From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1SS2aF-0006kN-FJ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 09 May 2012 08:49:20 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7BA28E0772; Wed, 9 May 2012 08:48:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-gg0-f181.google.com (mail-gg0-f181.google.com [209.85.161.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7228CE0713 for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 08:47:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ggnl1 with SMTP id l1so15122ggn.40 for ; Wed, 09 May 2012 01:47:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :x-enigmail-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eJp6K+auuUC00KvF9lYZfcyRVNZX7HMsaPe7tl/BFjY=; b=dtiasJTaDvZViPPAvWQoxIojvLi+2T+iK1K86kamfjm3AiKsjgzJW1a2TSpkaOpsGb /WpDwAmuMOJnVcuIn17lfoUkv31GqIWLdbBrDt3Tzg31T2YoT9XXTguxfQ7jPcE1aV13 I4t27jP+ngBMsWt52cwW2GZttEA+UYdP2xt6DJyUNxnxJbRBmZs02ZZGXTiaGEuPNZgV zuLd75v+Tra9eLCbuvvTewX0odbtFmoYr6DfSd7NeciVmJi8PTuhi1BvJcvyATnD4hCS HexUwGPXXYKQctUwFLbiXyo2Ruhs/9xNZFTPD0c9TUcPVzs8aZoiM29kzvyHcrPdscyQ uEWg== Received: by 10.60.2.226 with SMTP id 2mr185373oex.68.1336553232828; Wed, 09 May 2012 01:47:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-66-173.jan.bellsouth.net. [65.0.66.173]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a6sm2123678obo.10.2012.05.09.01.47.10 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 09 May 2012 01:47:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4FAA2F0D.8080900@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 03:47:09 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120508 Firefox/12.0 SeaMonkey/2.9.1 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-user] Are those "green" drives any good? X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 50b7cf0f-b104-4b46-99b2-0804ce20a8a1 X-Archives-Hash: 3ba942c2986e3dd40d50e51964e11703 Hi, As some know, I'm planning to buy me a LARGE hard drive to put all my videos on, eventually. The prices are coming down now. I keep seeing these "green" drives that are made by just about every company nowadays. When comparing them to a non "green" drive, do they hold up as good? Are they as dependable as a plain drive? I guess they are more efficient and I get that but do they break quicker, more often or no difference? I have noticed that they tend to spin slower and are cheaper. That much I have figured out. Other than that, I can't see any other difference. Data speeds seem to be about the same. Please, no brand wars. I may get a WD, Maxtor, Samsung or some other brand. I haven't picked that part yet. So far, I have had good luck with drives. I think I have one doorstop so far. I have at least one of each of the brands above too. Don't jinx me. I'm sure someone has a horror story about some brand. Thanks much. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! Miss the compile output? Hint: EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"