[Tfug] Western Digital "red" drives?

[Kramer Lee]

One thing about a laptop is that is it already equipped with a UPS,
unless the battery is no good.

On the lack of quality, there are a couple factors.  If the product
has too much quality and lasts too long, the manufacturer goes out of
business from lack of repeat business.  Software companies know this
too as they make sure their software is vulnerable and you have to
upgrade to be "safe".  If you make TVs that are good for 25 years,
then you sell a new one in 25 years.  If you make some that die in 10
years, much better, much much better for the business.  And it can be
sold for a smaller price.

Another factor is that some company starts selling cheap versions of
something, like T shirts for 99 cents.  People start buying them, even
if they only last for a month, because hey, it is only 99 cents.
Maybe you can buy one for $5 and it lasts 5 years, and you can get one
for 99 cents and it lasts a month, so maybe you spend $60 for 99 cent
T shirts when you could have gotten by for $5 one time, but hey, it is
only 99 cents, a real bargain and we love bargains.  And maybe it is a
lot less washing of T shirts.

It bugs me the way that Linux seems to be going the security upgrade
leaves your install unsupported and unable to use the latest Firefox
direction also.  Latest kernel upgrade in CentOS 6.5 leaves my M90
very dim, like it doesn't allow the back-light to go to a very high
level.  If I boot in the kernel just before that, it is just fine.
Another kernel upgrade in Mint dropped support for my particular
wireless chip.  The one next older still worked.  Sure it is an older
laptop, but now Linux is seeming to get on the "you must upgrade your
hardware" bandwagon.

On 4/3/13, Bexley Hall <bexley401 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Timothy,
>
> On 4/3/2013 12:46 PM, Timothy D. Lenz wrote:
>> We had to get a new washer. My mom hates it.
>
> We've been "reasonably happy", so far.  Though we are now
> stuck washing the way some techy in southeast asia *thinks*
> we should wash... :<
>
>> And what is with not putting a simple cap or even a suppercap on the
>> power for the electronics so they can function through glitches so short
>> you don't even see the lights flicker?????
>
> Supercaps are only practical for backing up memory for a "long time"
> in lieu of a battery.  They are disproportionately expensive as
> they need to cram lots of "plate" into that tiny package.  And,
> low voltage as they have to keep the plates pretty close together,
> etc.
>
> Power for "the electronics" is increasingly hard to isolate as
> so much is now "the electronics" (vs. electromechanical mechanism).
> So, everything runs off "one supply".
>
> With line switchers, all that "power" (ick... let's be colloquial
> instead of "technical") has to sit in the input filter cap *at*
> line voltage (~200V).  These are more expensive caps so they want
> to have the least "capacity" required.
>
> If the electronics can't do anything to *sense* a temporary glitch
> and try to shed load IN THE HOPE of spanning the glitch, then
> everything sucks power out of that cap.  Since it is usually
> only sized for 1/2 to 2 cycles of the AC mains, it droops quickly.
> (i.e., an 8 - 30ms outage/dimout is indistinguishable from power fail)
>
> One could isolate the MCU's power needs so that *it* could persist
> over such an outage (since that is where most of the "operating
> state" of the appliance is embodied).  But, that means at least
> another diode and/or winding on the switching transformer.
>
> But, even more significantly, the software (firmware) now has to
> be able to detect and/or handle recovery in this condition!
> E.g., if some aspect of it's field (I/O) may have experienced the
> outage BUT IT (MCU) DID NOT, then the MCU needs to know how to
> ensure the field is restored to useful condition.  Simpler to
> just let *everything* "reset" and come up clean (in the hope
> that outages are infrequent).
>
>> Or using the flasn memory
>> that comes with most small micros now to store user settings?
>
> That's easier!  :>  Internal flash has nowhere near that sort of
> longevity/durability!  Think in terms of *thousands* of update
> cycles.
>
> Flash came about as the natural evolution of MPU+ROM+RAM -->
> MPU+EPROM+RAM --> MPU+OTC EPROM+RAM --> EPROM MCU --> OTC MCU -->
> Flash MCU.  I.e., it was intended to make manufacturing easier
> by allowing MCU to be programmed in situ.  While this was
> possible with EPROM and OTC designs (regardless of whether the
> "ROM" was internal or external), it often required external
> devices to steer programming "power" to the device(s).  Flash
> makes this a simpler ($$) hardware interface.
>
> Some devices have separate Flash for "nonvolatile RAM".  But, still,
> their durability is sorely limited.  You could wear one out in
> an *hour* of misapplication!  (e.g., store every change a user
> makes to settings along with their natural consequences).
>
> I only use Flash for settings that change infrequently (ideally,
> settings that the application inherently LIMITS to infrequent
> changes!).  And, only when those settings can't be preserved
> in SRAM effectively.  In those cases, key settings are *copied*
> into Flash AS THE POWER IS FAILING and at no other time.  So,
> I can tolerate "thousands of power fails" instead of "thousands
> of user changes".
>
>> I put my
>> new sony TV on UPS because I had one close for my computer. But we had
>> to buy one for mom's which is the same make and model. And I thought the
>> timer/clocks on the old sharp VCR was bad. At least with it the power
>> had to go off long enough for the lights to dim nearly out.
>
> "Progress"!  :>
>
> I use UPS's on my machines for two reasons:
> - groups all of the power cords in one place so I can turn off
>    everything associated with "that machine" in that one place
> - handle the occasional "light flicker" that the machines are
>    likely not to be able to straddle.
> I'm not really concerned about keeping a system up for an
> orderly shutdown *if* power is truly failing.  That happens
> so infrequently, here, that it isn't a concern (and, having to
> buy a dozen batteries each time UPS's need upgrades gets
> costly!).
>
> Devices that need to span outages are on better UPS's and
> tend to have been chosen for their lower power requirements.
> E.g., I don't try to keep a dozen disks spinning when the
> lights flicker!  :<
>
> [OTOH, making sure a machine that turns off *stays* off is
> important!  I don't want it powering off, then on, then off,
> then on again as the utility struggles to die or return!]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
> Subscription Options:
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org
>