05-26-2008, 01:53 AM
[quote space-time]what's "redundant" in such a drive? the motor that spins the platters is dead: all data is lost. The logic board is dead; all data is lost. The case is not sealed anymore and dust gets in: all data is lost. To have a truly redundant drive, you need two drives packaged together. That is 2 sealed compartments, 2 motors, 2 separate reading arms/heads, 2 logic boards, 2 interfaces. It's like having 2 drives attached together with duct tape. I see no point in such a setup.
Uh uh. Pretty much the only way to lose data due to a hard drive failure is when the read/write head crashes into the drive platter (the most common hard drive failure). If anything else goes wrong, the drive platters can be put into a good mechanism and recovered.
We were talking about the WD 640GB drives which have 2 320GB platters and two read/write heads. If the drive was set up as "two drives" in a RAID1 configuration, if you had one head crash you could still recover all your data from the other platter.
Uh uh. Pretty much the only way to lose data due to a hard drive failure is when the read/write head crashes into the drive platter (the most common hard drive failure). If anything else goes wrong, the drive platters can be put into a good mechanism and recovered.
We were talking about the WD 640GB drives which have 2 320GB platters and two read/write heads. If the drive was set up as "two drives" in a RAID1 configuration, if you had one head crash you could still recover all your data from the other platter.