Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ginosko!usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!uci-ics!truesdel From: truesdel@ics.uci.edu (Scott Truesdell) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Is an(y) Apple Hard Disk better than any others? Message-ID: <1989Oct5.183440.18094@paris.ics.uci.edu> Date: 5 Oct 89 18:34:40 GMT References: <1989Oct3.011412.2789@paris.ics.uci.edu> <1989Oct4.044057.19765@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us> <1989Oct4.201337.27854@paris.ics.uci.edu> <1989Oct5.090136.5467@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us> Sender: news@paris.ics.uci.edu (Network News) Organization: UC Irvine Department of ICS Lines: 132 alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) writes: > I tend toward external drives on Macs (PCs too, occasionally). Well, for dozens of reasons, external drives make sense. Ease of swap-out in case of repair, sparing the inadequat power supplies of most microcomputers, et. al. But EMOTIONALLY and for convenience and neatness, the reasons for internal H.D.s are more compelling for the majority of microcomputer users. I've got a Mac SE/30 with the internal Quantum 80 and ethernet card and it's just so CONVENIENT to tote it all over the place. Of course, when I took it to Boston in August, the Quantum became stuck several times, including in Logan Airport when the security people wanted be to turn it on to assure them it wasn't a bomb. (I had a bootable floppy!). I guess humidity is the big culprit with this Quantum stiction problem. Absolute reliability in dry ol' So. Cal. > Apple supplies are a >constant source of terror and error, have been since the Apple II. Price >pressure (even Apple feels it) means they cut corners, and ask Sony to >do so on the supplies. This is an invisible headache cause which many >people never notice. The sad part is it's not that expensive to build 'em a little better. From the OEM's reference, it'd add $1 or $2 to build 'em robust, no? > The $65 Taiwan supply the cause (no overvoltage protection, > lousy filtering, worse regulation). But its day, in high-end > 386/486 computers, is on the wane. Praise whatever dieties are currently in vogue for this favor! >Moral: Power is more a problem than you think. I believe it! Your description of this as an invisible headache is so so true. re: the computer boots so the PS must be ok... what to look at next? Unless the PS actually shuts itself down, it never comes under suspicion. >[ref to Apple's power supplies], but the ones I've had apart don't make me >very reassured. The best indicator, alas, is time. ^^^^ ackkk!!! there's that word again! Seriously, though, even power supplies from "quality" vendors are subject to this pricing pressure. Case in point: One of our favorite OEMs, MicroNet, uses minimum PS technology in the external units. The only RMAs I've had with MicroNet have been PS related and it's (unfortunately) a higher average than I would like. >Hmmm. If you have to have 3-1/2" form-factor, I'd go with ST-157N. Really? I tend to shy away from Seagates when given an alternative. Knowing the nature of your work, I value your opinion and will reevaluate my policy on these drives. >I am not encouraged by the Apple/Quantum "cure" pronouncement. Me neither. > A ROM change doesn't >make up for the fact that *Quantum isn't plating the media well enough*. >And then they don't lube them well enough, either. No amount of >post-manufacturing shenanigans is going to cure stiction--they can't add >torque to the motor. If they run it harder at start-up they risk >burning the coils--almost invariably fatal. I thought about that. Throw more juice at it and watch it fry. As far as remedial fixes go, it's a hack. I can only hope this hack isn't going to the production line but rather they implemented a cure at the source; better media, lube, and motor. >Priams don't stick; CDCs don't stick. Maxtors don't seem to (not big >personal knowledge pool there). Seagates, MiniScribes, Plus HardCards >and Quanta do. The first two are easy for us to rescue, the last >two--not so easy. Hmmm Plus HardCards are made by Quantum, right? Or at least they are made and engineered by the same mother company. So this is an interesting coincidense. >Call me prejudiced against Quanta; I've seen entirely more than my share >come through the door. And their tech. support hasn't been very >helpful, I'm afraid (love to change that!). Parts are essentially >unavailable. They're selling all they can make, I'll bet. >> When the CDC Swifts start shipping [...] >Erm, didn't know CDC was STILL in the teething stage on those. Charles McConnethy told me they have been working with Imprimis on these teething problems. I forget the precise nature of the problem[s] though I remember that they were slight and almost solved. >Even Apple might use 'em. Hurray! They use the Wren V 173 megger for their 160MB drive. I love that drive for the size range. Fast, quiet, and relatively cool. >I might suggest Conners but my experience with the Compaq Conners has >been--uninspiring. Is that with the special ultra-power-miser version of the Conners? I haven't used Conners personally, but one thing that stuck in my mind when first reading about them in Computer Design several years ago was (a) the depth of experience behind their engineering dept. (starting with old man Conners himself) and (b) their method of designing in reliability and low cost by making up for RELATIVELY low tolerance parts compensated with intelligent firmware. In a production environment, the relaxation of a few ten thousandths of an inch translates into big long-term cost savings. >>good for economy, and, as an aside, they offer the best performance. >'Sides, the Mitsubishis and Fujis of the world haven't got into SCSIs in >a major way. :^) >Have to see your lab[s: 4 to 6 depending how you look at 'em] >sometime. Sounds fun.... Sure. Any time. A lot of rather vanilla implementations with the odd mighty Mac (8MB/173MB/24-bit color/19" screen/video I/O, etc) work- station thrown in. --scott 714/856-5697 -- Scott Truesdell