Re: [H] dead A8N-Sli Deluxe... :(
update: They just dispatched a new A8N-Sli Deluxe hooray part of me wishes they'd offered me a 'pay the difference get an A8N32-Sli Deluxe', but hey, I'll make do until I look at getting something dual woodcrest and beastlike with an Apple logo on it this Autumn :p On 19 Apr 2006, at 23:44:570, James Boswell wrote: I should get a brand new one of the same model. at least, that's what they assured me over the phone, if I don't.. well, I know where they headquarter.. and I can probably get past their dogs ;) On 19 Apr 2006, at 21:54:250, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: joeuser [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 3:54 PM Subject: Re: [H] dead A8N-Sli Deluxe... :( Not sure how lucky he is, he's getting the same board back again. They do not always send the same component back. Sometimes you get a pull instead. Either way, I hate to have to return anything. Chuck -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
They also announced a 15k.4 Cheetah last week, 300GB, 15k RPM spindle, 16MB cache... and 125MB/s sustained transfer rate HOLY MOLEY http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/04/17/ segate_announces_cheetah_perpendicular/ On 21 Apr 2006, at 05:28:150, Greg Sevart wrote: Just found out about this... Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 announced at a flagship 750GB capacity in four platters, with rumors and strong speculation of a 5-platter, 960GB design in progress. 750GB availability slated for early next month. Bloody hell. http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ ds_barracuda_7200_10.pdf http://www.excaliberpc.com/SEAGATE_750GB_Int_3.5-in_SATA_3G/ ST3750640AS/partinfo-id-565413.html Greg -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
Saw that too. (actually, 15k.5...) The problem is that I've always preferred capacity over speed. 750GB 7200.10 vs. 73GB 15K.5 for the same price...yeah, I'll take 10x the storage any day. The sad thing is that the real place where these drives will be primarily used (servers) take almost no advantage of the insane STR they offer. Greg - Original Message - From: James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 7:11 AM Subject: Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 They also announced a 15k.4 Cheetah last week, 300GB, 15k RPM spindle, 16MB cache... and 125MB/s sustained transfer rate HOLY MOLEY http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/04/17/ segate_announces_cheetah_perpendicular/ On 21 Apr 2006, at 05:28:150, Greg Sevart wrote: Just found out about this... Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 announced at a flagship 750GB capacity in four platters, with rumors and strong speculation of a 5-platter, 960GB design in progress. 750GB availability slated for early next month. Bloody hell. http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ ds_barracuda_7200_10.pdf http://www.excaliberpc.com/SEAGATE_750GB_Int_3.5-in_SATA_3G/ ST3750640AS/partinfo-id-565413.html Greg -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[H] Foreign disks in diskpart
I've got a machine with 3 SCSI drives (not RAIDed) which all display in the Adaptec diags (and pass the HD test there) but in Windows (both the 2000 on the machine and in BartPE) they should up as Foreign in diskpart, and when I do a detail on them, it tells me there are no volumes. Am I right in thinking this means the partitions have been trashed? T
[H] Network, Internet Settings
Had Cox Preferred Internet Service @ 3 months of an Introductory rate - It was really great, but cannot afford the $79/mo regular price. But the years of feeling that DSL was superior to cable has proved me wrong. Besides Cox is light years ahead of SBC/ATT in terms of customer service. So I went with the SBC Download speeds up to 3.0 Mbps for $17.99 a month and Downgraded Cox to the Value service with speeds of up to 256 Kbps at $9.95 a month. That way the family can have some decent download speeds, won't have to change their email addresses. And SBC has some router issues in this area as she cannot connect to the School Systems message board unless I ping the location about 30 times first. =Equip with == Have a router/modem for SBC Running on local network at 192.168.1.xxx Have a router/modem for Cox running on local network at 192.168.2.xxx Also have a Network Printer on local network @ 192.168.2.24x Also have a NOS drive on local network @ 192.168.2.24x =HOW TO SET UP Should I change the address of one of the router so that each is within - lets say - 192.168.2.xxx? Then Should I install a second network card on the current machines with only a single Ethernet card?? Then would I bridge the two cards together under network connection settings - but have cable only going to one of the cards Or what ?? Thanks
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
Yeah, it's a bitch on a cost/capacity basis If I ever build a system on a 'goes maximumfast, nevermind the price' basis though it's so getting one of those or whatever the then equivalent is as the system drive. hmm, wonder if Intel chipsets in the next few years will be able to handle SAS disks... I know SAS controllers can handle SATA drives... hmm (If Intels chipsets gained the ability to handle them, you could drop one straight into a Mac Pro and stash your OSX and Windows boot partitions on it. hmm... ) On 21 Apr 2006, at 13:57:200, Greg Sevart wrote: Saw that too. (actually, 15k.5...) The problem is that I've always preferred capacity over speed. 750GB 7200.10 vs. 73GB 15K.5 for the same price...yeah, I'll take 10x the storage any day. The sad thing is that the real place where these drives will be primarily used (servers) take almost no advantage of the insane STR they offer. Greg -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10
It'll be interesting to see if the 15K.5 is able to trump the WD1500ADFD in single-user performance, as the lowly 10k Raptor completely destroys the 15K.4...and all other SCSI drives, regardless of price or spindle speed. It does, of course, lag significantly behind in multi-user performance. I always find it funny when people believe that because they are enthusiasts/power users, their usage more closely reflects server/multi-user usage. Nothing could be less accurate. Power users don't use hard drives much different...they just use them more. If it is a single-user maxifast box, you'd be better served by a 1500ADFD than anything else ATM. RAID0 them if you want...though that, too, provides minimal single-user performance improvements for typical access patterns. There are select few situations in which STR is really that important. Video editing is the only one I think of off hand. Even then, two drives can often be faster, depending on what you're doing... Greg - Original Message - From: James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Hardware List hardware@hardwaregroup.com Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 11:11 AM Subject: Re: [H] Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 Yeah, it's a bitch on a cost/capacity basis If I ever build a system on a 'goes maximumfast, nevermind the price' basis though it's so getting one of those or whatever the then equivalent is as the system drive. hmm, wonder if Intel chipsets in the next few years will be able to handle SAS disks... I know SAS controllers can handle SATA drives... hmm (If Intels chipsets gained the ability to handle them, you could drop one straight into a Mac Pro and stash your OSX and Windows boot partitions on it. hmm... ) On 21 Apr 2006, at 13:57:200, Greg Sevart wrote: Saw that too. (actually, 15k.5...) The problem is that I've always preferred capacity over speed. 750GB 7200.10 vs. 73GB 15K.5 for the same price...yeah, I'll take 10x the storage any day. The sad thing is that the real place where these drives will be primarily used (servers) take almost no advantage of the insane STR they offer. Greg -_-_ James Boswell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 1653327 | AIM : TorazChryx MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [H] Foreign disks in diskpart
At 10:58 AM 4/21/2006, Thane Sherrington (S) typed: I've got a machine with 3 SCSI drives (not RAIDed) which all display in the Adaptec diags (and pass the HD test there) but in Windows (both the 2000 on the machine and in BartPE) they should up as Foreign in diskpart, and when I do a detail on them, it tells me there are no volumes. Am I right in thinking this means the partitions have been trashed? Do you know for a fact that you have the correct Adaptec drivers loaded when you run BartPe ? --+-- Wayne D. Johnson Ashland, OH, USA 44805 http://www.wavijo.com
RE: [H] Foreign disks in diskpart
I believe you just have to import them. I got the same message when I set up my array in XP MCE and when I booted to XP64 I got the same Foreign remark. Just go to 'Manage' --- 'Disk Management' and import them. Should be just fine unless they were trash to begin with. Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thane Sherrington (S) Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 10:58 AM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Foreign disks in diskpart I've got a machine with 3 SCSI drives (not RAIDed) which all display in the Adaptec diags (and pass the HD test there) but in Windows (both the 2000 on the machine and in BartPE) they should up as Foreign in diskpart, and when I do a detail on them, it tells me there are no volumes. Am I right in thinking this means the partitions have been trashed? T
[H] Laptop WiFi Problems
I just added an Atheros 5002 mini-PCI wifi card to my laptop (Acer 340T). I've been having troubles getting it to connect to the internet. I am using a Netgear wgr614 v5 wireless router. I have 2 computers connected via Ethernet cable. Keep in mind none of the connection problems occur with these 2 computers, all the problems are with the wireless. I am able to connect and authenticate the laptop. An IP is assigned, signal is reported as excellent. Everything looks fine until I try to connect to the internet or access NAS. I've disabling all encryption, MAC filters, etc to no avail. Windows XP recognizes the card and everything seems to load correctly. I ran the Atheros diagnosis utility and it passes all the tests. Anything else I should be looking at? Any help is appreciated.
No Thoughts???--- RE: [H] Network, Internet Settings
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of rls Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 11:16 AM To: 'The Hardware List' Subject: [H] Network, Internet Settings Had Cox Preferred Internet Service @ 3 months of an Introductory rate - It was really great, but cannot afford the $79/mo regular price. But the years of feeling that DSL was superior to cable has proved me wrong. Besides Cox is light years ahead of SBC/ATT in terms of customer service. So I went with the SBC Download speeds up to 3.0 Mbps for $17.99 a month and Downgraded Cox to the Value service with speeds of up to 256 Kbps at $9.95 a month. That way the family can have some decent download speeds, won't have to change their email addresses. And SBC has some router issues in this area as she cannot connect to the School Systems message board unless I ping the location about 30 times first. =Equip with == Have a router/modem for SBC Running on local network at 192.168.1.xxx Have a router/modem for Cox running on local network at 192.168.2.xxx Also have a Network Printer on local network @ 192.168.2.24x Also have a NOS drive on local network @ 192.168.2.24x =HOW TO SET UP Should I change the address of one of the router so that each is within - lets say - 192.168.2.xxx? Then Should I install a second network card on the current machines with only a single Ethernet card?? Then would I bridge the two cards together under network connection settings - but have cable only going to one of the cards Or what ?? Thanks
