4 ms·
In fact, the disks themselves are surprisingly reliable, the totally unreliable part of the system are the drives, with the quite unfortunate fact that broken d
by dfox 10y ago
In fact, the disks themselves are surprisingly reliable, the totally unreliable part of the system are the drives, with the quite unfortunate fact that broken drive can create disk that breaks other drives.
- curun1r 10y agoHe also could be confusing Zip disks with the Jazz disks, which were only slightly better than writing your data to /dev/null.
- dredmorbius 10y agoWriting to /dev/null had the advantage of being far faster, and far more predictable.
- eridius 10y agoYou could say that about literally any storage mechanism. Writing to /dev/null will always be faster and more predictable, no matter what the alternative is.
- aidenn0 10y agobut Jazz disks didn't have any better data retention than writing to /dev/null, whereas most alternatives do.
- dredmorbius 10y agoBingo. Cheaper, too.
- micro-ram 10y agoGRC still has a utility for click of death. https://www.grc.com/tip/clickdeath.htm https://www.grc.com/tip/clickdeath.htm
- angry_octet 10y agoThe Click-of-Death was the first hardware virus. No software was required to transmit it, nor could it be transmitted by software.
- bontoJR 10y agoReally? I wasn't aware of that problem in the system, any reference or article about that? I am just curios about the technical details why this was happening.