--- Narfi Stefansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know there are very likely valid technical reasons against WD
> drives in linux, everything that I have heard about WD drives
> bothers me deeply.
>
> On the other hand, if my Maxtor drive crashes tomorrow, that does
> not mean that Maxtor is a
I know there are very likely valid technical reasons against WD drives in
linux, everything that I have heard about WD drives bothers me deeply.
On the other hand, if my Maxtor drive crashes tomorrow, that does not mean
that Maxtor is a bad brand, absolutely not. We cannot infer anything about
e premises..
They then swapped to quantum...
Rgds
Frank
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lyvim Xaphir
Sent: Wednesday, 18 December 2002 8:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [expert] Western digital drives don't work?/maximum
capacity
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 10:18 pm, Joseph Braddock wrote:
> > No, I don't think so. It is a brand new motherboard. however... it DID
> > come with a special ide controller card. Seems that WD drives are junk
> > based on another thread. :(
>
> Do you know the make of the special IDE controller c
On Tuesday December 17 2002 01:04 pm, Todd Lyons wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Tom Brinkman wrote on Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 10:29:15PM + :
> >Bottom line is hardware is a moving target, always has been.
> > Unfortunately, specially with other than with M$, it's
- Original Message -
From:
James
Sparenberg
To: Expert List
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 3:15
AM
Subject: Re: [expert] Western digital
drives don't work?/maximum capacity
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 11:04, Todd Lyons wrote:>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE---
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 15:32, Charles A Edwards wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:39:07 -0800
> Larry Sword <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'm have problems finding this anywhere on the IBM web site or by
> > search. Can you please provide the source document you have for this??
>
> This all came
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 11:04, Todd Lyons wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Tom Brinkman wrote on Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 10:29:15PM + :
> >
> >Bottom line is hardware is a moving target, always has been.
> > Unfortunately, specially with other than with M$, it's a
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 09:18 pm, Joseph Braddock wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 19:43, Lorne wrote:
> > On Monday 16 December 2002 03:34 pm, Joe Braddock wrote:
> > > Is it possible that the size is too large for your bios? Most of the
> > > large WD drives come with floppy to install ez-bios
On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 19:43, Lorne wrote:
> On Monday 16 December 2002 03:34 pm, Joe Braddock wrote:
> > Is it possible that the size is too large for your bios? Most of the large
> > WD drives come with floppy to install ez-bios or something like that on the
> > drive to overwrite the system's dr
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 2:04 pm, Todd Lyons wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Tom Brinkman wrote on Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 10:29:15PM + :
> >Bottom line is hardware is a moving target, always has been.
> > Unfortunately, specially with other than with M$, it's a
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 12:07 pm, Todd Lyons wrote:
> Lyvim Xaphir wrote on Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 09:29:51PM -0500 :
> > On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 20:45, Lorne wrote:
> > > > One question I'm wondering about right now is the make/model of the
> > > > system board. ?
> > >
> > > A brand new Intel D84
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 05:18 pm, J. Grant wrote:
> The WD saga contintues, I have an 80GB drive that runs at far from
> optimium speeds.
>
> WD are adament that their drives are great, shame my WD certainly is not.
>
You know for some reason WD doesn't set their drives to high speed by
de
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 12:04 pm, Todd Lyons wrote:
> Tom Brinkman wrote on Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 10:29:15PM + :
> >Bottom line is hardware is a moving target, always has been.
> > Unfortunately, specially with other than with M$, it's a downhill
> > slide towards Junkyard Wars. Maxtor s
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 05:35 pm, Jim Tarvid wrote:
> Minor update on Charles' post:
>
> IBM sold much of their hard drive production to Fujitsu. Really nice IBM
> SCSI drives are available on Ebay cheap.
>
> 3% is not too bad. I've never had a hard failure on an IBM drive either
> (one bad sec
--- "Ronald J. Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 December 2002 02:04 pm, Todd Lyons wrote:
>
> > What is amazing to me is that nobody has had anything to say
> (positive
> > or negative) about:
> > 1) IBM drives
> > 2) Seagate drives
> >
> > I have my own personal experiences with t
Minor update on Charles' post:
IBM sold much of their hard drive production to Fujitsu. Really nice IBM SCSI
drives are available on Ebay cheap.
3% is not too bad. I've never had a hard failure on an IBM drive either (one
bad sector).
The problems with the "glass" drives rose exponentially wit
On Tuesday 17 Dec 2002 03:01, Jonathan Dlouhy wrote:
> All Maxtor drives I have tried in the
> past have failed the first day I used them, all with unrecoverable bad
> sectors.
For what it's worth I have 3 Maxtor 5TO60H6 60GB drives all working flawlessly
so far. Two for over two years now and o
The WD saga contintues, I have an 80GB drive that runs at far from
optimium speeds.
WD are adament that their drives are great, shame my WD certainly is not.
JG
Original Message
> Subject: WD hard drive does not follow correct CRC checking procedure,
> thus is incompatible w
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 13:39:07 -0800
Larry Sword <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm have problems finding this anywhere on the IBM web site or by
> search. Can you please provide the source document you have for this??
This all came about because the warranty that IBM used for about a month
some tim
Ronald J. Hall wrote:
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 02:04 pm, Todd Lyons wrote:
What is amazing to me is that nobody has had anything to say (positive
or negative) about:
1) IBM drives
2) Seagate drives
I have my own personal experiences with them, but am curious what
others have seen.
Blue s
On Tuesday 17 December 2002 02:04 pm, Todd Lyons wrote:
> What is amazing to me is that nobody has had anything to say (positive
> or negative) about:
> 1) IBM drives
> 2) Seagate drives
>
> I have my own personal experiences with them, but am curious what
> others have seen.
>
> Blue skies...
Todd Lyons wrote:
> What is amazing to me is that nobody has had anything to say (positive
> or negative) about:
> 1) IBM drives
> 2) Seagate drives
> I have my own personal experiences with them, but am curious what
> others have seen.
First Seagate I ever bought for personal use was in 1990.
y, 18 December 2002 3:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [expert] Western digital drives don't work?/maximum
capacity
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Brinkman wrote on Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 10:29:15PM + :
>
>Bottom line is hardware is a moving target,
Klar Brian D Contr MSG/SICN wrote:
My WD 40G drives always work without a hitch.
Brian D. Klar - CVE
Multimax
Network Engineer
WPAFB
Civilme should be here on this one. If you do a search through the
archives for Civilme + Western Digital you'll find a more complete
explanation but if I remem
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lyvim Xaphir wrote on Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 09:29:51PM -0500 :
> On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 20:45, Lorne wrote:
>
> > > One question I'm wondering about right now is the make/model of the
> > > system board. ?
> > A brand new Intel D845PEBT2 with a 2.4ghz P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tom Brinkman wrote on Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 10:29:15PM + :
>
>Bottom line is hardware is a moving target, always has been.
> Unfortunately, specially with other than with M$, it's a downhill
> slide towards Junkyard Wars. Maxtor seems to be t
On Monday 16 December 2002 07:29 pm, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 20:45, Lorne wrote:
> > > One question I'm wondering about right now is the make/model of the
> > > system board. ?
> >
> > A brand new Intel D845PEBT2 with a 2.4ghz P4 CPU.
>
> Looks like a WD problem. Western Digita
Hi,
What is the WD email support address please? their site is terrible
Regqards
JG
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Re: [expert] Western digital drives don't work?/maximum capacity
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 02:29:30 -0600
From: Jack and Melissa McSwain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday 16 December 2002 09:01 pm, Jonathan Dlouhy wro
On Monday 16 December 2002 02:03 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> On Tuesday December 17 2002 01:36 am, Lorne wrote:
> > On Monday 16 December 2002 10:47 am, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> > >Civileme, as I relate to his past reports, said it was due to
> > > CRC short cuts. To save a few $$'s, WD transfered t
On Monday 16 December 2002 5:29 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> On Tuesday December 17 2002 03:01 am, Jonathan Dlouhy wrote:
> > On Monday 16 December 2002 12:47 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> > > Civileme reported that WD's no longer supported CRC checking
> > > other that in Windoze. I believe he pronounc
On Tuesday December 17 2002 03:01 am, Jonathan Dlouhy wrote:
> On Monday 16 December 2002 12:47 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> > Civileme reported that WD's no longer supported CRC checking
> > other that in Windoze. I believe he pronounced them as
> > Win-harddrives.
> >
> > As an old timey overcl
On Monday 16 December 2002 8:36 pm, Lorne wrote:
> On Monday 16 December 2002 10:47 am, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> > On Monday December 16 2002 06:09 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > > Civilme should be here on this one. If you do a search through the
> > > archives for Civilme + Western Digital you'll
On Tuesday December 17 2002 01:36 am, Lorne wrote:
> On Monday 16 December 2002 10:47 am, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> >Civileme, as I relate to his past reports, said it was due to
> > CRC short cuts. To save a few $$'s, WD transfered this from
> > firmware to software. He also reported that WD's res
On Monday 16 December 2002 12:47 pm, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> On Monday December 16 2002 06:09 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > Civilme should be here on this one. If you do a search through the
> > archives for Civilme + Western Digital you'll find a more complete
> > explanation but if I remember ri
On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 20:45, Lorne wrote:
> > One question I'm wondering about right now is the make/model of the
> > system board. ?
> >
>
> A brand new Intel D845PEBT2 with a 2.4ghz P4 CPU.
Looks like a WD problem. Western Digital strikes out again.
LX
--
°
On Monday 16 December 2002 06:23 pm, Lyvim Xaphir wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 17:34, Joe Braddock wrote:
> > Is it possible that the size is too large for your bios? Most of the
> > large WD drives come with floppy to install ez-bios or something like
> > that on the drive to overwrite the syst
--Original Message---
> From: Lorne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: 12/16/02 08:28 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [expert] Western digital drives don't work?/maximum capacity
>
> > Well it seems that this is more serious than I first thought. I just
> &g
On Monday 16 December 2002 10:47 am, Tom Brinkman wrote:
> On Monday December 16 2002 06:09 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> > Civilme should be here on this one. If you do a search through the
> > archives for Civilme + Western Digital you'll find a more complete
> > explanation but if I remember ri
On Monday 16 December 2002 11:09 am, James Sparenberg wrote:
> Civilme should be here on this one. If you do a search through the
> archives for Civilme + Western Digital you'll find a more complete
> explanation but if I remember right it has something to do with the way
> WD has chosen to not fo
On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 17:34, Joe Braddock wrote:
> Is it possible that the size is too large for your bios? Most of the
> large WD drives come with floppy to install ez-bios or something like
> that on the drive to overwrite the system's drive table.
Which is a rather horrid solution, unless you'
e.
Joeb
---Original Message---
From: Lorne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: 12/16/02 08:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [expert] Western digital drives don't work?/maximum capacity
> Well it seems that this is more serious than I first thought. I just tried an
install to this
Tom Brinkman wrote:
On Monday December 16 2002 06:09 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
Civilme should be here on this one. If you do a search through the
archives for Civilme + Western Digital you'll find a more complete
explanation but if I remember right it has something to do with the
way WD has c
On Monday December 16 2002 06:09 pm, James Sparenberg wrote:
> Civilme should be here on this one. If you do a search through the
> archives for Civilme + Western Digital you'll find a more complete
> explanation but if I remember right it has something to do with the
> way WD has chosen to not fo
This is the stat on my WD drive (10gig)
/dev/hda:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 1.83 seconds = 69.95 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 3.61 seconds = 17.73 MB/sec
On Monday 16 December 2002 12:30 pm, J. Grant wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's a common joke, How do you bring a compu
issue may be fixed with your speed.. try hdparm, and look at the faq on:
http://linux.oreillynet.com/pub/a/linux/2000/06/29/hdparm.html
On Monday 16 December 2002 12:30 pm, J. Grant wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here's a common joke, How do you bring a computer to its knees? Put a WD
> drive in it! as t
Hi,
Here's a common joke, How do you bring a computer to its knees? Put a WD
drive in it! as they don't follow the standards or support their drives
under free software OS's.
This is why you dont want WD, email them and tell them this as well.
I've got an 80GB drive running about twice as fast
My WD 40G drives always work without a hitch.
Brian D. Klar - CVE
Multimax
Network Engineer
WPAFB
-Original Message-
From: James Sparenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 16, 2002 1:10 PM
To: Expert List
Subject: Re: [expert] Western digital drives don't
Civilme should be here on this one. If you do a search through the
archives for Civilme + Western Digital you'll find a more complete
explanation but if I remember right it has something to do with the way
WD has chosen to not follow DMA standards. Linux does rather strict
checking and WD doesn't
Well it seems that this is more serious than I first thought. I just tried an
install to this new WD 180GB drive. Seems there is some limitations to the
size of the drive, or the drive is junk. ?? Maybe truly a kernel bug. ?
End_request: I/O error, Dev 03:47 (hdb), sector
Journal-601, buffer wr
51 matches
Mail list logo
