Both you and Doug are using a Gmail account for your subscription to the
list, and that explains the dilemma. That's why I use my Comcast account
for this list rather than my customary Gmail account.
argh. it's that dupekilling feature of gmail. thanks for pointing out.
it was there some time
In my experience, every USB memory stick is different. The one I am
using now reads and writes at 16MBits per second, and my previous one was
only 8. There is a free utility on the web to test your speed, but
it is on my office computer and I forget what it is called.
What is the name of
You must be a journalist to take out 1 sentence and forgot to quote
all related stuff to earn some cheap popularity Let me quote those
sentences you forgot to mention that I wrote in the same mail: I did
not want to trash USB sticks. They good for something. Also, they are
more
I totally agree with you Vili. Also, flash drives perform much faster
on Win2K than XP. Often a factor of 2 or 3 to 1. The difference in
performance of USB hard drives is much closer between the 2 OSs and I
am sure it is related to the performance of the hard drive as opposed
to the
sábado, 12 may 2007 at 18:25, it seems you wrote:
typically(!), ANY 'usb-enclosed' hdd outperforms ANY usb flash stick.
flash cards inserted in readers give a slightly different mileage, but
that's a separate story.
There are USB flash sticks with an excelent speed. And they
outperforms some
5/13/2007 7:29 PM
Hi Rick,
On 5/13/2007 Rick Grunwald wrote:
RG Even when you have to be able to carry the data in your pocket?:))
Mine fits there although heavier than I like. As Vili stated there is
value in flash drives. However, the discussion was on maintaining data
integrity which makes
Hello Rick,
I tried a lot of things, the HDD just outperforms a stick, yet.
Even when you have to be able to carry the data in your pocket?:))
You must be a journalist to take out 1 sentence and forgot to quote
all related stuff to earn some cheap popularity ;) Let me quote those
sentences
I wrote a long answer. But I deleted it. Why? I dont want to argue.
I used stick with optimized for performance and use my HDD. Huge
difference. I DID try it. You didnt. End of story for me.
completely wrong. tried both and both work okay. of course, assuming
you don't expect the
Vili wrote:
you have the exact same reasons with your 'usb-enclosed' HDD.
...maybe even worse, given that write-back for USB flashdrives isn't
quite as optimistic as with HDDs (including those 'usb-enclosed').
:)) I dont know this stuff, all I am seeing is that with a USB stick,
it takes
Vili wrote:
I dont know... I dont _totally_ agree... Even in WinXP, you can
optimize a stick for performance, but if writing is delayed and for
some reason you have got a power failure... Or I just dont trust MS to
let them manage delayed writing :))
you have the exact same reasons
5/7/2007 2:35 PM
Hi Vili,
On 5/7/2007 Vili wrote:
V (What I observed is, that running Voyager from a USB stick is just not
V the way to go...)
Unless you use Win2K. 8-]}
--
Take Care,
Paul
Voyager v.3.95.06 on Win2k SP4-Rollup1 5.0.2195
No IMAP OTFE
11 matches
Mail list logo
