Utility to burn in new hard drive?

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 18:50:06 GMT, John Doe
Gave us:

Troll, probably Nym shifting

Top posting Usenet retard. Get a clue, dumb****.

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 04:54:02 +1000, "Rod Speed"
Gave us:

Phat Bytestard wrote
Rod Speed write
Phat Bytestard wrote
Rod Speed wrote

Also, replacing it would bring the system back up with no loss of data,

Depends on how the raid hardware dies.

That is true with any failure,

Nope, if the data is mirrored over multiple systems,
doesnt matter a damn how one of the systems dies,
the data is still safe on the one that hasnt died.

How can a soldier in the field mirror data to another machine,

Over the comms link that he's useless without, child.

You are an idiot.

My array is the most reliable platform for them.

Nope. And they dont need that volume of data storage anyway.

You are obviously unaware of what is in place on a modern
battlefield, chump. They record live A/V streams nowadays.

I have made DVRs that are utilized on carrier flight decks.

You, on the other hand, have no clue what is in the channel at
present.

Not so with any raid system where a death can render the data ****ed.

reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs

Do you ever make a post where you have been disputed where you don't
spew this same, old, tired crap response?

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 04:55:44 +1000, "Rod Speed"
Gave us:

Any 2 year old could leave that for dead, child.

Get one to help you before posting again, if anyone
is actually stupid enough to let you anywhere near one.

Come back when your maturity level is at least half your numerical
age.

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 04:59:30 +1000, "Rod Speed"
Gave us:

Pity about what happens between the pallet load and the end user.

If a hard drive in the box gets submitted to a 250 G shock, the
package will be damaged. Are you really so ****ing retarded that you
cannot grasp that fact?

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 04:59:30 +1000, "Rod Speed"
Gave us:

Phat Bytestard wrote
Mike Tomlinson write
Phat Bytestard writes

Flawed, ****ed up logic. They have already been thoroughly
tested as long as one sticks with a reputable manufacturer.

They may have been (though I have my doubts), but that doesn't
take account of any damage that may have occurred while the drive
makes its way from China, through the channel to the end-user.

That's total bull**** due to the specs of the drive. When not under
power, they typically can handle 250 plus G shocks, and the way
they are packaged and shipped, no such shock is even possible to
impart on a drive without damaging the packaging. Hence, if the
packaging is in proper order, the drive inside is as well. They
can even typically survive 60G shocks when in operation.

Pity about what happens between the pallet load and the end user.

Try again. In fact, **** that... YOU LOSE! Hands down!

Pathetic, really.

You are a ****ing retard.

That's why a wise user will burn the drive in
again himself if he wants to make sure it's okay.

A wise user will install a drive and start using it.

A wise user will back up his or her data.

You did manage to get that bit right.

As if your E-1 grade unqualified assessment means a ****ing thing.

A stupid user will inordinately exercise a piece of equipment when
it is not even necessary, further reducing its overall "in use"
lifespan, and wasting a lot of personal time.

And made a VERY spectacular fool of yourself again with that bit.

See above, you retarded dip****.

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 05:01:52 +1000, "Rod Speed"
Gave us:


Do you think they just turn them on for three minutes and call them "ready"?

Yep, thats what happens with mass market commodity drives, child.

Absolutely incorrect.

reams of your puerile **** any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs

If only you could eat a bullet for each of the thousands of times
that your pathetic ass has said that to anyone that has ever disputed
you. It shows how truly immature you really are.

You are pathetic in the extreme.

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 05:07:12 +1000, "Rod Speed"
Gave us:


Nope I just use it to rub the noses of the pig ignorant in thanks.

Hahaha... you are now in the process of making a total fool of
yourself.

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 05:07:12 +1000, "Rod Speed"
Gave us:

"When possible, it is better to eliminate the root
cause of early failures than doing a burn in."

Irrelevant to his pig ignorant claim about
ELEVATED TEMPERATURES and burn in tests.

Yes.... remove the last wagon from the train, as it is
always the one that is most damaged in an accident.

Irrelevant to his pig ignorant claim about
ELEVATED TEMPERATURES and burn in tests.

Of course the solution is the very best, if the value-component
in the decision is limited to preventing damage, but... well...
the factual component should get some consideration too.

Irrelevant to his pig ignorant claim about
ELEVATED TEMPERATURES and burn in tests.

Grow up, repeat boy. You give the real folks in the industry a bad
image. That is aside form the utter stupidity of your claims.

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 15:24:33 -0500, Teh White Recluse
Gave us:

****wit, too st00pid to nymshift.

Did you have to re-quote 80 lines to post that utterly retarded
crap? Grow the **** up, dip****.

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 16:35:23 -0400, kony Gave us:

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 18:02:02 GMT, Phat Bytestard
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 06:33:59 +0100, Mike Tomlinson
Gave us:

In article , Phat Bytestard
writes

Flawed, ****ed up logic. They have already been thoroughly tested
as long as one sticks with a reputable manufacturer.

They may have been (though I have my doubts), but that doesn't take
account of any damage that may have occurred while the drive makes its
way from China, through the channel to the end-user.

That's total bull**** due to the specs of the drive. When not under
power, they typically can handle 250 plus G shocks, and the way they
are packaged and shipped, no such shock is even possible to impart on
a drive without damaging the packaging. Hence, if the packaging is in
proper order, the drive inside is as well. They can even typically
survive 60G shocks when in operation.

Try again. In fact, **** that... YOU LOSE! Hands down!

Actually at least one drive manufacturer cites handling,
including shipping, as the major causes of premature drive
failure. Wish I remembered which one but that's not even a
guarantee their webpage or docs haven't changed in the
interim.

Probably MaxTurd.

How much force do you think a 250G shock imparts?

If the ****ing box is not damaged, the drive inside is very likely
not going to be damaged, and if it is, it was not done during
shipping.