🚀 go-pugleaf

More on hard drives, hopefully still of general interest.

I'm willing, eager even, to hear from other people (hint hint) on this
subject.  I would like very much to talk to more tech. engineers at
hard-drive companies mentioned, too.  I want to work *with* and not
*against* to help their customers get their data back when it's not
currently retrievable.


'Scuse the edits, but this discussion is reaching Mammoth proportions
already; you want the original text, read it in the previous messages...

truesdel@ics.uci.edu (Scott Truesdell) writes:

>alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes:

>> I tend toward external drives on Macs (PCs too, occasionally).

>Well, for dozens of reasons, external drives make sense. Ease of
>swap-out in case of repair, sparing the inadequat power supplies
>of most microcomputers, et. al.  {then on to the 'neatness' factor of
having everything in one box: SE/30}

Agreed absolutely.  The Mac has it all over the PC for true
dragability--size and weight too.  But I get a mite worried about the
power supplies with all that in there.  If your 5 and 12 Volts don't
vary (usual first sign of power supply error in "classic" [?!] Macs is
the screen jitters) much (1/2%?  1%?) with all that plugged in--go for
it.  I would if I had the money!

>> Apple supplies are a 
>>constant source of terror and error, have been since the Apple II.  Price 
>>pressure (even Apple feels it) means they cut corners, and ask Sony to 
>>do so on the supplies.  This is an invisible headache cause which many 
>>people never notice.

>The sad part is it's not that expensive to build 'em a little better.
>From the OEM's reference, it'd add $1 or $2 to build 'em robust, no?

Utterly correct.  The poster who said Sony Would Never Cut Corners Like
That is--misguided.  I have to differ.  We're talking razor-thin price
margins.  If GE is building 'em--great for GE, but the same comments
apply.

Maybe I just don't like anything that small that doesn't say "Sigma" or
"Lambda" on it.

>>[ref to Apple's power supplies], but the ones I've had apart don't make me
>>very reassured.  The best indicator, alas, is time.
>                                      ^^^^
>                                      ackkk!!! there's that word again!

You caught me.  Now I have to pay royalties.

>Seriously, though, even power supplies from "quality" vendors are
>subject to this pricing pressure. Case in point: One of our favorite
>OEMs, MicroNet, uses minimum PS technology in the external units. The
>only RMAs I've had with MicroNet have been PS related and it's
>(unfortunately) a higher average than I would like.

All you CMS users out there, beware: CMS was, for over 8 months, using a
35-watt power supply in their external 80meg (Seagate ST-277N) drives,
which take about 75 Watts at startup.  The result is predictable:
KA-BLOOIE! drives.  Fried beyond repair.
They kept it pretty quiet, no recalls or anything.
If you have one of 'em, see if it's got a Skynet supply board.  If so,
you should contact CMS.

>>Hmmm.  If you have to have 3-1/2" form-factor, I'd go with ST-157N.

>Really? I tend to shy away from Seagates when given an alternative.
>Knowing the nature of your work, I value your opinion and will 
>reevaluate my policy on these drives.

(backpedal backpedal, sounds of coughing and shuffling) I have re-
re-considered this.  The Seagates are,
despite my constant grotching about commodity drives, not bad.  But they
are not the equal of the price you pay for a high-end Mac.  Until CDC's
3.25" SCSIs are ready, I don't know WHAT to recommend; the Seagates work
the best (note caveat) of the ones I've tested.  But I have NOT tested
the Conner SCSIs, the new new Rodime SCSIs, the "next-wave" sub-3"
drives from PrarieTek or Areal, etc.  And my friends at the repair
places have essentially no experience with 3.25" SCSIs; too new.  The
Seagates are NOT as good as the MiniScribe 3.25" SCSIs, but they make
much larger ones.  At that, the largest is the 157N, though rumours of a
new line of 3.25" drives from Seagate will likely become true at ComDex
(nope: no inside bits.  Just market watching.)
And M/S has some problems outside the scope of this
exercise.  So I'm stuck for a recommendation within my experience.  So
I mentioned Seagate.

>>Erm, didn't know CDC was STILL in the teething stage on [The Swift
>>3.25" SCSIs]

>Charles McConnethy told me they have been working with Imprimis on 
>these teething problems. I forget the precise nature of the problem[s]
>though I remember that they were slight and almost solved.

>>I might suggest Conners but my experience with the Compaq Conners has
>>been--uninspiring.

>Is that with the special ultra-power-miser version of the Conners?

"Compaq Conners" says what I'm talking about: it all: the 40-pin "AT"
or "direct" interface drives that Compaq buys from Conner.  They're
essentially impossible to get diagnosed or fixed (this may change in a
month--stay tuned).

They have some brilliant engineers.  I'm just not sure they let them
make engineering decisions.


Is anyone interested in this stuff, or should Scott and I take it to
mail?

	Alex