Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Sure, but this ignore the discussion in the Ars article of the penalty: RMW (read, modify, write). Quoting from the Ars article: And so it was that last September (and it's this that makes it a little surprising that the BBC and other outlets are talking about the issue now, but it's one that certainly deserves the publicity), Western Digital announced its Advanced Format drives. Advanced Format drives use the 4096-byte sectors, 100-byte error codes, and a 40-byte gap as described above. However, to maintain compatibility with Windows XP, they pretend to use 512-byte sectors. As can be seen from the spec sheet (the drives with 64 MiB cache, model numbers ending in AARS or EARS) all use 4096 byte sectors internally) the sector counts even for the 2 TB drives are high; the 2 TB disk having just shy of 4 billion sectors. This kind of deceit is a problem if software tries to write less than 4096 bytes at a time. To write 512 bytes out of 4096, the drive must read all 4096, update the 512 written bytes, and then write back all 4096 bytes (a process known as read-modify-write, RMW). That means more seeking and more disk activity, which is clearly going to perform worse than a 512 byte write on an old drive with true 512 byte sectors. But this isn't such a problem since, as already mentioned, most disk activity occurs in multiples of 4096 bytes anyway. When writing 4096 bytes, the RMW cycle isn't needed, as there's no need to read data if it's going to be overwritten anyway, so the performance impact is negligible. The biggest problem is when the 4096 byte write straddles two sectors. When that happens, the situation is even worse as two RMW cycles are needed, one for each partially-written sector. However, as long as the partition starts on sector boundary, almost all subsequent writes will-due to the OS's widespread use of 4096 byte writes-line up properly, so they won't straddle multiple sectors and won't need read-modify-writes. And as luck would have it, the most widely used operating system in the world will always create partitions that don't line up nicely. Single partition Windows XP systems will always make the first partition start on the 63rd 512 byte sector. If it was just one sector further on, then everything would line up nicely on these pseudo-512 byte sector drives. But as it is, Windows XP partitions on such a disk will have to suffer two RMW operations for almost every single write made to the disk. This is mitigated somewhat by many operations being multiples of 4096 bytes, so it's only at the start and end of each operation that the read-modify-write is needed, but nonetheless the overhead is substantial. Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- The 512-byte sectors are emulated. That's what the OS sees. Physically, they're 4K sectors. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
This kind of deceit is a problem if software tries to write less than 4096 bytes at a time. Yes, but NTFS uses 4K clusters. To the best of my knowledge, it never writes 512-byte sectors. (And even if it did, the vast majority of writes in typical use would tend to be large--only the last, partial block would be small.) And as luck would have it, the most widely used operating system in the world will always create partitions that don't line up nicely. Single partition Windows XP systems will always make the first partition start on the 63rd 512 byte sector. If it was just one sector further on, then everything would line up nicely on these pseudo-512 byte sector drives. That's precisely what the jumper settings/utility rectify. They transparently move the partition start from the 63rd sector to the 64th sector. XP never knows that the sectors are not physically located where it thinks they are. So, both of these are non-issues. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Chris, you misunderstand RMW. Your jumper setting does not get around it. Bliss-based ignorance. Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- From: Computer Guys Discussion List [mailto:computerguy...@listserv.aol.com] On Behalf Of Chris Dunford Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 7:26 AM To: COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Subject: Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess This kind of deceit is a problem if software tries to write less than 4096 bytes at a time. Yes, but NTFS uses 4K clusters. To the best of my knowledge, it never writes 512-byte sectors. (And even if it did, the vast majority of writes in typical use would tend to be large--only the last, partial block would be small.) And as luck would have it, the most widely used operating system in the world will always create partitions that don't line up nicely. Single partition Windows XP systems will always make the first partition start on the 63rd 512 byte sector. If it was just one sector further on, then everything would line up nicely on these pseudo-512 byte sector drives. That's precisely what the jumper settings/utility rectify. They transparently move the partition start from the 63rd sector to the 64th sector. XP never knows that the sectors are not physically located where it thinks they are. So, both of these are non-issues. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Read what I wrote. 1.5 are at that price level. I never said 2 TB are not here. But right now they are at a premium price. I saw a 1.5 TB drive advertised for $99.00 so I expect 2 TB drives to be at that price by next year. There is a price mark that determines how much those drives will sell. Stewart At 05:08 AM 3/12/2010, you wrote: In the 3.5 format, 2 TB disk drives are already here. Here is a review for one model: http://www.storagereview.com/seagate_constellation_es_2tb_review Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- Right now 1.5 TB drives are at the price level to make them a consumer level drive. Within a year 2 TB drives will be there. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Chris, you misunderstand RMW. Your jumper setting does not get around it. Bliss-based ignorance. I understand RMW perfectly well, thank you. You are not paying attention, apparently. There are two issues. 1. There is a performance penalty for writes of 4K due to RMW. But, as the very article you quoted notes, this isn't much of a problem since most I/Os are 4K anyway. (In fact, it's my understanding that -all- NTFS writes are 4K, since that's the NTFS cluster size--but I haven't been able to find confirmation of that this morning.) 2. RMW comes heavily into play when an I/O straddles two 4K sectors. This is problem for XP because it places the first sector of the primary partition at sector 63, which would mean that -all- 4K I/Os straddle sectors. But what you do not seem to understand is that either the jumper settings or the disk utility fix this permanently by PHYSICALLY MOVING the first sector to sector 64. This issue goes away, completely and forever. It is a dead issue. It has gone to join the choir eternal. So, contrary to your assertion, the jumper settings do indeed get around it, and the bliss-based ignorance is not on this end of the conversation. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Okay, you are talking pricing. Got it. My posts were a bit more general, so I was not thinking (or writing) about prices. Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- Read what I wrote. 1.5 are at that price level. I never said 2 TB are not here. But right now they are at a premium price. I saw a 1.5 TB drive advertised for $99.00 so I expect 2 TB drives to be at that price by next year. There is a price mark that determines how much those drives will sell. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
On Mar 11, 2010, at 8:56 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote: You have a point but only because Apple has made the old hardware obsolete. Macs stay in service far longer than PCs. You know that. Why introduce a red herring? Please stay honest and don't go for debating points. This is a software problem in the OS. The only reason hardware is involved is because the M$ won't fix their software. So the hardware vendors have to use Rube Goldberg methods to work around the problem. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
On Mar 11, 2010, at 11:33 PM, Chris Dunford wrote: The 512-byte sectors are emulated. That's what the OS sees. Physically, they're 4K sectors. And you can't see that this is an awful kluge? Hardware vendors should not have to go Rube Goldberg to work around a mess created my the operating system vendor. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
On Mar 12, 2010, at 1:35 AM, mike wrote: I thought macs stayed in service longer than PC's? They do, but Mac users keep their OSs up to date because Apple charges a reasonable upgrade fee and the upgrade is easy to install. Mac owners are never faced with formatting their drives just to upgrade their OS. In fact, the latest OS versions don't even offer format and instal as an option. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
And you can't see that this is an awful kluge? Hardware vendors should not have to go Rube Goldberg to work around a mess created my the operating system vendor. Did I see something moving out of the corner of my eye? Ah, yes, it's the goalposts again. Your post was about what a horrible fix all six people who plan to install huge new AF drives on old XP boxes are going to be in. They will take a big performance hit. They are to be left high and dry, etc. It is a disaster! Well, now that this turns out to be wrong, suddenly the real issue isn't that XP users are screwed, it's that it's a kluge. Why am I not surprised? * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
On Mar 12, 2010, at 10:15 AM, Chris Dunford wrote: Well, now that this turns out to be wrong, suddenly the real issue isn't that XP users are screwed, it's that it's a kluge. The real issue has been in the subject line all along. It is still true. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
[CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Long article at Ars about how M$ failed to engineer a smooth transition for its customers to new hard drive technologies. Changes are necessary to take us to higher hard drive capacities. Apple took care of this many years ago so changes will be no big deal. Meanwhile XP users will take a big performance hit. I really doubt that M$ will provide any fix at all. After all leaving XP users high and dry will just be another money maker for M$. Why new hard disks might not be much fun for XP users http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/03/why-new-hard-disks-might-not-be-much-fun-for-xp-users.ars * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Tom, I was happy to read that OS X does not have this issue (accommodates sectors larger than 512 bytes). The article explained this as a BIOS issue in Windows and said Vista, W7 have work-around fixes. MS has not endorsed replacing BIOS with EFI, have they? Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- Long article at Ars about how M$ failed to engineer a smooth transition for its customers to new hard drive technologies. Changes are necessary to take us to higher hard drive capacities. Apple took care of this many years ago so changes will be no big deal. Meanwhile XP users will take a big performance hit. I really doubt that M$ will provide any fix at all. After all leaving XP users high and dry will just be another money maker for M$. Why new hard disks might not be much fun for XP users http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/03/why-new-hard-disks-might-n ot-be-much-fun-for-xp-users.ars * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
That is not just an MS issue but also a hardware manufacture issue. The largest consumer drives right now are 1.5 TB. If I remember XP will be non supported in a few years. I expect MS will come up with a programming fix for this. XP was released when? I do not think they thought far enough in the future to see the limitations of Disk size that are mentioned. I am Glad that Mac's do not have this, but they also have been releasing more new releases of their OS that Windows have. Also the Intel Mac is how old? Stewart At 09:47 AM 3/11/2010, you wrote: Tom, I was happy to read that OS X does not have this issue (accommodates sectors larger than 512 bytes). The article explained this as a BIOS issue in Windows and said Vista, W7 have work-around fixes. MS has not endorsed replacing BIOS with EFI, have they? Thank you, Mark Snyder Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
I'm not following...if it's a BIOS issue, why would installing Win7 solve it? MS does support EFI but the advantage with Apple is they create the OS and the hardware, this is a huge advantage to Apple. On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Snyder, Mark - IdM (IS) mark.sny...@ngc.com wrote: Tom, I was happy to read that OS X does not have this issue (accommodates sectors larger than 512 bytes). The article explained this as a BIOS issue in Windows and said Vista, W7 have work-around fixes. MS has not endorsed replacing BIOS with EFI, have they? Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- Long article at Ars about how M$ failed to engineer a smooth transition for its customers to new hard drive technologies. Changes are necessary to take us to higher hard drive capacities. Apple took care of this many years ago so changes will be no big deal. Meanwhile XP users will take a big performance hit. I really doubt that M$ will provide any fix at all. After all leaving XP users high and dry will just be another money maker for M$. Why new hard disks might not be much fun for XP users http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/03/why-new-hard-disks-might-n ot-be-much-fun-for-xp-users.arshttp://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/03/why-new-hard-disks-might-n%0Aot-be-much-fun-for-xp-users.ars * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Apple relased the first intel/EFI based mac in 2006. Again this is much easier when you control the entire platform as Apple does. On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Rev. Stewart Marshall popoz...@earthlink.net wrote: That is not just an MS issue but also a hardware manufacture issue. The largest consumer drives right now are 1.5 TB. If I remember XP will be non supported in a few years. I expect MS will come up with a programming fix for this. XP was released when? I do not think they thought far enough in the future to see the limitations of Disk size that are mentioned. I am Glad that Mac's do not have this, but they also have been releasing more new releases of their OS that Windows have. Also the Intel Mac is how old? Stewart At 09:47 AM 3/11/2010, you wrote: Tom, I was happy to read that OS X does not have this issue (accommodates sectors larger than 512 bytes). The article explained this as a BIOS issue in Windows and said Vista, W7 have work-around fixes. MS has not endorsed replacing BIOS with EFI, have they? Thank you, Mark Snyder Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
I agree the present IBM platform has been around over a decade. MS does not control the platform but they do control the OS and they can be more proactive in getting hardware folks to change. I give the article that much. I remember when I had to start dumping my old AT style cases when ATX came in. that has been slowly upgraded to include new stuff. I know Intel tried to come out with a new BTX format, but that did not get a lot of foothold. The BIOS issue is another thing, and I would hope that a better way of managing the system resources could be done. That really does need to be updated. Stewart At 10:15 AM 3/11/2010, you wrote: Apple relased the first intel/EFI based mac in 2006. Again this is much easier when you control the entire platform as Apple does. On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Rev. Stewart Marshall popoz...@earthlink.net wrote: That is not just an MS issue but also a hardware manufacture issue. The largest consumer drives right now are 1.5 TB. If I remember XP will be non supported in a few years. I expect MS will come up with a programming fix for this. XP was released when? I do not think they thought far enough in the future to see the limitations of Disk size that are mentioned. I am Glad that Mac's do not have this, but they also have been releasing more new releases of their OS that Windows have. Also the Intel Mac is how old? Stewart At 09:47 AM 3/11/2010, you wrote: Tom, I was happy to read that OS X does not have this issue (accommodates sectors larger than 512 bytes). The article explained this as a BIOS issue in Windows and said Vista, W7 have work-around fixes. MS has not endorsed replacing BIOS with EFI, have they? Thank you, Mark Snyder Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Rev, this is a BIOS issue in older versions of Windows (XP and Server 2003). Also, reams of Windows code expect a 512 byte sector. I am not optimistic about any fixes for this. XP came out around 2000 or 2001, didn't it? Apple escapes partly because they don't have the BIOS issue and partly because they have fixed most versions of OS X. Apple is much less anchored in obsolete (this one is 30-years old, came from floppies) standards than MS. The highest capacity 3.5-inch ff disk drives I see at the moment are at 2 TB. That is already pushing older versions of Windows to the limits. Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- That is not just an MS issue but also a hardware manufacture issue. The largest consumer drives right now are 1.5 TB. If I remember XP will be non supported in a few years. I expect MS will come up with a programming fix for this. XP was released when? I do not think they thought far enough in the future to see the limitations of Disk size that are mentioned. I am Glad that Mac's do not have this, but they also have been releasing more new releases of their OS that Windows have. Also the Intel Mac is how old? Stewart * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Quoting Rev. Stewart Marshall popoz...@earthlink.net: I am Glad that Mac's do not have this, but they also have been releasing more new releases of their OS that Windows have. Not to mention they control the software *and* the hardware. I'm sure it's a lot easier if you keep it all in house. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Ask App developers. Stewart At 10:44 AM 3/11/2010, you wrote: Quoting Rev. Stewart Marshall popoz...@earthlink.net: I am Glad that Mac's do not have this, but they also have been releasing more new releases of their OS that Windows have. Not to mention they control the software *and* the hardware. I'm sure it's a lot easier if you keep it all in house. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Yup and Windows 7 handles it. XP and server2003 are on their way out. (Non supported in a couple of years) It is now up to the manufacturers to get with it. Stewart At 10:36 AM 3/11/2010, you wrote: Rev, this is a BIOS issue in older versions of Windows (XP and Server 2003). Also, reams of Windows code expect a 512 byte sector. I am not optimistic about any fixes for this. XP came out around 2000 or 2001, didn't it? Apple escapes partly because they don't have the BIOS issue and partly because they have fixed most versions of OS X. Apple is much less anchored in obsolete (this one is 30-years old, came from floppies) standards than MS. The highest capacity 3.5-inch ff disk drives I see at the moment are at 2 TB. That is already pushing older versions of Windows to the limits. Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- That is not just an MS issue but also a hardware manufacture issue. The largest consumer drives right now are 1.5 TB. If I remember XP will be non supported in a few years. I expect MS will come up with a programming fix for this. XP was released when? I do not think they thought far enough in the future to see the limitations of Disk size that are mentioned. I am Glad that Mac's do not have this, but they also have been releasing more new releases of their OS that Windows have. Also the Intel Mac is how old? Stewart * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Long article at Ars about how M$ failed to engineer a smooth transition for its customers to new hard drive technologies. Changes are necessary to take us to higher hard drive capacities. Apple took care of this many years ago so changes will be no big deal. Your sad little summary fails, oddly, to mention that the ONLY version this affects is XP, now nearly a decade old. Vista, Server 2008, and Win7 are all just fine. So what failed to engineer a smooth transition really means is MS failed to go back and update all obsolete versions of Windows. Did Apple, which took care of this many years ago, go back and fix all of its obsolete OSs? And, by the way, WD already has a complete solution to the XP problem for its advanced drives. It involves running a utility one time or setting a jumper. End of problem. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
A bit smug, Chris. This bites my company big-time, which has not yet migrated from XP (about 100,000 users). I doubt it will until sometime in 2011. That is when 4TB drives (3.5-inch FF) will be available; beyond Window's BIOS addressing capability. It also affects Windows Server 2003. Until M$ frees itself from its 30-year old tech standards, such as its BIOS, it will only have work-arounds, such as READ-Modify-Write (RWM). All that does is increase write times and error rates. No OS X OS has this problem, and that goes back to a similar point in time. Thank you, Mark Snyder -Original Message- Your sad little summary fails, oddly, to mention that the ONLY version this affects is XP, now nearly a decade old. Vista, Server 2008, and Win7 are all just fine. So what failed to engineer a smooth transition really means is MS failed to go back and update all obsolete versions of Windows. Did Apple, which took care of this many years ago, go back and fix all of its obsolete OSs? And, by the way, WD already has a complete solution to the XP problem for its advanced drives. It involves running a utility one time or setting a jumper. End of problem. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
A bit smug, Chris. You're missing my point. Tom, who has long since lost all credibility in commenting on MS, clearly implied that only Apple has addressed this. That is patently not the case. I did, however, make one mistake. On re-reading Tom's post, I see that he did, in fact, mention that this is an XP issue. I said that he did not, and that was wrong. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
On Mar 11, 2010, at 2:14 PM, Chris Dunford wrote: A bit smug, Chris. You're missing my point. Tom, who has long since lost all credibility in commenting on MS Chris is our home grown version of Glenn Beck. He sure doesn't like any close brushes with reality. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
On Mar 11, 2010, at 1:21 PM, Chris Dunford wrote: Your sad little summary fails, oddly, to mention that the ONLY version this affects is XP... False. And downright rude. , now nearly a decade old. Vista, Server 2008, and Win7 are all just fine. So what failed to engineer a smooth transition really means is MS failed to go back and update all obsolete versions of Windows. The number of people still running XP is huge. They saw Vista and froze in their tracks. Did Apple, which took care of this many years ago, go back and fix all of its obsolete OSs? Did not need to. They made the change long in advance. That is the way Apple traditionally works. And, by the way, WD already has a complete solution to the XP problem for its advanced drives. It involves running a utility one time or setting a jumper. End of problem. False. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Just to be clear, Apple supported EFI since 2006...XP came out in 2001...the next major update to XP which was Vista supports EFI and the larger disks. All those still using older macs are out in the cold too...not that I think it will affect anyone either way. On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:34 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Mar 11, 2010, at 1:21 PM, Chris Dunford wrote: Your sad little summary fails, oddly, to mention that the ONLY version this affects is XP... False. And downright rude. , now nearly a decade old. Vista, Server 2008, and Win7 are all just fine. So what failed to engineer a smooth transition really means is MS failed to go back and update all obsolete versions of Windows. The number of people still running XP is huge. They saw Vista and froze in their tracks. Did Apple, which took care of this many years ago, go back and fix all of its obsolete OSs? Did not need to. They made the change long in advance. That is the way Apple traditionally works. And, by the way, WD already has a complete solution to the XP problem for its advanced drives. It involves running a utility one time or setting a jumper. End of problem. False. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Just to be clear, as of the end of February 2010, Windows XP is the most widely used operating system in the world with a 58.4% market share. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
False. And downright rude. Right. That was rude. But consistently referring to everyone who doesn't share your obsessive hatred of MS as sheeple, lapdogs, or M$ minions, nothing rude about any of that, right? As to false, I already corrected the misstatement. Nice of you to acknowledge that. Did not need to. They made the change long in advance. Right. The first OS X support is in Tiger (2005). The first Windows support is in Vista (2006). Neither company has added support to earlier versions. Wowie. And, by the way, WD already has a complete solution to the XP problem for its advanced drives. It involves running a utility one time or setting a jumper. End of problem. False. Ah. Well, WD sees it differently: To create a single Windows XP partition from a clean install, apply a jumper across pins 7-8. ... Setting the jumper is all that is required to achieve full performance. and The WD Align utility enables older operating systems to operate at full performance on Advanced Format hard drives. But I guess you know more about WD drives than WD does. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Just to be clear, Apple supported EFI since 2006...XP came out in 2001...the next major update to XP which was Vista supports EFI and the larger disks. All those still using older macs are out in the cold too...not that I think it will affect anyone either way. Just to be clear XP Service Pack 3 was 21 April 2008; 22 months ago. OK, let's see if we can summarize your position: 1. MS continued to update XP after Vista's release but did not include this particular fix. 2. Apple has never updated Panther since Tiger's release. 3. Apple's response is superior. In short, never updating the older version is superior to updating it but omitting a fix for a drive type that nobody running XP actually has. The mind boggles. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
On Mar 11, 2010, at 7:33 PM, Chris Dunford wrote: Ah. Well, WD sees it differently: Or you and they are feeding us BS. Simple math on the drive specs shows these drives still have only 512B sectors. http://www.westerndigital.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=763 Formatted Capacity: 1,000,204 MB User Sectors Per Drive: 1,953,525,168 Dividing capacity by bytes per sector: 512B WTF? * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
On Mar 11, 2010, at 7:54 PM, Chris Dunford wrote: In short, never updating the older version is superior to updating it but omitting a fix for a drive type that nobody running XP actually has. Big difference. You are comparing Apple's support of an old OS version that almost nobody uses to M$ support of the most popular version of Windows. That is a huge difference that just about everybody except you will not fail to notice. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
You have a point but only because Apple has made the old hardware obsolete. Again MS does not control the hardware. However they should make a fix for this. Right now 1.5 TB drives are at the price level to make them a consumer level drive. Within a year 2 TB drives will be there. Kind of reminds me of when 1 GB drives outstripped conventional MB drives and the motherboards did not support them. On the PC side hardware always seems to lag behind. Stewart At 07:41 PM 3/11/2010, you wrote: Big difference. You are comparing Apple's support of an old OS version that almost nobody uses to M$ support of the most popular version of Windows. That is a huge difference that just about everybody except you will not fail to notice. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
Ah. Well, WD sees it differently: Or you and they are feeding us BS. Simple math on the drive specs shows these drives still have only 512B sectors. http://www.westerndigital.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=763 Formatted Capacity: 1,000,204 MB User Sectors Per Drive: 1,953,525,168 Dividing capacity by bytes per sector: 512B WTF? The 512-byte sectors are emulated. That's what the OS sees. Physically, they're 4K sectors. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] M$'s HD Mess
I thought macs stayed in service longer than PC's? On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 6:41 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Mar 11, 2010, at 7:54 PM, Chris Dunford wrote: In short, never updating the older version is superior to updating it but omitting a fix for a drive type that nobody running XP actually has. Big difference. You are comparing Apple's support of an old OS version that almost nobody uses to M$ support of the most popular version of Windows. That is a huge difference that just about everybody except you will not fail to notice. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
