Torsdag den 14. oktober 2004 13:34 skrev Bahram Alinezhad:

--- Bob S wrote:

...

Hello SuSE folk,

Might want to consider this for your next hard drive purchase. Tried to get a diagnostics program for a Western Digital hard drive that I suspect might be giving me problems. They ONLY have it for the windoz flavors. I don't believe it !!!

Bob S.

PS pre-ordered and paid for my new SuSE 9.2 Pro tonight. Can't wait unitl Nov. whatever for it to arrive.

Good point! Lack of attention to non-Microsoft OSs may reach to a point that even a hard-drive manufacturer considers its consumers to be Windows users! But my question is: Have other hard disk manufacturers linux-based softwares?

IBM / hitachi But I haven't bought an IBM HD for 4 years ;-) Does any of you have any experience with the new lines from Hitachi ??

I think a diagnostic tool should be stand-alone (on a bootable media) or be able to run under DOS.

Regards, Bahram Alinezhad, Tehran, Iran.

_______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com

...

Notice that testing a HD inside windows is asking for trouble...

How's that any different, from just running Windows? ;-)

:) Sounds like the Linux equiv. of running fsck on a mounted drive...

Carlos, On Thursday 14 October 2004 15:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

Right. The problem is that windows can not umount a disk, nor can it deny access to the disk (I wonder why?) - so the only way is to request the user from refrain using the disk, and detect if there is an access and stopping or pausing the process - meaning that things like the wallpaper launching stops scandisk.

Under Windows NT and "higher," the OS most certainly can and does prohibit direct access to the drive. That's why you have to reboot to run "CHKDSK.EXE" on the boot volume or on any volume that cannot be unmounted (e.g., because it contains an active paging file ("pagefile.sys"). In those cases, CHKDSK runs outside the normal Windows environment in an early boot stage.

...

-- Cheers, Carlos Robinson

Randall Schulz

On Thursday 14 October 2004 14:37, Chadley Wilson wrote:

Yes the first version of MDK10 had a habit of destrying WD hard drives, I'm not kidding. We had to swap out a entire production run of drives thanks to mandrake. I tested the new drives with Fedora 1 back in those days and it was fine and then reloaded mandrake and had to swap out some more drives.

Yeah, they busted a couple of CD-ROMs too. Good reason to stay with SUSE... -- Kind regards Hans du Plooy Newington Consulting Services hansdp at newingtoncs dot co dot za

torsdag 14 oktober 2004 19:33 skrev Damon Register:

Chadley Wilson wrote:

...

On Thursday 14 October 2004 14:19, Felix Miata wrote:

...

Bob S wrote:

...

Might want to consider this for your next hard drive purchase.

A little late. I bought WD 120 GB last fall

I just bought an 80GB last fall as well ... I've been getting some squeeks from one of the hard drives, which causes system freezes. When I unplug the second hard disk, which is an IBM 20GB, the system boots well on the remaining WD 80GB one. This is a good read, since I was just about to go out and get myself a 200GB one ... what would be the best choice of hard drives, besides WD ?

Örn Hansen wrote:

This is a good read, since I was just about to go out and get myself a 200GB one ... what would be the best choice of hard drives, besides WD ?

I've been buying Seagate since Maxtor absorbed Quantum and Hitachi took over IBM. 5 year Seagate warranties are a major plus. -- "[W]hoever finds me finds life....[A]ll who hate me love death." Proverbs 8:35-6 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/

The Friday 2004-10-15 at 11:45 +0200, Hans du Plooy wrote:

It stayed in the top shelve in my closet, from where I've dropped it countless times - on a concrete floor. I still have that drive too - working like day one. I used to use it to backup my mail folders, until they became to big...

That's probably because the heads are parked when off, so the surface is safe. I once inadvertently broke a HD by pounding my fist on the table (probably win 3.11 had crashed for the umpteen time that day), and the HD started having read problems right away. Head crash. Barely had time to copy over to another disk. I had tape backups, also. -- Cheers, Carlos Robinson

Örn Hansen wrote:

torsdag 14 oktober 2004 21:28 skrev Felix Miata:

...

I've been buying Seagate since Maxtor absorbed Quantum and Hitachi took over IBM. 5 year Seagate warranties are a major plus.

Stores here, that are selling Seagate Barracuda are advertising 2 or 3 year warranty, not 5 years?

It takes a while for old packaging to be purged from the retail channels. http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,117040,00.asp -- "[W]hoever finds me finds life....[A]ll who hate me love death." Proverbs 8:35-6 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/

JL > JL >> This is a good read, since I was just about to go out and get myself a JL >> 200GB one ... what would be the best choice of hard drives, besides WD ? JL > JL >I prefer Seagate also, so it's unanimous! JL > JL >Jeff I go through lots of drives -- maybe 20 or 30 new drives a year -- (I perform voluntary tech work for a few organisations what use lots of storage). I have consistently found Maxtor to be the worst, and this spring switched to Seagate. I haven't had a Seagate go down yet (I have lost plenty of Maxtors and a few WDs within weeks of installing them) I'd like to try IBM/Hitachi but I can't get them in town and I don't like to order drives through the mail (more banging and bumping before it gets to me). -- ---------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Wilson Cedar Creek Software http://www.cedarcreeksoftware.com

On Thursday 14 October 2004 14:05, Jeffrey Laramie wrote:

...

This is a good read, since I was just about to go out and get myself a 200GB one ... what would be the best choice of hard drives, besides WD ?

I prefer Seagate also, so it's unanimous!

Here's something I'll add to this hard drive issue... and trust me, something you don't want to go through personally. I've gone through 2 IBM 15GB hd's, 3 WD 40GB and now I'm currently running with a 10GB Maxtor and a 60GB WD, and has all happened within 7 month period. The IBM drives had a known production problem, don't really know about the WD drives. Personally, I think debian had a kill issue in at least 2 of the WD drives. (one was outright doa, since you couldn't even partition the drive...) Being a former partner of a computer store, I can tell you that this happens with almost *all* hardware to some extent. I've had Linksys/3com/Intel nics die, maxtor, western digital and seagate hard drives die, etc. But I must admit that the quality of hardware is going downhill for the most part, compared to years back. I still have a really old 512MB seagate and a maxtor 1GB drive chugging along on a system running as a firewall. (try that Microsoft!) ;) (it's a old gateway 100Mhz Pentium btw) In a nutshell, buyer beware. Dana

On Friday 15 October 2004 06:22, Jeffrey Laramie wrote:

...

Being a former partner of a computer store, I can tell you that this happens with almost *all* hardware to some extent. I've had Linksys/3com/Intel nics die, maxtor, western digital and seagate hard drives die, etc.

Your store wasn't in Northern Virginia by any chance, was it?

Nope, it was in Wisconsin. :) Dana

On Thursday 14 October 2004 14:19, Felix Miata wrote:

Bob S wrote:

...

Might want to consider this for your next hard drive purchase. Tried to get a diagnostics program for a Western Digital hard drive that I suspect might be giving me problems. They ONLY have it for the windoz flavors. I don't believe it !!!

I do. WD is the winmodem of ATA drives: http://qa.mandrakesoft.com/show_bug.cgi?id=12078

Leendert Meyer wrote:

...

I hope Western Digital does not go the same way as Asus.

Too late. They did that about 12 years ago.

Didn't know that. But this is good to know. ;) Cheers, Leen

Don wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Believe this ?? OT' on Thu, Oct 14 at 12:00:

Well, there you go, "pre-ordering" stuff. Shame on you! The Grammar Patrol will be around soon to see you. :D

Get on the floor and place your hands behind your back. The modifier "soon" should not come between the infinitive phrase and the verb phrase that the infinitive phrase is modifying. "Soon" would more appropriately be placed directly ahead of the verb phrase, as in "Soon, the Grammar Patrol will be around to..." or "The Grammar Patrol will soon be around to...". --Danny

On Thursday 14 October 2004 17:20, Danny Sauer wrote:

Don wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Believe this ?? OT' on Thu, Oct 14 at 12:00:

...

Well, there you go, "pre-ordering" stuff. Shame on you! The Grammar Patrol will be around soon to see you. :D

Get on the floor and place your hands behind your back. The modifier "soon" should not come between the infinitive phrase and the verb phrase that the infinitive phrase is modifying. "Soon" would more appropriately be placed directly ahead of the verb phrase, as in "Soon, the Grammar Patrol will be around to..." or "The Grammar Patrol will soon be around to...".

--Danny

Who paid attention in English class but now has way too much time on his hands. ;-)

On 14-Oct-04 Danny Sauer wrote:

Don wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Believe this ?? OT' on Thu, Oct 14 at 12:00:

...

Well, there you go, "pre-ordering" stuff. Shame on you! The Grammar Patrol will be around soon to see you. :D

Get on the floor and place your hands behind your back. The modifier "soon" should not come between the infinitive phrase and the verb phrase that the infinitive phrase is modifying. "Soon" would more appropriately be placed directly ahead of the verb phrase, as in "Soon, the Grammar Patrol will be around to..." or "The Grammar Patrol will soon be around to...".

--Danny

Beautifully done! Ted. -------------------------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 [NB: New number!] Date: 14-Oct-04 Time: 22:47:31 ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------

Örn Hansen wrote:

torsdag 14 oktober 2004 23:20 skrev Danny Sauer:

...

Don wrote regarding 'Re: [SLE] Believe this ?? OT' on Thu, Oct 14 at 12:00:

...

Well, there you go, "pre-ordering" stuff. Shame on you! The Grammar Patrol will be around soon to see you. :D

Get on the floor and place your hands behind your back. The modifier "soon" should not come between the infinitive phrase and the verb phrase that the infinitive phrase is modifying. "Soon" would more appropriately be placed directly ahead of the verb phrase, as in "Soon, the Grammar Patrol will be around to..." or "The Grammar Patrol will soon be around to...".

Actually, I think he merely forgot a comma "The Grammar Patrol will be around soon, to ...".

Stop, please stop! Yo guys are giving me nightmarish flashbacks to high school grammar with Sister Mary Catherine! Passing by putting the apostrophe over the "s" and getting credit for it being correct, because I didn't remember the rule for where it belonged in that context, still stands as one of those small miracles in my life! Yeah, I know, I probably dangled or mangled a participle in that paragraph ... whatever a participle is! ;-) -- Thanks! & 73, doc kd4e West Central Florida 100% Linux. Suse 9.1 Drake, Hallicrafters, Heathkit, TenTec, Yaesu Radio Life: http://www.gospelcom.net/twr/ Linux-Incompatible hardware is defective! "...a plan is not a litany of complaints." USA Pres. Election 2004: http://www.rnc.org/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~