tantone
10-19-2006, 01:50 AM
Anyone had any experience with these? From what I can see, the performance sucks overall compared to other notebook drives.
Click to See Complete Forum and Search --> : Laptop 1.8" perpendicular storage drives
BipolarBill
10-22-2006, 11:17 AM
That's because there are no 7200RPM perpendicular drives yet. Those would be prohibitively expensive. My perp. Seagate SATA drive is a bit faster than my other 16MB cache drives because all other factors are the same. If it was 5400RPM, it would no doubt be slower.
If you want speed, get a Hitachi or Seagate 7200RPM drive.
If you want speed, get a Hitachi or Seagate 7200RPM drive.
naptownman
10-22-2006, 12:10 PM
Many of the newer notebook products aren't designed to necessarily perform faster. There was an interesting article I read recently where the differences between Americans and Asians were explained. Americans are obsessed with speed, performance, specs, etc. and want to pay as little as possible for the device. Asians, OTH, want lightweight, compact, power efficient devices and will pay sometimes twice or more as much to get it.
Perhaps these drives fall into the latter category where they'll allow a pc make to shrink the thickness or allow room for something else at the expense of raw data read/write throughput.
Perhaps these drives fall into the latter category where they'll allow a pc make to shrink the thickness or allow room for something else at the expense of raw data read/write throughput.
fizur2002
10-23-2006, 04:32 PM
Many of the newer notebook products aren't designed to necessarily perform faster. There was an interesting article I read recently where the differences between Americans and Asians were explained. Americans are obsessed with speed, performance, specs, etc. and want to pay as little as possible for the device. Asians, OTH, want lightweight, compact, power efficient devices and will pay sometimes twice or more as much to get it.
Perhaps these drives fall into the latter category where they'll allow a pc make to shrink the thickness or allow room for something else at the expense of raw data read/write throughput.
To put this into perspective:
Asia
http://www.eastes.net/content/adventure4/transport2.jpg
America
http://cache.jalopnik.com/cars/assets/resources/2006/06/2007_Dodge_Viper_400.jpg
Perhaps these drives fall into the latter category where they'll allow a pc make to shrink the thickness or allow room for something else at the expense of raw data read/write throughput.
To put this into perspective:
Asia
http://www.eastes.net/content/adventure4/transport2.jpg
America
http://cache.jalopnik.com/cars/assets/resources/2006/06/2007_Dodge_Viper_400.jpg
tantone
10-24-2006, 03:42 PM
What you say may be true, but these are the US offerings. Perp storage drives do come in 7200rpm, just not at the 1.8" size.
BipolarBill
10-24-2006, 06:56 PM
Well, I am not sure why they are slower. I am just postulating a possible explanation.
I'm very happy with my 7200RPM Hitachi.
I'm very happy with my 7200RPM Hitachi.
naptownman
10-24-2006, 10:33 PM
What you say may be true, but these are the US offerings. Perp storage drives do come in 7200rpm, just not at the 1.8" size.
Perp drives are also relatively new. How long did it take to go from 4200 to 5400 to 7200 in conventional drive technology?
Besides, the mfr. may choose to market everywhere - there are no market specific drives that I'm aware of. But it doesn't change the fact that Asians will pay $2500 for a notebook that is 20mm thick, weighs 1.6 lbs, get 8 hours of battery life and has a measly 1.2gHz processor. And you don't get those specs with a 7200 rpm drive or x800 graphics, etc. Americans will gripe about paying more than $800 or $900 for a core 2 duo, a gig of RAM, 17" display, 120 GB hard drive, dvd+/- RW and those same graphics. It'll get 97 minutes of battery life and weigh 7.8 lbs.
Perp drives are also relatively new. How long did it take to go from 4200 to 5400 to 7200 in conventional drive technology?
Besides, the mfr. may choose to market everywhere - there are no market specific drives that I'm aware of. But it doesn't change the fact that Asians will pay $2500 for a notebook that is 20mm thick, weighs 1.6 lbs, get 8 hours of battery life and has a measly 1.2gHz processor. And you don't get those specs with a 7200 rpm drive or x800 graphics, etc. Americans will gripe about paying more than $800 or $900 for a core 2 duo, a gig of RAM, 17" display, 120 GB hard drive, dvd+/- RW and those same graphics. It'll get 97 minutes of battery life and weigh 7.8 lbs.
tantone
10-25-2006, 02:06 AM
SOME Asians will pay that. It's hard to generalize about the entire population of a country and their taste in notebook technology.
Larger corporations don't want to pay $2500 for some employee to have a TINY notebook with poor performance. We'd rather pay the lesser amount for a larger notebook with better performance...then we can't blame the notebook when the user doesn't pull their weight. :)
I can understand something with a massive battery life and miniscule form factor for someone who's always on the road and only has time to charge at night in a hotel somwhere. However, in the US--and in most countries our company has offices in--the user base has a fit when things aren't fast enough for them.
In the end, the hard drive--in both notebooks and desktops--is a MAJORLY overlooked factor when it comes to performance. I installed Office 2003 Pro in under 45 seconds the other day on a Dell Precision 690 with SAS RAID5. You pull those drives and stick in a 7200 SATA II drive, and it's horrible in comparison.
Larger corporations don't want to pay $2500 for some employee to have a TINY notebook with poor performance. We'd rather pay the lesser amount for a larger notebook with better performance...then we can't blame the notebook when the user doesn't pull their weight. :)
I can understand something with a massive battery life and miniscule form factor for someone who's always on the road and only has time to charge at night in a hotel somwhere. However, in the US--and in most countries our company has offices in--the user base has a fit when things aren't fast enough for them.
In the end, the hard drive--in both notebooks and desktops--is a MAJORLY overlooked factor when it comes to performance. I installed Office 2003 Pro in under 45 seconds the other day on a Dell Precision 690 with SAS RAID5. You pull those drives and stick in a 7200 SATA II drive, and it's horrible in comparison.
Sterling_Aug
10-25-2006, 09:19 AM
So, I can remember when it took me 45 minutes to install Office 97 on a Pentium Pro system.
The hardware will improve. Give it time (6 months to a year). In th mean time, suck it up and stop whining. LOL
The hardware will improve. Give it time (6 months to a year). In th mean time, suck it up and stop whining. LOL
SysOpt.com
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright Internet.com Inc. All Rights Reserved.