160 GB 2.5" SATA Drives not ready for prime time yet?

[timswim78]

What brand of 3.5" drives you used?

Are you referring to the old Minis? I find the SATA drives in the new Minis to boot up quite a fair bit faster than from my external Seagates, I have no idea what this is the case.

For 3.5" drives, I use Seagate drives in my systems. I have a couple of Maxtor's that I use in external enclosures, for backup purposes only.

For 2.5" drives, I have used Toshiba and whatever is stock in the mini. I sent the 2.5" Toshiba in two weeks ago (It failed and is under warranty), and Toshiba's tech support today told me that they have no idea when they will be able to ship me a new drive.

 

[Muriac]

I'm really keen to hear people's experiences with 160GB 2.5" drives. I'm looking to upgrade the drive in my MacBook, but I can't find any comparisons of the Momentus and Travelstar of the same interface and size. Comparisons of drives with other specifications don't help, as Seagate and Hitachi seem to win an even number of them.

 

[PaulinMaryland]

Compare post-formatted, post-OS capacities

I assume you mean a 100% jump over the 80GB

Actually, the advantage is better than100 percent when you compare net capacity--the drive's capacity to hold data after the drive is formatted and loaded up with the OS and applications.


80GB gross
74GB after formatting (est.)
66GB after installing the OS (est.)
62GB after installing apps (typical)

160GB
148GB after formatting (est.)
140GB after installing the OS (est.)
136GB after installing apps (typical)

136/62= 80GB + 119 percent.

 

[jacg]

Note that the refreshed Mac Mini now has 160 GB as a BTO option. Presumably that is a 2.5" drive and therefore Apple believes they are ready for prime time (in a Mac Mini, however prime that time might be...)