Re: It seems being in an explosion isn't enough...

[mark seiden-via mac]

i think the issue may simply devolve to  lower areal density in the  
old drives.
i.e. the bits are bigger.

does anyone know if they used encodings that were more tolerant of  
certain kinds of errors
in the past which are less common (and so, not worth doing) than now?


On May 9, 2008, at 1:44 PM, Ali, Saqib wrote:

      Edwards said the Seagate hard drive -- which was
      about eight years old in 2003 -- featured much
      greater fault tolerance and durability than current
      hard drives of similar capacity.

I am not so sure about this statement. The newer drives are far more
ruggedized and superior in constuction. For e.g. the newer EE25 are
designed to "operate" @
1) Operating temperatures of –30°C to 85°C
2) Operating altitudes from –1000 feet to 16,400 feet
3) Operating vibration up to 2.0 Gs
4) Long-duration (11 ms) shock capability of 150 Gs

where as the older ST9385AG:
1) Operating temperatures of 5° to 55°C (41° to 131°F)
2) Operating altitudes from –1,000 ft to 10,000 ft (–300 m to 3,000 m)
3) Operating vibration up to 0.5 Gs
4) shock capability of 100 Gs


Source:
http://www.seagate.com/docs/pdf/datasheet/disc/ds_ee25_2.pdf
http://www.seagate.com/support/disc/manuals/ata/9655pma.pdf

saqib
http://doctrina.wordpress.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]