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

Groups > comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage > #6380 > unrolled thread

Why are external drives cheaper than internal?

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage

Contents

  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? "Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> - 2016-06-04 10:28 -0400
                  Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-06-05 07:57 +1000
              Re: Why are external drives cheaper than internal? Ed Light <nobody@nobody.there> - 2016-01-25 16:38 -0800

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#6437

On 9/15/2015 4:57 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
> Ed Light wrote:
>
>> Rod is a troll. Just filter him out. I'd say.
>
> Perhaps but I still find he sometimes prods me to do the research that I
> should've done beforehand if for anything to prove him wrong.
>

Happy mindf*** !!

-- 
Ed Light

Better World News TV Channel:
http://realnews.com

Iraq Veterans Against the War and Related:
http://ivaw.org
http://couragetoresist.org
http://antiwar.com

Send spam to the FTC at
spam@uce.gov
Thanks, robots.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6432

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

>>> Some cases are designed to snap together.  Prying
>>> the half shells apart often breaks off a tang or lip

>> Not if you do it correctly it doesn't.

> That requires pre-knowledge so you have
> already opened the same shells before.

No, just someone else having done it and
showing the open one on youtube etc.

> There are lots of things you can do if you knew
> how to do them correctly, even heart surgery.

And now its trivially easy to see if someone has
done it before you and has taken some photos.

>>> which is a telltale sign of opening the case.

>> Anyone with even half a clue checks
>> which drive is in the case electronically.

> Thanks for the highly informative response.

Says he carefully deleting from the quoting where
I told him how to get the drive manufacturer and
model number without opening the case.

>>> Some put stickers on.  If the seal is broke, removed, defaced, altered,
>>> tampered, or rendered unintelligble then warranty is voided.

>> Wrong. Those claims are pure bluff.

> Uh huh, and so are stop signs.

Nope. Those have cops that will book you when you ignore them.

Any jurisdiction with even half a clue forces the manufacturer
to honor the warranty even when the sticker has been removed.

>>> Some put a seal on the inside.

>> Not even possible because there is no way to check
>> if the seal has been breached without opening it.

> Frangible seal.  Put on the inside.  Open shell
> from the opposite side (which you must know)

And that can be trivially seen in the report of
someone else who has opened it before you.

> and do not open very much to check integrity before fully opening;
> else, the seal delaminates, and you cannot reach there to put another
> seal in its place (well, maybe you can using an elongated forceps
> and you somehow happened to have another same seal).

Fuck all have anything like that with the commodity drives being discussed.

>>> Some require screws be removed and they are below the
>>> label so you have to puncture the label to get at the screws.

>> Just because some fool claims something...

> Even fools can see puncture holes in labels.

Pity that has no legal value as far as the warranty is concerned.

>>> If they didn't care about boobs getting inside their cases,
>>> why put seals on the case, put screws under labels,

>> Pure bluff.

> Ever try to return an HDD under warranty but with the seal missing?

We aren't discussing HDD seals, we are discussing CASE seals.

And yes, I have made a warranty claim with systems that have
had the CASE seal that some fool has put on the CASE seam
and tried to claim that breaching that voids the warranty and
have had the warranty honored because they know that that
is pure bluff and that I would have fucked them over using the
legal system if they had tried to avoid honoring the warranty.

> I have.  It came back rejected (warranty voided).  Yeah, a bluff, uh huh.

Not with the CASE being discussed.

>>> or use snap-together cases that get damaged when forcibly unsnapped?

>> They don't when they are opened properly.

> Oh, I see,

Like hell you do.

> if I "properly" break into someone's house and sneak back out
> (no damage, no trace, nothing taken) then the break-in is okay.

No one ever said anything even remotely like that.

It's YOUR property, you are legally free to open the
case without damaging it if you want to do that.

> It's "If you don't get caught then it's legal".

Wrong again.

>>> How is that performed [not opening the case] (to get at the firmware
>>> string from the HDD through the USB-to-SATA converter PCB)?

>> It shows up on the SMART report etc.

> Sorry, don't know the etc program. ;->

> 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.

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

I said SMART REPORT for a reason.

> 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.

> 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.

> Actually I was disappointed that none of the USB enumeration
> data would identify the HDD in the external USB enclosure.

Sure, that would certainly be a good approach.

> 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.

> and burned into the drive's IDE chip

It isn't necessarily burned, some manufacturers have
it stored on the platter so its easy for them to have
different models which use drives which have one
platter surface which isn't viable to use etc.

> (and why I often refer to it as the firmware string).
> HD Sentinel seems capable of pulling the hardware ID from
> the drive but they present that separately of the S.M.A.R.T. data.

Most SMART utes show it at the top of the SMART report.

> 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.

> Piriform's Speccy will give me the serial number and
> firmware version but not the hardware ID (maker+model)
> and only a couple S.M.A.R.T. attribute values.

So use a decent SMART ute that does and
give you the full SMART report as well.

> 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.

> 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.

> 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. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6433

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.

>> 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 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.

Since you chose to be obtuse, "REPORT" adds no further clarification to
"SMART".  You didn't determine how to retrieve the firmware string.  I
did that despite your vague response.

>> 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.  The device's firmware
screen is not part of the S.M.A.R.T. specifiction.  The firmware string
was retrievable on devices that provided it before S.M.A.R.T. even
showed up.

>> 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 (which does not
identify the device).  Does require a utility that reads the firmware
string whether it also includes S.M.A.R.T. data or not.

You got caught claiming S.M.A.R.T. provides device identification and
now you're trying to cover your for your mistake.

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

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

It also means you've admitted it is not required and ineffective to
retrieve S.M.A.R.T. attributes 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.  Plus you
were wrong since S.M.A.R.T. does not identify the device.

>> 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, I
have to instead use a program that retrieves the firmware string.  That
utility may include S.M.A.R.T. data but it is not required nor relevant
to identifying the device.  Lots of utilities do more than one thing.
Some only do one thing: what you want them to do and only that.

>> 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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6435

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. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6439

On Monday, September 14, 2015 at 3:04:35 AM UTC-7, VanguardLH wrote:
> Rod Speed wrote:

> > You don't void the warranty by checking what drive is in there
> 
> Opening the enclosure for a pre-built external drive does not void the
> warranty?

Some programs can tell you what's inside the box, provided its
SATA-USB interface chip is supported by the program.  HDDguru.com 
has several, including HDDscan.  
 
> Some cases are designed to snap together.  Prying the half shells apart
> often breaks off a tang or lip which is a telltale sign of opening the
> case.  Some put stickers on.  If the seal is broke, removed, defaced,
> altered, tampered, or rendered unintelligble then warranty is voided.

Apparently manufacturers are much more likely to complain about 
stickers than snaps because sticker tampering is easier to notice 
(even if you use a heat gun while peeling back the sticker to 
prevent striations), and manufacturers break snaps themselves 
because they open the enclosures quickly.  But if you're worried 
about any broken snaps rattling around inside, shake them out 
of the enclosure so they fall out.  There are lots of videos
showing how to open enclosures, but they'e not all good, 
especially those that tell you to use a screwdriver to pry open 
snaps.  It's better to use something thin and with no sharp 
edges, like a dull smooth knife, guitar pick, obsolete credit 
card, or a plastic tool made especially for opening phones.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6415

On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 17:00:03 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
<Nobody@NotMyISP.net> wrote:

> On 09/10/2015 03:05 PM, Mark F wrote:
> > On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 12:09:46 -0500, Mark Perkins <mark@none.invalid>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 10:46:45 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
> >> <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
> >>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for less
> >>> than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
> > Can you give specific examples?
> 
> 6TB external $199 ($179 with a coupon code):
> 
>  > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178681
> 
> Seagate's cheapest 6TB internal (bare) drive, which is what I am 
> *guessing* is in the external box (or perhaps with a smaller cache) is 
> $50/$70 more:
> 
>  > http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822178783

1. Both have a 2 year warranty so that is not a difference

2. The Search on www.seagate can't find either, so that isn't
   a difference.

3a. I found the external in the Seagate store, but all capacities
   got "the model you selected is currently not available for purchase
   on seagate.com.

3b. The internal also got currently not available in all
    capacities.

Maybe they have stopped being made (perhaps replaced by newer models
HDD with flash.

If they are not being made any more than the prices can be anywhere,
depending on what the individual vendors feel: a. "low performance,
but captive audience, so lets raise the price or b. "low performance,
lets get rid of them fast."
  
 

> 
> > I'm sure there are some examples of the same drive being cheaper
> > when buying in an external case, but many times:
> > 1a. The drive is slower than you would normally buy for internal use.
> > 1b. Since the actual drive model in the external drive isn't
> >      specified, the model can vary depending on what is available.
> > 2. The warranty period is shorter.
> > 3. Two drives are in the external case, so a given capacity
> >     can be achieved with cheaper disks.
> > 4. If you are comparing retail packages, the retail package,
> >     my include cables, brackets, and cloning software that
> >     isn't in the (retail) external drive.
> > 5. Maybe even, the external drive is being sold with a lower
> >     margin for some business reason.
> >
> >>
> >> I don't know, but it's been true for quite a few years now, so I take
> >> advantage of the situation by buying an external drive when I need an
> >> internal drive. It usually only takes a few minutes to strip the drive out
> >> of its case.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6396

Percival P. Cassidy <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> wrote 

> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- 
> can sell an external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter 
> and a cable for less than they sell any 6TB internal drive?

Because the external drive isn't just a single 6TB drive.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6398

On 09/10/2015 05:15 PM, Rod Speed wrote:

>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for
>> less than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
>
> Because the external drive isn't just a single 6TB drive.

Hardly any different in size from my 2TB and 5TB ones. Don't think 
there's room for two drives in there.

Perce

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6403

On Thu, 10 Sep 2015 17:48:46 -0400, "Percival P. Cassidy"
<Nobody@NotMyISP.net> wrote:

>On 09/10/2015 05:15 PM, Rod Speed wrote:
>
>>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
>>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for
>>> less than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
>>
>> Because the external drive isn't just a single 6TB drive.
>
>Hardly any different in size from my 2TB and 5TB ones. Don't think 
>there's room for two drives in there.

If it was a dual drive enclosure, it would be obvious and you'd know it.
First, it's way bigger in order to hold two drives, and second, it would
cost way more than a single internal drive of the same capacity, and
therefore it wouldn't apply to the premise of this thread. You can safely
rule out a dual drive enclosure.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6718

On Thursday, September 10, 2015 at 7:46:37 AM UTC-7, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an 
> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for less 
> than they sell any 6TB internal drive?

reliability?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6719

On 01/23/2016 12:24 AM, Sam wrote:

>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for less
>> than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
>
> reliability?

Hardly -- when the drive in the enclosure is the same one (at least in 
some cases) as the one that is sold for more without the enclosure, wall 
wart, and USB interface and cable.

Perce

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6722

On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 10:32:09 -0500, "Percival P. Cassidy"
<Nobody@NotMyISP.net> wrote:

>On 01/23/2016 12:24 AM, Sam wrote:
>
>>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
>>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for less
>>> than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
>>
>> reliability?
>
>Hardly -- when the drive in the enclosure is the same one (at least in 
>some cases) as the one that is sold for more without the enclosure, wall 
>wart, and USB interface and cable.
>
>Perce

Warranty period.

Internal drives typically have a 3-yr warranty. External devices are
usually warranted for 1-2 yrs. So the drive mfr has passed the cost of
service and replacement to the reseller. To make the cost of the
external box acceptable, the cost of the drive (to the reseller) must
be fairly low. 

Also remember, the reseller must buy a fairly large number of the
drives in order to get the lower price. Thus, the drive mfr is getting
a chunk of "cash now" and avoiding all those expenses in the future
(warranty replacement, etc) related to those bulk-sale drives.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6723

<jerryab@juno.com> wrote in message 
news:0qs9abhm24sfvpdp29aontccdg36t4rgtl@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 10:32:09 -0500, "Percival P. Cassidy"
> <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> wrote:
>
>>On 01/23/2016 12:24 AM, Sam wrote:
>>
>>>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
>>>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for 
>>>> less
>>>> than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
>>>
>>> reliability?
>>
>>Hardly -- when the drive in the enclosure is the same one (at least in
>>some cases) as the one that is sold for more without the enclosure, wall
>>wart, and USB interface and cable.
>>
>>Perce
>
> Warranty period.
>
> Internal drives typically have a 3-yr warranty. External devices are
> usually warranted for 1-2 yrs. So the drive mfr has passed the cost of
> service and replacement to the reseller. To make the cost of the
> external box acceptable, the cost of the drive (to the reseller) must
> be fairly low.
>
> Also remember, the reseller must buy a fairly large number of the
> drives in order to get the lower price. Thus, the drive mfr is getting
> a chunk of "cash now" and avoiding all those expenses in the future
> (warranty replacement, etc) related to those bulk-sale drives.

The problem with that theory is that the same external
drive has a 3 year warranty here, but a 1 year warranty
in the US and is cheaper than the same drive bare here.

The real reason they are often cheaper is just the usual
reason, they sell in higher volume than internal drives
in the retail market. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6727

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 05:06:56 +1100, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
><jerryab@juno.com> wrote in message 
>news:0qs9abhm24sfvpdp29aontccdg36t4rgtl@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 10:32:09 -0500, "Percival P. Cassidy"
>> <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On 01/23/2016 12:24 AM, Sam wrote:
>>>
>>>>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
>>>>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for 
>>>>> less
>>>>> than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
>>>>
>>>> reliability?
>>>
>>>Hardly -- when the drive in the enclosure is the same one (at least in
>>>some cases) as the one that is sold for more without the enclosure, wall
>>>wart, and USB interface and cable.
>>>
>>>Perce
>>
>> Warranty period.
>>
>> Internal drives typically have a 3-yr warranty. External devices are
>> usually warranted for 1-2 yrs. So the drive mfr has passed the cost of
>> service and replacement to the reseller. To make the cost of the
>> external box acceptable, the cost of the drive (to the reseller) must
>> be fairly low.
>>
>> Also remember, the reseller must buy a fairly large number of the
>> drives in order to get the lower price. Thus, the drive mfr is getting
>> a chunk of "cash now" and avoiding all those expenses in the future
>> (warranty replacement, etc) related to those bulk-sale drives.
>
>The problem with that theory is that the same external
>drive has a 3 year warranty here, but a 1 year warranty
>in the US and is cheaper than the same drive bare here.

Learn how businesses operate. The laws regarding warranties in other
countries are not the same as the US. 

>The real reason they are often cheaper is just the usual
>reason, they sell in higher volume than internal drives
>in the retail market. 

Nope. They are all internal drives. All the external mfrs (OEMs) do is
put the internal drives in external boxes and resell the package with
a different warranty--one they create. This OEM warranty is not
dependent on the drive manufacturer's warranty for an internal drive
sold to the public. In the US, the drive manufacturer will not honor
any warranty for the drives sold to the OEM unless the claim is made
by the OEM against the drive manufacturer--which requires the consumer
to return the device to the OEM for warranty service. If the device is
out of the OEM's warranty, that is the end of all claims.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6728

<jerryab@juno.com> wrote in message 
news:2jecabdvu2kum4dfo0r047spi4ttfqdhog@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 05:06:56 +1100, "Rod Speed"
> <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>><jerryab@juno.com> wrote in message
>>news:0qs9abhm24sfvpdp29aontccdg36t4rgtl@4ax.com...
>>> On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 10:32:09 -0500, "Percival P. Cassidy"
>>> <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 01/23/2016 12:24 AM, Sam wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
>>>>>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for
>>>>>> less
>>>>>> than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
>>>>>
>>>>> reliability?
>>>>
>>>>Hardly -- when the drive in the enclosure is the same one (at least in
>>>>some cases) as the one that is sold for more without the enclosure, wall
>>>>wart, and USB interface and cable.
>>>>
>>>>Perce
>>>
>>> Warranty period.
>>>
>>> Internal drives typically have a 3-yr warranty. External devices are
>>> usually warranted for 1-2 yrs. So the drive mfr has passed the cost of
>>> service and replacement to the reseller. To make the cost of the
>>> external box acceptable, the cost of the drive (to the reseller) must
>>> be fairly low.
>>>
>>> Also remember, the reseller must buy a fairly large number of the
>>> drives in order to get the lower price. Thus, the drive mfr is getting
>>> a chunk of "cash now" and avoiding all those expenses in the future
>>> (warranty replacement, etc) related to those bulk-sale drives.
>>
>>The problem with that theory is that the same external
>>drive has a 3 year warranty here, but a 1 year warranty
>>in the US and is cheaper than the same drive bare here.
>
> Learn how businesses operate.

Ran more than one thanks.

> The laws regarding warranties in other
> countries are not the same as the US.

That longer warranty here isnt imposed by law.

>> The real reason they are often cheaper is just
>> the usual reason, they sell in higher volume
>> than internal drives in the retail market.

> Nope.

Yep.

> They are all internal drives.

Not in the retail market they aren't.

> All the external mfrs (OEMs)

Plenty of them are the manufacturer of the drive.

> do is put the internal drives in external boxes
> and resell the package with a different warranty
> --one they create. This OEM warranty

There is no OEM warranty with plenty of external drives.

> is not dependent on the drive manufacturer's
> warranty for an internal drive sold to the public.

But it is when there is no OEM and the manufacturer of the
drive is the manufacturer of the external format of the drive.

> In the US, the drive manufacturer will not honor any
> warranty for the drives sold to the OEM unless the claim
> is made by the OEM against the drive manufacturer--

There is no OEM with plenty of external drives.

> which requires the consumer to return the
> device to the OEM for warranty service.

The law varys on that world wide.

> If the device is out of the OEM's warranty,
> that is the end of all claims.

Its nothing like as black and white as that world wide. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6729

On 01/25/2016 10:26 AM, jerryab@juno.com wrote:

>>>>>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
>>>>>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for
>>>>>> less
>>>>>> than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
>>>>>
>>>>> reliability?

>>>> Hardly -- when the drive in the enclosure is the same one (at least in
>>>> some cases) as the one that is sold for more without the enclosure, wall
>>>> wart, and USB interface and cable.

>>> Warranty period.
>>>
>>> Internal drives typically have a 3-yr warranty. External devices are
>>> usually warranted for 1-2 yrs. So the drive mfr has passed the cost of
>>> service and replacement to the reseller. To make the cost of the
>>> external box acceptable, the cost of the drive (to the reseller) must
>>> be fairly low.
>>>
>>> Also remember, the reseller must buy a fairly large number of the
>>> drives in order to get the lower price. Thus, the drive mfr is getting
>>> a chunk of "cash now" and avoiding all those expenses in the future
>>> (warranty replacement, etc) related to those bulk-sale drives.
>>
>> The problem with that theory is that the same external
>> drive has a 3 year warranty here, but a 1 year warranty
>> in the US and is cheaper than the same drive bare here.
>
> Learn how businesses operate. The laws regarding warranties in other
> countries are not the same as the US.
>
>> The real reason they are often cheaper is just the usual
>> reason, they sell in higher volume than internal drives
>> in the retail market.

> Nope. They are all internal drives. All the external mfrs (OEMs) do is
> put the internal drives in external boxes and resell the package with
> a different warranty--one they create. This OEM warranty is not
> dependent on the drive manufacturer's warranty for an internal drive
> sold to the public. In the US, the drive manufacturer will not honor
> any warranty for the drives sold to the OEM unless the claim is made
> by the OEM against the drive manufacturer--which requires the consumer
> to return the device to the OEM for warranty service. If the device is
> out of the OEM's warranty, that is the end of all claims.

I was not talking about Seagate drives in "Brand X" enclosures: I was 
talking about Seagate-branded external drives vs. Seagate internal 
drives of the same capacity -- and in many cases the same model/part# as 
what is in the enclosure. IIRC, all have the same 2-year warranty.

Ii haven't looked at other makes.

Perce

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6993

On 01/25/2016 03:38 PM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:

>>>>>>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
>>>>>>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for
>>>>>>> less
>>>>>>> than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> reliability?
>
>>>>> Hardly -- when the drive in the enclosure is the same one (at least in
>>>>> some cases) as the one that is sold for more without the enclosure,
>>>>> wall
>>>>> wart, and USB interface and cable.
>
>>>> Warranty period.
>>>>
>>>> Internal drives typically have a 3-yr warranty. External devices are
>>>> usually warranted for 1-2 yrs. So the drive mfr has passed the cost of
>>>> service and replacement to the reseller. To make the cost of the
>>>> external box acceptable, the cost of the drive (to the reseller) must
>>>> be fairly low.
>>>>
>>>> Also remember, the reseller must buy a fairly large number of the
>>>> drives in order to get the lower price. Thus, the drive mfr is getting
>>>> a chunk of "cash now" and avoiding all those expenses in the future
>>>> (warranty replacement, etc) related to those bulk-sale drives.
>>>
>>> The problem with that theory is that the same external
>>> drive has a 3 year warranty here, but a 1 year warranty
>>> in the US and is cheaper than the same drive bare here.
>>
>> Learn how businesses operate. The laws regarding warranties in other
>> countries are not the same as the US.
>>
>>> The real reason they are often cheaper is just the usual
>>> reason, they sell in higher volume than internal drives
>>> in the retail market.
>
>> Nope. They are all internal drives. All the external mfrs (OEMs) do is
>> put the internal drives in external boxes and resell the package with
>> a different warranty--one they create. This OEM warranty is not
>> dependent on the drive manufacturer's warranty for an internal drive
>> sold to the public. In the US, the drive manufacturer will not honor
>> any warranty for the drives sold to the OEM unless the claim is made
>> by the OEM against the drive manufacturer--which requires the consumer
>> to return the device to the OEM for warranty service. If the device is
>> out of the OEM's warranty, that is the end of all claims.
>
> I was not talking about Seagate drives in "Brand X" enclosures: I was
> talking about Seagate-branded external drives vs. Seagate internal
> drives of the same capacity -- and in many cases the same model/part# as
> what is in the enclosure. IIRC, all have the same 2-year warranty.
>
> Ii haven't looked at other makes.

And now I noticed that BestBuy has 2TB external Seagates (Slim" 2.5" 
drive inside) with 3-year warranties whereas the 2TB internal notebook 
drive has only a 2-year warranty. Aren't external drives more likely to 
suffer rough handling?

Perce

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6994

"Percival P. Cassidy" <Nobody@NotMyISP.net> wrote in message 
news:drg6qqFauo6U1@mid.individual.net...
> On 01/25/2016 03:38 PM, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> How come Seagate -- to name just one manufacturer -- can sell an
>>>>>>>> external 6TB drive in a case with a USB 3.0 adapter and a cable for
>>>>>>>> less
>>>>>>>> than they sell any 6TB internal drive?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> reliability?
>>
>>>>>> Hardly -- when the drive in the enclosure is the same one (at least 
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> some cases) as the one that is sold for more without the enclosure,
>>>>>> wall
>>>>>> wart, and USB interface and cable.
>>
>>>>> Warranty period.
>>>>>
>>>>> Internal drives typically have a 3-yr warranty. External devices are
>>>>> usually warranted for 1-2 yrs. So the drive mfr has passed the cost of
>>>>> service and replacement to the reseller. To make the cost of the
>>>>> external box acceptable, the cost of the drive (to the reseller) must
>>>>> be fairly low.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also remember, the reseller must buy a fairly large number of the
>>>>> drives in order to get the lower price. Thus, the drive mfr is getting
>>>>> a chunk of "cash now" and avoiding all those expenses in the future
>>>>> (warranty replacement, etc) related to those bulk-sale drives.
>>>>
>>>> The problem with that theory is that the same external
>>>> drive has a 3 year warranty here, but a 1 year warranty
>>>> in the US and is cheaper than the same drive bare here.
>>>
>>> Learn how businesses operate. The laws regarding warranties in other
>>> countries are not the same as the US.
>>>
>>>> The real reason they are often cheaper is just the usual
>>>> reason, they sell in higher volume than internal drives
>>>> in the retail market.
>>
>>> Nope. They are all internal drives. All the external mfrs (OEMs) do is
>>> put the internal drives in external boxes and resell the package with
>>> a different warranty--one they create. This OEM warranty is not
>>> dependent on the drive manufacturer's warranty for an internal drive
>>> sold to the public. In the US, the drive manufacturer will not honor
>>> any warranty for the drives sold to the OEM unless the claim is made
>>> by the OEM against the drive manufacturer--which requires the consumer
>>> to return the device to the OEM for warranty service. If the device is
>>> out of the OEM's warranty, that is the end of all claims.
>>
>> I was not talking about Seagate drives in "Brand X" enclosures: I was
>> talking about Seagate-branded external drives vs. Seagate internal
>> drives of the same capacity -- and in many cases the same model/part# as
>> what is in the enclosure. IIRC, all have the same 2-year warranty.
>>
>> Ii haven't looked at other makes.
>
> And now I noticed that BestBuy has 2TB external Seagates (Slim" 2.5" drive 
> inside) with 3-year warranties whereas the 2TB internal notebook drive has 
> only a 2-year warranty. Aren't external drives more likely to suffer rough 
> handling?

That isnt the only thing that affects there warranty period.

I just bought a Seagate 8TB external and it has a 3 year warranty
and I deliberately bought that one for the 3 year warranty. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6730

On 1/25/2016 7:26 AM, jerryab@juno.com wrote:

>
> Nope. They are all internal drives. All the external mfrs (OEMs) do is
> put the internal drives in external boxes and resell the package
...

WD laptop drive size portables, those really little ones, have drives 
that only have a USB port on/in them.

-- 
Ed Light

Better World News TV Channel:
http://realnews.com

Iraq Veterans Against the War and Related:
http://ivaw.org
http://votevets.org
http://couragetoresist.org
http://antiwar.com

Send spam to the FTC at
spam@uce.gov
Thanks, robots.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage

csiph-web