That Maxtor Drive - Again!

[John A]

Whilst waiting for the drive to be delivered I emailed Maxtor asking where I
could find data on the STM3250820A, there being nothing on the Maxtor site
other than references to the Diamondmax21 family - but with old-style Maxtor
numbers - not STM.

This produced an email from Seagate - yes Seagate - Ireland telling me to
look for it on the Seagate site. This despite Seagate's home page telling
you to go to the Maxtor site for Maxtor Drives. Hmm.

On the Seagate site was the same two-page flyer - but with the Maxtor
numbers replaced by STM ones - but no real data. Progress of some sort!

I emailed Seagate again, then again, asking where option jumper link data
might be found - and if the Maxtor STM3250820A was the same as Seagate's
ST3250820A. They gave me a link for the settings and an assurance that the
two drives were the same - just a different label stuck on the top.

When I followed the link I found that the jumper for the STM was very
different from that of the ST drive. Different number of pins, different
functions. Different. So I emailed back - very politely - asking what was
the real situation. Got a non-answer. I also asked what was the appropriate
OEM supports software - Maxtor's or Seagate's. "Obviously" - don't you hate
it when bullshitters say "Obviously"? - "Obviously, you can use either".

Now, what eventually (snow-delayed) turned up? A drive with a Maxtor label
on it. The type number? It is a 6A250V. What???

Further down the label was a barcode which decrypts as STM3250820A.

Then further down it is a 7200.10 - the code for a Seagate Barracuda drive.

OK, so the score is Maxtor 2, Seagate 1. What about the option links? Maxtor
has five option links, Seagate only four. Damn, there are only four - Maxtor
2, Seagate 2.

Well, "Obviously" the tie-breaker will be the OEM support software, so what
did Maxtor MAXBLAST4 make of it? "No Maxtor Drives Found" - obviously!


Well, Rod, you asked!


Oh, BTW, the drive works fine - quiet and not too hot in action - and with a
sustained transfer rate (important to me - not to Seagate, they tell me) of
about 67Mbyte/sec.

 

[Rod Speed]

Whilst waiting for the drive to be delivered I emailed Maxtor asking
where I could find data on the STM3250820A, there being nothing on
the Maxtor site other than references to the Diamondmax21 family -
but with old-style Maxtor numbers - not STM.

This produced an email from Seagate - yes Seagate - Ireland telling
me to look for it on the Seagate site. This despite Seagate's home
page telling you to go to the Maxtor site for Maxtor Drives. Hmm.

On the Seagate site was the same two-page flyer - but with the Maxtor
numbers replaced by STM ones - but no real data. Progress of some
sort!

I emailed Seagate again, then again, asking where option jumper link
data might be found - and if the Maxtor STM3250820A was the same as
Seagate's ST3250820A. They gave me a link for the settings and an
assurance that the two drives were the same - just a different label
stuck on the top.

When I followed the link I found that the jumper for the STM was very
different from that of the ST drive. Different number of pins,
different functions. Different. So I emailed back - very politely -
asking what was the real situation. Got a non-answer. I also asked
what was the appropriate OEM supports software - Maxtor's or
Seagate's. "Obviously" - don't you hate it when bullshitters say
"Obviously"? - "Obviously, you can use either".

Now, what eventually (snow-delayed) turned up? A drive with a Maxtor
label on it. The type number? It is a 6A250V. What???

Further down the label was a barcode which decrypts as STM3250820A.

Then further down it is a 7200.10 - the code for a Seagate Barracuda
drive.

OK, so the score is Maxtor 2, Seagate 1. What about the option links?
Maxtor has five option links, Seagate only four. Damn, there are only
four - Maxtor 2, Seagate 2.

Bizarre that they felt the need to have a different pcb with different jumpers.

Well, "Obviously" the tie-breaker will be the OEM support software,
so what did Maxtor MAXBLAST4 make of it? "No Maxtor Drives Found" -
obviously!

Well, Rod, you asked!

Thanks for that, cant say I'm surprised, wota shambles.

 

[kony]

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 20:44:06 -0000, "John A"

When I followed the link I found that the jumper for the STM was very
different from that of the ST drive. Different number of pins, different
functions.

That's why it'd be good to look at the drive itself, to
confirm that it does match the Seagate 7200.10 sheet which
it should.

Also if you are only replying to Rod it would be good to
leave the reply in the corresponding thread instead of
creating a new one with a different Subject line.

 

[Noozer]

Also if you are only replying to Rod it would be good to

leave the reply in the corresponding thread instead of
creating a new one with a different Subject line.

Or better yet, don't bother.

He never could bullshit his way out of a wet paper bag.

 

[John A]

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 20:44:06 -0000, "John A"



That's why it'd be good to look at the drive itself, to
confirm that it does match the Seagate 7200.10 sheet which
it should.

Despite the label on the drive being Maxtor, the description of the options
printed thereon reflects the Seagate (i.e. 4-jumper) - not Maxtor
Diamondmax - option jumper header. At least that description does physically
match the jumpers on the drive! Curiouser and curiouser!

Also if you are only replying to Rod it would be good to
leave the reply in the corresponding thread instead of
creating a new one with a different Subject line.

Two good reasons for doing what I did - "Obviously" ;-}

JohnA

 

[kony]

Two good reasons for doing what I did - "Obviously" ;-}

?? Your changed subject line fragmented the reply.

 

[John A]

My primary intent was to reply to yourself, kony, and to Rod - and so the
original thread wasn't really necessary. By starting a new thread I also
ensured that, whichever group you were following this story on, it would
still be visible to you even if your newsreader only displays most recent
threads. OK?

Actually, this new thread stands alone quite well as an example of a grumpy
old man ranting at the insanity of the world around him, don't you think?
;-}

John A

 

[CBFalconer]

My primary intent was to reply to yourself, kony, and to Rod - and
so the original thread wasn't really necessary. By starting a new
thread I also ensured that, whichever group you were following this
story on, it would still be visible to you even if your newsreader
only displays most recent threads. OK?

Not OK. First, usenet is not for personal communication, it is for
public communication. Use email for personal stuff. Second, you
should not top-post in usenet. Your answer belongs after (or
interspersed with) the material to which you reply, after snipping
anything immaterial to that reply. See the following links.

Third, cross-posts should almost always have a follow-up to
concentrate the results in one newsgroup. Done here.

--
Some informative links:
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
<http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html>
<http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html>
<http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> (taming google)
<http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/> (newusers)

 

[Sam Jones]

Not OK.

You get no say on that or anything else at all, ever.

First, usenet is not for personal communication, it is
for public communication. Use email for personal stuff.

Get stuffed. Plenty of others are likely interested in the question
being discussed, even if they havent actually posted to the thread.

Second, you should not top-post in usenet.

You get no say what so ever on that or anything else at all, ever.

Your answer belongs after (or interspersed with) the material to
which you reply, after snipping anything immaterial to that reply.

You get no say what so ever on that or anything else at all, ever.

See the following links.

Request denied, they are just pig ignorant crap.

Third, cross-posts should almost always have a
follow-up to concentrate the results in one newsgroup.

Wrong again.

Done here.

Reversed here.

 

[kony]

Get stuffed. Plenty of others are likely interested in the question
being discussed, even if they havent actually posted to the thread.

Their needs, interests are served by the original thread to
which this was applicable. A second thread for a lone
reply has no useful purpose.

 

[Rod Speed]

Their needs, interests are served by the original thread to which this was
applicable. A second thread for a lone reply has no useful purpose.

Irrelevant to that stupid demand that email be used.