Login with username and password (forgot your password?)

This is slightly offtopic, but speaking of new music, take a listen to my new organ trio recording.  My friend (the drummer) and I have been wanting to record some organ jazz for a long time and we finally did:
http://www.myspace.com/rootdownorgantrio

god, I cannot recognize a single artist in your screenshot, superboyAC

Yeah, I'm pretty old school.  I'm mostly into jazz, but have nostalgic ties to good country, classic rock, and a pop tune occasionally.

I do use foobar as my library, tagger, transcoder, and ripper smiley
I think one explanation for the high memory usage is that I may still have some album art in tags; but I think I read in one of the threads that Lashiec posted that these are completely ignored.

Just about all my mp3 files have album art embedded in the tags (I don't do the whole keep the jpg file in the folder business).  I don't know if I've ever noticed the memory usage being high.  Sometimes it goes high, but I don't why, and it's only temporary.  Then again, I don't have my whole library loaded into it, usually just a couple albums or maybe 100 songs or so.

In fact my current library (a small one on a 2.5 HD!) is about 1242 entries (most of it cue sheets) and foo is using 45mb of RAM + 37 of virtual memory.

I wonder why that is...

I have about 700 songs loaded right now, it's 15 mB RAM.  Cue sheets?!  What are you playing, lossless files?  Or do you keep your albums as one file and navigate the tracks through the cue?  That's pretty hard core.

foobar is the most ridiculously configurable app I've ever seen.
After hours of browsing and configuring, this is the best interface I liked (I got bits and pieces of it from other people, I barely did anything).  Just FYI, I don't use my mp3 player as my "library" meaning all the songs are loaded in once, and I keep playing them.  I drag and drop my songs from my file manager.  I say this because a lot of people use their mp3 player as their library manager, so the preferable interface would be different.  I also don't prefer the foobar configs that automatically group the songs of one album together in a fancy way.  I like having each file it's own entity.  Anyway, that being said, here's my screenshot:
[attachthumb=1]

Glad you like it Darwin.  It just feels like a good program, doesn't it?  The more I use it, the nicer it actually gets.  If I ever need an indexer, this is definitely the one I'll get...at least for now.  It's still amazing how little coverage this app has on the internet.  There's nothing!

I think the size of the index depends on the type of files.  For example, if you're a programmer and you have 300 GB of code, that's basically all text, so the index (which is all text) is going to be large.  But if you have a lot of word documents (text in a bloated container) then the index will be smaller.  So, it just depends on the kinds of files you have.

superboyac - what is it that you especially like about archivarius? I'm just curious - I've tried Filehand, YDS, X1 and have recently gone back to Copernic. X1 was the best of the bunch in terms of speed and features but had all sorts of "issues", most irritatingly with Outlook (putting a notebook into standby or hibernate with Outlook minimized to the system tray - take that, Raymond Chen  - caused errors in both X1 and Outlook on resuming my system). Copernic is OK, but it takes quite a while to display previews of the files that it finds, which is very annoying. Perhaps I should take archivarius for a test drive...

Darwin, like I said before, I'm not much of a desktop search user, so I can't discuss the details like I normally do with other software.  From what little experience I had, it seemed like Archivarius was just really lightweight, it's interface was simple, yet nothing really lacking.  It was fast (faster than x1 from my experience).  The only other one I've tried is x1, and I felt like archivarius was a little less intrusive as far as monitoring.  I don't know, like I said, I barely have any experience with these kinds of softwares.  I know a big issue with these are how compatible it is with your specific email program, etc., but I didn't even consider that.  i was only concerned about text documents, word documents, and the like.

Basically, Archivarius just felt better than x1 and I liked it right off the bat.  I base this on nothing more than a "sense" I've developed from using a lot of software.  That probably doesn't help you at all, but it's the truth in this case.

Maybe someone with more experience should do a roundup of desktop search software, any volunteers?

Geez man, why do you have so many documents?  You must be a programmer...indeed, you are (I looked at your bio).  Nice!

This Archivarius is a cool piece of software.  I really like it a lot, from what little I've used it.  Granted, I'm not too big on desktop searching softwares, namely because I keep my computer really OCD organized.  I have an extremely organized file structure, I keep multiple note-taking databases for random notes and information, and my email program is well organized as well.  But, sometimes, it does help to find something where you need to search across the board.  Archivarius does this pretty nicely.  And it's a lightweight program!  And relatively cheap, especially if you're a student.

The only other desktop search I've used is X1, and I like archivarius better.  There's barely anything on the internet about this program, how come?  Weird.

My brief impressions of TC, and some of the odd feature requests from ex-TC users about what they'd like the mouse buttons to do in Opus, is that moving from it to any other program would be a bit weird in a few ways. Or maybe that's just a configuration thing (i.e. it allows you to make it weird but it also has the option of working the way most other Windows apps do) in which case that's fair enough.

Right, I've gotta get out of the house to go buy the new NIИ album that came out today (tomorrow in the USA) for £12. Despite buying his last five albums and turning a few dozen people on to his music, I don't get a free copy .

Hehe... that would be me.  I think that I'm the main one making the posts about what the button clicking should be like on the mouse.  I did a particularly detailed post on the DOpus forum just recently.  In my defense, it's not that I want the clicking to be like TC because I'm used to that.  On the contrary, I'm used to DOpus and haven't used TC for 2 years now.  But the mouse navigation on TC allowed faster navigation with fewer mistakes (as far as selecting things and drag & dropping).  It's very subtle.

Anyway, I suggested it and got an email confirmation back from the Dr., but I don't know if it is being seriously considered.

To be honest, I just don't even want to deal with that right now.  I just want to make sure my stuff is backed up on 3 different hard drives and I'll be ok.  Like I said, I'll explain in more detail on my next blog and it will make more sense.  Believe me, my next computer I build, I will be much more sophisticated.

The problem with me is that my computer habits are borderline OCD, and for me to change anything requires months of mental preparation if that makes any sense.  It took me maybe a year to actually switch all my email to the Bat, after I decided that I was going to switch.  Not because switching was hard, but mentally it was stressfull for me.

You bring up an interesting point about that overheating.  My old hard drive practically died immediately after copying over about 200GB onto the new drive.  I wonder if that caused it to die, all that work it did.  That's worrisome, because shouldn't a drive be able to handle that?  It's not like I was doing something the drive isn't designed for.  Should I be careful about this when I do it again?

Speaking of hear, these drives get HOT!  I looked online and the operating temperatures go up to 70 C (which is about 160 F) which is really hot.  So, even though it's hot, it seems like it's not dangerous.  Is this a correct conclusion?

Thanks f0dder,
I don't think I can exchange this drive at the store.  I got it from Fry's over 2 years ago, I don't think they would allow any kind of return at this point, so I have to go straight to Seagate.

I'm not ready for raid yet.  I have an old computer, and I just want to be able to back stuff up on it for now.  When it's time to get a new one, I'll probably think about raid and all that.  My next blog is going to be about this backup solution I'm doing.  Maybe I'll call it "robust backing up for people with old computers and old technology".  Or something like that.

Man, I'm so fortunate that I copied all that data onto the new drive just hours before the original drive died.  I'm still a little shell-shocked by the whole thing, because my drive crashed 2 years ago (the one this replaced) and I vowed never to go without backing up again.  Then, when I came up with this solution, I waited months for the Seagates to go on sale.  Then, right when I buy it and copy the data over, the drive dies.  I couldn't believe it.  I've taken the new drive out of the computer, and I'm not putting it back in until I get the replacement to copy the data over again.  I'm very tense right now.

Hi, I need some advice rather badly.

I need to return a Seagate hard drive for an exchange as it just went bad on me.  I went through their process and got the RMA number and all that.  I also got their information on packaging instructions.  Can anyone here describe their experiences returning drives to Seagate and things I should pay attention to?

For example, should I get shipping insurance?  Can I just send the drive back in it's original box?  And stuff like that.  (I don't mind excruciating detail!)

I've had a horrible day.  2 weeks ago, I bought 2 500GB Seagate drives thinking they were the 7200.10 line, but I just found out they were the dreaded 7200.9.  Just then, my existing 300GB Seagate storage drive died on me.  This would have been a huge disaster, but by a stroke of what I can only call divine intervention, I had just backed up that drive on one of the new drives just hours before!  I mean, I've been planning for months to back it up hoping nothing would happen until I found a good deal on the 500GB drives.  Now, I'm dead scared that the new drive will die sometime before the replacement gets shipped to me.  Please don't let that happen.  PLease.

Also, when i get the replacement drive, what will be the warranty on that?  THe previous drive's warranty would have lasted until 2010, I hope the replacement will last until at least 2010 also, or else, it kind of sucks, right?

Well, thanks for any help. 

Nudel, thanks for writing here.  People, Nudel is extremely active in the DC forums and is very, very helpful in answering DOpus questions.

I agree with most of what you wrote here, and I can understand your frustration with some of what's been discussed here.  I also respect Zaine's opinion, who has been very helpful here on the DC forum.  I really think the main, core issue here is the money, and that is what's getting people riled.  Regardless of what features are added or aren't added to DOpus 9, it's the price that is bothering people.  There's no right or wrong about.  If GP charges too much, he will price himself out of the business, and if he charges too little, he won't be able to sustain himself.  There's a very large middle ground and that's where we are.  It's economics, people, and the owner is free to charge whatever he wants, and we as customers have the right to choose whether to buy or not.  So, no one is really doing anything wrong here.

Personally, I wish DOpus was cheaper, but there's nothing I can do about it.  But I like the program so much and it's just so dang useful that I'm going to pay the upgrade fee anyway.  I guess the only other thing I can ask for is maybe GP can give an *extra* discount for Donationcoder users for the upgrade?

In any case, let's just remember that money is the real issue here not the quality of the programs.  I think it's pretty obvious that DOpus and XYplorer are both well-written, useful, and fantastic programs.  Comparing the two is like debating whether or not chocolate or vanilla ice cream is better.  They're both delicious.

Well, Zaine does have a point.  I wouldn't say that XYPlorer would be at the same level of DOpus if only for a dual-pane feature, but I can certainly understand where he's coming from.  As great as DOpus is, their pricing is a little hostile.  I've even seen some people on other forums question GPSoft's pricing scheme compared to other similar programs, and GPsoft didn't take too kindly to it.

Realistically speaking, all we can hope for is a nice discount here at DC, otherwise, if you want it you'll have to pay for it.

Thanks, I'll try Google Desktop.  You know, I've never really liked the big name desktop search programs.  The best one I've tried recently is the one called Archivarius, which has a mini-review here at DC.

As far as adding notes to files, it won't happen here.  The secretaries are the ones writing the memos and the file-naming system was established a long time ago (really lame system).  I doubt too many people are even aware of file-indexing programs, but I needed one because I lost one of my memos.  I try to not let people here notice how much I've customized my computer work, or else they'd think I was extremely OCD and anal.

I'm looking for something like an x1 desktop search, but that will allow me to index network files also.  I downloaded the now free version of x1, but it won't allow network files to be indexed.  I seem to remember someone here suggesting a program that started with "A" that was an interesting desktop search software, but it had not been developed for a while.

Anyway, please let me know.  Here's the application:  on our network at work, there is a drive that has a bunch of memo's (Word files) and the filenames are just numbers, so I need to be able to search the content of the documents if I am to find anything.  Thanks.

I'm at work, and I can't view that preview because the address has nude in it.  The filter here blocks it as containing pornographic content.

 

Well, depending on how much you like DOpus, it's almost as exciting as porn, so maybe you should wait until you go home to read it!

Wow!  Did you guys check out nudel's preview of the new v9?  It's freakin amazing.  Expensive or not, this program is crazy!
http://nudel.dopus.com/opus9/

Dopus is the shiznit!

Yeah, DOpus' one "negative" has always been their pricing.  But, damn, if it isn't one of the finest pieces of software ass around.  Darwin's right, even though they are giving us a somewhat nice 40% discount for the upgrade, the original price is so expensive in the first place, that the upgrade fee alone is still more than the regular price of other software.  Oh well, as long as the quality of the software remains excellent, then it's ok I guess.

well, right now I'm in foobar heaven. It took me 2-3 days of struggling, but I'm impressed. bye MM, xmplay for now...

Oh yeah!  I switched to foobar last year also.  What a pain in the ass program it is to customize the way you want it.  But once you figure it out, it's great.  I hate their forum with a passion.  Not the content, but finding anything in there is a nightmare.  Foobar's forum made me appreciate how beautifully done this DC forum is.

Yes, it would be nice to hear from the software authors.  Of course, the collectorz authors have a pretty active forum of their own.

Even though this thread has changed from it's original intent, I think we are still keeping it relevant to the title question, "Why is it so hard to find a decent image organizer?".  The reason why it's so hard, is because there are so many programs out there and a lot of them are very good at one thing or another, and it's very difficult to find the specific combination of features you are looking for.  What I'm finding out now, after doing a few reviews here, is how difficult it is to review almost any kind of software.  There are a lot of half-ass reviews around, but it is extremely difficult to do a nice comprehensive review of anything.  You almost can't say anything is the best; everything needs to be qualified to some extent.

This is becoming an interesting thread.

So, which software seems to be better as a cataloger?  To me, it seems like several people here have gravitated towards ExifPro and Photo Collector, and the primary reason for this seems to be the speed of the two applications.  I know that the OP, MrCrispy, had started this thread with other very specific features in mind, but it seems like speed is really the key factor here.

I haven't tested either program in detail yet, but from a first glance it seems like ExifPro has more options and customizeability than Photo Collector.  On the other hand, I think PC might have more powerful organizational tools, just based on my familiarity with collectorz software.  As a viewer, I think ExifPro is the better program, I don't think PC is meant to be used as a viewer.

Right now, I use ACDSee as my viewer, as I'm sure a lot of people do.  I don't use anything for an image organizer or cataloger, however.  I can see myself replacing ACDSee with ExifPro as my primary viewer, but I don't know about cataloging.  I guess that is the ultimate question in this thread; which is the better cataloging software?

Wow, exifPro IS fast!  That's pretty cool.  I don't know how much it will slow down once it has thousands of pictures, but it's definitely faster than any other application I've tried.  It seems to have a lot of nifty features also, at first glance.  Perhaps this will pry me away from ACDSee, as far as my main viewer (as tomos suggested).  MrCrispy is still probably going to want several specific features, but this is a nice surprise so far.

I really liked Lightroom when I tried it, but boy, was it slow!

I wonder about Seagate's Barracuda drives - they are very nice drives (quick and quiet) but I can't help wondering about the temperatures they reach. It is great having quiet drives but they seem to acheive this by insulating them so that the sound can't get out - unfortunately this means the heat can't either.

So, I just bought two Seagate 500GB drives from fry's this weekend ($120 each!).  Carol is right, the drives get hot!  Not just warm, but like "ouch" hot.  I did a little reading online, and apparently the hot temperatures are well within the operating temperature of the drive, so that's good.  Besides, I do have that 5 year warranty.  Of course, there's the issue of data recovery, which I'm taking care of by backing stuff up (which will be the topic of my next blog).

On a related note, I was at Vegas last week for business, and at one of the expos, there was a Seagate booth, and I had a nice talk with one of their guys.  They have a line of drives (7200.2, 7200.3) which was strange because the newest consumer line is 7200.10.  I didn't really get a good answer on why they named it such, but it sounded like some internal marketing disputes.  Anyway, the .2 and .3 lines aren't advertised or sold in retail stores like the 7200.10 lines, but they are the same drives with modifications done to reduce noise, heat, and be more efficient.  They are for applications like data storage (video, audio) where speed isn't such a big issue, so they are designed to be quieter and cooler.  Anyway, I would've bought them if the 7200.10 weren't so cheap at Fry's.

PS I saw a server rack that had 42 hard drives in it (all in the space of about 3 or 4 RU's).  It had a fan blowing over it like a freakin jet engine!

[Backing Up My Data]

Backing Up My Data
A "Unique" Solution

[attach=1]

We all know that it's vital to back up our important data, but how many of us actually do it diligently?  It's easy when the amount of data you have can fit on a disk, cd, dvd, etc., but once you get into much larger sizes, backing up becomes much more complicated, much more of a nuisance, and the average person just will not have the proper motivation to do it--especially if it's only personal data and not work related or something.

As hardcore as I am with computers, I fell into this lackadaisical mindset.  Unfortunately, I had all of my data on the dreaded IBM 80 GB Deskstar (aka "DeathStar") drive.  The drive died mechanically and I lost all my data.  I couldn't afford the expensive data recovery services (who can?), so that was it.  I vowed to take backing up seriously from that point on.  It took 2 years, but I finally came up with a solution that I feel is great for my situation, and hopefully it will help others here.

The reason why I call this a "unique" solution is because that's what a random guy told me at Fry's when I was talking to him about it.  This is not the traditional backup solution that gets talked about a lot (images, raid arrays, external drives, etc.).  There are many reasons why I chose this solution:

• I have a relatively old computer (early 2002).  It's not RAID ready, and the motherboard doesn't have a SATA connection.  I built the computer myself, and it's nowhere near its last legs, and can still do everything I need.  So, I'm not really ready to buy a new computer or build a new one.  Besides, getting a new computer is a big ordeal for me (personal computer, not for work) and I don't even want to deal with that right now.
  
  
• Cost.  I want to keep the cost of all of this pretty low, like around $400.  Even if I wanted to buy a new computer, it would cost a lot more than that.  Of course, I don't want to sacrifice quality either, so I won't be spending money on gimmicks.
  
  
• I don't want an external hard drive or enclosure.  I just plain don't like them.  I can't even say that I have a good reason for not liking them, because I know they work perfectly fine.  First, I don't want another thing hanging off my computer.  Second, I feel much more secure having a hard drive plugged directly into the motherboard, there's something satisfying about all that.  I barely ever have the need to take my hard drive anywhere, so I don't need the portability.  Third, I've never liked USB and I don't have Firewire (nor do I want to buy an adapter), and I don't really like firewire either.  Having said all this, for a while, I was considering getting one of those enclosures that has all the connections on it, like, usb, firewire, and esata.  But, I decided against it.
  
  
• I didn't want an image of my data or anything like RAID mirroring.  I simply wanted the files backed up on a separate drive.  That way, I can take that drive out of the computer and take it anywhere else, and those files will still be accessible without having to do anything else.  I struggled with this one for a while going back and forth between just backing up files, to imaging, to doing incremental backups with software, etc.  In the end, I just kept it simple.

Anyway, since I was very picky and indecisive, it took me forever to make up my mind.  I even started several threads here at DC asking about various things related to this, check them out:

• How do you backup your files?
• Recommendations for good external hard drive solutions?
• Anyone actually use rewriteable media?
• Best way to protect hard drive that is only used for backup?
• Will copying 300 GB from one hard drive to another kill it?

OK, enough suspense, I will get on with the show!


Description
I have about 300 GB of data I want to have backed up.  They are currently stored on two separate hard drives (Western Digital 120 GB, and a 300 GB Seagate, both PATA, if you must know).  The 300 GB Seagate is the drive that replaced the 80 GB DeathStar I had previously (this is interesting for a reason which you'll find out later).  I keep all my storage files (music, documents, etc.) on the Seagate drive.  On the WD drive is my OS and some storage files on a separate partition, some of which eventually get moved to the Seagate (my methods are complicated).

I decided I needed a 500 GB drive to back everything up and still leave some room for future space.  However, I wasn't going to get just one drive, but rather, TWO new ones.  This is not for RAID or anything.  One drive I would leave in my computer that would back up my data regulary (weekly) and the other drive I would keep in a separate location (my parent's house) and that would get backed up monthly.  This system should be more or less foolproof.  The chances of all 3 locations being destroyed simultaneously is very slim (I hope I didn't just jinx myself!).  I say three locations because of:

• The original data on the two old PATA drives.
• Each new 500 GB will backup (mirror, in a sense) the above drives.  So, they are essentially the same.  Except one is in a physically different location.
• That's 3 locations of identical data.  That's pretty good.

So, that's essentially the whole solution right there.  It's not terribly groundbreaking or anything, but few people do it this way.  Most people are either very commercial about it (RAID drives, tape backup, backup/imaging software) or very simplistic (external hard drive).  I find this to be a happy medium between the two.

>>Rambling Anectode Alert<<
Back to that guy at Fry's who called this "unique".  He was obviously a knowledgeable computer guy and he was trying to give me advice (not knowing that I had thought this through for months).  I was wondering out loud whether it was time for a new computer when I needed to get a SATA adapter for my motherboard, and I wanted SATA II, but those only came in PCI-Xpress cards, whereas my motherboard only had regular PCI slots.  The guy told me, "It's time, just do it".  Then he listened to what I was doing and he said to just get an external drive.  Then we went back and forth in what I would describe as a polite argument with some mild tension.  Eventually, he said, "Well, it seems like you've come up with a unique solution."  I mean, we talked about everything: my somewhat irrational dislike of USB/Firewire; how to transport/handle a drive between different physical locations; warranties of external drives vs. internal drives.  He was just trying to help, but I think it was a frustrating experience for him, and if he's reading this, I apologize.

What I Needed To Buy (in detail)
Hard Drives:
The most important item here is the hard drive to get.  But which one?  Oh, I struggled with this for a while.  As I asked around, everyone had vastly different opinions on which drives were better.  Bottom line is that it's ultimately a crap shoot; there is no right answer.  I decided that the most important consideration here by far was the drive's warranty.  How come?  Well, since my data is being backed up in 3 locations, I'm not really in danger of losing the data, so that takes reliability of of the equation.  You see, I'm not relying on the hard drive's quality, but instead I am relying on physical redundancy.  With reliability out of the way, that only leaves issues like warranty, temperature, noise level, speed, etc.  I only care about warranty, because I'm not doing anything too intense with the drive and I don't care about anything except my files.  With Seagate offering 5-year warranties on all their drives, that pretty much made up my mind.  Western Digital also has 5-year warranties on some of theirs, but Seagate is more available and offers it on ALL of their drives.  So, I waited for months for Seagate's 7200.10 500 GB drives to go on sale (tracking it using Website-Watcher).  They finally did at both Fry's (not really; see end of this article) and Newegg (with a $10 Ben's Bargains coupon), and I got them.

[attachthumb=7]

SATA Adapter:
The other thing I needed was a PCI SATA adapter for my motherboard, since it wasn't SATA ready.  I got one at Fry's for about $30 (SIIG brand).  By the way, I found out that for PCI, only SATA I (1.5 GB/s) is available and not SATA II (3 GB/s).  No big deal.  Why didn't I get PATA?  Well, for one thing, if I'm going to get something new, I might as well get the most modern incarnation possible for future use.  Secondly, I heard you can hot-swap a SATA drive (actually, I'm too paranoid to remove/insert a hard drive while the computer is still on, but just in case I get over that, I hear it's possible).  Thirdly, I already have two PATA drives in my computer, along with two DVD drives and you can only have a maximum of 4 IDE devices.  I don't need both DVD drives (a burner and an older reader) so I will take one of them out anyway to free up a 5-1/4" slot.  Most of all, I hate that big-ass PATA cable.  [attachthumb=2]

Removable Hard Drive Bay:
The next thing I got was the icing on the cake; the i-Rack QuickSwap SATA drive mount, from CoolDrives (made by CoolGear).  This thing is so cool.  You can basically slip your bare drive in and out as if it were a floppy disk!  I love that so much.  No more tray's or whatever other mobile racks use.  Check it out:

[attach=4]

Synchronization Software:
The last thing I needed was a program to synchronize my files (remember, NOT backup or image, just synchronize).  The best tool for this is DirSync.  I discovered DirSync right here at DC; zridling is pretty big on it as a synchronization tool.  It's highly configurable and according to zridling, very accurate.
[attachthumb=3]

So that's it.  The whole thing cost me under $400.  It's not cheap, but my data is worth much, much more than that to me.  Also, any other solution as robust as this would cost significantly more (tape backup, RAID array).  And always remember, "RAID is not an alternative to backing up!"  I still don't understand why people say that.  If anyone can explain it, I'd appreciate it.

Here's a summary:

Two Seagate SATA 500 GB hard drives	$290 ($145 x 2)
PCI SATA I adapter	$30
i-Rack QuickSwap	$40 ($30 + $10 shipping)
DirSync software	$25
TOTAL	$385

Installation and Subsequent Issues
So, now that I have all the hardware I need, installation should be a breeze, right?  Normally, this would be the case, but what an ordeal this turned out to be.

First thing I had to do was remove my old DVD reader to free up a 5-1/4" slot, since I now have a DVD burner.  That was easy enough, and it was also very easy to install the i-Rack Quickswap Bay into the slot.  Then I used up the very last PCI slot remaining in my computer (another sign that I may need a new computer soon!) for the SATA adapter.  I connected the SATA bay to the adapter, and I was ready to go.  Next, I opened one of the Seagate drives from it's retail kit package and slid it into the new bay.  I was now ready to start backing up my data.

[attachthumb=5] [attachthumb=6] [attachthumb=8]
[attachthumb=10] [attachthumb=9] [attachthumb=11]

I started Windows and everything was fine (it takes a little longer to boot while the SATA adpater does something).  I formatted the drive with NTFS using Windows default administration tools.  I set up DirSync to transfer the information over and after double-checking several times, I started the process.  It took a while (a few hours?) but when it was done, it was all very good.  I checked to see if the data was properly backed up and everything.  I was happy, and took a couple of hours off for good behavior.  I came back to the computer to do some other stuff, was browsing the internet, and, BAM, everything freezes on the screen.  I couldn't do anything, I couldn't even reboot or type, move the mouse...nothing.  I thought, "No big deal, the computer just crashed."  When I restarted, the BIOS would not recognize my old Seagate 300 GB storage drive.  It was gone.  That was a disaster.  I was so freaked out and devastated that I had to go on my bed and just lie down for a minute.  You see, I had forgotten that I had just backed up all the data only hours before!  It took me a few minutes to remember that fact, but when I did, I was relieved a little.  However, now, I was on pins and needles because my data was still only in one location on the new Seagate.  Just to be safe, I pulled the drive out and was not intending to use it again until I receive the replacement drive from Seagate.  THAT'S WHY YOU WANT THE 5-YEAR WARRANTY; THAT OLD DRIVE WAS COVERED UNTIL 2010!

But, it got a little worse.  When I pulled out the new Seagate I had bought, I noticed on the label that it was of the 7200.9 line.  Well, now I was really pissed because I wanted the newest 7200.10 line with the perpendicular recording.  Not only that, but I remember hearing about problems with the 7200.9 line.  I wanted to return both drives, but I couldn't because one of them had the only copy of my life's data!  So, I returned one of them and kept the other one.  Then, I bought the 7200.10 from Newegg, and it arrived in 2 days!

I sent the dead drive to Seagate (it cost me about $10).  About 3 weeks later, I received the replacement drive from Seagate.  3 weeks is a long time to wait (especially when you're anxious), but it's not so bad, so I commend Seagate on that.  I don't know if the hard drive I got back was refurbished, but I checked the warranty and it's still until 2010 (like the original drive) so I'm happy.  The old hard drive that I sent to them was the 7200.8 line and the new one I got back is a 7200.10.

[attachthumb=12]     [attachthumb=15]

Now that I had a complete set of healthy drives, I got back to synchronizing the drives.  I used DirSync to not only synchronize the two new hard drives, but I also used it to reverse synchronize the replaced hard drive with the original data.  So, I've only had this "solution" in place for a couple of weeks, and I've already had to do a complete backup/restore process.  I would say that it's paid off already!  I count myself extremely fortunate that the data got backed up in time.  It was really very foolish of me to wait for so long without having some kind of backup solution in place.

So, there's my story.  I hope it helps all of you reading this.  For anyone that has any kind of irreplaceable, personal data on their computer, you absolutely MUST be backing it up.  Remember, it's all fine and easy when you only have a few megabytes or gigabytes of data, and it fits on a CD/DVD.  The effort level is much higher when you're talking about backing up entire hard drives, and that's where most people will lose the motivation to backup.  Think about how much it's worth to you.    For me, it's worth way more than the $400 I put into it.  I'm still devastated by the IBM drive that died on me in 2005, what I call the "Crash of '04".  In the words of Juvenile, "Back that Azz Up".

LAter,
SuperboyAC

[attach=14]

Random Ranting

• One thing I learned about Seagate's new 7200.10 drives (the ones that have perpendicular recording technology) is that you can't buy any of them in a retail box at the store, except for the 750 GB model.  That's why the one I got from Fry's was a 7200.9 model.  The worst part of all this is that nowhere on the box can you tell which line of drives you have.  Seagate should really write that clearly somewhere on the box.  Of course, for the astute observer, if you recognize the long model number on the Fry's sticker, that might help.
  
  
• I kept one of the 7200.9 drives, so I have one of each.  Man, that 7200.9 drive has a pretty loud seek noise.  I think I will use that one as my monthly backup, so I won't have to listen to it.  I really don't care that much about the noise, but I know some people do, and I wanted to point out that the 7200.10 model was quieter.
  
  While I'm talking about Seagate's line of drives, let me mention a recent experience of mine.  A few weeks ago, I was in las Vegas for a convention (business) and one of the booths there was Seagate.  Since all this stuff was fresh on my mind at the time, I had a nice, long chat with the rep there.  I told him that I had heard that people were complaining about the 7200.10 and 7200.9 line running hot and being loud.  I also asked him for recommendations for drives that just store data files (like music, video, documents, etc.) and don't necessarily need to be super speedy or anything.  He said that Seagate has a line of drives tagged 7200.2 and 7200.3 that are the equivalents of the 7200.9 and 7200.10, respectively.  They are designed for exactly what I was saying; to run cooler, quieter, and not necessarily as fast.  He said they are primarily for DVR applications, which would also include audio files.  They have an 8 MB cache instead of 16 MB (I don't completely understand what the cache is for, but I know it has to do with speed...mostly the kind of speed that probably doesn't concern my use).  You won't find these drives in any of your stores, nor is it even talked about around the internet much at all.  Seagate doesn't even explicitly market them.  They are used a lot in stuff like Tivo boxes from what I understand.  You can buy it from a couple of vendors online, but none of the major ones.  I asked him what was the deal with the numbering system of the drive line (you would assume 7200.2 is much older than 7200.10, but it's not the case).  He agreed and told me that there were some internal issues regarding that among the different Seagate divisions, and his people don't use those numbers when referring to those drives, and simply call them the "DB35" models because that is the model name.  I thought this was all very interesting, but then again, I'm a geek!  The reason why I'm explaining all of this is because most of this information is not anywhere else on the internet, so I wanted to at least have it on record for anyone who might be wondering.  You have to admit, it's pretty confusing if you don't know the whole story.
  
  
• When I pulled out the dead Seagate after it died on me, it was pretty dang hot.  I try to do what I can do keep my drives cool, but I know I can do better.  Just FYI, the operating temperature on these drives is listed up to 70 degrees Celsius, which is pretty freakin hot, so it's nothing out of the ordinary.  Also, transferring 300 GB and sustaining that heat for that long may not be that good of an idea.  But, again, it's not like I was doing something the drive wasn't designed for.
  
  
• When I was still considering an external enclosure solution, I wanted one that had every possible connection on it; firewire, usb, eSata, etc.  There weren't that many, but here's a pretty cool one I found:
  USB, Firewire 400, Firewire 800, eSATA...$110 (eek!)
  
  
• Like I said before, everyone has had vastly different experiences with hard drives, as far as them dying.  I'm absolutely convinced that no one is better than the other, it's just that some people have randomly had better luck with some companies than others.  Of all the drives I've owned, here are my experiences:
  I've had 2 Western Digital drives, both of them have never died, and lasted for years.  My current OS drive is an old 120 GB WD drive.  I had a Maxtor that died on me within 6 months in 1999 when I was in college (you can see a picture of that computer in the picture at the end of this article).  I have since had a bad taste in my mouth for Maxtor and haven't bought one since (although they are now part of Seagate, ironically).  And there's that IBM Desk Star which I've already mentioned.  Even though they have since been acquired by Hitachi and the quality is supposedly much better, I still can't get over it.  Of course, now, all I care about is the 5-year warranty, so if Hitachi can match or beat that, I would think again.
  
  
• I love that i-Rack QuickSwap bay, but I have a couple of minor complaints with it.  Like most of these mobile drive bays, there's a lock on the door to lock the door.  On this thing, when the hard drive is inside, it's such a tight fit that you have to push the door in with one hand to turn the lock to the locked position.  Otherwise, the lock won't turn.  It shouldn't be that way.  Also, the outside casing of the rack is made of plastic, and, naturally, I'd prefer a cool metal like aluminum.  Other that that, there's no real complaints with the thing.
  
  
• I recommend to everyone to keep the boxes that your hard drives come in, in case you have to return it.  Seagate is VERY picky about how you send them your hard drive for an RMA.  They have a long pdf document telling you how to package it.  Fortunately, I had the old retail box, so I just sent it back in that.  Otherwise, I would have had to go to the store and buy a clamshell box, or some foam and stuff, which would increase the overall cost and hassle.  Just a little helpful advice to you hard drive owners in case you're the type to throw out boxes packages come in.
  
  
• <Shameless Plug!>
  For over two years, my good friend and I have been wanting to start a jazz organ trio.  Well, we finally found a guitar player and put something together.  Some of you may remember my cheesy organ tunes on the DC podcasts, so here is the real thing.  Please check it out!