Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 5, 2009, 4:00 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 83
Default

I will agree that no storage in terms of backing up is perfect, as products these days have to really be researched as to their quality and longevity and in few cases no one brand can stand solely behind its name and say "we've got the best of everything." It used to be (as an example) that WD had a notable advantage over Maxtor from ca. 2001-2004 whereas before that they were roughly even in failure rates (incredibly low + long warranties, especially ca. pre-2001). Then at one point (say about 2004-2006, Seagate was kicking everyone's tail with their Barracuda line. Now though, Maxtor is universally considered trash (internal + external), both Seagate and WD are rightfully demonized for their Indian tech support that rarely fixes the problem and Seagate is especially bad about sending refurbished drives (notably more than WD) instead of replaced failed HDDs in the warranty period with brand new ones like they should. People are RMA'ing drives to Seagate on average 5 times to up to 7-8 just to get a brand new one or at least one that doesn't fail in a few weeks to months after replacement. At the very least, LaCie's heralded for Oregon-based U.S. tech support that in very high % of cases sends new drives during the warranty period and is very helpful on the support lines. If someone buys Calvary drives, it has no website one can access and the Fantom line (while recently stepping up and giving 2-yr warranties to match LaCie's Neil Poulton line) have considerable problems with the cases they use for external HDDs where the chipset interface fails and users either crack the case and use it for an internal HDD if they have the drive bay open + connection for the mobo or they pop it into a new case with a more reliable chipset and viola... Lots of people like Samsung HDDs + burners but their reliability is sometimes mixed although there are many users that when they get a good one of either, love them. The common denominator is that one can only hope to make a good informed decision nowadays after doing a fair amount of research; however, it doesn't garantee with the 'cost-cutting-corners' bandwagon approach of the majority that some product won't fall through the cracks. The only exception to all this is Taiyo Yuden and their 8x media line from Rima.com, who on the off chance someone gets even ONE bad media in the spindle, Rima will replace it at Rima's expense and the user's out nothing. Aside from that, going internal or external drives for backup means nothing's guaranteed anymore and anyone can get bitten. BTW, in theory with the new SSD drives (once they become as affordable to consumers as current 500 gb - 1 TB SATA-2 3.0 mb interface ones) will eliminate heat and write head problems as failure issues in current HDDs. However, with the way this world is going and with fewer people + companies ultimately caring about quality and the end user, I wouldn't be surprised if those don't end up being slightly dodgy too (depending on who ends up selling them and who that company uses for their chips and assembly), requiring the same kind of current research now to attempt to determine what appears to be a better choice (but not the perfect one). :roll:


fotografo35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2009, 9:48 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Decatur, GA
Posts: 2,053
Default

The people I work for swear by seagate hard drives.

Also the important things for backups is on two different mediums in case one medium fails. I use memorex CD/DVD-Rs and netygear storage central with seagate hard drives in that. Both are duplicates of each other. With one folder on the netgear drive = contents of the DVD or CD of the same name.

dave
Photo 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2009, 10:37 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

I have never had a problem with a Seagate HDD. That's since 1980. And that includes 22 years owning a computrer consulting company.

One thing I have noticed is that when a HDD fails under warranty, and the PC was from HP, Compaq, Gateway, Dell, etc., the drive that failed was a Maxtor, WD, etc., and the replacement drive was from Seagate, and there's never a problem after that.

IBM, Hitachi, Samsung, & Toshiba are all good, but when it's my data, I want a Seagate.

Internal.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 6, 2009, 4:23 PM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 83
Default

Photo 5 wrote:
Quote:
The people I work for swear by seagate hard drives.

Also the important things for backups is on two different mediums in case one medium fails. I use memorex CD/DVD-Rs and netygear storage central with seagate hard drives in that. Both are duplicates of each other. With one folder on the netgear drive = contents of the DVD or CD of the same name.

dave
While I never concluded Seagate was "junk," it's no longer the obvious leader it was during period I cited. What I was saying is that Seagate's now having significant quality issues and just by the reviews at Newegg on several different drives, users there that have had their drives die aren't impressed. Additionally, a lot of these problems are happening just in the last 2 months with Seagate. Here's what I was referring to:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822148335
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16822148294
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=22-148-262&SortField=0&SummaryType=0&Pagesize =10&SelectedRating=-1&PurchaseMark=&VideoOnlyMark=False&Ve ndorMark=&Keywords=(keywords)&Page=3
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductReview.aspx?Item=22-148-298&SortField=0&SummaryType=0&Pagesize =10&SelectedRating=-1&PurchaseMark=&VideoOnlyMark=False&Ve ndorMark=&Page=1&Keywords=(keywords)

Add to that Seagate has now tossed their exclusive 5-yr warranty in most cases (see here: http://www.lockergnome.com/theoracle...-they-kidding/

I agree internal is preferable to external but only when someone has the extra bay(s) and mobo connections open. If not, one has to go external or build a newer system. In my case, I can't afford to build a new system so I was forced to go external. Does that mean I wouldn't have used an internal drive if I were able to? Not at all--in fact I would have gone that way instead. Notwithstanding, while there are people at NewEgg still swearing by Seagate, there are growing numbers that are swearing AT it after their experience. :? While Seagate's lowering of it's 5-yr warranty to 3-yr may not be major news, it begs the question why--especially in light of user troubles in the last 2 months (and the warranty was lowered on many Seagate drives after 3 Jan).

Some are mentioning the Samsung Spinpoints as well as Hitachi as good drives as well. However, if one takes a gander at cdfreaks.com about Hitachi Deskstars, they have the occasional moniker of "Deathstars." For that matter, drives such as WD, Maxtor in manufactured systems like Dell, Compaq, HP or Gateway...well, that could be the company's fault rather than solely on the drive. I use these reviews as a counterpoint to show that people burned by Seagate are going to WD or some other brand. I've had straight WD drives in my own systems and never had trouble since I've owned them. As I previously stated, WD has had their share of trouble too, but how I'm looking at it is this: past performance no longer matters, as it's clear companies like whether Sony, Plextor (gone now), Verbatim, Seagate, WD or whomever are cutting quality corners in sometimes notable ways that don't bode well for the end user and I'm saying research is now required of all purchases since consumers can no longer trust a company's "past" reputation. Sony banked on that when it decided to deliberately manufacture all those faulty laptop batteries that cost HP, Lenovo, Dell and company over 5.1 million battery recalls. The fact Sony cut serious corners and in fact ordered it to be done was shown by at least 2 independent watchdog groups that had nothing to gain by reporting that. People swore by Plextor (rightfully so) until 2005 when they decided to go short on quality and people RMA'd Plextor 712/716a's 3-8 times and in some cases still never got functioning ones. Before that, people could count on Plextor ODDs to be workhorses for 15 years whereas starting in 2005, they saw they could no longer count on Plextor. :shock: So I stand behind my statement of "buyer beware" and that a buyer should do one's due diligence before making an investment. If someone never gets burned by anyone, I'm pleased as punch.:G

As for Memorex CD/DVDs...if they've never failed on you, that's great. However, while the CDs should be ok (they are typically either Prodisc, CMC or Ritek, with the Prodisc having serious PIE/PIF errors right at the end at ~ 76.5 min to the 80 min end; I've yet to have trouble with the Ritek CD-Rs [knock on wood] while the CMC Magnetics manufactured CD-Rs are sometimes pretty good or slightly dodgy). Also, tests do show it's not advisable to burn anything other than Taiyo Yuden CD-R at the max rated speed, so generally anything except that is recommended to burn 2 speeds below the max rating. I'm sure you knew that general recommendation already though, Photo5. :-) Your backup thing is quite right, as my computer teacher used to say "have a backup in your desk; have a backup in your car and have a backup by your bed." lol (I seriously questioned the backup in a the car part, but I knew he meant have at least 2-3 backups in a safe place in case anything goes wrong). :lol: However, going back to the "Memorex" DVDs, most of those are some variety of CMC Magnetics and they NEVER burn well at 16x or even 12x; the CMC MAG M01 (16x DVD+R), AM1 (16x DVD-R) both have serious tracking error and Focus Error issues that will error out above tolerance levels at those speeds; they only hold up (sometimes barely) at 8x. Also, if you do some research at CDFreaks.com, you'll find people don't trust those Memorex/CMC Magnetic-manufactured DVDs to last for longer than 2 years (even had a guy that had unburned Memorex DVD media that all went bad after 1 year was up). :? So just FYI... :G
fotografo35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 7, 2009, 3:41 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
dr_spock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 879
Default

jranaudo wrote:
Quote:
I'm trying to figure out a safe way to manage our photos.

My current setup I store all my pictures on my local hard drive which is protected by RAID backup. All new photos usually go into a new folder in the root until my wife reorganizes them into the "library".

Once a week or so, I copy all new and changed photos to an external hard drive. I use the microsoft SyncToy 2.0 program to do this. Only renames AND NEW files are copied over. Deletions are not. This results in the backup library
getting littered as my wife will delete files from one place to another from time to time and since I am not carrying over deletions, it gets "dirty".

Any suggestions on how to handle this process?

For example, I am thinking it would be good to give my wife a "playground" where she can put new photos and prepare them before "publishing" them to the library.

Thanks.
I also use Microsoft SyncToy 2.0. You have to set it to "echo" then the deletions you made on the main drive will also happen on the external hard drive. With SyncToy, you can also set the deletes to go into the recycle bin first so that if you change your mind, you have a way out.


dr_spock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 7, 2009, 6:35 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Decatur, GA
Posts: 2,053
Default

Well that what works for me.......... I haven't had any serious issues or problems with my work flow. A lot of my pictures are evidence typework so its important that everything go smooth especially in the area of storage. While people may agree or disagree with the brands I use or the way I store stuff its what weorks for me and never had any serious issues.

dave
Photo 5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 1:57 PM   #17
conor
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I have two computers, each has a lot of disk space. They're in different rooms in the house, on different circuits, on different power bars, and of different ages.

Most of my work is done on one computer, where I have photoshop, outlook, and all the other day-to-day applications I use. The other is used primarily as storage.

Once every month or so, I copy my entire /data folder from one machine to the other across the network. The odds that both machines fail at the same time are extremely low, since one machine is tucked away in a corner and doesnt even have a monitor connected to it, the odds that it gets stolen should I have a break-in is slim.

As time goes on, I'm adding a second drive to the 'storage' machine to mirror the first. I swear by RAID in MOST CASES. Backing up pictures is not one of them. I'm only adding the mirrored disk as an EXTRA level of protection.

1) Think about the failures you've had, or that a friend has had with their computer. The most likelyproblems are: power surges destroying computer, motherboard failure, and THEN drive failure (I've owned 10+ computers over the last 10 years, I have 3 dead hard-drives (out of maybe 25), and 4 dead motherboards (out of 10). In my experience, you're far more likely to lose a motherboard than harddrive. So, if your RAID controller is onboard, you might have to find the EXACT motherboard in order to get your array back up (which we all know is extremely difficult after a few years). So, if you're using RAID as your safety net, you'll probably want an extra controller sitting in a box in case your main one fails.

2) Recovery should you lose data is more difficult, especially with RAID-5 / 6 arrays. I've noted in earlier that a friend lost two drives in a 10 drive RAID-5 array and the datarecovery bill was around 3000. RAID was used in his case to protect 9 drives worth the data at the cost of 1 drive (90% usable space). Because of the relatively low cost of disk space now, 2 500GB drives should cost you under $200 CAD ($160 USD). Why not just mirror them? If one drive fails, replace it, if the controller fails, move one drive it to a different one, the data should all be on both drives. Now, since you're already buying two drives, why not throw them in two different machines instead? Now you gain a bit of security because you've got two isolated systems. Different power supplies, different surge bars, etc.

Personally, I think two copies on two isolated drives is pretty safe. If you fill up one of your "copy" drives, take it out of the machine, put it in a static bag, in a box, in a safe place. You can even store it at the office in your desk. Test it now and again to make sure it's still working.

If money is less of an object, tapes are the way to go. They're one of the oldest backup techniques still in use, and there's reasons for it. Tapes are proven reliable (even after thousands of writes). A quality 20/40 GB tape drive and4 times the tapes required to do one backup is probably suitable for most home-backup setups. You'll likely get 25GB of JPG files on a 20/40 tape. Number your tapes from 1-4. First week of the month, tape set 1, second week, tape set 2, etc. Most backup software understands how to use a tape-backup system, doing a full backup on every tape will give you at all times 3 previous backups, which will incrementally lose 1 more week of data should you have to roll back that far.

Since tapes are more expensive per gigabyte than a harddrive, I've noticed people shy away from them. In reality, they're very stable storage mediums, dont have a pile of sensitive electronics or shock affected moving parts. And since most large companies still use them, its very likely that there will always be drives available to read your tape.

I think I just rant too much (and I definitely don't practice what I preach)


  Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 3:12 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

conor wrote:
Quote:
Recovery should you lose data is more difficult, especially with RAID-5 / 6 arrays. I've noted in earlier that a friend lost two drives in a 10 drive RAID-5 array and the datarecovery bill was around 3000. RAID was used in his case to protect 9 drives worth the data at the cost of 1 drive (90% usable space). ...
The more drives you put into a RAID-5 Array, the greater the likelyhood that two drives will fail. That's why I only ever use three drive RAID-5 Arrayswith hot spares.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 13, 2009, 3:44 PM   #19
conor
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

TCav wrote:
Quote:
conor wrote:
Quote:
Recovery should you lose data is more difficult, especially with RAID-5 / 6 arrays. I've noted in earlier that a friend lost two drives in a 10 drive RAID-5 array and the datarecovery bill was around 3000. RAID was used in his case to protect 9 drives worth the data at the cost of 1 drive (90% usable space). ...
The more drives you put into a RAID-5 Array, the greater the likelyhood that two drives will fail. That's why I only ever use three drive RAID-5 Arrayswith hot spares.
Exactly, which, combined with the low price of harddrives, is another good reason to use mirrors.
  Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:17 PM.