Another reason to buy SCSI

[Texmaster]

The Warrenty!

5 years on hard drives. My big beautiful bastard died after giving his all for 3 1.2 years

*a moment of silence*

But I got my new one in 3 days!

It is nice to be under that kind of warrenty.

 

[sMashPiranha]

Wow, five years? What brand/model was it?

 

[dullard]

Five years could be a great warranty. However, I'd like to know one thing: will they replace it with something up to date or will they replace it with some drive using 5 year old technology?

If I had a 4 year old drive go bad, I certainly wouldn't want a replacement to be the same speed/size. I'd want something newer, faster, and larger. A five year old drive is extremely slow (even SCSI).

 

[DSTA]

If I had a 4 year old drive go bad, I certainly wouldn't want a replacement to be the same speed/size. I'd want something newer, faster, and larger. A five year old drive is extremely slow (even SCSI).

They'll try to send you an exact replacement, and most corporate users would certainly like it that way. Imagine one drive in your three year old RAID array goes bad.

 

[dullard]

<< They'll try to send you an exact replacement, and most corporate users would certainly like it that way. Imagine one drive in your three year old RAID array goes bad. >>


That may be good from a convenience standpoint if you have a SCSI RAID. But in my experience a single new drive is usually larger and faster than a 4+ year old RAID (at least with my uses). Thus I'd rather have a new drive and copy the old RAID onto it - it is a bit more work though.

 

[Pariah]

The advantage for SCSI isn't the longer warranty. How many people use IDE drives for more than 3 years? I don't think I've used any IDE drive for more than 2 years. The benefit of SCSI is that its drives are still useful after 3 years. A year or 2 from now, IDE drives will still be struggling to catch up to the original X15 in most applications.

 

[crt1530]

From my experience, I've found that every aspect of SCSI is preferable to IDE (price excluded, of course).

 

[bearmeat]

yes some scsi HDs warrantys rival that of cars. The prices also rival that of cars. Some scsi HDs cost so much they should give you a free GEO metro or something

 

[Radboy]

I just bought a new Atlas 10KIII (10Krpm, 4.5ms seek, 8MB cache) for $189 .. Geo not included. The biggest advantage of SCSI drives are their blazing-fast seek/access times (the X15-36LP is faster), which give your system that silky-smooth SCSI feeling of responsiveness. It's like getting a new system for the price of a hard drive (..or, it was for me).

 

[Pabster]

Yep, a full 5-year warranty is not uncommon with SCSI drives.

SCSI is the only way to go. With entry level, high-performance drives (like Quantum's Atlas 10K III) dipping sub-$200, there's never been a better time. Those who are "holding off" for the arrival of SerialATA are going to be awful disappointed, I'm afraid.

Today's IDE devices are great for the mainstream, no qualms about it. The price/performance ratio is incredible. But once you've experienced the blazing speed and multiple device capabilities the SCSI bus offers...

 

[WyteWatt]

Do they sell a Seagate Cheetah X15-36LP that is less than 18 gigs? Like 9 gigs? And where could i get one and how much is it ? Thanks.

 

[Pariah]

no

 

[WyteWatt]

I thought they sold a Seagate Cheetah X15-36LP that is smaller than 18 gigs. Did they ever use to?

 

[DarkManX]

yep let us know what drive u get

 

[GoSharks]

there used to be a 9GB version for the original X15

 

[WyteWatt]

Ok.

GOSHARKS ok thanks must have got confused. Wish there was a 9 gig now sure would be a whole lot cheaper.

 

[Pariah]

The original X15 had an anounced 9GB version that was never released. It was only sold to system integrators like Compaq.

 

[Texmaster]

<< Wow, five years? What brand/model was it? >>



It was a Quantum Atlas 10kII 70GB

 

[MisterDuck]

After being die hard SCSI for a while (every computer I've ever had was SCSI), I've pretty much come to the conclusion that it's not worth the extra costs for about 99% of the average desktop user. In addition to that, I'd say it's not worth it for about 75% of the people who have it who think they need it.

Yes, it used to be much easier to add devices to the SCSI chain (I loved my plextor CD-RW and my magneto optical drive) - but it's really not an issue anymore. Proof of that would be the fact that Plextor isn't even going to be making SCSI CD-RW drives in the future, because there's no longer an advantage.

It used to be much faster (MUCH faster) and now the only place it really shines is seek time - which is essentially only very noticable in a server environment.

It has never been cost effective.

Either way, my change was due to several computers I built for other people that were strictly IDE, that felt almost identical in use to my own SCSI machine (which is, in all fairness, almost three years old now). In addition to that, they felt plenty fast as it was - I never really noticed the hard drive spooling up, or any sort of unresponsiveness whatsoever. In all fairness, the $75.00 IDE hard drive on my brother's computer feels every bit as fast (and then some) as my SCSI set-up - which leads me to believe that SCSI is just worthless to the average desktop user.

 

[WyteWatt]

MisterDuck thank you for the real world feel difference you are talking about. I wanted someone to do that. Thank you. Very well appreicated. I sure wish i could do the same then it would be easier choosing hardware.

 

[bcterps]

Why not just buy a small (~10 gig) SCSI drive for your OS, Apps, and Games and use a large IDE drive for everything else? Seems like the best of both worlds. Personally I'd rather go IDE just because of the price issues, unlike most people here I don't need the best of everything hehe.

--Ben

 

[MisterDuck]

I've thought about that very thing, but it's still going to set you back the cost of a SCSI hard drive (I'd say a nine gig drive + controller would be about $150 or so, for cheap stuff?) and then another 75 bucks on top of that for a decent IDE hard drive.

Not to mention the speeds/seek times of the smaller drives are arguably not even as good as a high end IDE drive these days - as you go to a smaller data density, you drastically affect the transfer rates and overall speed of the drive. I know the SCSI drive I have in my current computer is a Seagate 9.1 gig, and it doesn't even feel as fast as the 40 gb IDE drive I just put in a friend's computer.

Once again, with the exception of having a server or the need to access a lot of files in very geographically random locations on a hard drive (IE: a server), I simply don't think SCSI is worth the extra cash or time. Three years ago, I wouldn't have agreed, but times change. IDE has a bright future in desktops - I can't say the same for SCSI in the desktop environment.

 

[WyteWatt]

MisterDuck too bad computer stores does not have like the same computer specs for 10 computers lets say and 5 have the top of the line IDE Hds and the other 5 have the top of the line SCSI HDs. Then you could test them side by side and see how it feels to you personally. I have a feeling i would be very disappointed. I just do not think you can feel much faster. If you do its hard.

 

[Pabster]

MisterDuck wrote:

"Proof of that would be the fact that Plextor isn't even going to be making SCSI CD-RW drives in the future, because there's no longer an advantage."

That isn't proof of anything, except Plextor succumbing to the demands of the market. IDE controls the vast, vast majority. They'd be unable to continue manufacturing and selling exclusively SCSI devices. The market just isn't large enough.

Those who say SCSI no longer has an advantage are misguided. Burn-Proof might make modern IDE writers more reliable, but I like watching my buffers stay at 100% even whilst I'm thrasing every hard disk in the rig. No need for Burn-Proof.

 

[MisterDuck]

<<
That isn't proof of anything, except Plextor succumbing to the demands of the market. >>



...which is, in and of itself, proof that there isn't a market for SCSI peripherals. This "market" you speak of is what dictates what is effective and what is not. Since there is no longer a demand for SCSI burners, Plextor is getting out of it.



<< Those who say SCSI no longer has an advantage are misguided. Burn-Proof might make modern IDE writers more reliable, but I like watching my buffers stay at 100% even whilst I'm thrasing every hard disk in the rig. No need for Burn-Proof. >>



Then you go right ahead and spend twice as much so you can "watch your buffers stay at 100%." How is this an advantage?

Like I said, Plextor is getting out of making SCSI peripherals because there is:
1. No longer a market for it.
2. There is NO MARKET because there is NO ADVANTAGE.

Two years ago, I'd be agreeing with you that SCSI was the way, but that just isn't the truth anymore with desktops. I find SCSI to be a complete and total waste of money for %99 of the people out there - granted, if you HAVE the money and you don't mind wasting it to urk out that tiny, miniscule amount of performance, then go for it. Personally, I think people's money is much better spend elsewhere, but that's just my opinion.

Cheers,
MisterDuck