Err, plenty of point reviewing hard drives as they aren't equal - i've noticed some major variation of read and write times.
As for FAT32, i think this was for the purpose of the test for use on a Mac, sure they could have gone HFS+ but that wouldn't be in line with the others. Most backup programs worth their salt also allow you to specify maximum file size too... maybe you should try a proper OS ;-)
Who makes the drive that's inside this thing? Such information would be very useful to folks, such as myself, who will no longer touch Seagate drives with a shitty stick after the Barracuda firmware debacle.
LG XD4 500GB
This post has been deleted by a moderator
This post has been deleted by a moderator
James Hughes 1
FAT #
Posted Friday 26th June 2009 09:15 GMT
So, you won't be making files > 4GB then.....like all of my backup files (admittedly on a Linux box).
And, really, is there any point in reviewing USB hard drives? After all, they are all pretty much exactly the same.
Deadly_NZ
500 gig #
Posted Friday 26th June 2009 11:14 GMT
Waste of time way too small nee 2 TB plus not piddley little 500 gig babies
Scott Mckenzie
@James #
Posted Friday 26th June 2009 11:14 GMT
Err, plenty of point reviewing hard drives as they aren't equal - i've noticed some major variation of read and write times.
As for FAT32, i think this was for the purpose of the test for use on a Mac, sure they could have gone HFS+ but that wouldn't be in line with the others. Most backup programs worth their salt also allow you to specify maximum file size too... maybe you should try a proper OS ;-)
Simon Ward
What make of drive? #
Posted Friday 26th June 2009 15:28 GMT
Who makes the drive that's inside this thing? Such information would be very useful to folks, such as myself, who will no longer touch Seagate drives with a shitty stick after the Barracuda firmware debacle.
Tony Smith, Editor, Reg Hardware
@Simon Ward #
Posted Friday 26th June 2009 15:41 GMT
It's a Hitachi drive.