Seagate Drive Models..Whitch one..?

>> You are *NOT* supposed to exercise your rights in any warranty.
> This Is New Zealand with have total rights here and
> full warrantee coverage, no one can get out of it..

No... I meant the stuff you paid for should not require a repair so soon...

I knew some bad people deliberately damage their goods near the end of
the warranty period so as to ....


--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04.1) Linux 2.6.26.2
^ ^ 15:37:01 up 23:50 1 user load average: 1.00 1.02 1.04
? ? (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...ub_addressesa/

Rod Speed wrote in news:6g1upsFdqtc5U1@mid.individual.net
> Squeeze <rubberduck@duckies.au> wrote
> > Rod Speed wrote
> > > Brian Mathews <bm@yummy.conn> wrote:
>
> > > > Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250310AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>
> > > > Which is the better drive to get, here the 16MB Buffer models is a is a few $ cheaper..
>
> > > > Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250820AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>
> > > Neither of the above. The buffer doesnt make any real difference tho.
>
> > > > I have the Seagate docs, but what is better 3 heads, 2 platters or 2 heads 1 platter.?
>
> > > 2 heads.
>
> > It's not that simple.

> Wrong when the drives are the same sized, ****wit.

Exactly because they are the same size, dummy.
You can't have 2 drives within the same model range from different
generations. The difference has to be subtle and deliberate.

>
> > You will have to compare the specs or the benchmarks if the specs
> > fail to show the differences.

> Wrong when the drives are the same sized, ****wit.

Exactly because they are the same size, moron.

>
> > A 3-head drive may be faster on average if the sector density
> > (not the platter density) is the same between the two.

> It wont be when the drives are the same size, ****wit.

Exactly because they are the same size, nitwit.
With the same total capacity for 2 and 3 platter sides and the
sector density being the same then the track density must differ.

>
> > That allows for wider inner tracks yielding a higher
> > minimum speed and lower maximum seektimes.

> Taint the case with those two drives, ****wit.

Like that you checked you clueless moron.

If you had you would have noticed they both have
"78 MB/s maximum sustained data transfer rate"
That shows that the sector density is the same.

seektimes for the one is: Read < 11ms Write < 12ms
for the other: Read < 8.5ms Write < 10ms

Which is which isn't clear since HTML spec and data
sheet PDF contradict each other.

>
> > > > The price here does not always reflect this.

Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) wrote in news:489bf7fe@127.0.0.1
> > > You are *NOT* supposed to exercise your rights in any warranty.
> > This Is New Zealand with have total rights here and
> > full warrantee coverage, no one can get out of it..
>
> No... I meant the stuff you paid for should not require a repair so soon...

> I knew some bad people

They dead now?

> deliberately damage their goods near the end of the warranty period so as to ....

.... possibly get back a lemon with only a few months of warranty left.

Squeeze <rubberduck@duckies.au> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Squeeze <rubberduck@duckies.au> wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Brian Mathews <bm@yummy.conn> wrote:

>>>>> Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250310AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB

>>>>> Which is the better drive to get, here the 16MB Buffer models is a is a few $ cheaper..

>>>>> Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250820AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB

>>>> Neither of the above. The buffer doesnt make any real difference tho.

>>>>> I have the Seagate docs, but what is better 3 heads, 2 platters or 2 heads 1 platter.?

>>>> 2 heads.

>>> It's not that simple.

>> Wrong when the drives are the same sized, ****wit.

> Exactly because they are the same size

Wrong, as always, ****wit.

> You can't have 2 drives within the same model range from different generations.

You can with Seagate, ****wit.

> The difference has to be subtle and deliberate.

Wrong with Seagate, ****wit.

>>> You will have to compare the specs or the benchmarks if the specs fail to show the differences.

>> Wrong when the drives are the same sized, ****wit.

> Exactly because they are the same size

Wrong, as always, ****wit.


>>> A 3-head drive may be faster on average if the sector density
>>> (not the platter density) is the same between the two.

>> It wont be when the drives are the same size, ****wit.

> Exactly because they are the same size

Wrong, as always, ****wit.

> With the same total capacity for 2 and 3 platter sides and the
> sector density being the same then the track density must differ.

Yep, with the 2 head drive having the best, as I said, ****wit.

>>> That allows for wider inner tracks yielding a higher
>>> minimum speed and lower maximum seektimes.

>> Taint the case with those two drives, ****wit.

> Like that you checked

Dont need to, ****wit.

> If you had you would have noticed they both have
> "78 MB/s maximum sustained data transfer rate"

Irrelevant what matters.

> That shows that the sector density is the same.

Nope.

> seektimes for the one is: Read < 11ms Write < 12ms
> for the other: Read < 8.5ms Write < 10ms

With the 2 head drive the best, as I said, ****wit.

> Which is which isn't clear since HTML spec and data sheet PDF contradict each other.

And you're too stupid to be able to work out that when the
size is the same, the 2 head drive will be the fastest, ****wit.

>>>>> The price here does not always reflect this.

>> I knew some bad people
> They dead now?

well... evil is everywhere... <diablo 2 music playing>

--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04.1) Linux 2.6.26.2
^ ^ 16:36:01 up 2 days 49 min 3 users load average: 1.01 1.13 1.10
? ? (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...ub_addressesa/

In message <a6fi94l7j9099bcuq4usd1qp8j2gmp4fpi@4ax.com> Brian Mathews
<bm@yummy.conn> wrote:

>Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250310AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>
>
>Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250310AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>
>
>Which is the better drive to get, here the 16MB Buffer models is a is a few $ cheaper..
>
>Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250820AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>
>
>
>
>I have the Seagate docs, but what is better 3 heads, 2 platters or 2 heads 1 platter.?
>
>
>The price here does not always reflect this.

Is there a particular reason you're looking at 7200.10 rather then
7200.11?

On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 04:21:23 -0600, DevilsPGD <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net> wrote:

>In message <a6fi94l7j9099bcuq4usd1qp8j2gmp4fpi@4ax.com> Brian Mathews
><bm@yummy.conn> wrote:
>
>>Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250310AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>>
>>
>>Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250310AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>>
>>
>>Which is the better drive to get, here the 16MB Buffer models is a is a few $ cheaper..
>>
>>Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250820AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>I have the Seagate docs, but what is better 3 heads, 2 platters or 2 heads 1 platter.?
>>
>>
>>The price here does not always reflect this.
>
>Is there a particular reason you're looking at 7200.10 rather then
>7200.11?



Yes as its not sold here..

They get rid of the old ones first, see my header this is the land of to many sheep.

"Brian Mathews" <bm@yummy.conn> wrote in message
news:a6fi94l7j9099bcuq4usd1qp8j2gmp4fpi@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250310AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>
>
> Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250310AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>
>
> Which is the better drive to get, here the 16MB Buffer models is a is a
> few $ cheaper..
>
> Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (ST3250820AS) - Hard Disk Drive - 250GB
>
>
>
>
> I have the Seagate docs, but what is better 3 heads, 2 platters or 2
> heads 1 platter.?
>
>
> The price here does not always reflect this.

Just be sure to stay away from 7200.11s. 7200.10s have a good reputation
though and hopefully that won't change. I know there is a 320 GB 7200.10. I
wonder if it is single platter like the 7200.11 (?).

Tony

"Brian Mathews" <bm@yummy.conn> wrote in message
news:nb5l94pjv0h920vdkhkm5osuh9nes1kmdg@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 12:40:53 +0800, "Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)"
> <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>I think Hitachi's disks are a bit cooler and faster...
>
> Yes but Only a 3 year warrantee.
>
>
>
> Yes I had 4 IBM drives and they all went back, so no way I would buy
> them..

I remember the IBM "deathstar" series as I had gotten some of those hockey
pucks and won't be buying Hitachis any time soon. I've had good luck with
Maxtor (though don't know if the new ones still run on the warm side like my
old ones do/did) and Western Digital (but haven't bought one of those since
the noisey original Caviars) and Seagate a few years ago (7200.9) before the
7200.11 fiasco. If Seagate's quality continues to drop, I'll probably
evaluate Samsung drives next.

Tony

"terryc" <newssixspam-spam@woa.com.au> wrote in message
newsan.2008.08.07.12.26.08.608465@woa.com.au...
> On Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:28:09 +1200, Brian Mathews wrote:
>
>> Yes but Only a 3 year warrantee.
>
> If you are relying on the warranty, make sure you have the forms and
> proceedure sorted before you buy and have considered that in the eval, i.e
> if you have to courier them interstate, then that may tilt the best buy.

VERY good point. Currently, it's costing me 10 bucks everytime I have to
send a drive back to Seagate, AND the required packaging they require could
dent your wallet too if you aren't buying retail drives with the approved
packaging. (Note that chances are, if you are buying OEM drives, they won't
be shipped in Seagate-approved packaging which requires 2 inchess of dense
foam around the drives in a corrugated box). If you're a reseller or system
builder, hopefully you can find a good distributor that will handle the
warranty replacement for you, as I am seeing now that buying from online
stores can lead to nightmarish scenario.

Tony