Western Digital debuts 2TB Green Power hard drives

It’s two terabytes of green storage win, at least as far as Western Digital is concerned. Backing up your huge “data” collection and saving the planet has never been easier than it is today. Of course, you’ll probably need two, just so you can back the other one up–unless you feel like burning some 428 DVDs (just 214 if you use double-sided discs).

Link: http://arstechnica.com/hardware/news/2009/01/western-digital-debuts-2tb-green-power-hard-drives.ars

:cool::cool:

Lets hope they don’t prove to be as much a problem as the 1.5gb Seagate drives were at first.

Good. Now I can have 20 XP installs at once for when my others get screwed.:stuck_out_tongue:

[QUOTE=Kerry56;2207177]Lets hope they don’t prove to be as much a problem as the 1.5gb Seagate drives were at first.[/QUOTE]

I read from Newegg alot of people had problems with Seagate 1TB drives made in Thailand of the 7200.1 series drives… If WD 2TB can pull it off they might just knock Seagate off the top list…and if not it will be a PR nightmare for WD if the 2TB takes a crap…

2TB is sure nice but i got a 1TB Samsung (fastest in transfer rates in it’s class) back in early Nov 2008 (for $109.99, great deal at the time and right this moment it costs $103.54 out the door on newegg) and i could not be happier with it… as i think it will give me some breathing room for quite a while now for the most part cause i still have about 388GB free out of my total 1.85TB space (4 HDD’s, 250-200-400-1000) … but just on the 1TB itself i still have a little over 326GB left :wink: … and if i had to i could probably free up space (roughly 50-100GB or so) pretty fast if i had to.

but my general plan is to wait as long as i can before space runs really right and then buy a new hard drive… by then i figure 1TB (or possibly even 2TB) drives will be at a cheaper or at least at a reasonable (reasonable as in around 100 dollars) price by then :wink:

p.s. does anyone know how many platters are in the 2TB WD hard drive? (maybe 4x 500GB?)

Hi,[quote=NBR;2207320]
p.s. does anyone know how many platters are in the 2TB WD hard drive? (maybe 4x 500GB?)[/quote]I read 4 x 500GB in a german news article.

Michael

/me tries to figure out how many CDSpeed scans can be saved on a 2 TB harddrive…

[QUOTE=DrageMester;2207328]/me tries to figure out how many CDSpeed scans can be saved on a 2 TB harddrive…[/QUOTE]

Hehe :slight_smile:

/me tries to figure out how much Kitty Pr0n would fit on a 2TB drive…

[quote=Arachne;2207479]/me tries to figure out how much Kitty Pr0n would fit on a 2TB drive…[/quote] Almost Enough! :wink:

On any given day I’d much rather have a multiple of smaller drives with the same capacity.

Even over a 1Tb drive.

Oh sure, I’ll e-v-e-n-t-u-a-l-l-y get drives in that size class… (>500Gb), When all the “early adopters” are going Ga-Ga
over the 4-5Tb drives that WD or Seagate that will have
just been introduced.

Though it’s entirely possible that by the time I get around to it
They may be even bigger… because of the acceleration in technology
OR SSD’s will have caught up… or dealt with the limited re-write capacity…

Time will tell…

AD

With a file size of 36.0kb

[B][B](2 terabytes) / (36 kilobits) = 477 218 588[/B][/B]

:cool::cool:

^ That’s a lot of scans. We know what to get Drage for his birthday :wink:

Back to the topic. I find 1TB is quite enough for me - with a 250GB HDD in this machine, and 500GB in the other, I don’t think I’ve filled up much of my external WD 1TB. :slight_smile:

[QUOTE=platinumsword;2207847]With a file size of 36.0kb

[B][B](2 terabytes) / (36 kilobits) = 477 218 588[/B][/B]

:cool::cool:[/QUOTE]
How many worn out scanning drives does that equal?:stuck_out_tongue:

Isn’t the green power drive series 5400 RPM? :slight_smile:

[quote=Arachne;2207855]^ That’s a lot of scans. We know what to get [B]Drage[/B] for his birthday :wink:

Back to the topic. I find 1TB is quite enough for me - with a 250GB HDD in this machine, and 500GB in the other, I don’t think I’ve filled up much of my external WD 1TB. :)[/quote]

Agree :iagree:

Two 500GB and one 250GB have been enough for me at the moment.

:cool::cool:

[QUOTE=debro;2207931]Isn’t the green power drive series 5400 RPM? :)[/QUOTE]
The WD specification sheet just says Intellipower. Their explanation of Intellipower is:

IntelliPowerâ„¢
A fine-tuned balance of spin speed, transfer rate, and caching algorithms designed to deliver both significant power savings and solid performance. For each drive model, WD may use a different, invariable RPM.

This sounds completely different to the original Greenpower drives which were supposed to vary between 5400rpm & 7200rpm as required.

So the current drives run at a constant rotational speed, not all drives in the range run at the same speed and WD won’t tell you the speed anyway?:confused::a

[QUOTE=Ibex;2208238]This sounds completely different to the original Greenpower drives which were supposed to vary between 5400rpm & 7200rpm as required.

So the current drives run at a constant rotational speed, not all drives in the range run at the same speed and WD won’t tell you the speed anyway?:confused::a[/QUOTE]
All the reviewed drives (that I’ve read about) had results consistent with 5400rpm HDD’s of other manufacturers.

While the WD advertising hints that the rotational speed can vary … they haven’t implemented it in any current drives … so I’d suggest it’s all just marketting B$.

At any rate, I fail to see why anyone would need a 2000GB (not 2TiB) as a primary drive … so it’d be great for a [external] storage drive, or to sit in a network/usb enclosure or similar - It has it’s uses.

However, the more platters a drive has, the more prone it is to breaking down. Just more things to go wrong, I guess.
Most OEM’s try to stick with the single platter drives, in their PC bundles, for that reason - that, and it’s also cheaper.

[QUOTE=debro;2208493]

At any rate, I fail to see why anyone would need a 2000GB (not 2TiB) as a primary drive … so it’d be great for a [external] storage drive, or to sit in a network/usb enclosure or similar - It has it’s uses.
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I feel the same way. :iagree:

[QUOTE=Arachne;2207479]Hehe :slight_smile:

/me tries to figure out how much Kitty Pr0n would fit on a 2TB drive…[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=DrageMester;2207485]Almost Enough! ;)[/QUOTE]

I don’t want to know where one would find 2tb of kitty pron.:disagree::eek:

Every internal hard drive I have bought in the last 5 years has had a single platter with the highest density I could find. As well as (in theory) better reliablilty, a single platter drive should consume less power, produce less heat and possibly be slightly quieter than an equivilent with multiple platters.

[B][Off topic - Warning, long monologue!:o][/B]
Here are two rules of computing which in my experience are just as true today as they were 17 years ago when I had a 65MB hard drive:

  1. Data will always expand to fit the space available.
  2. Backup storage capacity will always be insufficient for the quantity of data which needs to be backed up.

So a hard drive which is significantly larger than you need will just result in more data, much of which needs to be backed up. And the only affordable device that currently has enough capacity to backup a large hard drive is another hard drive. Extra hard drives are very useful for fast, frequent backups and imaging whole partitions, but I don’t trust them as the only storage medium for anything important.

I think that a proper reliable backup system should meet the following basic criteria:

  1. The read/write mechanism and storage medium should be separate.
  2. It should be (virtually) impossible for a malfunctioning read/write mechanism to destroy data on the storage medium. And when the storage medium suffers partial failure or damage any intact data should be retrievable.
  3. There should be a hardware write protect system, and/or the option of using write once storage as well as rewritable (to guard against human error).
  4. The backup medium should be adequately protected from accidental and enviromental damage (when handled and stored with reasonable care).

Hard drives fail every requirement. When the read/write mechanism or controller fails there is little the user can do, and often the platters are damaged or the data corrupted. You can try freezing the drive, changing the controller board etc., but there is a high risk of losing everything beyond any hope of recovery. A professional data recovery service could remove the platters in a clean room and use a scanning magnetometer to read them, but the cost is prohibitive and they can’t always recover what was corrupted or damaged when the drive failed. Any magnetic storage medium is likely to fail the second requirement; I have twice had Zip drives which suddenly decided to destroy the entire contents of every disc that was inserted. Solid state drives and USB memory sticks have an integrated controller, and I expect that any flash memory based storage would fail the second requirement.

Optical storage could meet every requirement, but for the mass market manufacturers insist on using bare discs which are too susceptible to accidental damage. A Plasmon UDO drive would meet all the stated requirements, but at £1800 per drive it is much too expensive.

Will there ever be an affordable backup system that meets these requirements? Probably not. Does the thought of having hundreds of gigabytes of data which hasn’t been backed up or archived scare me? It certainly does.:sad: