Notices
Computer & Technology Related Post here for help and discussion of computing and related technology. Internet, TVs, phones, consoles, computers, tablets and any other gadgets.

S0dding IBM hard drives!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 25 August 2003, 04:06 PM
  #1  
Fatman
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Fatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angry

Apologies - I'm going to have a bit of a rant...
I've just had my second IBM hard drive fail on me. It's an ultra-160 SCSI drive, running in my main desktop PC. I had one fail on me a couple of years ago and it was replaced. Fair enough - these things happen. Unfortunate, but forgivable. Now it's replacement has failed. That's the last IBM hard drive that I buy!

Yes, everything important was backed up but that's not the point. If you value your data, do not buy IBM hard drives.

So - can anyone recommend a decent ultra-160 HDD? I'd like the drive to be as quiet as possible, and it doesn't have to be huge; 18Gb is fine.
Old 25 August 2003, 04:40 PM
  #2  
RichiW
Scooby Regular
 
RichiW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

I had 2 ibm IDE Deskstars go down on me in one year, never buying ibm again
Old 25 August 2003, 04:46 PM
  #3  
Fatman
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Fatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Red face

My younger brother has had a Deskstar fail on him. These were Ultrastars, which I thought would be more reliable. They're intended for hardcore server use. How can anyone expect them to be used 24*7 in a critical server when I've had two fail in a desktop PC?
Old 25 August 2003, 05:13 PM
  #4  
swaussie
Scooby Regular
 
swaussie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up

We ( big German company that sponsers Real Madrid ) run nothing but Seagate drives and although it does happen they dont seem to die very often. Also found them quiter than most so might be a good choice for a desktop. I think they do a line of Cheetah drives that are around 18 gigs.

[Edited by swaussie - 8/25/2003 5:15:11 PM]
Old 25 August 2003, 05:17 PM
  #5  
Fatman
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Fatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up

Yeah... I use IDE Barracudas for 'data' drives in my desktops, and I really like them. For IDEs they're pretty fast, and very quiet as well. Are you referring to IDE or SCSI Barracudas?
Old 25 August 2003, 05:19 PM
  #6  
Fatman
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Fatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

Yep - they do 10k and 15k rpm drives in the Cheetah range. There's no need for 15k rpm in my desktop PC; I'll go for 10k. You can recommend these?
Old 25 August 2003, 05:21 PM
  #7  
swaussie
Scooby Regular
 
swaussie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

SCSI or at least last time I looked Ultra160 was a SCSI standard
Old 25 August 2003, 05:23 PM
  #8  
swaussie
Scooby Regular
 
swaussie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

yeah can definately recommend them as its what I use in my PC at home as well (ultra320). I find them actually very quite for the performance they give, but are obviously louder than an IDE. It depends if you need quite or performance.
Old 25 August 2003, 05:34 PM
  #9  
Fatman
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Fatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

I'm used to the noise that the IBM drive made (past tense, awful piece of cr@p... ), which I believe was quite agricultural in comparison. I bet the Seagate SCSI drives are quite a bit quieter. It would be nice if they were as quiet as the Seagate IDE (Barracuda) drives, but I know that's not realistic!
Old 25 August 2003, 05:38 PM
  #10  
Fatman
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Fatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question

Perhaps this is a daft question...? I have an Adaptec 29160 Ultra160 controller. Since most drives are now U320, can I assume that they're all backwards compatible? i.e. that they'll run at U160 speeds on my controller.

You know... I'm very tempted to ditch this SCSI lark. It's a pain in the @ss when drives fail and I'm sorely tempted to go for a couple of RAID-1 IDE Barracudas just for the security of it! Or, perhaps IBM have just tainted my view of SCSI drives...
Old 25 August 2003, 05:44 PM
  #11  
swaussie
Scooby Regular
 
swaussie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 643
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

I think they are backwards compatible but why would you spend extra money buying a drive that can move 320MB per second when its running at 160MB per second? It would be like never taking your Scooby out of second gear And yes I think you have had a bad run with the IBM drives because every major datacentre in the world runs SCSI for two reasons: its speed and reliability. It is majorly more expensive for these reasons.

[Edited by swaussie - 8/25/2003 5:47:10 PM]
Old 25 August 2003, 05:51 PM
  #12  
Fatman
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Fatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

I understand the logic for (firstly) sticking with SCSI and (secondly) advocating the faster standard. I'm just bitter at IBM, that's all!
Old 25 August 2003, 05:53 PM
  #13  
Fatman
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Fatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

...the other thing is that the new controller would be more expensive than the drive!
Old 25 August 2003, 07:30 PM
  #14  
snowcrash
Scooby Regular
 
snowcrash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: www.scoobyzone.co.uk
Posts: 2,082
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

ibm's seem to run fine as long as you install some fans for them...

otherwise they toast
Old 25 August 2003, 09:46 PM
  #15  
ChrisB
Moderator
 
ChrisB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Staffs
Posts: 23,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

You can be plain unluckly with HDs.

I have a server in Telehouse in London. It reported being a 18GB HD down (RAID 1 mirror). Got HP to send out a new one. Day later, the new drive is reporting as being down. Try it in a different hot swap bay, nope.

So the swap out drive gets swapped and it's been fine since. Touch wood!

I've got servers running three year old 9GB IBM SCSI HDs and they've run 24/7 since installation with no hassles at all.
Old 25 August 2003, 10:32 PM
  #16  
BaldyMan
Scooby Regular
 
BaldyMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sunny Lancs
Posts: 2,530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angry

ibm + tiny bit of heat = bollix

had 3 on a raid - on the main server - all went the same way - bad sectors - crashing - lost info = lots of work for me
Old 25 August 2003, 10:42 PM
  #17  
Sith
Scooby Regular
 
Sith's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 2,706
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

IBM drives (shudder) Know too many people at work with IBM drives that failed. I warned them, but they didn't listen.
Old 26 August 2003, 12:04 AM
  #18  
Fatman
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
Fatman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,390
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Post

Unfortunately nobody warned me. Still, at least I can warn people off buying IBM drives now.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
gazzawrx
Non Car Related Items For sale
13
17 October 2015 06:51 PM
InTurbo
Other Marques
20
08 October 2015 08:59 PM
Ganz1983
Subaru
5
02 October 2015 09:22 AM
WrxSti03
Drivetrain
0
30 September 2015 10:24 PM
Littleted
Computer & Technology Related
0
25 September 2015 08:44 AM



Quick Reply: S0dding IBM hard drives!



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:42 AM.