"With the advent of external hard drive enclosures and the
ease of plug and play USB and Firewire connections, many
people are asking themselves if they should buy an internal
or external hard drive when it comes to adding more storage
or work space..."
"DC" <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in message
news:763df81946e24187310aa6278b149039@pseudo.borke d.net...
> "With the advent of external hard drive enclosures and the
> ease of plug and play USB and Firewire connections, many
> people are asking themselves if they should buy an internal
> or external hard drive when it comes to adding more storage
> or work space..."
>
> Continued: http://easyurl.net/HardDrive
>
>
"DC" <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in message
news:763df81946e24187310aa6278b149039@pseudo.borke d.net...
> "With the advent of external hard drive enclosures and the
> ease of plug and play USB and Firewire connections, many
> people are asking themselves if they should buy an internal
> or external hard drive when it comes to adding more storage
> or work space..."
>
> Continued: http://easyurl.net/HardDrive
>
That's a real good question.
Skill level of person installing this thing.. as you pointed out, external
drives are plug and play... if you can plug in a toaster you can install an
external drive.
an external drive can be easily moved from one platform or pc to another.
Nice for creating backup images of multiply systems.
Portability... easy to travel with... like taking with you to a friends or
relatives home and copying music or movies to it (like anyone does that)
Guess I can't think of a compelling reason to go with an internal drive
unless one wanted everything in the pc itself. Maybe someone else can think
of reasons to go with internal but it really escapes me right now.
"dennis meissner" <dennis@just4fun.com> wrote in message
news:n7WdnYw7HsatlrLUnZ2dnUVZ_uWdnZ2d@wavecable.co m...
>
> "DC" <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in message
> news:763df81946e24187310aa6278b149039@pseudo.borke d.net...
>> "With the advent of external hard drive enclosures and the
>> ease of plug and play USB and Firewire connections, many
>> people are asking themselves if they should buy an internal
>> or external hard drive when it comes to adding more storage
>> or work space..."
>>
>> Continued: http://easyurl.net/HardDrive
>>
>
> That's a real good question.
>
> Skill level of person installing this thing.. as you pointed out, external
> drives are plug and play... if you can plug in a toaster you can install
> an external drive.
>
> an external drive can be easily moved from one platform or pc to another.
> Nice for creating backup images of multiply systems.
>
> Portability... easy to travel with... like taking with you to a friends or
> relatives home and copying music or movies to it (like anyone does that)
>
> Guess I can't think of a compelling reason to go with an internal drive
> unless one wanted everything in the pc itself. Maybe someone else can
> think of reasons to go with internal but it really escapes me right now.
>
>
> Dennis
Guess I should have read the OP's message a little better, for that I
apologize. If your intent is for only additional workspace then maybe the
internal drive may make more sense but you can buy external drives for the
same price as internal. Internal drives don't require additional external
cabling and don't require additional AC power plug (ok, pretty minimal
issues), Again I'm sure there are other reasons for internal.
> of reasons to go with internal but it really escapes me right now.
That's because you're stupid. Think again. Internal drive > IDE or SATA
interface or External drive > USB interface. Now think again once more.
Which drive would perform faster, eh? Think just one more time again now
before you come up with ****witted answers.
dennis meissner <dennis@just4fun.com> wrote:
> "DC" <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in message
> news:763df81946e24187310aa6278b149039@pseudo.borke d.net...
>> "With the advent of external hard drive enclosures and the
>> ease of plug and play USB and Firewire connections, many
>> people are asking themselves if they should buy an internal
>> or external hard drive when it comes to adding more storage
>> or work space..."
>>
>> Continued: http://easyurl.net/HardDrive
>>
>
> That's a real good question.
>
> Skill level of person installing this thing.. as you pointed out,
> external drives are plug and play... if you can plug in a toaster you
> can install an external drive.
>
> an external drive can be easily moved from one platform or pc to
> another. Nice for creating backup images of multiply systems.
>
> Portability... easy to travel with... like taking with you to a
> friends or relatives home and copying music or movies to it (like
> anyone does that)
> Guess I can't think of a compelling reason to go with an internal
> drive unless one wanted everything in the pc itself. Maybe someone
> else can think of reasons to go with internal but it really escapes
> me right now.
One obvious one is if you drop things much. Externals dont last very long if you drop them.
dennis meissner <dennis@just4fun.com> wrote:
> "DC" <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in message
> news:763df81946e24187310aa6278b149039@pseudo.borke d.net...
>> "With the advent of external hard drive enclosures and the
>> ease of plug and play USB and Firewire connections, many
>> people are asking themselves if they should buy an internal
>> or external hard drive when it comes to adding more storage
>> or work space..."
>>
>> Continued: http://easyurl.net/HardDrive
>>
>
> That's a real good question.
>
> Skill level of person installing this thing.. as you pointed out,
> external drives are plug and play... if you can plug in a toaster you
> can install an external drive.
>
> an external drive can be easily moved from one platform or pc to
> another. Nice for creating backup images of multiply systems.
>
> Portability... easy to travel with... like taking with you to a
> friends or relatives home and copying music or movies to it (like
> anyone does that)
> Guess I can't think of a compelling reason to go with an internal
> drive unless one wanted everything in the pc itself. Maybe someone
> else can think of reasons to go with internal but it really escapes
> me right now.
One obvious one is if you drop things much. Externals dont last very long if you drop them.
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 13:03:39 -0800, "dennis meissner"
<dennis@just4fun.com> wrote:
>
>"DC" <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in message
>news:763df81946e24187310aa6278b149039@pseudo.bork ed.net...
>> "With the advent of external hard drive enclosures and the
>> ease of plug and play USB and Firewire connections, many
>> people are asking themselves if they should buy an internal
>> or external hard drive when it comes to adding more storage
>> or work space..."
>>
>> Continued: http://easyurl.net/HardDrive
>>
>
>That's a real good question.
>
>Skill level of person installing this thing.. as you pointed out, external
>drives are plug and play... if you can plug in a toaster you can install an
>external drive.
>
>an external drive can be easily moved from one platform or pc to another.
>Nice for creating backup images of multiply systems.
>
>Portability... easy to travel with... like taking with you to a friends or
>relatives home and copying music or movies to it (like anyone does that)
>
>Guess I can't think of a compelling reason to go with an internal drive
>unless one wanted everything in the pc itself. Maybe someone else can think
>of reasons to go with internal but it really escapes me right now.
Unless one custom modifies an external to achieve the
balance of airflow vs noise that is needed (why doesn't the
manufacturer do that? Some things will remain a mystery.),
they tend to end up making addt'l audible noise, or allowing
the hard drive to run hotter.
Internal PATA or SATA are higher performing and have less
system resource overhead. System PSU tends to provide
cleaner power, a quality system PSU tends to last longer,
and as I was reminded earlier today while using a USB
external, if the power fickers for even the slightest moment
(in theory it can be used on an UPS but for convenience
purposes I usually just use the closest outlet since it's
being moved from system to system), then the power
flickering can cause the external drive to fall off the bus
and corrupt data even if the system stays running ok
otherwise.
Generally an external also costs less. The larger the drive
size, the smaller the % of total cost is the external
enclosure. It may not be true in all cases but someone
shopping for the best price (on a name-brand) can get a
lower price on an internal rive. Externals also may have a
shorter warranty and if one fails and you're left trying to
troubleshoot it as multiple subsystems meaning drive plus
USB bridge board plus separate power plus another data cable
and/or connector, plus it may void the warranty to open it
and extract the drive to test each portion separately. Some
can be easily opened to try this anyway, but others require
some prying that is detectable.
Externals only have the one obvious thing going for them,
they are so easily disconnected, and/or moved to a different
system. That alone is a reason to have one but without
that need it's just adding more complexity which tends to
make the inevitable failure more complicated. I almost
forgot, some OS don't like booting from them even if the
board can boot a USB drive.
I like external HD, but they are a hassle when in mobile situation
like in a airplane. The other problem is that they require a
additional power source or battery. The prices & capacity of internal
HD's have fallen significantly in the past year so price is much less
of a issue.
kony wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 13:03:39 -0800, "dennis meissner"
> <dennis@just4fun.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"DC" <nobody@pseudo.borked.net> wrote in message
> >news:763df81946e24187310aa6278b149039@pseudo.bork ed.net...
> >> "With the advent of external hard drive enclosures and the
> >> ease of plug and play USB and Firewire connections, many
> >> people are asking themselves if they should buy an internal
> >> or external hard drive when it comes to adding more storage
> >> or work space..."
> >>
> >> Continued: http://easyurl.net/HardDrive
> >>
> >
> >That's a real good question.
> >
> >Skill level of person installing this thing.. as you pointed out, external
> >drives are plug and play... if you can plug in a toaster you can install an
> >external drive.
> >
> >an external drive can be easily moved from one platform or pc to another.
> >Nice for creating backup images of multiply systems.
> >
> >Portability... easy to travel with... like taking with you to a friends or
> >relatives home and copying music or movies to it (like anyone does that)
> >
> >Guess I can't think of a compelling reason to go with an internal drive
> >unless one wanted everything in the pc itself. Maybe someone else can think
> >of reasons to go with internal but it really escapes me right now.
>
>
> Unless one custom modifies an external to achieve the
> balance of airflow vs noise that is needed (why doesn't the
> manufacturer do that? Some things will remain a mystery.),
> they tend to end up making addt'l audible noise, or allowing
> the hard drive to run hotter.
>
> Internal PATA or SATA are higher performing and have less
> system resource overhead. System PSU tends to provide
> cleaner power, a quality system PSU tends to last longer,
> and as I was reminded earlier today while using a USB
> external, if the power fickers for even the slightest moment
> (in theory it can be used on an UPS but for convenience
> purposes I usually just use the closest outlet since it's
> being moved from system to system), then the power
> flickering can cause the external drive to fall off the bus
> and corrupt data even if the system stays running ok
> otherwise.
>
> Generally an external also costs less. The larger the drive
> size, the smaller the % of total cost is the external
> enclosure. It may not be true in all cases but someone
> shopping for the best price (on a name-brand) can get a
> lower price on an internal rive. Externals also may have a
> shorter warranty and if one fails and you're left trying to
> troubleshoot it as multiple subsystems meaning drive plus
> USB bridge board plus separate power plus another data cable
> and/or connector, plus it may void the warranty to open it
> and extract the drive to test each portion separately. Some
> can be easily opened to try this anyway, but others require
> some prying that is detectable.
>
> Externals only have the one obvious thing going for them,
> they are so easily disconnected, and/or moved to a different
> system. That alone is a reason to have one but without
> that need it's just adding more complexity which tends to
> make the inevitable failure more complicated. I almost
> forgot, some OS don't like booting from them even if the
> board can boot a USB drive.
> That's because you're stupid. Think again. Internal drive > IDE or SATA
> interface or External drive > USB interface. Now think again once more.
> Which drive would perform faster, eh?
eSATA is the winner. External, and same speed as internal SATA.
The only issue is that, before Win7, Windows does not support automatic hotplug detection on eSATA.
More so, some eSATA hardware is just the adapter plug in the chassis slot - piece of metal, socket and cable, internally connected to the usual SATA socket on the motherboard. With such a configuration, this is usual SATA for any software - Win7 included, so, no hotplug detection.
You will need to run Device Manager, disable the eSATA controller, connect and power up the disk and re-enable the controller manually. After this, the disk is detected and works fine without a reboot.
Unplugging the disk is a worse song. Disabling the controller in Device Manager will fail if there are any open files on any volumes on the disk, in which case Device Manager _just suggests you to reboot_.
"dennis meissner" wrote:
> [......] Internal drives don't require additional external cabling and don't
> require additional AC power plug (ok, pretty minimal issues), Again I'm sure
> there are other reasons for internal.
>
> Dennis
I wouldn't run an external hard drive (especially one
at 7,200rpm) without a fan to keep it cool. And usually
that implies that there be an external power module for
reliable power. Having external "stuff" sorta defeats the
purpose of a laptop, doesn't it?
"kony" wrote:
> [..........]
> Generally an external also costs less. The larger the drive
> size, the smaller the % of total cost is the external
> enclosure. It may not be true in all cases but someone
> shopping for the best price (on a name-brand) can get a
> lower price on an internal rive. Externals also may have a
> shorter warranty and if one fails and you're left trying to
> troubleshoot it as multiple subsystems meaning drive plus
> USB bridge board plus separate power plus another data
> cable and/or connector, plus it may void the warranty to
> open it and extract the drive to test each portion separately.
> Some can be easily opened to try this anyway, but others
> require some prying that is detectable.
This assumes that an external hard drive is sold as a
unit by the manufacturer as an external hard drive (i.e.
hard drive plus enclosure/cables/power supply/backup
software, etc.). But there is a very viable alternative -
buy an internal 3.5" SATA hard drive and put it in a $28
external box with its own power module. 3.5" internal
HDs are cheap. And Kingwin makes a line of boxes to
put them in: http://www.kingwin.com/enclosures.asp
I use the JT series (which actually stands on edge for
efficiency of ventillation) with a SATA 3.5" 320GB hard
drive in it and a flexible eSATA cable running from it to
the eSATA ExpressCard on my laptop. I chose the JT
series because of its aluminum construction and because
I wouldn't be paying for any backup software. On a
per-byte basis, it's much cheaper than going with a
high capacity internal laptop hard drive. The tradeoff,
of course, is the added bulk.
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 11:09:27 -0800, "Timothy Daniels"
<SpamBucket@NoSpamPlease.biz> wrote:
>"kony" wrote:
>> [..........]
>> Generally an external also costs less. The larger the drive
>> size, the smaller the % of total cost is the external
>> enclosure. It may not be true in all cases but someone
>> shopping for the best price (on a name-brand) can get a
>> lower price on an internal rive. Externals also may have a
>> shorter warranty and if one fails and you're left trying to
>> troubleshoot it as multiple subsystems meaning drive plus
>> USB bridge board plus separate power plus another data
>> cable and/or connector, plus it may void the warranty to
>> open it and extract the drive to test each portion separately.
>> Some can be easily opened to try this anyway, but others
>> require some prying that is detectable.
>
>
> This assumes that an external hard drive is sold as a
>unit by the manufacturer as an external hard drive (i.e.
>hard drive plus enclosure/cables/power supply/backup
>software, etc.). But there is a very viable alternative -
>buy an internal 3.5" SATA hard drive and put it in a $28
>external box with its own power module. 3.5" internal
>HDs are cheap. And Kingwin makes a line of boxes to
>put them in: http://www.kingwin.com/enclosures.asp
>
> I use the JT series (which actually stands on edge for
>efficiency of ventillation) with a SATA 3.5" 320GB hard
>drive in it and a flexible eSATA cable running from it to
>the eSATA ExpressCard on my laptop. I chose the JT
>series because of its aluminum construction and because
>I wouldn't be paying for any backup software. On a
>per-byte basis, it's much cheaper than going with a
>high capacity internal laptop hard drive. The tradeoff,
>of course, is the added bulk.
Too much turkey yesterday... I meant "Generally an internal
also costs less".
I like metal enclosures for their durability, but they also
seem to absorb less noise if they aren't lined with
something.
"hizark21" <hizark21@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a3cf6a37-89f3-45d5-99c9-e3f4066db45a@q26g2000prq.googlegroups.com...
|I like external HD, but they are a hassle when in mobile situation
| like in a airplane. The other problem is that they require a
| additional power source or battery.
Not necessarily. I have a 500 GB Buffalo model that runs off USB power.
On Nov 29, 7:19*am, "iws" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> "hizark21" <hizar...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:a3cf6a37-89f3-45d5-99c9-e3f4066db45a@q26g2000prq.googlegroups.com...
> |I like external HD, but they are a hassle when in mobile situation
> | like in a airplane. The other problem is that they require a
> | additional power source or battery.
>
> Not necessarily. I have a 500 GB Buffalo model that runs off USB power.
Yes it's true you can run it off USB Power. The problem however is
that your battery life will be limited. Perhaps when the fuel cells
this will change things.
Somewhere on teh intarwebs Timothy Daniels wrote:
> "dennis meissner" wrote:
>> [......] Internal drives don't require additional external cabling
>> and don't require additional AC power plug (ok, pretty minimal
>> issues), Again I'm sure there are other reasons for internal.
>>
>> Dennis
>
>
> I wouldn't run an external hard drive (especially one
> at 7,200rpm) without a fan to keep it cool. And usually
> that implies that there be an external power module for
> reliable power. Having external "stuff" sorta defeats the
> purpose of a laptop, doesn't it?
Nah, I have all sorts of things hooked up to my ThinkPad's docking station
[Port Replicator]. Including a couple external (fan cooled) HDDs, printer
and speakers.
Easy as pie to click the "Undock" icon and push the button on the dock to
'eject' the lappy. The work of mere moments and the laptop's in the bag and
I'm outta here.
--
Shaun.
Somewhere on teh intarwebs Maxim S. Shatskih wrote:
>> That's because you're stupid. Think again. Internal drive > IDE or
>> SATA interface or External drive > USB interface. Now think again
>> once more.
It would seem that thinking isn't your strong-suit either Johhny-the-Wad.
> Which drive would perform faster, eh?
>
> eSATA is the winner. External, and same speed as internal SATA.
>
> The only issue is that, before Win7, Windows does not support
> automatic hotplug detection on eSATA.
>
> More so, some eSATA hardware is just the adapter plug in the chassis
> slot - piece of metal, socket and cable, internally connected to the
> usual SATA socket on the motherboard. With such a configuration, this
> is usual SATA for any software - Win7 included, so, no hotplug
> detection.
>
> You will need to run Device Manager, disable the eSATA controller,
> connect and power up the disk and re-enable the controller manually.
> After this, the disk is detected and works fine without a reboot.
>
> Unplugging the disk is a worse song. Disabling the controller in
> Device Manager will fail if there are any open files on any volumes
> on the disk, in which case Device Manager _just suggests you to
> reboot_.
My motherboard has /proper/ eSATA connectors, as does my ThinkPad (via
Cardbus). They both work as they should, little different to USB.
--
Shaun.
I believe internal drives are cheaper for the same type of drives.
Eg.. If you wanted a 1TB internal SATA drive wouldn't this be cheaper
than a 1TB eSATA drive?
I think the main advantage for internal SATA drives is that they are
cheaper than the equivalent eSATA ones. External USB may be cheaper I
don't know I haven't looked for quite a while, but then they are not
as fast with the USB connection and they use up more system resources.
The main advantage I can see for external drives is that you can
backup your important data to it, and you can also keep it further
away from your computer if you want. You can run a cable anywhere so
the external drive could be hidden someplace or in another room which
would provide better protection if you are ever burgled. They may take
your computer but miss a hidden external drive with a backup of all
your important data on.
You can also use an external drive to put your photos and videos on
etc and take it with you when you go and visit friends and relatives.
Though it's not something I've ever thought to do although I've now
had an external USB drive for about 2 years. My external drive remains
off most of the time. I only switch it on once a month to backup my
main drive to it, then I turn it off again and it stays off.
If you have an eSATA drive you can just clone your internal hard drive
directly to it then you'll have a backup for the whole system. I'm not
so sure you could do that with a USB external drive and boot off of
it?
"John" wrote:
> I believe internal drives are cheaper for the same type of drives.
> Eg.. If you wanted a 1TB internal SATA drive wouldn't this be cheaper
> than a 1TB eSATA drive?
The last time I looked, 3.5" SATA dekstop drives were cheaper
than their laptop counterparts, byte-for-byte. That's the point: Use
a desktop drive for external laptop storage.
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 19:28:46 -0800, "Timothy Daniels"
<SpamBucket@NoSpamPlease.biz> wrote:
>"John" wrote:
>> I believe internal drives are cheaper for the same type of drives.
>> Eg.. If you wanted a 1TB internal SATA drive wouldn't this be cheaper
>> than a 1TB eSATA drive?
>
> The last time I looked, 3.5" SATA dekstop drives were cheaper
>than their laptop counterparts, byte-for-byte. That's the point: Use
>a desktop drive for external laptop storage.
>
>*TimDaniels*
I wouldn't mind having a small notebook to take with me wherever. I'd
only want one that was quite small though with a screen size between
something like 8 to 11 inches max. I think I'd only use it as a
synchronised mobile offspring to my main tower system though. With a
notebook I'd just want that one thing for when I'm using it for its
purpose of being mobile and "out and about" not to have to lug around
a bunch of peripherals for it as well.
> The last time I looked, 3.5" SATA dekstop drives were cheaper
> than their laptop counterparts, byte-for-byte. That's the point: Use
> a desktop drive for external laptop storage.
If size, weight and the need in an extra power supply are OK - then yes.
External enclosures with laptop-size drives are usually fed off USB and do not require extra PSU.
"John" wrote:
> [.....] With a
> notebook I'd just want that one thing for when I'm using it for its
> purpose of being mobile and "out and about" not to have to lug
> around a bunch of peripherals for it as well.
Right. That's what a laptop is about - mobility. But for backups,
which are usually done at home or at the office, bulikiness is OK.
With my external 320GB hard drive, I can store 2 entire clones of
my laptop's 160GB hard drive. Actually more, since my laptop
doesn't use anywhere near the full 160GBs and my cloning software
knows where the data ends. Actually, I don't think anyone suggested
in this thread that the external hard drive be carried about wherever
the laptop was taken, but that the external hard drive would be used
for archiving or for storage of infrequently used large data files.
"John" <magna@carta.com> wrote in message
news:41s4j4pvetbafvaeec44rgtala82dtkc8d@4ax.com...
| On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 19:28:46 -0800, "Timothy Daniels"
| <SpamBucket@NoSpamPlease.biz> wrote:
|
| >"John" wrote:
| >> I believe internal drives are cheaper for the same type of drives.
| >> Eg.. If you wanted a 1TB internal SATA drive wouldn't this be cheaper
| >> than a 1TB eSATA drive?
| >
| > The last time I looked, 3.5" SATA dekstop drives were cheaper
| >than their laptop counterparts, byte-for-byte. That's the point: Use
| >a desktop drive for external laptop storage.
| >
| >*TimDaniels*
|
| I wouldn't mind having a small notebook to take with me wherever. I'd
| only want one that was quite small though with a screen size between
| something like 8 to 11 inches max. I think I'd only use it as a
| synchronised mobile offspring to my main tower system though. With a
| notebook I'd just want that one thing for when I'm using it for its
| purpose of being mobile and "out and about" not to have to lug around
| a bunch of peripherals for it as well.
|
| John
|
You mean like this: http://www.jr.com/acer-computer/pe/ACE_AOA1501447/
Hard drive - internal or external? 
Linear Mode
