Re: How I love Time Machine :)

John Slade <hhitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-hh wrote:
John Slade <hhitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Lloyd Parsons wrote:
John Slade <hhitma...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You would do better if you get a ExpressCard/PCMCIA to
ESATA adapter and an ESATA enclosure for your HD...
Sorry John, there is no advantage to using eSATA over FW to do backups.  
First there is the cost of the needed adapter, and then there is the
twitchiness of the interface itself to contend with.
  Then why does Apple use a SATA interface inside their
computers if it's too "twitchy"?

Because internal SATA is not the same as eSATA.   The internal SATA
connector simply isn't designed for the stress/strain/repetition of an
external I/O connection ... which is precisely why the SATA standards
board rejected it for external SATA and approved the less-bad eSATA
connector.   Go do your technology research, John.

You are talking about a non issue, the connector isn't the
issue. It's the rate of data transfer and you know it's faster.
There are adapter cables that will let you plug in a regular
SATA drive to the different eSATA connector.

Oh really? Which one is faster, John: Is SATA faster than eSATA, or
is eSATA faster than SATA?


http://www.satacables.com/html/sata_external_cables.html

      This is a minor issue. I remember someone having to buy a
USB to Mini USB cable to make an external device compatible. It
did not come with a cable and the person thought a regular USB
cable was all they needed.

eSATA is a more recent standard than SATA ... just as mini-USB is
versus USB. Both were created and formally standardized because the
marketplace recognized a shortcoming with the more original design.


I mean if FW is so much better, why not use it for the internal
connector for the HD on all Macs?

Because paying more to have the superior connector for *external*
connections simply isn't value-added for quasi-permanent and stress
relieved *internal* connections.

       No it would not. A FW port would be very easy to put
inside. You're a damned liar and clueless.

Sorry John, but it is impossible to make something cheaper than
FREE.

Everyone who does backups and restores as part of their
JOB knows that eSATA/SATA is way faster than Firewire.

The same people also know that its the SATA *standards* which are
faster, but in reality, the hard drives are the performance
bottleneck, so the differences between SATA/eSATA and Firewire800 are
minor: on the relative magnitude order of only 10%.

Sometimes you don't even need an
enclosure for the external drive. The external adapter comes
with a power connector that extends a power connector from the
internal power supply.

Oh yes: having two cables to hook up instead of just one. Clearly a
(cough) superior ... product!


I would love to hear your answer as to why Apple is
is dumping FW on some of it's computers. LOL

Go do your technology research, John.

Apple did remove Firewire400 from the MacBook notebook, but in the
next refresh, not only was Firewire back onto the MacBook, but it had
been upgraded it to Firewire800.


 I guess all the PC makers
in the world don't know as much as you because they think SATA
is just fine for storage, even Apple. I tell you what, why don't
you get FW and run your OS off it. Then you'll find out why the
companies use SATA.

The basic reason why many PC manufacturers offer eSATA is
because it is cheaper than Firewire,

     Complete bull***! PC manufactures put FW headers on the
motherboard. How easy would it be to produce a cable that would
just change the FW header on the MB to a standard FW connector.
You are full of bull***. The reason they use SATA is because
it's faster and more efficient.

If it truly that easy & cheap for them to do...then why don't we see
the external FW connectors all over the place on Windows PCs, John?

and because their profit margins are so
slim, they're trying to save a few pennies & dimes anywhere they
can.   Specifically, the technical cost of an eSATA port is quite low,
because it can be added by simply externalizing a preexisting internal
SATA port...no additional controller chips required.

      Already shown that this is complete bull***.

Sorry, but the slim profit margins of PCs is no fiction. Just look
at Dell's Market Cap: why isn't it 4x that of Apple's?


Go do your technology research, John.

      Here we go again, I've shown you time and time again why
FW is slower. I've also shown you that Apple is dumping FW on
many of it's computers. Why haven't they dumped SATA?

What you really are trying to say is: why hasn't Apple dumped
Firewire across the board and incorporate eSATA connectors to replace
them?


eSATA is identical in performance to SATA, just so you know.

When you're only measuring simple I/O transfers, sure.

I'm glad you finally see the light. There is nothing more
to be said.

There's nothing more only as far as you can see, John. The problem is
that you're so far down in your PC hole that you can't see. Firewire
isn't the fastest bandwidth connector today, but its standard has
included integrated power and timing protocols since essentially Day
1. USB lacks the latter and eSATA still lacks both. That's why all
exist in the marketplace.


-hh
.

Loading