Re: Backup Software rcommendation

Brian A. wrote:
"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ukNugihjIHA.2304@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I think the best backup for one's source hard drive IS an external USB
hard
drive enclosure, since it's only powered on when you make the backup -
so
its life is very long, as it hardly gets much use at all (as in
contrast with
an internal drive).

Now your digging Bill. You've mentioned your an EE many times over the
years

Which is true.

I wasn't doubting it and never had a reason to.


which means you should know what initial startup surge "can" do.

"Can do" is the operative word here. The way you're slanting it, you
assume that the surge from turning on the enclosure HD is worse than
leaving
it on all the time (in terms of life expectancy), which, I believe, is a
debateable point.

For an incandescent light bulb, however, you may have a point. :-)

C'mon Bill, take the twist out and/or read the entire thread before
responding. As an EE, you know very well the intent of my response, at
least
you should have after reading through this post of the thread.

I assume the intent was to strongly suggest or imply that the life
expectancy of an external hard drive enclosure is shorter if you turn it on
and off than it would be if you left it on all the time. Is that not your
assertion?

The point is, I don't think that is true. Sure, I can see the possibility
(due to the surges as you said), but it would be nice to have an article
documenting the results of a test for a hard drive under these two different
scenarios.

My point on
that statement is directed at shortened lifetime of the product, not
that it
will instantly explode or fail after a few startups.

Understood. But I think you missed my point too. A hard drive has a
limited lifetime in constant use, right? Like a few years (give or
take).
So the less you use it, the longer it lasts, right? Right. :-)
As to whether or not turning it off and on (only when needed) results in
a
shorter lifetime.... I wouldn't assume so. It might. But it equally
well
might not (and that's what I've been assuming).

Or, to put it another way, does it really make much sense to keep your
backup
drive running all the time along with the main drive, given that the life
expectancy of these drives is a few years? Or does it make more sense
to
use it only when it's needed?

UNLESS your surge argument trumps that. If you have a source supporting
that
(like from Western Digital, or whatever) that would be nice to see.


It's not argument, it's fact that the initial surge of energy delivered to
power up any electrical component is a factor in the life expectancy of
that
component.

Of course it is. No argument on that point.

I don't believe I've missed any of your points, if I have I
apologize for that and would like you to point them out and explain what I
have missed in accordance to what you mentioned and my response to that
mention

Well, the discussion here (I thought) was about which leads to a longer life
for a hard drive. Leaving the hard drive on all the time, or turning it
off and on, and not using it very often. And some documented studies may
have that info somewhere, but I don't know.

On my personal home network, the machine I use, which I built in 2001,
is
since 2003 used for the backups/images and has been running almost
constant
since, maintenance and required reboots are the only time it gets
powered
down
and back up again. Although maintenance gives it some down time rest (3
times a year planned schedule), required reboots don't.

OK, and there may be room for some debate here. But for me it works
best to
shut the machine down each night.


To each their own is the way I see it, each purpose/demand =
demand/purpose,
if there is no demand there is no purpose, as is if there is no purpose
there
is no demand.

As to its life expectancy (including the monitor), there may be some room
for
debate here, too.

I'm sorry, this appears to have gone into left field and really shouldn't
be
continued here.

Perhaps so. If we're talking about the life expectancy (or MTBF) of a hard
drive, that's one thing, but for the computer and some of its other
components, that may well be another.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Backup Software rcommendation
    ... drive enclosure, since it's only powered on when you make the backup - so its ... that the surge from turning on the enclosure HD is worse than leaving it on all the time (in terms of life expectancy), which, I believe, is a debateable point. ... Or, to put it another way, does it really make much sense to keep your backup drive running all the time along with the main drive, given that the life expectancy of these drives is a few years? ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: USB backup program
    ... Flash drives are not really very reliable for backups since the ... the life of the memory far exceeds what you state because the ... A backup is not a backup unless it's backed up. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)
  • Re: USB backup program
    ... Flash drives are not really very reliable for backups since the ... the life of the memory far exceeds what you state because ... A backup is not a backup unless it's backed up. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)
  • Re: USB backup program
    ... Flash drives are not really very reliable for backups since the ... the life of the memory far exceeds what you state because ... A backup is not a backup unless it's backed up. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)
  • Re: Obamas plans for the US
    ... And herein lies a real problem for the country. ... life expectancy at birth is now 78 in the United ... Given the increasing participation of the judges in the ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
Loading