Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > What a relief! -Portable storage...

Reply
Thread Tools

What a relief! -Portable storage...

 
 
Pat Chaney
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-20-2003
On 20/7/03 7:30 am, "Mark M" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Frankly, I can think of things I'd MUCH rather spend my time doing while in
> Europe than looking for and wasting away in cyber cafes!


Me too, but you don't have to spend long looking for them in most cities
these days.


Pat
--
Photos at:
http://www.shuttercity.com/ShowGalle...ll&AcctID=1251

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
bowser
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-20-2003
Well, I'm not "doing" anything. These are store bought Compaq/HP products.
Throw in a few Dells, Gateways, and you've got the several hundred PCs in my
facility. There's nothing homebuilt or custom-made in the facility.

Anyway, drives can, and will fail. As can power supplies, and many other
things.

"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:dUdSa.3208$(E-Mail Removed)...
> [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <i4cSa.97144$ye4.67915@sccrnsc01> on Sat, 19 Jul 2003 13:54:22 GMT,
> "bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >72 drives, no crashes? Man, you're lucky. I've seen three crashes this
> >month.

>
> Then you're doing something wrong; e.g., power, heat, handling.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> John Navas
> [PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
> <http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jason O'Rourke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2003
John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>72 drives, no crashes? Man, you're lucky. I've seen three crashes this
>>month.

>
>Then you're doing something wrong; e.g., power, heat, handling.


And clearly John has never worked in a datacenter.

It's rather simple probability - as the number of drives increases,
the odds of a failure quickly approach 1. And that's in a location
where power, heat concerns are addressed.

And thus we have RAID.

--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lisa Horton
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2003


Mark M wrote:
>
>
> No more lugging my notebook all over the world on long trips...
> Fits right in my Orion AW, or on my dashboard for tunes.
> Very useful...but not cheap $499 (though cheaper than 30 more 1GB
> microdrives).
>
> I don't mean to sound like a salesman, but this is the device I've been
> waiting for. Perhaps you too?



A laptop seems more useful for long trips, to me. You can convert and
view your photos while you are at that far from home place. Viewing on
hotel TV's is of limited usefulness, at best. The picture, like on any
TV, is a pretty vague approximation, and hotel TV's often aren't the
best. Then there's the extra weight of carrying an RF modulator for
those TV's lacking a composite input.

Then again, some people might not want full email and internet access
while traveling, unlike me

Lisa
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2003

"Lisa Horton" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>
> Mark M wrote:
> >
> >
> > No more lugging my notebook all over the world on long trips...
> > Fits right in my Orion AW, or on my dashboard for tunes.
> > Very useful...but not cheap $499 (though cheaper than 30 more 1GB
> > microdrives).
> >
> > I don't mean to sound like a salesman, but this is the device I've been
> > waiting for. Perhaps you too?

>
>
> A laptop seems more useful for long trips, to me. You can convert and
> view your photos while you are at that far from home place. Viewing on
> hotel TV's is of limited usefulness, at best. The picture, like on any
> TV, is a pretty vague approximation, and hotel TV's often aren't the
> best. Then there's the extra weight of carrying an RF modulator for
> those TV's lacking a composite input.
>
> Then again, some people might not want full email and internet access
> while traveling, unlike me


I have no desire to view images on TV either.
For some trips, I'll likely take my laptop still.

I don't have 30GB of storage left on my laptop though...and it gets awfully
heavy hiking through the wilds with it in my backpack.
Plus... I hate sitting and waiting for boot-up...call me impatient.


 
Reply With Quote
 
John Navas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-21-2003
[POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

Switching from bottom-posting to top-posting in mid-thread is confusing and
rude.

Hard disk drives are very reliable, but 3 crashes per month is about what
would be expected from a population of 1000 drives running 24x7.

In <bGySa.108219$H17.33213@sccrnsc02> on Sun, 20 Jul 2003 15:36:39 GMT,
"bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Well, I'm not "doing" anything. These are store bought Compaq/HP products.
>Throw in a few Dells, Gateways, and you've got the several hundred PCs in my
>facility. There's nothing homebuilt or custom-made in the facility.
>
>Anyway, drives can, and will fail. As can power supplies, and many other
>things.
>
>"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:dUdSa.3208$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>> In <i4cSa.97144$ye4.67915@sccrnsc01> on Sat, 19 Jul 2003 13:54:22 GMT,
>> "bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>> >72 drives, no crashes? Man, you're lucky. I've seen three crashes this
>> >month.

>>
>> Then you're doing something wrong; e.g., power, heat, handling.


--
Best regards,
John Navas
[PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
<http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]
 
Reply With Quote
 
John Navas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-22-2003
[POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <bfhkpd$2p4t$(E-Mail Removed)> on Mon, 21 Jul 2003 21:09:02 +0000
(UTC), http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (Jason O'Rourke) wrote:

>John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>>>72 drives, no crashes? Man, you're lucky. I've seen three crashes this
>>>month.

>>
>>Then you're doing something wrong; e.g., power, heat, handling.

>
>And clearly John has never worked in a datacenter.


Wrong. But thanks for playing. And I've also worked in the hard disk
business, with access to lots of data.

>It's rather simple probability - as the number of drives increases,
>the odds of a failure quickly approach 1. ...


You need to learn more about MTBF. The expected failures per hour (which is
how the industry measures such things) increase, but that's a different thing
entirely. It can and does exceed 1, depending on the population.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
[PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
<http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]
 
Reply With Quote
 
John Navas
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-22-2003
[POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <(E-Mail Removed)> on Mon, 21 Jul 2003 14:51:00 -0700, Lisa
Horton <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>A laptop seems more useful for long trips, to me. You can convert and
>view your photos while you are at that far from home place. Viewing on
>hotel TV's is of limited usefulness, at best. The picture, like on any
>TV, is a pretty vague approximation, and hotel TV's often aren't the
>best. Then there's the extra weight of carrying an RF modulator for
>those TV's lacking a composite input.


Haven't run into one of those yet. I would save far more weight than that in
any event by not carrying a laptop.

--
Best regards,
John Navas
[PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
<http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jason O'Rourke
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-22-2003
John Navas <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>72 drives, no crashes? Man, you're lucky. I've seen three crashes this
>>>>month.
>>>Then you're doing something wrong; e.g., power, heat, handling.

>>And clearly John has never worked in a datacenter.

>Wrong. But thanks for playing. And I've also worked in the hard disk
>business, with access to lots of data.


Bluster on all you like, John, but when you make ridiculous claims such as
3 drive failures implies incompetence you only make a fool out of yourself.

Like with Maniac, that doesn't seem to discourage you from making such
remarks.

--
Jason O'Rourke www.jor.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
bowser
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-22-2003
Bottom to top? I didn't change anything.

Anyway, the point is that hard drives fail, and somewhat routinely. Too much
so for my taste, and too often to trust my travel shots.

"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:sS_Sa.3995$(E-Mail Removed)...
> [POSTED TO rec.photo.digital - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> Switching from bottom-posting to top-posting in mid-thread is confusing

and
> rude.
>
> Hard disk drives are very reliable, but 3 crashes per month is about what
> would be expected from a population of 1000 drives running 24x7.
>
> In <bGySa.108219$H17.33213@sccrnsc02> on Sun, 20 Jul 2003 15:36:39 GMT,
> "bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Well, I'm not "doing" anything. These are store bought Compaq/HP

products.
> >Throw in a few Dells, Gateways, and you've got the several hundred PCs in

my
> >facility. There's nothing homebuilt or custom-made in the facility.
> >
> >Anyway, drives can, and will fail. As can power supplies, and many other
> >things.
> >
> >"John Navas" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >news:dUdSa.3208$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >>
> >> In <i4cSa.97144$ye4.67915@sccrnsc01> on Sat, 19 Jul 2003 13:54:22 GMT,
> >> "bowser" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >>
> >> >72 drives, no crashes? Man, you're lucky. I've seen three crashes this
> >> >month.
> >>
> >> Then you're doing something wrong; e.g., power, heat, handling.

>
> --
> Best regards,
> John Navas
> [PLEASE NOTE: Ads belong *only* in rec.photo.marketplace.digital, as per
> <http://bobatkins.photo.net/info/charter.htm> <http://rpdfaq.50megs.com/>]



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Advertisments