I thought about hot-melt glue, but I removed the drive because there is no use for it in my system. I did not think about an RMA, assuming it would not be covered. I bought the 740GD ages ago and probably could not find the receipt anyway.
Bigger Drives When?
- Thread starter LunarMist
- Start date
BooST said:
Apparently not. It is always something with WD drives - whining, humming, screeching, hot, and now this. Sorry I need to vent, but f*ck WD and the horse they rode in on.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Praise the loahd! You have seen the light brotha Lunar!
I wouldn't doubt if they would warranty it still. This is a failry common problem with S-ATA drives and you bought their top tier drive. Perhaps they'll cut you some slack.
Maybe I'll take the cover off and destroy the platters. Do they break easily?
Bozo
0
The connector is not WDs fault. That's the new standard. All SATA drives use the same connector.
I RMA'd two drives to WD for the broken connector. Both were replaced.
Bozo :mrgrn:
I RMA'd two drives to WD for the broken connector. Both were replaced.
Bozo :mrgrn:
Tea
0
NTFS vs FAT32:
Gain: possibly some performance, better reliability
Loss: possibly some performance, ability to rescue data or perform repairs by booting off floppy and using any number of simple, practical tools. You can access an NTFS drive when it's non-bootable because of accident or error, but it capapults you into a whole different degreeof-difficulty class.
Summary: In general, use FAT32 for boot volumes, NTFS for data volumes.
Exceptions to the general rule: where your user is an expert or can be relied upon not to bugger things up, just use NTFS for everything. Where your user has poor to average skills, use FAT32 for everything.
Gain: possibly some performance, better reliability
Loss: possibly some performance, ability to rescue data or perform repairs by booting off floppy and using any number of simple, practical tools. You can access an NTFS drive when it's non-bootable because of accident or error, but it capapults you into a whole different degreeof-difficulty class.
Summary: In general, use FAT32 for boot volumes, NTFS for data volumes.
Exceptions to the general rule: where your user is an expert or can be relied upon not to bugger things up, just use NTFS for everything. Where your user has poor to average skills, use FAT32 for everything.
Bozo
0
The one difference that I've noticed between FAT32 and NTFS is the way they handle crashes.
If a FAT32 system crashes and it manages to reboot, it usually does a disk check.
If a NTFS system crashes, it usually just boots back up.
Bozo :mrgrn:
If a FAT32 system crashes and it manages to reboot, it usually does a disk check.
If a NTFS system crashes, it usually just boots back up.
Bozo :mrgrn:
I have had significantly more data corruption on FAT32 than on NTFS. The biggest problems are on developer stations, where the system hard locks and can't be shut down properly often. Another one of my clients was using a power bar to turn on/off their PC, that caused me to have to do a re-install every 4-6 weeks or so. Not they're on XP with NTFS and no issues.
Bozo
0
I did the online RMA on WDs site.
All the drives that I buy are barebones (OEM) drives. Usually they come from an online retailer like Newegg.
Bozo :mrgrn:
All the drives that I buy are barebones (OEM) drives. Usually they come from an online retailer like Newegg.
Bozo :mrgrn:
Explorer
0
LunarMist said:Bozo said:
Great.
There are more than one vendor for SATA WD is probably using the cheapest soft plastic connectors they can find, now they are paying for it.
It would behoof ye to tie up any loose SATA cables in a way to promote strain relief. Sooner or later the world needs to get away from the old method of using free-hanging cabling for SATA drives and go with a standard chassis that has a SCA-like drive plug-in. This would be a chassis where short SATA data and power cables plug into a ports permanently attached to the chassis.
Bozo said:
Well, I hope you don't think that FAT32 is somehow superior to NTFS because FAT32 runs check disc after abending.
NTFS is a far more resilient journaling file system than the potentially-one-way-to-hell File Allocation Table file system. FAT32 is nothing more than a highly evolved floppy disc file system!
Bozo
0
You took my statement bass-ackwards.
NTFS is a much more robust system and usually doesn't require a disk check after a crash.
One of my test during the XP beta was to copy a large file from one partition to another, and pull the power cord out of the power supply. The system always came back up. No files were corrupted. The file transfer had to be started again, and usually it would ask if you wanted to replace the files on the destination partition.
I also did the same thing while doing a defrag. Still no problems.
Bozo :mrgrn:
NTFS is a much more robust system and usually doesn't require a disk check after a crash.
One of my test during the XP beta was to copy a large file from one partition to another, and pull the power cord out of the power supply. The system always came back up. No files were corrupted. The file transfer had to be started again, and usually it would ask if you wanted to replace the files on the destination partition.
I also did the same thing while doing a defrag. Still no problems.
Bozo :mrgrn: