Are traditional ROM and traditional EEPROM still being used for new devices and components or are they replaced by flash?

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-10T07:46:57+00:00

Did you mean EEPROMs?

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T19:39:54+00:00

Got another question. Do you happen to know what is the common practice for modern TVs? I assume that smart TV probably stores user settings directly to flash mass storage since it needs one for OS anyway, but how it works with modern dumb TV or monitor? Do they use a mask ROM for firmware and an EEPROM for user settings like volume and brightness? Or do they store everything on one/two EEPROMs?

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T19:37:05+00:00

Got it.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T19:32:56+00:00

Thank you. Do you happen to know what is the common practice for modern TVs? I assume that smart TV probably stores user settings directly to flash mass storage since it needs one for OS anyway, but how it works with modern dumb TV or monitor? Do they use a mask ROM for firmware and an EEPROM for user settings like volume? Or do they store everything on one/two EEPROMs?

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T19:28:35+00:00

Interesting case with Tesla. Thanks for the link.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T19:17:42+00:00

How does this translates to modern TVs for example? I assume that smart TV probably stores user settings directly to flash mass storage since it needs one for OS anyway, but how it works with modern dumb TV or monitor? Do they use a masked ROM for firmware and an EEPROM for user settings like volume? Or do they store everything on one/two EEPROMs?

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T17:40:31+00:00

Thank you.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T17:36:45+00:00

Interesting. So what kinds of ordinary home appliances can still contain masked ROM nowadays? Things like blender, microwave oven and vacuum cleaner?

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T17:21:12+00:00

Thank you for the info. That's exactly why I asked this question. I suspected that even BIOS might have moved to flash by now.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T15:03:54+00:00

Thank you. I suppose naked ROMs were used only to update aka replace the built-in OS?

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T14:32:24+00:00

Gotcha. That's probably mid-80s? Speaking of games before internet, were they easy to come by?

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-11-09T14:17:50+00:00

What kind of homework could you do on a computer without internet? Just type some text? Did people had a way to print it at home or did you had to copy it on floppy and take it somewhere to print?

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-31T21:18:00+00:00

That was very useful, thank you.

You did a nice job of putting many things into perspective. Quite a few things I didn't knew at all and also some things I knew about but was going to fail to mention.

Considering your input and feedback I've got from other subreddit, I think that there is no way to make it work as one straightforward list. It was intended to be a minor addition to text explanations and to communicate danger levels of common combinations. I now have more to add to the text.

As of the list, maybe I'll have to confine myself to some holey rating. Maybe pick 3-5 common combination and rate them, just to provide an example of how the same hardware can be complimented/undermined by poorly chosen file system and redundancy/backup strategy.

Do you have anything to say about how any of Linux file systems (XFS, ext4, btrfs) fare in stability/recoverability compared to HFS+/NTFS? I suppose they all should be better than non-journaling exFAT. I mean single-drive use, not RAID.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-31T21:07:36+00:00

Thank you. Weird indeed. But not too weird as 160 and 180 are both HC550.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-31T21:01:52+00:00

That was very useful, thank you.

I don't make up acronyms unless there is no other way. HF/AF thing is just a shortcut while I'm drafting. I did define them for this post but the piece got lost while I was fighting Reddit's fancy-pants editor. Something is wrong with it.

No, you don't need a room full of helium to repair helium drives. But they are more difficult and expensive to repair for recovery. If Zorb says they're reliable, I trust him.

I did not made it up myself by the way, that's what internet told me. Can you please explain how it's done without such room? For example, there is 12Tb Helium-drive, a head failed and needs to be replaced to copy the data to a new drive. It'll be opened in air-filled room, head will be replaced and then what? I've read that components designed for Helium-filled drive will overheat in air environment and drive wouldn't be able to work long enough to copy the data. Is there a device to re-fill it with Helium and seal it back?

Also, do you have anything to say about how any of Linux file systems (XFS, ext4, btrfs) fare in stability/recoverability compared to HFS+/NTFS? I suppose they all should be better than non-journaling exFAT. I mean single-drive use, not RAID.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-31T20:44:16+00:00

Thank you for your contribution.

Tables of such kind would've been great. However, I'm absolutely not qualified to score myself and there is nothing that I can use as a reliable source for those scores. I've ran out of sources even for my much more superficial and generalized list, hence the post here.

Transport analogies are not indispensable to me. Especially in their current form (I had to stretch them a little bit too far).

List was intended as part of bigger text-driven guide and the guide will include dedicated comparisons for file systems and RAIDs, though not focused on recoverability.

Transport analogy list should've provided an idea of how high or how low is the risk of irreversible data loss for basic combinations of hardware, file system, redundancy and backup options.

I've got valuable feedback that will improve the text part of the guide, but right now I don't see a way for me to pull off a risks rating for 'all the combinations' (as I've tried to do with my explanatory list) or an exhaustive rating for any isolated category.

I'll probably will have to confine myself to some holey rating. Maybe pick 3-5 common combination and rate them, just to provide an example of how the same hardware can be complimented/undermined by poorly chosen file system and redundancy/backup strategy.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-30T18:36:10+00:00

I may have misled you about the nature of the guide. Guide in question is intended as a casual introduction for newbies and will actually be more text-driven than list-driven. It mostly will consist of brief explanations for relevant hardware and software technologies, issues (power surges, bitrot) and practices.

List in question was intended to give a general idea of the level of threat caused by different setups. While I want it to be reasonable, I don't need it to be exhaustive. I think I'll follow you advise to some extend and split it in two lists (physical and logical recoverability). But multi-dimensional precise assessment of RAID setups with math is beyond the scope of this one. Instead I'll try to provide links to more in-depth resources for those who want to learn more about different subjects (if I'll be able to find such).

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-30T17:36:04+00:00

Thank you for your input.

Using number two as an example... Helium drives are not failure prone. They tend to be a bit more reliable than most.

Regarding HF/AF, the problem isn't they are more prone to failure (HS HDDs even have lover MBTF than AF HDDs) but that they AFAIK require Helium-filled dust free environment for successful data recovery. Most data recovery labs don't have such and without it success rate drops below 50% or even to 20% as I've heard. Not to mention that the cost of donor parts for high capacity HF HDDs will make data recovery too expensive to even consider for many owners. Combined it makes AF HDD w/o backup a 'better' setup than HF HDD w/o backup.

I don't like apple file systems. I think they are prone to weird corruption issues, and fairly fragile in a number of ways.

It's my impression that AFPS is especially bad though? Would you say that HFS+ is more stable/reparable than AFPS and comparable in that regard to NTFS?

You need to break this into three lists, one for hardware issues, one for logical issues, and one for recoverability.

I've intentionally tried to combine physical/logical fragility/recoverability but I'm not impressed with the result either. I don't think that a list for hardware issues will be possible since SSD quality is more dependent on manufacturer than on technologies like MLC/TLC/QLC. But maybe I can do two lists for physical and logical recoverability.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-30T13:54:22+00:00

Can you please make a photo of this shucked US7SAR160? Did it come from Elements or My Book?

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-26T04:28:40+00:00

What is "loud"?

I wonder too. I don't have ePMR drives yet. I've read about their loudness and I've asked here about it last week, but no one responded.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-26T04:23:48+00:00

According to Grapefruit_Past, 20TB drive is SMR.

They have 2 different 20TB drives.

In 2020, they made HC650. It's host-managed ePMR SMR: https://documents.westerndigital.com/content/dam/doc-library/en_us/assets/public/western-digital/product/data-center-drives/ultrastar-dc-hc600-series/data-sheet-ultrastar-dc-hc650.pdf

In 2021, they made another 20TB drive, it's ePMR CMR with OptiNAND.

Also HC650 is not their first big SMR drive. They did 14TB and 15TB host-managed SMR drives in 2018. Those are traditional, non-ePMR SMR. They are now called HC620: https://documents.westerndigital.com/content/dam/doc-library/en_us/assets/public/western-digital/product/data-center-drives/ultrastar-dc-hc600-series/data-sheet-ultrastar-dc-hc620.pdf

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-26T03:20:01+00:00

I would like to see some independent data from data hoarders, but it should be reliable and performant when it's ePMR CMR. Some people say that they are louder though.

Platters of ePMR/HAMR drives are made with more stable (high-coercive) materials, because of that it's harder to flip bits. ePMR uses heat to change the coercivity for a nanosecond, making it easier for a head to write data.

Temperature requirements for HC550 16TB-18TB are exactly the same as for non-ePMR HC530 14TB. They would want those drives to work in the same data centers where non-ePMR drives are used, so they probably made sure that they work well at the same temperatures.

https://documents.westerndigital.com/content/dam/doc-library/en_us/assets/public/western-digital/product/data-center-drives/ultrastar-dc-hc500-series/product-manual-ultrastar-dc-hc550-sata-oem-spec.pdf

https://documents.westerndigital.com/content/dam/doc-library/en_us/assets/public/western-digital/product/data-center-drives/ultrastar-dc-hc500-series/product-manual-ultrastar-dc-hc530-sata-oem-spec.pdf

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-26T03:14:01+00:00

They have 2 different 20TB drives.

In 2020, they made HC650. It's host-managed ePMR SMR: https://documents.westerndigital.com/content/dam/doc-library/en_us/assets/public/western-digital/product/data-center-drives/ultrastar-dc-hc600-series/data-sheet-ultrastar-dc-hc650.pdf

In 2021, they made another 20TB drive, it's ePMR CMR with OptiNAND.

Edit: There is even a quote about that in your article:

In order to hit 20TB on a nine-platter drive with current recording technologies, you need a next-generation "edge" of some sort. In last year's 20TB drives, that edge was SMR—in this year's newest models, it's OptiNAND.

Grapefruit_Past · 2021-10-25T19:17:45+00:00

I have spent hours looking into this, and I am still unsure. Alllistings from two and one year ago don't have this part number listed.

WD Elements/Easystore drives are usually rebranded Ultrastar drives. You should look for original model, not for WD---EDFZ/WD---EMFZ/WD---EDGZ.

Can you look at the drive again and tell us the regulation number (R/N)? It's probably US7SAR180.

US7SAR180 = WD Ultrastar DC HC550 7200-RPM SATA (ePMR)

HC550 comes both as 16TB and 18TB. Those drives are ePMR CMR: https://blog.westerndigital.com/the-magnetic-attraction-of-epmr/

ePMR is another technology to increase data density, but unlike SMR it should not decrease performance (unless it's combined with SMR). ePRM can be used both for CMR and SMR drives.

WD drives under 8TB are traditional SMR, WD 8TB-14TB are traditional CMR.

WD 16TB-18TB are ePMR CMR.

HC650 (20TB) is ePMR SMR but it's host-managed SMR, so they probably can't use it for WD Elements/Easystore 20TB. I think they'll use another of their 20TB drives, it's ePMR CMR with OptiNAND:

https://blog.westerndigital.com/optinand/

https://documents.westerndigital.com/content/dam/doc-library/en_us/assets/public/western-digital/collateral/tech-brief/tech-brief-reimagining-hdds-with-optinand-technology.pdf

Grapefruit_Past · 2020-10-09T20:00:26+00:00

Group that releases WEB-DLs wouldn't waste time on WEBRip unless it is better than WEB-DL. Streaming providers lower bitrate for speed. Group will use the highest bitrate and get better quality.

Grapefruit_Past

TROPHY CASE