Requires that the user enter the password before they'll be able to access the drive's contents.Matija wrote:Never heard of that. What does it do?
I've mostly seen it used in notebooks TBH.
Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee
While http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_ATA doensn't mention this feature, but I'm assuming it carried over to the new standard and just isn't mentioned by Wikipedia.HDD Passwords and Security
The disk lock is a built-in security feature in the disk. It is part of the ATA specification, and thus not specific to any brand or device.
A disk always has two passwords: A User password and a Master password. Most disks support a Master Password Revision Code. Reportedly some disks can tell you if the Master password has been changed, or if it still the factory default. The revision code is word 92 in the IDENTIFY response. Reportedly on some disks a value of 0xFFFE means the Master password is unchanged. The standard does not distinguish this value.
A disk can be locked in two modes: High security mode or Maximum security mode. Bit 8 in word 128 of the IDENTIFY response tell you which mode your disk is in: 0 = High, 1 = Maximum.
In High security mode, you can unlock the disk with either the User or Master password, using the "SECURITY UNLOCK DEVICE" ATA command. There is an attempt limit, normally set to 5, after which you must power cycle or hard-reset the disk before you can attempt again. Also in High security mode the SECURITY ERASE UNIT command can be used with either the User or Master password.
In Maximum security mode, you cannot unlock the disk without the User password - the only way to get the disk back to a usable state is to issue the SECURITY ERASE PREPARE command, immediately followed by SECURITY ERASE UNIT. In Maximum security mode the SECURITY ERASE UNIT command requires the User password and will completely erase all data on the disk. The operation is rather slow, expect half an hour or more for big disks. (Word 89 in the IDENTIFY response indicates how long the operation will take.)
EXACTLY!echn111 wrote: People complaining about storage capacity are missing the point. And if you haven't tried it and seen the difference, you may wish to consider your lack of hands-on experience when stating your opinions....
That's true if you are a owner of some of the early SSD's. But if you got Vertex (or something newer) than you are a WINNER and you can fully use this technology and appreciate this jump in the overall system performance.nutball wrote:None of which is very helpful if you happen to already own an expensive, buggy SSD. PERIOD.aztec wrote:The technology will get better. PERIOD.
It will get cheaper. PERIOD.
The bugs will get ironed out. PERIOD.
The reason that an SSD makes everything faster is because Windows is so blatantly not designed for performance. Windows is constantly checking DLLs, touching log files, reading setup files, etc. These files are all scattered around a hard disk and create many of random HDD accesses every minute. The milliseconds of access time that a magnetic hard drive has will really add up when there's a queue of small actions to be performed at different locations on the disk.Matija wrote:I still don't understand how exactly SSDs make things faster.
Most people today spend 95% of their time in browsers, which are extremely far from requiring fast disk performance.
There are also gamers, who don't benefit from SSDs that much.
What do you use the speed for?
Have you not read a good SSD review?Matija wrote:I still don't understand how exactly SSDs make things faster.
Most people today spend 95% of their time in browsers, which are extremely far from requiring fast disk performance.
There are also gamers, who don't benefit from SSDs that much.
What do you use the speed for?
Install FileMon and watch in awe how much read/write activity windows does even when it's supposed to be "idle", and most of it for small files/registry/checking if file is there or not, etc...Matija wrote:Browsers: non-issue. There's this thing called "write cache".
DLL checking / registry / what not: non-issue. There's this thing called "read cache".
Boot time: non-issue. Computers usually boot once per day.
Game level load times: non-issue. Relevant only for some gamers and in some games.
I understand the silence aspect and the occasional performance improvement, but the latter is extremely rare. If you are a C programmer and compiling something with thousands of files, yeah, having a SSD will help you... But if you are a normal, or even an above average computer user, there is no REAL benefit from SSDs, apart from "gee, I can launch five programs at the same time" instead of "launch, wait (x5)", although even that is a non-issue because once launched, you will be using those things for hours.
I worked on a machine with an X25 yesterday, and haven't noticed ANYTHING, despite synthetic benchmarks just screaming with speed.
Cov wrote:Can I suggest that nobody replies to Matja's last posting please ?
Otherwise this silly discussion is gonna last until the end of my life.
Thank you
*unsubscribed*
JazzJackRabbit wrote:Install FileMon and watch in awe how much read/write activity windows does even when it's supposed to be "idle", and most of it for small files/registry/checking if file is there or not, etc...Matija wrote:Browsers: non-issue. There's this thing called "write cache"....worked on a machine with an X25 yesterday, and haven't noticed ANYTHING, despite synthetic benchmarks just screaming with speed.
LOL!Matija wrote:It's all in the cache, it doesn't slow anything down.... I can only say "meh, is this what people are making all the fuss about?" Most of you are probably too young or too computer-fresh to remember...
Because you arealleycat wrote:Seems that Matija thinks all us SSD owners are deluded
Dude, you really need to chill out. Seems like you've got a bit of an inferiority complex or something. I don't think anyone here is looking down on others for not owning an SSD. I do, however, look down on those who don't know what they're talking about.Shamgar wrote:I'd rather be alive and in tune with my environment with a little noise, than "dead" in an anechoic chamber for an office where somewhat deluded people are having tea parties with cupcakes and scones celebrating the purchase of their SSDs and looking down on those who still use mechanical drives and fans.
This proves to me more than anything that you just don't "get it". I've never tried benchmarking my computer, it's irrelevant, I'm not interested. The performance speaks for itself in my "regular work and real world usage". You say you worked on a computer with an SSD and didn't notice anything. This is very different from my experience, so either your judgement is extremely poor, or something wasn't set up properly on that machine. Surely, with so many of us reporting massive performance gains, you would try to find out why your experiences are so different to ours? Continually reiterating non facts and making inaccurate analogies is not advancing your argument. It just reinforces to all of us that you have missed the point.Matija wrote:It's almost the same as with people overclocking their CPUs to over 9000!!! MHz. Yes, there are indeed certain scenarios in which you can notice the massive speed increase (and extremely easy to prove it in benchmarks), but for *regular work* and *real world usage*, it doesn't matter the slightest.
I agree the overcloking part is a bad analogy.alleycat wrote:This proves to me more than anything that you just don't "get it". I've never tried benchmarking my computer, it's irrelevant, I'm not interested. The performance speaks for itself in my "regular work and real world usage". You say you worked on a computer with an SSD and didn't notice anything. This is very different from my experience, so either your judgement is extremely poor, or something wasn't set up properly on that machine. Surely, with so many of us reporting massive performance gains, you would try to find out why your experiences are so different to ours? Continually reiterating non facts and making inaccurate analogies is not advancing your argument. It just reinforces to all of us that you have missed the point.Matija wrote:It's almost the same as with people overclocking their CPUs to over 9000!!! MHz. Yes, there are indeed certain scenarios in which you can notice the massive speed increase (and extremely easy to prove it in benchmarks), but for *regular work* and *real world usage*, it doesn't matter the slightest.
And in case anyone has forgotten, this is SilentPCReview, so is it surprising that a silent solution to one of the most problematic sources of noise has been met with such enthusiasm by forum members?
^ That sums it up really. It makes for an extremely responsive system. It's all about fast seeks and a mechanical drive just cannot compare.alleycat wrote:I open and close browsers, office documents, photoshop and other programs many times throughout the day. Everything happens almost instantaneously. It makes for an extremely responsive system.