Hazards of hard disk internals in the house

[John Weiss]

GLASS? U sure about that?!

Technically? No. Practically? Yes.

The HD in my old laptop failed, so I took it apart to destroy the platter.
I took a pair of pliers to it, and it shattered into a thousand shards.
They sure looked and acted like glass!

 

[John Turco]

Being that they're no-absorbant, thin metal (which conducts
reasonably well), and have a hole in the middle, it would
seem they are ill-suited towards being coffee mug mats.
Perhaps wind chimes or ???


Have you actually taken the platters out and looked at them?
Not exactly suitable for a sandwich/snack tray.

Since they are not meant for contact with food, the easy
answer is just don't do it. They're "probably" safe if you
washed them off good but I'd not bet on it.


They are almost always nickel-plated neodymium, their
greatest hazzard is violently attaching to something and
scratching it, or a strong magnetic field wiping out a
floppy disc, possibly damaging a watch mechanism... I've
never tried to trash a watch with one though. Their
toxicity should be low but if these things are really a
concern to you, perhaps keeping food on real plates wouldn't
be such a bad idea.

Hello,

Certain DVD's and CD's (e.g., AOL free-trial discs) make great
"coasters," so, why fool around with hard disks? <g>


Cordially,
John Turco <[email protected]>

 

[Folkert Rienstra]

I meant most older drives, I've opened quite a few from past
years, typically up to 60GB size and they weren't glass
unless there's a new glass formulation that allows it to bend.

That doesn't necessarily mean most new drives are,

Right, so much for that "most".

it wouldn't be surprising if many have switched to glass or
ceramic in more modern models.

IBM switched over in 2000. That's hardly recent.

No idea, was it actually solving a problem

The need for lower flying hight and therefor ultra smooth and
stable surfaces that aluminum substrate allegedly didn't provide
-or- Contact Start Stop didn't allow.

or same thing different day, they they'd merely hoped to increase
density more, and sought lower expansion and more rigid platters?

Whatever that enabled them to go to higher densities and keep the business going.

 

[kony]

Right, so much for that "most".

True, but then any information is going to be post-dated,
unless you have an inside ear at every HDD manufacturer or
go store to store opening new drives.

IBM switched over in 2000. That's hardly recent.

Yes, now who else did? Given all the brands, IBM is a
minority. Seems like IBM might look back in retrospect and
wonder if their timing was right.

The need for lower flying hight and therefor ultra smooth and
stable surfaces that aluminum substrate allegedly didn't provide
-or- Contact Start Stop didn't allow.

I won't dispute that, but then how do you account for other
manufacturers managing to continue with aluminum? I don't
think it was yet a "need", Seagate was making 40GB drives
out of aluminum, I may even have one here but to now FIND
it, LOL, might not happen till I'm looking for other parts
and come across it.

 

[don]

What magnet?

The disk?

it is not a magnet?

it is a substrate (material is specific to the mfgr) coated with (mostly)
metal oxide (rust) which can store magnetic information, but it is not a
magnet.

 

[kony]

What magnet?

The disk?

No the one (Or two) in the drive.

 

[J. Clarke]

What magnet?

The disk?

it is not a magnet?

it is a substrate (material is specific to the mfgr) coated with (mostly)
metal oxide (rust) which can store magnetic information, but it is not a
magnet.

No, the "magnets" are magnets, part of the head positioner mechanism
although the ones I've encountered are nowhere near as powerful as is
claimed.

 

[Alexander Grigoriev]

Iron oxide has not been used for long time. Special alloy coating (not
oxide) is used instead.