more airplay than MASH reruns. If the entire nation spends to next week glued to their TV's, watching every single video they can find on the net and not going to work (or at work and just abusing company time) we will only hurt ourselves more. This stuff is important. Greater storage and faster access is vital to the growth of the industy that led to slashdot's creation. America has NOT shut down, news stories such as this may be squelched out because of recent events, and will never go noticed no matter how important.

  • Controller troubles (Score:2, Interesting)

    by PsyQ ( 87838 )
    What will happen now when other manufacturers release their new hard drives? Will all controller manufacturers have to keep updating their controllers to include support for everyone's proprietary ATA extensions or will they all have firmware so you can use whichever driver matches your drive?

    What if your brand new 330 GB slave drive isn't from the same manufacturer as the master one? Will you there be "multi-BIOS" capable controllers or are you gonna need one card for each drive, eating up all your IRQs?

    Does this call for a "next big thing" to replace the IDE/ATA standard or will we get ourselves into the same awkward situation that gave us MS-DOS' "memory management" back then, i.e. a patch to patch the patch that fixed the patch?

    160 GB on one drive does sound cool, but I hope some standard is on the horizon. Something as fundamental as a hard drive shouldn't be left to conflicting proprietary standards..
  • When you get over 100gig, you need to start thinking about reliability. That's an assload of data to lose and a whole lot of eggs in one basket. It sounds great but you have to start seriously considering the reliability of the drive.

    I have a three 40gig drive here at work that cost me $140 each but I spent $2500 for a tape system to back them up. What's up with that?

    • Re:The Paradigm shifts (Score:3, Insightful)

      by GigsVT ( 208848 )
      Just buy twice as many drives, and have two physically seperate computers, preferably in different buildings, or at least in different rooms, on different circuits. Combine this with RAID1 or 5 if you want.

      Hard disks are so cheap, the preferred media to back up a hard disk becomes another hard disk.
    • I think you are going to find that as we move forward with larger and larger drives we are going to hit a physics brick wall. Tape drives are not going to be able to back the data up fast enough (never mind the insane cost). Disk space is cheap. Mirror your primaries to keep your data available. Back up to other disks for your primary backup methods. Tapes are probably going to be used only for disaster recovery purposes (think offsite storage). Before you say, what about 3rd party disk vaulters... yes some companies will go that route, but a lot of others are going to be more comfortable with tape because it is easier to transport tapes to a hot site for recovery.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Editors PLEASE!

    getting pass the 137GB barrier.

    I'm sorry, but I just can't get 'pass' this obvious error and wish the editors couldn't.

    Beyond that, I don't see a story. Bigger/faster drives. Did anyone NOT expect this?
  • I have to worry-

    with the lull in any news about CPRM, I worry that they'll announce a spectacular product like this, and not tell anyone that it has CPRM inside.

    That way, they can be ready for the SSSCA if/when it comes.

    Now, I don't know if this drive has CPRM in it or not, but I think I'm justified in being scared and cautious- I'll stock up on 80gb drives before I buy something with CPRM in it.

  • I love the speed bandwidth increases and the barrier breaking stuff but how compatibile will this be? I have a near useless maxtor ata-100 40gigger that on ocassion will run under winme/2k but not at all under linux. I should say the drive runs fine its the adapter card that runs like snot. when it runs is runs well but thats rare. the maxtor card is a rebranded promise tech card. i understand that with some tinkering one can get the card to run under linux but I don't want to tinker essential hardware to make it run. it just should. i expect hardships with video or sound hardware but not with a bloody ata card. sorry ranting to take my mind off things falling from the sky.
    • I may have a solution to your problem. I have seen an issue with my 60 gig maxtor paired to my promise ATA/100 card -- and the solution took me weeks of lost files to discover.

      Set your drive mode on that interface through hdparm to use DMA, but only at ata-33 for that drive. Everything else can be left alone (I for one, however, made sure every other drive worked fine before committing the settings to rc.local)

      Of course, with this method, you will not want to use that as a boot drive. That's why I have plenty of spare 1 gig drives lying around....

  • "Maxtor Big Drive" = ATA/ATAPI-6 (Score:4, Informative)

    by Otto ( 17870 ) on Wednesday September 12, 2001 @10:26AM (#2286152) Homepage Journal
    Maxtor's so called Big Drive technology is no more than an implementation of the spec. ATA/ATAPI-6 specifies a 48 bit address scheme, giving a new upper limit of 2^48*512 bytes, or 128 petabytes.

    Also, the limitation is not 137 GB, it's 128 GB. And Maxtor's new drives are not 160 GB, they're slightly more than 149 GB. These mistakes are what happen when you start believing "drive manufacturer math".
  • Why is SCSI equipment still so much more expensive than IDE? I can understand a small price premium, but 3-5 times the cost per Gb plus the cost of a controller is downright ridiculous. I've always been a fan of SCSI for its technical advantages, but as of late, IDE has become the only feasible option for my (bulk) mass storage needs. (Although I keep my system stuff on SCSI disks.) I can easily afford a 60Gb. IDE drive, but a SCSI equivalent is way out of my budget. So why is this? SCSI should be cheaper if anything because the controller is not built in. And the drives are made in the same plants by the same manufacturers. Something doesn't add up.
    • Becouse SCSI is thought as "high-end" technology and manufacturers let you pay for it. This won't change anytime soon becouse they don't count content users but money... (what would you expect? ;)

      You can only hope that firewire devices would be more affordable and won't get similar stamp. Firewire is also more friendly (no terminators) and quite cheap now.

      So buzz manufacturers that you want an internal firewire disc ...
    • That's the thing, the mechanisms aren't the same. They often spin faster (10K, 15K), seek faster, are more reliable (>10^6 MTBF), have bigger buffers, and so on. IDE mechanisms are cheap. There's a little overlap at IDE's high end and SCSI's low end where they may share a mechanism. If there were a Cheetah-15K/IDE it would cost about the same as a Cheetah-15K/SCSI.
  • do any kind of reasonable backup of media of this size? As hard disks scale up to the point where a single drive holds hundreds of hours of my video, thousands of hours of my audio, all of the e-textbooks I've ever used (if you believe in that), and every document I've ever written (no matter how trivial), how do I mitigate, at reasonable cost, the risk associated with a hard disk failure? CDR doesn't seem to cut it, I'll probably have video files larger than a single CDR can hold. High-capacity tape is expensive, and the time to dump a significant portion of a 160G disk to tape is probably excessive. Will writable DVD get cheap? Am I forced into some sort of second hard disk?

    • Re:How do I... (Score:3, Informative)

      by haruharaharu ( 443975 )

      how do I mitigate, at reasonable cost, the risk associated with a hard disk failure?

      Buy 2 and run them in raid-1. If you're paranoid, buy 3 at the same time so you have a spare

  • Let's see... for only $800, I can further upgarde my TiVo from 160GB (2x80GB) and 193 hours to over 400 hours! At highest quality, I would only have about 200 hours... at lowest quality, I could record a single TV channel for over two weeks and 3 days straight! Woohoo!

  • Ahhhhh, when will they learn! Why didn't they just make it 64 bits or maybe 80 bits. That way in 8 years we won't have to upgrade the damn IDE command protocol again. Christ, all the new processors have 64 bit virtual address spaces. The commonly accepted address space numbers say roughly one bit of growth a year, that means that it will take 28 years or so before we start to run out of address space again. Drive capacities are growing a little faster than that. We are at 2^37 right now, they are extending it to 2^48. Not even enough head room for the next 10 years!!!!

Slashdot Top Deals

How many hardware guys does it take to change a light bulb? "Well the diagnostics say it's fine buddy, so it's a software problem."

Close