Yes, but Matt, you sound like Jami and his mouse. How can you blame the
drive? I have "crappy drives" ;) and I burn CDs all the time without
problems. Maybe it's because I too decided to buy Nero instead of the
apparently flaky Roxio's Easy CD software. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Daggett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 2:39 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] SCSI v IDE & IBM Deathstars (was Protel 
> vs. DirectCD)
> 
> 
> Yes, all disks can and do fail and yes people should be 
> responsible for backing up their data.  My point was simply 
> that IDE disks are your bottom line cheap commodity storage 
> solution and it should be noted that you can spend a slight 
> bit more money and get a storage solution that is several 
> orders of magnitude better in performance and reliability.  
> This original thread was from users who have to close every 
> program and disconnect from the internet to nurse their PC 
> through simply burning a CD... which is ridiculous.  Sure 
> many of the users on this list may not be doing heavily I/O 
> intensive tasks like audio/video editing, file serving, 
> etc... but when you cant even burn a CD.. that should toss up 
> the red flag for sure, no matter how slow/old your system is.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Karavidas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 4:46 PM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] SCSI v IDE & IBM Deathstars (was Protel vs.
> DirectCD)
> 
> 
> My drive is from the 120GXP family, not the 75GXP.
> 
> I read about Mr. Granito's lawsuit. It's bogus. He and some 
> lawyers are fishing for $$$$$. Period. $75,000 per plaintiff; 
> that will by a lot of future computers for each of those 
> greedy individuals. Even if it were true, it was focused on 
> one model of drive which was released early in the 'big 
> drive' war. If there were design problems, I bet they are gone now.
> 
> Overview Section 6 is amusing: "...stored their vital (and in 
> many cases invaluable and irreplaceable) computer data on 
> them, and many times lost that data without warning..." 
> Really? Didn't backup...HA HA HA what were they thinking? I 
> knew a guy that bought 5 drives of brand x, and stacked them 
> in a case and they were so hot, they all failed within a 
> couple months. I wonder how many people have done that and 
> blamed the drive manufacturer??
> 
> People need to be responsible for backup. Any system could 
> fail at any moment for any reason. Those people that lost 
> data were lazy. (I've said that before)
> 
> I could have started similar actions against any HD company: 
> Seagate, Quantum, Maxtor, WD, Fujitsu. They all fail.
> 
> You say: "SCSI is intended for servers and high end 
> workstations where as IDE is more suited for the home PC user 
> who is using AOL and Word." Really?? Hmmm, I make a living on 
> THIS computer and I USED to have SCSI back when the machine 
> was around Pentium200MHz or so. Now, my current IDE system 
> will run rings around that older SCSI system.  
> 
> What makes IDE not suitable for "professionals?" BTW, I've 
> had several SCSI drives die on me, particularly a Quantum Grand Prix. 
> 
> I've had a very good experience with IBM drives. They are 
> quiet, fast for the money, and I haven't had one fail yet. (I 
> now own 4 of them in various flavors and ages)
> 
> I do have a large disks cache, I don't notice my machine 
> chugging slowly when it hits the drive. Sure SCSI160 is 
> faster, but I don't care. There simply isn't that much 
> difference, and most people know it. I rather spend the money 
> on a faster CPU, a second CPU, or more memory. Like I said in 
> my last post, the hard drive is barely accessed 
> in THIS workstation. If it were a server, I would agree with 
> you, but my point was in workstations.
> 
> Maybe they were running Protel and it's Protel's fault for 
> writing too much data. :)
> 
> Tony
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Matt Daggett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 12:55 PM
> 
> > To: Protel EDA Forum
> > Subject: Re: [PEDA] SCSI v IDE & IBM Deathstars (was Protel
> > vs. DirectCD)
> > 
> > 
> > Its very noticeable... especially if you have any kind of
> > disk caching.  Also anytime you do anything I/O intensive you 
> > are taking a CPU hit which slows performance.  SCSI is 
> > intended for servers and high end workstations where as IDE 
> > is more suited for the home PC user who is using AOL and 
> > Word.  IDE hits a great price for large cheap storage but its 
> > hardly a reliability or performance solution.
> > 
> > Also, I hope you have good luck with your new DEATHstar.  To
> > prove a point about the unreliability of IDE drives you 
> > should look into the ongoing major class action law suit 
> > against IBM over its Deskstar line of drives.  Disks failing 
> > at abnormally high rates and IBM turning the blind eye.  Most 
> > users have reported having a disk fail and then that 
> > replacement fail and the replacement for that failing.  
> > Something like that would be unheard of in the SCSI realm due 
> > to just plain higher quality drives.  
> > 
> > Another thing you should be aware of is that if you look in
> > the IBM documentation the deskstar is described as having 
> > "recommended power-on hours" of 333 per month--about 11 hours 
> > a day.  Drive reliability is typically measured with the 
> > assumption that the drive is on 60 percent of the 
> > time--somewhat higher than 46 percent of the time that 333 
> > hours a month would mean. On laptops, the standard duty is 40 
> > percent, and on servers, which usually use SCSI drives, it is 
> > 100 percent.  So even in the manufacturer's documentation 
> > they don't consider the drive to be used for constant duty 
> > cycle.  That's plain unacceptable for a work/development 
> environment.
> > 
> > So to answer your question..."why would I pay 3 times as much
> > for SCSI as I would with ATA100"... higher throughput 
> > performance, half the access time, 4-8X larger caches with 
> > prefetch algorithms, and 4-5X the MTBF.
> > 
> > How much is your data and productivity worth to you?  Is it
> > worth saving that extra $1-300 bucks?  
> > 
> > matt
> > 
> > PS: Below is a link to a benchmark of a $200 Fujitsu disk in
> > my system as compared to all flavors of IDE.  The results 
> > speak for themselves.
> > 
> > http://www.mecards.com/SCSI_v_IDE_Benchmark.jpg
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Tony Karavidas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 2:20 PM
> > To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel vs. DirectCD
> > 
> > 
> > It may be fast, but it is useable or noticeable in a
> > workstation?? Probably not. I've been watching my harddisk 
> > like, and it rarely blinks. That tell me my system doesn't 
> > spend much time chugging on the disk and therefore why would 
> > I pay 3 times as much for SCSI as I would with ATA100? I just 
> > bought an 80GB IBM deskstar drive for $90 to my door.
> > 
> > I looked at the media transfer rate and the sustained rate of
> > a IBM Ultrastar Ultra160SCSI drive (at 10k RPM) and Deskstar 
> > 120 ATA100 drive (at 7200 RPM) and the rate between the two 
> > isn't enough for me to justify triple the cost. (And the fact 
> > you need a controller card that is roughly another $100.
> > 
> >                     Ultra160SCSI            ATA100
> > Media rate:         373 to 690 Mbits/s      592(max) Mbits/s
> > Sustained rate:     29 to 57 MB/s           23 to 48MB/s
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Matt Daggett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 10:47 AM
> > > To: Protel EDA Forum
> > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel vs. DirectCD
> > > 
> > > 
> > > You should invest in SCSI I/O if you have a lot of throughput 
> > > problems to cause buffer underruns.  I can defrag a 
> partition while 
> > > burning from the other without underrun issues and without 
> > > burnproof.  Most of the problems arise with all IDE based systems 
> > > that use 100% CPU to burn CDs and MUST use burnproof or 
> else you get 
> > > a coaster.  With a SCSI based system you'd see about a 
> 1-2% CPU hit 
> > > while burning.  I have a 200Mhz Pentium Pro machine that 
> I used to 
> > > use to duplicate CDs that can copy a CD to five burners at 8X at 
> > > once w/o any underrun issues.  IDE couldn't even dream of that...
> > > 
> > > I cant really stress enough how important I/O is to system 
> > > performance independent of CPU and memory size.  A single 
> Ultra160 
> > > 15K disk will outperform two ATA100 disks in a RIAD 0 
> stripe.  Also 
> > > when putting a SCSI disk under full throughput stress it 
> doesn't use 
> > > 100% of the CPU like all IDE based systems.  Not to mention the 
> > > reliability and increased cache sizes you get with most 
> server-class 
> > > SCSI disk.  SCSI disks have no where near the high 
> failure rates of 
> > > IDE disks because you are buying a enterprise solution. 
> Prices have
> > > really come down as well.. you can get a 73GB 10k RPM 
> > > Ultra160 disk for about $320 now...that's really cheap!
> > > 
> > > Anyhow, back to Protel...
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dennis Saputelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 12:53 PM
> > > To: Protel EDA Forum
> > > Subject: Re: [PEDA] Protel vs. DirectCD
> > > 
> > > 
> > > it works for me (new roxio)
> > > i have had far less coasters w/ roxio than nero and i 
> find it much 
> > > easier to use
> > > 
> > > but i usually close all other apps while burning and 
> don't do other 
> > > tasks at the same time
> > > 
> > > Dennis Saputelli
> > > 
> > > 
> > > mariusrf wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > if you Google  rec.video.desktop you will see the vast 
> majority of 
> > > > people had problems with roxio and switched to ahead 
> nero for cd 
> > > > burning .
> > > directcd
> > > > and easy cd creator historically had tons of issues 
> with the most 
> > > > diverse
> > > pc
> > > > configurations .
> > > > 
> > > > Matt Tudor , MSEE
> > > > http://www.gigahertzelectronics.com
> > > > 
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 11:33 AM
> > > > Subject: [PEDA] Protel vs. DirectCD
> > > > 
> > > > > I've just encountered a problem which essentially crashes
> > > my machine
> > > > > (W2K P99SE SP6) when I try to run Protel while 
> Roxio's Easy CD 
> > > > > Creator v
> > > > 5.01_E2
> > > > > is running. I think it's just a shell for DirectCD; it
> > > came bundled
> > > > > with
> > > > my
> > > > > Dell, but is actually just crippleware (lowering my
> > > opinion of Dell;
> > > > > they promised a CDRW with supporting software, but this
> > > comes with
> > > > > ads to buy
> > > > the
> > > > > full software).
> > > > >
> > > > > Has anyone else seen this? Is there anything specific I
> > can do to
> > > > > alow continuing to at least view schematics in Protel
> > > while writing
> > > > > a CD of unrelated files?
> > > > >
> > > > > Steve Hendrix
> > > > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > **************************************************************
> > > **********
> > > * Tracking #: 79CB9D5E956ED94B9A4A281EF20A5D3A14E050EF
> > > *
> > > **************************************************************
> > > **********
> > > -- ______________________________________________________________
> > > _____________
> > > www.integratedcontrolsinc.com            Integrated 
> > Controls, Inc.    
> > >    tel: 415-647-0480                        2851 21st 
> > Street          
> > >       fax: 415-647-3003                        San 
> > Francisco, CA 94110
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to