> Sorry, but I have to disagree on this one.  Hard drives have too many
> moving parts to trust after being that old.  Especially if they've
> sat around unused.  Time kills things with moving parts :)  Plus, old
> drives may not provide SMART data, which helps you detect errors
> sooner.

as a mechanical engineer, i have to disagree with your disagreement :-)

time doesn't kill things with moving parts, cycles kill things with 
moving parts.  movement cycles, temperature cycles, whatever.  a hard 
disk that's been sitting idle for a couple of years is no closer to 
death now than it was two years ago, assuming it was stored reasonably.

modern disks have -substantially- higher storage densities than their 
older siblings, which require much tighter physical tolerances in order 
to operate.  as such, a trifling deviation that doesn't adversely 
affect an older disk will render a new disk worthless.  you can only 
push the cost/capacity envelope so far without affecting quality and 
reliability, and unfortunately people keep voting (with their wallets) 
for cheap rather than reliable.

again, just my $.02.

jason
-- 
TriLUG mailing list        : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
TriLUG Organizational FAQ  : http://trilug.org/faq/
TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
TriLUG PGP Keyring         : http://trilug.org/~chrish/trilug.asc

Reply via email to