[Pc_Support] Western Digital Enterprise 250 GB <pde; wd2500js

[Homer Whittaker]

Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> [ Moved from LeapList to PC_Support.  I'm not on LeapList, so feel
> free to post a link of my response from the PC_Support articles to
> LeapList.  I'm planning on writing a blog article very shortly. ]
I am looking forward to your blog article.
I am comfortable on the PC_Support, unless you prefer that I link it to 
LeapList.

>
> Homer Whittaker wrote:
>> Has anyone had any bad experiences with the subject WD hard drive. 
<snip>
> 16MB SDRAM.
>
> I still swear by the "older" "S" (107MB/platter) series, with only 8MB
> SDRAM buffers.  Unfortunately, all NewEgg has is an "open box" unit
> for over $80:
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822144394
>
> Now some of the older "J" versions was the consumer version of the
> "S".  I personally have the WD3200JD, which is the consumer rated
> version of the SD3200SD.  I haven't had one fail yet in over 2 years
> of usage.
>
> But I seriously doubt the WD3200JS is the same, especially given the
> newer logic.  In fact, I believe it's a 80GB/platter device, and
> packed with 4 discs.  So the WD2500JS is the similar with 3 discs.  I
> would _not_ trust it.
>
> BTW, some might point out the older WD3200JD/WD3200SD they are
> non-native SATA/300, using an internal ATA/133 to SATA/150 converter.
> Oh well, again, they work damn fine for me.

I agree and could care less.   From what you are saying my best bet is 
to buy two of the WD3200JD/WD3200SD.
I had forgotten about the previous discussions on model number -not 
manufacturer.  Thanks for the reminder.
>
>> for a new install/upgrade on an old 32 bit machine.
>> Safety and longevity concerns are more important than price and actual
>> size (but not much smaller).
>
> The enterprise-rated Caviar "RE[2]" is about a 20% cost premium over
> consumer-rated Caviar "SE[2]".  The RE versions roll of the same line
> as the SE versions, but are tested to higher tolerances.
>
> The enterprise-rated Seagate NL35 (older) Barracuda ES (newr) are
> about a 50+% cost premium over the consumer-rated Seagate Barracuda
> 7200.x series.  Again, fabbed the same, tested differently.
>
> Same goes for the enterprise-rated Hitachi T7Kxxx versus the
> consumer-rated Hitachi 7Kxxx.
>
>> It currently has 540 meg of memory and I most likely will kick that 
>> up to 1.5
>> or whatever the max turns out to be.
>
> Sound expensive if it's older PC100/133.  Might be a _lot_ cheaper to
> go with a new mainboard and more commodity DDR400 or DDR2-533.
Yes it is an Asus K7S5A, 133Mh.

One again I agree that a new mother board might be best, but it must be 
an AMD 32bit, ATX format.  I looked at the Tyan n3400B and h1000s boards 
but Tyan's lack of support for Linux is scary.  They are less than 
enthusiastic about the the Linux kernels, etc.

Given that, can anyone suggest a good conservative (I do not care if it 
will never play "games").  I want to use the existing component ps, 
video board, etc.
>
>> It has one of ThBS's favorite Millenium graphics cards
>
> Favorite from ... say ... 5 years ago?
>
> I consider the nVidia NV44 (GeForce 61x0/620/6500) to be the absolute
> _minimum_ standard today, even for just 2D.
>
Not to argue with your expertise, but in my instance, why?  Given a new 
board, and good RAM memory what will the nVidia suggestion do that my 
current Millenium G400 won't do?  And, is the suggested board worth the 
extra dollars?


>> and plays on a Princeton Digital 20" screen :-)  .
>> Any thoughts or information would be appreciated.
I found one at Costco for $289 plus tax.  Is there one just about as 
good, at a lessor cost on the internet?
I am not married to Princeton.  It is just that they have done me well 
over the past 15/20 years.

Homer Whittaker



> _______________________________________________
> Pc_support mailing list
> Pc_support at matrixlist.com
> http://lists.matrixlist.com/mailman/listinfo/pc_support
>