A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » General Hardware & Peripherals » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Utility to burn in new hard drive?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #221  
Old August 8th 06, 10:05 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.engineering.electrical
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,274
Default Utility to burn in new hard drive?

Jon D jon nomail.com wrote:

Hi there Phat, maybe you feel this branch has nothing to do with
the original thread


In my opinion, cross-posting to (alt.engineering.electrical) made
this thread off topic to begin with.

but I think we are discussing packaging and how poor
packaging may be the cause of early failure. As OP I was
concerned that I may encounter early failure and wanted a way to
force its early appearance before I put data on the drive.


A hard drive can fail at any time without warning. The solution is
to keep copies of your data, either in real-time or by
periodic/regular backups.








Path: newssvr27.news.prodigy.net!newsdbm04.news.prodigy. com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon 06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!nx02.iad01.newshos ting.com!newshosting.com!post01.iad01!news.shared-secrets.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware ,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.engineering.electrical
Subject: Utility to burn in new hard drive?
From: Jon D jon nomail.com
References: Xns980DE70E160AC628D1 127.0.0.1 pKCdnXe6S5vW2FTZnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d comcast.com ONdyg.6549$Oh1.3053 news01.roc.ny m9ilc256obpuhdsdmng780kkprfeikl3sh 4ax.com yyofYpCHTEzEFwWZ jasper.org.uk emspc2l4nihuuputenfvu681bhq18tf44n 4ax.com ut5qc219dfnsbt0dbjuqtu06k4dsh4u5gh 4ax.com Xns9814D979ACE4A74C1H4 127.0.0.1 mo98d29cpgihaa0di8olmlk82vnqjmttfq 4ax.com
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 20:53:29 +0100
Message-ID: Xns9819D4854D57217E53A 127.0.0.1
User-Agent: Xnews/2005.10.18
Lines: 63
Organization: Unknown
X-Complaints-To: abuse shared-secrets.com
Xref: prodigy.net comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage:375567 alt.comp.hardwa317197 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:473073 alt.engineering.electrical:180691



  #222  
Old August 8th 06, 10:44 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.engineering.electrical
Folkert Rienstra
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,297
Default Utility to burn in new hard drive?

"Jon D" wrote in message
On 05 Aug 2006, Phat wrote:
On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 21:22:43 +0100, Joe S Gave us:
On 30 Jul 2006, wrote:
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.


ISTR Hitachi specified and illustrated the sort of packaging they
considered suitable for drives being sent back as RMAs. Was it
Hitachi?


A package spec to guide a customer on boxing up his return has
absolutely NOTHING to do with the package a drive is shipped from a
maker to the US shores in. Totally unrelated to this thread.


Hi there Phat, maybe you feel this branch has nothing to do with the
original thread but I think we are discussing packaging and how poor
packaging may be the cause of early failure. As OP I was concerned
that I may encounter early failure and wanted a way to force its early
appearance before I put data on the drive.

I recall receiving a hard drive from a supposedly reputable supplier in
the UK which was just wrapped several times in bubble wrap and then put
into an ordinary envelope.


And this was bad exactly why? (That's assuming it was still in it's antistatic bag)

I am amazed i didn't get premature failure.


And why is that?
Retail drives come in plastic containers (clamshells) or in boxes with only
top and bottom place holders. The protection is in that they allow enough
flexing to fully absorb or diminish any shock forces.

A loosely wrapped OEM drive gets exactly that if the drive can move
sufficiently within the layers of bubble wrap.
If this were to be a problem many drives would be returned and that sup-
plier would very quickly stop sending them this way if that were the case.


OTOH if you see what Hitachi (I think it was) insist on being used for
RMAs then you can see how the last-leg delivery from retailer to
consumer might add to the early failures.


Hitachi sends them back in a box with only two softplastic placeholders.
My Seagate RMA's came back in a fully padded box, called a SeaShell.
  #223  
Old August 8th 06, 11:36 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.engineering.electrical
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8,559
Default Utility to burn in new hard drive?

Folkert Rienstra wrote:
"Jon D" wrote in message

On 05 Aug 2006, Phat
wrote:
On Thu, 03 Aug 2006 21:22:43 +0100, Joe S Gave us:
On 30 Jul 2006, wrote:
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.


ISTR Hitachi specified and illustrated the sort of packaging they
considered suitable for drives being sent back as RMAs. Was it
Hitachi?

A package spec to guide a customer on boxing up his return has
absolutely NOTHING to do with the package a drive is shipped from a
maker to the US shores in. Totally unrelated to this thread.


Hi there Phat, maybe you feel this branch has nothing to do with the
original thread but I think we are discussing packaging and how poor
packaging may be the cause of early failure. As OP I was concerned
that I may encounter early failure and wanted a way to force its
early appearance before I put data on the drive.

I recall receiving a hard drive from a supposedly reputable supplier
in the UK which was just wrapped several times in bubble wrap and
then put into an ordinary envelope.


And this was bad exactly why? (That's assuming it was still in it's
antistatic bag)

I am amazed i didn't get premature failure.


And why is that?
Retail drives come in plastic containers (clamshells) or in boxes
with only
top and bottom place holders. The protection is in that they allow
enough
flexing to fully absorb or diminish any shock forces.

A loosely wrapped OEM drive gets exactly that if the drive can move
sufficiently within the layers of bubble wrap.
If this were to be a problem many drives would be returned and that
sup-
plier would very quickly stop sending them this way if that were the
case.


OTOH if you see what Hitachi (I think it was) insist on being used
for RMAs then you can see how the last-leg delivery from retailer to
consumer might add to the early failures.


Hitachi sends them back in a box with only two softplastic placeholders.
My Seagate RMA's came back in a fully padded box, called a SeaShell.


Whoever was responsible for that name should be publicly flogged and then stoned to dead.


  #224  
Old August 9th 06, 08:13 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Mike Tomlinson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 30
Default Utility to burn in new hard drive?

In article ews.net,
Folkert Rienstra writes

And this was bad exactly why? (That's assuming it was still in it's antistatic
bag)


In the UK, to our beloved Royal Mail, a parcel marked "Fragile" means
"Break it gently".

Come on. Wrapping a drive in a bit of bubblewrap and sticking it in an
envelope is in no way an acceptable means of shipping it through the
post.

Retail drives come in plastic containers (clamshells) or in boxes with only
top and bottom place holders. The protection is in that they allow enough
flexing to fully absorb or diminish any shock forces.


I've seen bulk packs (drives at the local distie.) The individual
drives - in clamshells - are packed in strong, double-layer cardboard
boxes with shock absorption: thick polyurethane foam with slots cut in
it to accept each drive.

That distie also ships the individual drives (still in the clamshell)
properly - in boxes with 3 inches of protective foam surrounding the
drive.

(note: alt.engineering.electrical removed)

--
(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination.

  #225  
Old August 9th 06, 11:54 AM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.engineering.electrical
kony
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,416
Default Utility to burn in new hard drive?

On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 23:44:03 +0200, "Folkert Rienstra"
wrote:


I recall receiving a hard drive from a supposedly reputable supplier in
the UK which was just wrapped several times in bubble wrap and then put
into an ordinary envelope.


And this was bad exactly why? (That's assuming it was still in it's antistatic bag)


For one, had the drive been damaged or defective, the
purchaser does not have suitable packaging to return ship
it. One should not have to spend time or money to repack a
product in a way other than it was sent to avoid possible
warranty rejection.




I am amazed i didn't get premature failure.


And why is that?
Retail drives come in plastic containers (clamshells) or in boxes with only
top and bottom place holders. The protection is in that they allow enough
flexing to fully absorb or diminish any shock forces.


No, they do not fully absorb, somewhat diminish would be
more appropriate. They are obviously suitable for general
handling, but a lot can happen to a box between manufacturer
and final delivery. Dropping it for example, though
hopefully today's FDB bearing drives are more shock
resistant than the old BB versions.


A loosely wrapped OEM drive gets exactly that if the drive can move
sufficiently within the layers of bubble wrap.


Depends on how much bubble wrap and how well it was wrapped.
I tend to doubt someone mass packing orders is going to take
the utmost care with each and every one. It also means one
more stage of human handling, another potential for it to be
damaged _before_ securely wrapped up.


If this were to be a problem many drives would be returned and that sup-
plier would very quickly stop sending them this way if that were the case.


Not necessarily, if the drive can survive in a working order
but fails prematurely, say 1 year later, only the warrantor
ever realizes it failed and since the warrantor probably
didn't receive it re-wrapped in the same exact packaging,
they wouldn't even know how the seller wrapped it. That is,
unless some HDD manufacturers are now bulk packing with just
bubblewrap but I suspect it would be shells and/or foam
instead.
  #226  
Old August 9th 06, 01:58 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.engineering.electrical
Joe S
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 63
Default Utility to burn in new hard drive?

On 08 Aug 2006, John wrote:

Jon D jon nomail.com wrote:

Hi there Phat, maybe you feel this branch has nothing to do with
the original thread


In my opinion, cross-posting to (alt.engineering.electrical) made
this thread off topic to begin with.



I am talkinh about electrical failure as well as mechanical failure.
I guessed that alt.engineering.electrical knew more than a little
about failure of electronic boards.


but I think we are discussing packaging and how poor
packaging may be the cause of early failure. As OP I was
concerned that I may encounter early failure and wanted a way to
force its early appearance before I put data on the drive.


A hard drive can fail at any time without warning. The solution is
to keep copies of your data, either in real-time or by
periodic/regular backups.


That's true. But I don't want the backup to be on my new drive if it
is likely to fail! IYSWIM.
  #227  
Old August 9th 06, 07:04 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.engineering.electrical
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,274
Default Utility to burn in new hard drive?

Joe S js foldback.net wrote:

On 08 Aug 2006, John Doejdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote:

Jon D jon nomail.com wrote:

Hi there Phat, maybe you feel this branch has nothing to do with
the original thread


In my opinion, cross-posting to (alt.engineering.electrical) made
this thread off topic to begin with.



I am talkinh about electrical failure as well as mechanical
failure. I guessed that alt.engineering.electrical knew more than
a little about failure of electronic boards.


You may as well have been asking them for advice about which hard
drive to buy. And of course that would be off-topic too.

but I think we are discussing packaging and how poor
packaging may be the cause of early failure. As OP I was
concerned that I may encounter early failure and wanted a way to
force its early appearance before I put data on the drive.


A hard drive can fail at any time without warning. The solution
is to keep copies of your data, either in real-time or by
periodic/regular backups.


That's true. But I don't want the backup to be on my new drive if
it is likely to fail! IYSWIM.


Buy a reliable hard drive.












Path: newssvr12.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm05.news.prodigy. com!

newsdst01.news.prodigy.net!prodigy.com!newscon04.n ews.prodigy.net!
prodigy.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!
nntpserver.com!statler.nntpserver.com!news-out.octanews.net!
indigo.octanews.net!authen.yellow.readfreenews.net .POSTED!not-for-mail
Newsgroups:

comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware ,alt.comp.hardware.pc
-homebuilt,alt.engineering.electrical
Subject: Utility to burn in new hard drive?
From: Joe S js foldback.net
References: Xns980DE70E160AC628D1 127.0.0.1

pKCdnXe6S5vW2FTZnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d comcast.com ONdyg.6549$Oh1.3053
news01.roc.ny m9ilc256obpuhdsdmng780kkprfeikl3sh 4ax.com
yyofYpCHTEzEFwWZ jasper.org.uk emspc2l4nihuuputenfvu681bhq18tf44n
4ax.com ut5qc219dfnsbt0dbjuqtu06k4dsh4u5gh 4ax.com
Xns9814D979ACE4A74C1H4 127.0.0.1 mo98d29cpgihaa0di8olmlk82vnqjmttfq
4ax.com Xns9819D4854D57217E53A 127.0.0.1 Xns9819A3B0754570123456789
207.115.17.102
Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2006 13:58:04 +0100
Message-ID: Xns981A8E16CB1F274C1H4 127.0.0.1
User-Agent: Xnews/2005.10.18
Lines: 28
Organization: Read Free News
NNTP-Posting-Date: 09 Aug 2006 07:58:03 CDT
X-Trace: DXC=XGO:bVeGJ2c3^3VT\k;2CnbQ9WK20`3bO6Gh9bA988n8= Y_5a;

9md5:h`7[fI?b`SBjabJ[]JdbSePQ0\L;5hU\CD0S;JPno
Xref: prodigy.net comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage:375590

alt.comp.hardwa317271 alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt:473098
alt.engineering.electrical:180711



  #228  
Old August 9th 06, 07:49 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.engineering.electrical
Joe S
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 63
Default Utility to burn in new hard drive?

On 09 Aug 2006, John wrote:

On 08 Aug 2006, John Doejdoe usenetlove.invalid wrote:

Jon D jon nomail.com wrote:

Hi there Phat, maybe you feel this branch has nothing to do with
the original thread

In my opinion, cross-posting to (alt.engineering.electrical) made
this thread off topic to begin with.



I am talkinh about electrical failure as well as mechanical
failure. I guessed that alt.engineering.electrical knew more than
a little about failure of electronic boards.


You may as well have been asking them for advice about which hard
drive to buy. And of course that would be off-topic too.


I think I know what you mean but I guess you are much more of a martinet
than I am!


but I think we are discussing packaging and how poor
packaging may be the cause of early failure. As OP I was
concerned that I may encounter early failure and wanted a way to
force its early appearance before I put data on the drive.

A hard drive can fail at any time without warning. The solution
is to keep copies of your data, either in real-time or by
periodic/regular backups.


That's true. But I don't want the backup to be on my new drive if
it is likely to fail! IYSWIM.


Buy a reliable hard drive.



You say "Buy a reliable hard drive" to avoid problems with a backup on a
new drive if it's likely to fail.

What hard drive would you buy which you define as "reliable" such that
it is more reliable than what I might have bought and will not fail in
its early life?
  #229  
Old August 9th 06, 08:09 PM posted to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt,alt.engineering.electrical
Mike T.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 454
Default Utility to burn in new hard drive?


Buy a reliable hard drive.



You say "Buy a reliable hard drive" to avoid problems with a backup on a
new drive if it's likely to fail.

What hard drive would you buy which you define as "reliable" such that
it is more reliable than what I might have bought and will not fail in
its early life?


ALL hard drive manufacturers produce duds here and there. That's why you
will see some people speak out against IBM/Hitachi or Western Digital or
????? Those are the people who got burnt because they were unlucky enough
to buy brand X at a time when brand X was not doing as well as would be
hoped.

But, over the long run, certain brands tend to be the cream of the crop.
Your best bet is to buy Seagate or Western Digital. In fact, buy TWO of
them, maybe one of each brand. Use one to boot off of, and get backup
software to periodically copy everything to the other (or RAID it in a
mirrored setup). Lately, Samsung has been making some pretty darned nice
hard drives, also. But Seagate and WD both have more of a history of
reliability, and are for the most part pretty rock-solid reliable, ignoring
a few duds here and there (just like all brands) -Dave


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
best cloning method? [email protected] Storage (alternative) 72 April 1st 06 07:40 PM
how to test psu and reset to cmos to default Tanya General 23 February 7th 05 10:56 AM
Norton Ghost - Clone Won't Work jimbo Homebuilt PC's 70 November 15th 04 02:56 AM
How to install 2nd HDD with Partition Magic 6.0 partitions under Windows ME? Phred Dell Computers 13 February 18th 04 09:45 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.