Sound peculiar to me. IDE is IDE, SCSI is SCSI and filesystems are
what they are. If it were true, I suppose we could run Linux on FAT
(ick!). Besides, I would doubt that a global community of
programmers and users would design systems such as Linux and BSD,
etc. with the intent or flaw (take your pick) of flubbing the hard
disk.
Besides, have you seen the warranties hard disk manufacturers are
offering off the shelf? They're terrible; some as bad as ninety
days! I won't buy a hard disk unless it has at least a three year
warranty out of the box. I haven't looked lately, but I remember
five year warranties being standard on some consumer line products.
Hey, I don't care about the hardware. I care about my data. That's
why I use a computer.
/mario
>I self proclaimed "expert" tells that - no uncertain terms - that Unix (and
>Linux) trash hard drives after two-three years. What he says is that
>because of the heavy load that Unix puts on the heads and actuator, they
>wear sooner than they would on a M$ box. Could this have been true at one
>time? I've been in this game a while (albeit on the M$ side of the fence,
>but on the Linux side for about 3 years now. Sounds like bunk to me. Any
>thoughts?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:14:56 EDT