StarTech HD Racks

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tim
  • Start date Start date
Tim said:
I'm trying to find the sturdiest IDE HD rack available. Does anyone have
an
opinion about StarTech racks? Here is a link ...

http://www.startech.com/ststore/ItemDetail.cfm?ProductID=DRW150ATABK&tab=c&mt=a

and here ...

http://www.startech.com/ststore/itemdetail.cfm?ProductID=DRW115ATABK&mt=

Thanks
Click to expand...


Tim:
I'm not familiar with that particular brand/model of mobile rack, however,
the prices shown on the links you provided appear very high. On the other
hand they apparently reflect the MSRP and presumably they would be available
from online vendors at sharply reduced prices. At least I would hope so.

I assume you've noticed that the DRW150 model is plastic/aluminum, i.e., the
rack (or bay) is plastic and the drive drawer (a/k/a caddy or removable
tray) is aluminum, while the DRW115 is an all-aluminum model.

I've had a fair amount of experience working with dozens of different mobile
racks over the years, both all-plastic, plastic-aluminum, and all-aluminum.
And from the cheapest models to the most expensive ones, they all seem to
work and hold up quite well. On my own computers I've been using the Lian-Li
RH-42 model (all-aluminum) because I settled on that model a few years ago
and need the interchangeability of their removable trays. (Note that there
is no industry standard for the removable trays (caddies), so that there is
generally no interchangeability between different makers' models, or for
that matter between models from the same maker. This may not be important to
you if you're working with a single computer, of course).

An important consideration in selecting a mobile rack is knowing the overall
length of the rack to determine if it will fit in your particular computer
case without butting up against the motherboard. This is a problem I run
into with my Lian-Li rack, since it's very long compared with other racks
(because its fan is attached on the end, rather than the underside of the
rack or some other location). In most cases, however, there's no problem in
this area.

Do a Google search for "removable hard drives" or "mobile racks" for a
wealth of information on this subject.

Art

P.S.
I don't know if you've had any experience with configuring your desktop PC
with hard drive removable racks, but if you haven't, let me assure you that
you're making a wise decision. One that you will never regret. I hope you're
considering installing two removable racks rather than a single one. The
flexibility and peace of mind this arrangement gives you cannot be
overestimated, believe me. Not too long ago I wrote an article for a local
computer club which I entitled "The Joy of Removable Hard Drives", and for
good reason!
 
Art said:
I've had a fair amount of experience working with dozens of different mobile
racks over the years, both all-plastic, plastic-aluminum, and all-aluminum.
And from the cheapest models to the most expensive ones, they all seem to
work and hold up quite well.


I don't know if you've had any experience with configuring your desktop PC
with hard drive removable racks, but if you haven't, let me assure you that
you're making a wise decision. One that you will never regret. I hope you're
considering installing two removable racks rather than a single one.
Click to expand...

Many thanks for your reply. This is my strategy: I would like to have two
drives installed on my motherboard's primary IDE channel - each in its own
removable rack and set to "cable select", and each with an instance of
Windows XP installed. I would like to boot from either drive just by
choosing which rack to power on, meanwhile the other drive remains powered
off but stays connected to the rack. I'm hoping that this will work as it
makes a two-user system very easy to set up and isolate. My question
regarding sturdiness pertains mostly to the racks' key switches (for
powering on/off) - being able to endure the constant use in a very busy rig.

Have you ever tried such a configuration? .
 
This is my strategy: I would like to have two
drives installed on my motherboard's primary IDE channel - each in its own
removable rack and set to "cable select", and each with an instance of
Windows XP installed.
Click to expand...

Two instances of the same copy of XP? Oooh, Microsoft don't like that.
They told me you can only install one copy of XP to one HDD even if
they are on the same PC. I got flagged to call them during activation
when I installed one copy of XP to two HDD's.
 
Art said:
that you're making a wise decision. One that you will never regret. I hope
you're considering installing two removable racks rather than a single
one.
Click to expand...


Tim said:
Many thanks for your reply. This is my strategy: I would like to have
two
drives installed on my motherboard's primary IDE channel - each in its own
removable rack and set to "cable select", and each with an instance of
Windows XP installed. I would like to boot from either drive just by
choosing which rack to power on, meanwhile the other drive remains powered
off but stays connected to the rack. I'm hoping that this will work as it
makes a two-user system very easy to set up and isolate. My question
regarding sturdiness pertains mostly to the racks' key switches (for
powering on/off) - being able to endure the constant use in a very busy
rig.

Have you ever tried such a configuration? .
Click to expand...

Hi again:
Yes, we have used the configuration you've envisioned and generally there's
no problem with it. I say "generally" because from time-to-time we've come
across motherboards whose BIOS did not permit booting from a Slave position
on either IDE channel. It's a rarity in our experience but it has happened.
Our preferred configuration is either setting up both removable drives as
Masters (Cable Select is fine) or the first removable drive as Primary Slave
(assuming of course there's no motherboard boot problem as previously
indicated) and the second one as Secondary Master. The reason we sometimes
use the latter configuration is that when there are four IDE/ATAPI devices
installed, e.g., the two removable drives, a CD/DVD-ROM, and a CD/DVD
burner, some users (including myself) prefer accessing the latter two
devices in (from top to bottom) bays 1 and 4, respectfully, and the two
removable drives in bays 2 and 3. Since we prefer to use standard 18" IDE
ribbon cable (no round cables or longer cables) for the connections, this
kind of hookup facilitates the configuration I've indicated insofar as the
two devices in bays one and two are concerned. Incidentally, based on
detailed tests we've made, we could discern no negative impact on the
performance of the hard drive when it is connected as a Primary Slave rather
than Master.

In any event the important point in connecting your two removable drives is
that regardless of their position on the IDE cable, each one can boot
independently. That's your basic objective.

In addition to its ideal use involving multi-users, I'm sure you're aware of
its value as a near-failsafe backup system using disk imaging programs such
as Symantec's Norton Ghost or Acronis True Image. The fact that you can
profitably use a *limitless* number of hard drives in a two removable drives
arrangement is an extraordinary advantage.
Art
 
Our preferred configuration is either setting up both removable drives as
Masters (Cable Select is fine)
Click to expand...

Are you saying that both drives share the "Master" connector of the IDE
cable, or that both drives have their jumpers set for "Master" using both
cable connectors? If you used both cable connectors with both drives set
for "Master", what happens if a person accidentally boots up with both
drives powered on?

Very recently I tested my planned configuration on a rig with the
motherboard that I wish to use (an Intel D865PERL). The system boots up fine
from either drive without a hitch. So, fingers crossed, there won't be any
weird consequences later on.

With a SCSI system there are problems if the cable is not properly
terminated. Could leaving unpowered drives on an IDE cable cause similar
impedence issues? If the system boots, can I be reasonably sure that there
aren't any issues?

In addition to its ideal use involving multi-users, I'm sure you're aware of
its value as a near-failsafe backup system using disk imaging programs such
as Symantec's Norton Ghost or Acronis True Image.
Click to expand...

You're reading my mind. I plan to have a third tray with a drive just for
backup purposes. Jumpers set for "cable-select", it should boot as the
slave of whatever "Master" is attached at the time. From there I can make a
disk image to it then restore the slave rack to running the secondary system
drive again.

Originally I planned to try such a two-drive/two-system configuration using
the motherboard's serial ATA controllers, but Intel tells me that I can't
boot from SATA2 if no powered drive is found on SATA1. (bootable serial
drives must be attached to SATA1) Something tells me that they may be wrong,
but I don't want to invest in the drives to find out.

Thanks for all the help.
 
Tim: See my inline comments...



Tim said:
Are you saying that both drives share the "Master" connector of the IDE
cable, or that both drives have their jumpers set for "Master" using both
cable connectors? If you used both cable connectors with both drives set
for "Master", what happens if a person accidentally boots up with both
drives powered on?
Click to expand...
We usually configure the removable drives as follows: The first removable
drive - our day-to-day working drive - is connected/configured as Primary
Master on the primary IDE connector. The second removable drive is connected
as Primary Master on the secondary IDE connector. The system will boot to
the drive connected as PM even when both removable drives are connected and
powered up so no harm is done when both removable drives are connected and
powered up simultaneously. There's nothing sacrosanct about this
configuration. As I previously informed you, we usually use that
configuration since it allows a boot to whatever drive is connected at the
moment whenever the other drive has been powered off. Other configurations
will work just as well.
Very recently I tested my planned configuration on a rig with the
motherboard that I wish to use (an Intel D865PERL). The system boots up
fine
from either drive without a hitch. So, fingers crossed, there won't be
any
weird consequences later on.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Virtually every motherboard we've come across works this way.
But we have found some exceptions, rare as they might be. We came across a
recent Intel MB (I can't recall the specific model) that would *only* allow
a boot from the Primary Master position. So in our configuration setup (see
above) it was necessary to move the second removable HD to the mobile rack
occupying the PM position. Not a big deal, of course. Just a simple pull of
the removable tray's handle and inserting it into the other rack. All of 10
seconds or so.
With a SCSI system there are problems if the cable is not properly
terminated. Could leaving unpowered drives on an IDE cable cause similar
impedence issues? If the system boots, can I be reasonably sure that
there
aren't any issues?
Click to expand...
We've never run into any problem along those lines with the PATA drives we
employ, but we haven't worked with SCSI drives in a long time. I'm not aware
of any issues with respect to SCSI drives in a removable drives environment.

Art writes...
of its value as a near-failsafe backup system using disk imaging programs
such as Symantec's Norton Ghost or Acronis True Image.
Click to expand...
You're reading my mind. I plan to have a third tray with a drive just for
backup purposes. Jumpers set for "cable-select", it should boot as the
slave of whatever "Master" is attached at the time. From there I can make
a
disk image to it then restore the slave rack to running the secondary
system
drive again.
Click to expand...
Yes, we pretty much do the same thing although our configuration may be
different from the one you're planning. Using Ghost (and more recently
Acronis True Image) we directly clone the contents of one drive to the
other. It's simple, relatively quick, and most of all - effective.
 
Back
Top