SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Microcap & Penny Stocks : JTS- "A Nordic Drive in Every PC and laptop"

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: David Krafcsik who wrote (1421)10/10/1997 2:28:00 PM
From: Scott Sterling   of 1985
 
> I believe the bigfoot line has some serious drawbacks though

I find it to be more than adequate for my main drive. It is much faster than the 1.2G Maxtor it replaced. The actual specs are 3600RPM and 13.3 ms seek for the 4.3G one (the smaller ones are 14 or 15ms).

But there are elements in its favor, especially if you compare it to a similarly priced 3.5" drive with less storage.
1) The linear velocity of the data is the same as for 3.5" 5400RPM drives, so the data transfer rate is quite good.
2) Seek time to adjacent tracks are similar to 3.5" drives. The reason the avg. seek time looks so bad is because the head has further to go on average. But if you only consider the outermost 3.5 Gigs for instance (partition the drive so that important stuff is on outer tracks, usually the first partition I think) then the avg seek time for that space will be more comparable to 3.5"
3) There is more data on a track, so there is less need to switch tracks or heads.

What does hurt it's performance is latency, since if you pick a spot at random on the drive, it will take longer to spin to that place.
Quantum of course likes to stress the contiunous data speed of the drive and not the random access speed.

--Scott
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext