Answer 1. The normal Windows Update will list SP1 unless
there was some problem. You can download it for free from
Windows Update Catalog/ Windows Downloads.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/search.aspx?displaylang=en
Service packs
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=FH;[LN];sp&
Answer 2. An external USB 2.0 drive will work better with
your system because of the limited internal space. It also
has the advantage that you can back-up working files and
take it with you when you need a secure copy of important
data. It also will allow you to take your work with you.
Answer 3... Firewire, aka IEEE 1394 is a very fast (speed
about same as USB 2.0) means to connect devices to a
computer. It is common on movie cameras and Apple calls it
iLink. You can get a Firewire card IF you have available
PCI slots.
| Thanks, everyone. So much info, so few remaining brain
cells! ;-)
|
| Two more questions:
|
| 1. How do I get SP1? Do I just download it from
support.microsoft.com, or
| will it cost money? I checked My Computer -> Properties,
and it says
| nothing about SP1 so I assume I don't have that.
|
| 2. If I go with an external USB 250 GB drive, will that
obviate all these
| issues?
|
| On a probably unrelated topic, what is firewire?
|
| TIA,
|
| Steve
|
| "David Hollway" <
[email protected]>
wrote in message
| | > "Steven C. Liu" <> wrote in message
| > | > > I'm thinking of installing a second internal EIDE hard
disk to my new
| Dell
| > > Dimension 2400. What's the difference between SATA
and ATA? I am
| > > considering the WD2500JB and the WD2500JD drives. The
250GB SATA-133
| > drive
| > > seems like much better value than the 250GB
DMA/ATA-100 one, but I am
| > > concerned about compatibility issues with the SATA
technology. What
| > exactly
| > > is SATA, and what are my issues? I'm asking also
because I read in
| > another
| > > thread here about a system with a newly installed
250GB SATA drive only
| > > being able to see about 1/2 of the available capacity.
| >
| > Steven,
| >
| > Compared to ATA/100 ("Parallel ATA") Serial ATA uses a
completely
| different
| > data signalling system, using serial data transmission
to allow higher
| data
| > rates. The Parallel signalling system used by
traditional ATA interfaces
| > has reached its practical speed limit at ATA/133; it's
not possible to
| > reliably push data any faster over the 40 parallel data
tracks used by
| that
| > interface.
| > As a result, Serial ATA uses a different cable type for
both power and
| data.
| > The data cables are much smaller and thinner, because
they have a lower
| pin
| > count. The advantages of this are:
| >
| > -For the chipset designer: S-ATA uses a lower signalling
voltage, hence no
| > need to accomodate legacy 5V signalling in the IDE
controller, something
| > that has become more of an issue as chipset voltages
trend lower.
| >
| > -For the motherboard designer: far fewer tracks to route
between the IDE
| > controller and the connector. Less space is taken up by
S-ATA, leaving
| more
| > room on the board for other features.
| >
| > -For the system builder: smaller cables mean better
airflow through the
| > chassis, leading to better cooling. The redesigned
connectors are less
| > liable to being plugged in the wrong way, aiding
manufacturability. Also,
| as
| > S-ATA only has one drive per cable, there are no
master/slave jumpers to
| > worry about.
| >
| > -For the user: the cooling/airflow benefits mentioned
above, plus
| > theoretically better performance - first-generation
S-ATA offers 150MB/s
| of
| > bandwidth per channel ("S-ATA/150"). This is only
theoretical, however,
| > because the limiting factor is the speed at which
today's hard drives can
| > transfer data over the interface. A fast drive, doing a
burst read from
| > cache, might show an improvement, but for most of the
time you probably
| > won't see a difference. This will change in the future
as data densities
| and
| > spin-speeds increase.
| >
| > All this is probably irrelevant for you at the moment,
however, because
| I've
| > pored over the (admittedly, very badly laid out)
information on the
| > Dimension 2400 on the Dell.com website, and there is no
mention of your
| > system having Serial-ATA ports. That being the case,
you'd have to buy a
| PCI
| > S-ATA interface - not recommended, because it would be
sharing the 133MB/s
| > bandwidth of your PCI bus with all your other PCI
devices, and hence
| > performance would be reduced. If I'm wrong, and you
know for a fact that
| > your board DOES have S-ATA ports, then go for it.
Otherwise, stick with
| the
| > parallel ATA/100 drive.
| >
| > More information on S-ATA is at:
| >
http://www.serialata.org/
| >
| > As far as software and the OS are concerned, S-ATA
drives appear exactly
| the
| > same as Parallel-ATA drives. The issue you allude to
(someone being able
| to
| > see only half of a large drive) is common to both drive
types. There is a
| > "limit" in the ATA specification at 137GB. Motherboard
BIOSes that do not
| > implement the latest version of the spec (specifically,
48-bit LBA
| > translation) will not correctly see drives beyond this
size.
| > This is just the latest in a series of limits that have
been hit (and
| > breached) in the IDE/ATA spec; about 8 years ago
everyone was concerned
| with
| > motherboards not supporting drives larger than 528MB,
then later there was
| a
| > limit in the FAT filesystem that caused problems above
2GB, then there was
| > another limit that was hit at 8GB... you get the idea.
Each time, a
| > workaround/solution has been implemented.
| > In short, someone who has a non-compliant BIOS will
encounter this 48-bit
| > LBA issue with a drive larger than 137GB whether it's
ATA/100 or S-ATA.
| >
| > Hope this helps.
| >
| > -David Hollway
| > mail as in header - remove spam blocker
| >
| >
| >
| >
|
|
