Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage > #6435

Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal?

Show all headers | View raw

VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> VanguardLH wrote

>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.M.A.R.T.
>>> Which of the SMART attributes give the maker and model?  None.

>> Pity about the make and model that shows up
>> with almost all drives on the SMART report.

> Evading the question again.

Everyone can see you are lying thru your teeth,
as you always do when you have got done like
a fucking dinner, as you always are.

>>> It's the hardware ID (firmware string) that identifies the device.

>> I said SMART REPORT for a reason.

> Yeah, that's obvious why you are trying to obfuscate your response.
> That does not actually specify what utility you were thinking about

I said ALL THE SMART UTES THAT I CAN THINK OF DO THAT, FUCKWIT.

> but failed to mention, a utility - as it turns out - is not only
> reporting S.M.A.R.T. attributes but performing *other* tasks,
> like retrieving and parsing the firmware string.

Never said a word about SMART attributes, fuckwit.

> Since you chose to be obtuse, "REPORT"
> adds no further clarification to "SMART".

Everyone can see you are lying thru your teeth,
as you always do when you have got done like
a fucking dinner, as you always are.

> You didn't determine how to retrieve the firmware string.

Everyone can see you are lying thru your teeth,
as you always do when you have got done like
a fucking dinner, as you always are.

> I did that despite your vague response.

Nothing vague about what I said, fuckwit.

>>> Yes, you can use the drive maker's own utility to get that
>>> info since they know how to retrieve the firmware string.

>> And any even halfway decent SMART report includes it too.

> Not if it only retrieve the S.M.A.R.T. data.

Can't think of any that do just that, fuckwit.

> The device's firmware screen is not part of the S.M.A.R.T. specifiction.

Never said it was, fuckwit.

> The firmware string was retrievable on devices
> that provided it before S.M.A.R.T. even showed up.

Irrelevant to whether it is normally shown in a SMART REPORT, fuckwit.

>>> I was hoping there were 3rd party utilities that would
>>> extract the hardware ID from the device's firmware.

>> There are, they are called SMART utes.

> Doesn't require a utility to read S.M.A.R.T. data

Never said it did, fuckwit.

> (which does not identify the device).

Never said it did, fuckwit.

> Does require a utility that reads the firmware string
> whether it also includes S.M.A.R.T. data or not.

Duh.

> You got caught claiming S.M.A.R.T. provides device identification

Everyone can see you are lying thru your teeth,
as you always do when you have got done like
a fucking dinner, as you always are.

> and now you're trying to cover your for your mistake.

There is no mistake, fuckwit child.

>>> Couldn't find anything that said getting S.M.A.R.T. data would
>>> divulge the hardware ID (which contains maker and model)

>> You could have got real radical and had a look at the
>> SMART reports that are all over the web and seen the drive
>> manufacturer and model listed on almost all of those.

> S.M.A.R.T. has no attributes to report the device identification.

Never said it did, fuckwit child.

> Any of those so-called reports are the utilities
> retrieving MORE than just the S.M.A.R.T. attributes.

You quite sure you ain't one of those rocket scientist
terminal fuckwit children, fuckwit child ?

>>> Then I found:
>>> http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/17973/How-To-Get-Hardware-Information-CPU-ID-MainBoard-I
>>> http://www.soft.tahionic.com/download-hdd_id/hardware%20id%20programming%20source%20code/idex.html

>>> So, yep, you have to query the devices to get their hardware ID string
>>> and other device attributes.  Not all utilities to retrieve the firmware
>>> string parse out all values.

>> I can't think of a SMART ute that doesn't include the drive's 
>> manufacturer
>> and drive model number at the top of the SMART report.

> Ah, so now you're finally admitting that S.M.A.R.T.
> does not provide device identification

Never said that SMART does, fuckwit child.

> and these utilities have to retrieve MORE
> than just the S.M.A.R.T. attributes.

You quite sure you ain't one of those rocket scientist
terminal fuckwit children, fuckwit child ?

> It also means you've admitted it is not required

Admitting nothing, fuckwit child.

> and ineffective to retrieve S.M.A.R.T. attributes

Everyone can see you are lying thru your teeth,
as you always do when you have got done like
a fucking dinner, as you always are.

> when the intent is to identify the device.

>>> HD Sentinel gives me most S.M.A.R.T. data and also parses
>>> more out of the firmware string: VID, PID, hard disk model
>>> ID (maker+model), firmware version, and serial number.

>> So as I said, there is no need to open the case to work out
>> what drive is being used in a particular external hard drive.

> Yes, you explained that so well in your prior responses that no further
> research was required to figure out what the fuck you meant.

You're that stupid ?  Your problem as always, fuckwit child.

> Plus you were wrong since S.M.A.R.T. does not identify the device.

Never said it did, fuckwit child. So I'm not wrong.

>>> S.M.A.R.T. and USB enumeration doesn't provide any of the ID info.

>> But almost all SMART reports do in fact have the drive manufacturer
>> and model listed at the top of the SMART report, presumably
>> because it can be handy to see which drive the report is about.

> So unlike your original claim that S.M.A.R.T. identifies the device,

Everyone can see you are lying thru your teeth,
as you always do when you have got done like
a fucking dinner, as you always are.

> I have to instead use a program that retrieves the firmware string.

And ALL the SMART utes that aren't steaming turds that don't bother
to specify which drive the report belongs to do that, fuckwit child.

> That utility may include S.M.A.R.T. data but it is not required

You quite sure you ain't one of those rocket scientist
terminal fuckwit children, fuckwit child ?

> nor relevant to identifying the device.

You quite sure you ain't one of those rocket scientist
terminal fuckwit children, fuckwit child ?

> Lots of utilities do more than one thing.

But SMART utes normally do identify the
drive manufacturer and model, fuckwit child.

> Some only do one thing: what you want them to do and only that.

You quite sure you ain't one of those rocket scientist
terminal fuckwit children, fuckwit child ?

>>> I had forgotten that I installed HD Sentinel.  I have found other
>>> tools, like those above, that will poll the devices to query for
>>> their firmware string(s) to parse out values, like hardware ID.

>> So, like I said, there is no need to open the case to see
>> what drive is used in a particular external hard drive.

> And, so, unlike you said, S.M.A.R.T. does not identify the device.

Never said it did, fuckwit child. 

Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> - 2015-09-10 10:46 -0400
  Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Mark Perkins <mark@none.invalid> - 2015-09-10 12:09 -0500
    Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Mark F <mark53916@gmail.com> - 2015-09-10 15:05 -0400
      Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2015-09-10 20:27 +0000
        Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Mark Perkins <mark@none.invalid> - 2015-09-10 15:59 -0500
          Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 07:14 +1000
          Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2015-09-11 02:01 +0000
          Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? larrymoencurly@my-deja.com - 2015-09-17 21:58 -0700
            Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Mark Perkins <mark@none.invalid> - 2015-09-30 17:50 -0500
              Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Ed Light <nobody@nobody.there> - 2015-09-30 19:58 -0700
              Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Mark F <mark53916@gmail.com> - 2015-10-04 12:24 -0400
      Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> - 2015-09-10 17:00 -0400
        Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2015-09-10 22:10 -0500
          Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 04:45 +1000
            Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2015-09-14 05:04 -0500
              Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 05:00 +1000
                Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2015-09-14 19:16 -0500
                Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Ed Light <nobody@nobody.there> - 2015-09-15 00:03 -0700
                Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2015-09-15 18:57 -0500
                Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 13:14 +1000
                Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Ed Light <nobody@nobody.there> - 2015-09-16 14:12 -0700
                Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 05:01 +1000
                Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2015-09-15 18:57 -0500
                Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 13:12 +1000
              Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? larrymoencurly@my-deja.com - 2015-09-17 22:50 -0700
        Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Mark F <mark53916@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 18:44 -0400
  Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 07:15 +1000
    Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> - 2015-09-10 17:48 -0400
      Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Mark Perkins <mark@none.invalid> - 2015-09-10 21:08 -0500
  Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Sam <newsgroup2003@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 21:24 -0800
    Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> - 2016-01-23 10:32 -0500
      Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? jerryab@juno.com - 2016-01-24 09:59 -0600
        Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 05:06 +1100
          Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? jerryab@juno.com - 2016-01-25 09:26 -0600
            Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 06:23 +1100
            Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> - 2016-01-25 15:38 -0500
            Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Ed Light <nobody@nobody.there> - 2016-01-25 16:38 -0800

csiph-web