On Thursday 23 December 2010 18:09:20 Ivan K wrote: > --- On Thu, 12/23/10, Arnold Krille <arnold@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The difference in price between 500G > > and 1.5TB is less > > then the difference in size. > > I was not writing about cost in terms of money. Everyone > knows that 1-2TB drives are cheaper than candy these days. > > I was writing about cost in terms of reading/writing. > I would be willing to pay more for a 500GB drive if > there is a performance benefit. Why should there be a performance benefit if the disk is smaller? If there was, I still have a 650MB disk I could sell you... You want the disk for storage, not for RAM-extension. And doing audio you will read and write big files. Unless the disk-cache is big enough to hold the whole session, it will not make a significant impact. What matters is reliability. And when you ask 10 people about that, you will get 10 different opinions. As you ask for that, here is my experience: I had seagate disks fail, I have seagate disks running fine since 5 years. I have western digital disks work fine since years. I had an IBM disk fail after about two years. I have maxtor disks perform good since 5 years. My hardware dealer recommended me samsung disks, but the first two I bought failed after about two years. Lets see how the rest of them (bought later) performs... Have fun, Arnold
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
