External HD vs Portable HD

Kurt Ullman <kurtullman.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I travel and stay at one place for a couple of months occasionally. I
> usually go "bare" as it were as far as back-ups go for catastrophies. I
> am thinking about getting something that is resilient, durable, and
> relatively small to take with me when I leave on my projects.

Resilience of any external hard drive is a tricky issue. They are
somewhat fragile so need to be treated with care.

> I see some HDs are just called external and others are called
> portable or something close to it. Any real differences in these two
> kinds or is it marketing?

Partly marketing, but there are two sorts of external hard drive.

The larger ones use a 3.5" hard drive mechanism, which is the same type
that most desktop computers use internally.

The smaller ones use a 2.5" hard drive mechanism, which is the same type
that most laptops use internally.

Advantages of the 3.5" (large) type:

- Much higher capacities are available.
- Considerably cheaper (for the same capacity).
- Usually much faster.
- More options might be available for how to connect it to the computer.

Advantages of the 2.5" (small) type:

- Much smaller and lighter.
- Usually quieter.
- Some are able to to be powered directly by the computer, avoiding the
need to carry an extra power supply or plug it in.

For either type, you need to decide what interface method (or methods)
you require. Your options currently include (in order of speed):

- USB 2.0
- Firewire 400
- Firewire 800
- eSATA

I have a 3.5" external drive which supports all four of these types.

If you are using the drive with a single computer, you should choose the
best interface supported by your computer (probably Firewire 400, maybe
Firewire 800).

Considerings for other applications...

USB 2.0 is supported by all current models of Macs and Windows PCs. On
the Mac, it was introduced around late 2003 or early 2004. Earlier
models (back to about 1998 - the original iMac) have USB 1.1, which is
significantly slower and is painful to use for large scale data
transfer.

Firewire 400 is available on all Mac models from late 2000, and some as
far back as 1999. Its availability on Windows PCs is mixed, with some
brands supporting it (often using Sony's "i.Link" name for it) and
others not.

Firewire 800 is rare on Windows PCs. On Macs, it appears on most high
end models, and is working its way down to the middle of the range. In
the current lineup, it is available on all Mac Pro, MacBook Pro and iMac
models. In earlier generations it only appeared on high end iMacs,
MacBook Pros and PowerBook G4s. It is also standard on the PowerMac G5,
and one late model PowerMac G4.

You can connect a Firewire 800 device to a Firewire 400 one with the
correct cable. The extra performance of Firewire 800 probably isn't an
issue for you - it really only matters if high levels of performance are
required, e.g. capturing video.

eSATA support is rare on Macs (and only with third party add-ons), but
is becoming more common on Windows PCs.


If all computers involved support Firewire, it is your best option.
Firewire is faster than USB 2.0, can be used to boot most Macs, and is
able to supply enough power (on a Mac) for nearly all 2.5" external hard
drives. A bus-powered drive might be a problem on a Windows PC, as the
i.Link connector doesn't supply power for the drive.

USB 2.0 is the best choice for maximum compatibility, if performance
isn't quite as important. USB can supply power for 2.5" external hard
drives, but not as much as Firewire, so some drives might not work
reliably if powered from a USB port. I've seen some that have a double
USB cable to get power from two ports.

I prefer cases with both USB and Firewire support. They cost more but
give you more options.

The last issue is file system choice.

You can run into file system compatibility issues if going between
different platforms. You generally have to stick to the lowest common
denominator if setting up a cross-platform external drive, which means
FAT-32 (MS-DOS/Windows old standard).

If you only intend to connect the drive to Macs, use Mac OS Extended
format (with journaling).

I have a USB thumb drive (in FAT format) which I use to exchange files
with PCs, so my external hard drives are all Mac formatted.

--
David Empson
dempson.DeleteThis@actrix.gen.nz
 >> Stay informed about: External HD vs Portable HD 

In article <1i2oj75.oic1zkxs5pnpN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
dempson DeleteThis @actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:

> Kurt Ullman <kurtullman DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I travel and stay at one place for a couple of months occasionally. I
> > usually go "bare" as it were as far as back-ups go for catastrophies. I
> > am thinking about getting something that is resilient, durable, and
> > relatively small to take with me when I leave on my projects.
>
> Resilience of any external hard drive is a tricky issue. They are
> somewhat fragile so need to be treated with care.

Thanks for all the info. MUCH appreciated. By resilience, I mean can
I pack it up, put it in my car, unpack it, use it for a couple months
and then repeat the process to move it to the next place or home and
have it still likely to work? Not like I am going to be bouncing it
around a lot. Any real difference in the two in that scenario?

>
> > I see some HDs are just called external and others are called
> > portable or something close to it. Any real differences in these two
> > kinds or is it marketing?
>
> Partly marketing, but there are two sorts of external hard drive.
I'll go through the great deal of information soon. Probably just
looking for something to clone the HD overnight every week or so. Maybe
use for Time Machine if I upgrade in a couple months.
Would that application make any real difference in kind? Currently
have a earlier MBP so that would max out FW at 400.

>
>
> - Some are able to to be powered directly by the computer, avoiding the
> need to carry an extra power supply or plug it in.
>

This is to move every couple months or so when I get a new assignment.
I'd take it in the original box for little more protection, so power
supply probably isn't an issue.


>
> If all computers involved support Firewire, it is your best option.
Just the one MBP, although I pondering a second one (that I would
probably also use this for) early next year.


> Firewire is faster than USB 2.0, can be used to boot most Macs, and is
> able to supply enough power (on a Mac) for nearly all 2.5" external hard
> drives. A bus-powered drive might be a problem on a Windows PC, as the
> i.Link connector doesn't supply power for the drive.

USB Bootable? Considering SuperDuper or similar for the Back up
program.

>
 >> Stay informed about: External HD vs Portable HD 

Kurt Ullman <kurtullman.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In article <1i2oj75.oic1zkxs5pnpN%dempson@actrix.gen.nz>,
> dempson.DeleteThis@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) wrote:
>
> > Kurt Ullman <kurtullman.DeleteThis@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I travel and stay at one place for a couple of months occasionally. I
> > > usually go "bare" as it were as far as back-ups go for catastrophies. I
> > > am thinking about getting something that is resilient, durable, and
> > > relatively small to take with me when I leave on my projects.
> >
> > Resilience of any external hard drive is a tricky issue. They are
> > somewhat fragile so need to be treated with care.
>
> Thanks for all the info. MUCH appreciated. By resilience, I mean can
> I pack it up, put it in my car, unpack it, use it for a couple months
> and then repeat the process to move it to the next place or home and
> have it still likely to work? Not like I am going to be bouncing it
> around a lot. Any real difference in the two in that scenario?

Either will be fine. I've had external hard drives which are a few years
old and get moved around quite often (with reasonable care). They are
fine.

> I'll go through the great deal of information soon. Probably just
> looking for something to clone the HD overnight every week or so. Maybe
> use for Time Machine if I upgrade in a couple months.
> Would that application make any real difference in kind? Currently
> have a earlier MBP so that would max out FW at 400.

Time Machine does incremental backups, so if you want to keep multiple
generations of files it would be a good idea for your external drive to
be somewhat larger than your internal one.

I just went through a similar exercise for my new MacBook Pro, which has
a 160 GB drive. I decided to get a 500 GB external drive (3.5") as a
backup for it. I've set aside about 30 GB for use as a general utility
partition (emergency boot disk), a 160 GB partition for cloning the
internal drive, and the rest will be used as a Time Machine backup when
Leopard comes out.

I could have managed with 400 GB, but I thought I'd give myself some
extra headroom.

If you only want a Time Machine backup on the external drive (not also
having a clone), then getting one somewhat larger than the internal
drive should be plenty, e.g. if your current internal drive is 80 GB,
then perhaps a 120 GB external will be enough.

A higher capacity drive would let you do more, e.g. set aside a
partition for storage of less important data ("offloads") that you don't
want cluttering up your internal drive.

> > - Some are able to to be powered directly by the computer, avoiding the
> > need to carry an extra power supply or plug it in.
> >
>
> This is to move every couple months or so when I get a new assignment.
> I'd take it in the original box for little more protection, so power
> supply probably isn't an issue.

It sounds like a 3.5" drive would be a much better choice for you. Save
money and get a bigger drive.

> > If all computers involved support Firewire, it is your best option.
> Just the one MBP, although I pondering a second one (that I would
> probably also use this for) early next year.

If you aren't too worried about performance, and only intend to use the
drive with Intel Mac models, then USB will save money.

> > Firewire is faster than USB 2.0, can be used to boot most Macs, and is
> > able to supply enough power (on a Mac) for nearly all 2.5" external hard
> > drives. A bus-powered drive might be a problem on a Windows PC, as the
> > i.Link connector doesn't supply power for the drive.
>
> USB Bootable? Considering SuperDuper or similar for the Back up
> program.

You can boot an Intel Mac from USB, if you set up the drive correctly.
It won't boot a PowerPC Mac.

(Setting up a Firewire drive to boot either type of Mac is possible in
principle, but rather complicated.)

--
David Empson
dempson.DeleteThis@actrix.gen.nz
 >> Stay informed about: External HD vs Portable HD