Chris's Moblog

by chris

user profile | dashboard | imagewall

« older newer »

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Search this moblog

Recent visitors

Mmmmm, 160 gigabytes...

(viewed 1203 times)
Bookmark and Share
And finally I can back up my PC!
30th Mar 2006, 12:46   | tags:,

nige says:


30th Mar 2006, 12:53

neel says:

More space: such a sense of relief.

30th Mar 2006, 13:42

Spike says:

oo yay,

how much did you pick it up for dude?

30th Mar 2006, 14:04

chris says:

70 quids offof bit of a bargain i thought...

30th Mar 2006, 14:47

Steve says:

That's not bad at all

30th Mar 2006, 16:44

Spike says:

*goes to buy hard-drive*

30th Mar 2006, 16:50

not bad at all. i would prefere it to be a firewire, as i use mac and its much faster but i might look on ebuyer

30th Mar 2006, 16:54

neel says:

I am plagued with a fondess for Firewire - always end up paying more. Gah.

30th Mar 2006, 16:58

Steve says:

isn't USB 2 faster than Firewire?

I have one Firewire 2 drive and that flies along

30th Mar 2006, 16:59

fire wore drive also draw power from the computer sometimes so no need for external power wich is great. i thought firewire was faster than usb 2. it is on my Emac any way, usb2 to ipod takes long time where as firewire to ipod is lightening speed

30th Mar 2006, 17:01

Steve says:

I still have to plug in my firewire drives :( but they are great so I forgive them.

Found this:
"Don't be confused by the rated speeds you see emblazoned across USB 2.0 and FireWire product boxes. Despite USB 2.0's 80 Kbps speed advantage over FireWire, our testing showed that the additional overhead of USB 2.0 made it slower than FireWire. For high-bandwidth devices such as external hard drives, the difference was as high as 70 percent. On a positive note, we noticed that the CPU usage of each interface was similar on our Pentium 4 1.3-GHz test system. During a 1.54GB data transfer from our system's internal hard drive to an external drive, USB 2.0 averaged 40 percent CPU usage compared to 37 percent for FireWire. "

and this:

'Read Test:

* 5000 files (300 MB total) FireWire was 33% faster than USB 2.0
* 160 files (650MB total) FireWire was 70% faster than USB 2.0

Write Test:

* 5000 files (300 MB total) FireWire was 16% faster than USB 2.0
* 160 files (650MB total) FireWire was 48% faster than USB 2.0"

30th Mar 2006, 17:05

so firewire faster but usb should be faster? im now confused.

30th Mar 2006, 17:08

Spike says:

sounds about right! (the read/write thing, not you being confused)

*still trawls to buy external harddrive

30th Mar 2006, 17:10

ebuyer is really good just had a look

30th Mar 2006, 17:12

Steve says:

That's the magic of computers!

30th Mar 2006, 17:30

Joe says:

my mate just got a job at ebuyer...
Chris, I have that backup software I was talking about if you need it...

30th Mar 2006, 17:57

chris says:

oooh, that would be good.

i've just got tot see how to partition it now...

30th Mar 2006, 18:00