2 TB WD Green 2.5-inch Hard Drive Goes on Sale

[Mussels]

TPU quoted the source, and never claimed it was from WD.

The comment about RPM had a question mark, to indicate it was a guess and not reliable information (based on previous drives)


i have nothing at all to do with the news here, and it was really obvious as to the source of this information, and why it was incomplete. If you have trouble understanding that, its your comprehension skills that are lacking - not the writer of the articles fault.

[kater]

On the contrary, my comprehension skills seem superior to the ones of whoever wrote this news. Contrary to the author of the piece I was able, in no time at all, to check what WD has to say on this. Well, naturally, TPU may choose its sources freely and may disregard the producer's information (albeit skimpy in this case) and this being a relatively free world TPU may also choose to add anecdotal stuff at its option. But ask yourself - what's gonna happen to the sites credibility then?

Putting a question mark solves nothing, only adds to the mess, already created by WD. I already gave you a link to WD spec sheet (basic as it is), where it clearly reads "invariable". What part of "invariable" do you not understand? TPU's piece still reads "variable" ATM. The fact that suggested RPM is given is also disturbing. WD never ever quoted RPM for their entire Green series - check the documents, they're available at WD site.

[theeldest]

Originally Posted by kater

On the contrary, my comprehension skills seem superior to the ones of whoever wrote this news. Contrary to the author of the piece I was able, in no time at all, to check what WD has to say on this. Well, naturally, TPU may choose its sources freely and may disregard the producer's information (albeit skimpy in this case) and this being a relatively free world TPU may also choose to add anecdotal stuff at its option. But ask yourself - what's gonna happen to the sites credibility then?

Putting a question mark solves nothing, only adds to the mess, already created by WD. I already gave you a link to WD spec sheet (basic as it is), where it clearly reads "invariable". What part of "invariable" do you not understand? TPU's piece still reads "variable" ATM. The fact that suggested RPM is given is also disturbing. WD never ever quoted RPM for their entire Green series - check the documents, they're available at WD site.

That's an annoying number of posts about nothing.

The story is pointing out a 2TB 2.5" drive. Details are obviously sparse as the source isn't even English.

"Variable" is the right word to use because the RPMs used for drives does vary between drives even if it doesn't vary in an individual drive.


Jeez.


Back on topic, now we just need these to hit 7200 rpm. This doubles storage density for businesses as the highest capacity 2.5" drives on the market right now is 1TB.

[kater]

Austin, TX, so I guess in all probability you are American and hence a native speaker of English. Well, I'm not, and that's why I use a dictionary if I'm not entirely sure what a word means.

And "variable" in this case does not mean what you say it means. For your definition a proper word would be "different". Just look it up in the 2 links below.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/variable?s=t
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/different?s=t

Heck, even WD says it is their spec sheet. Please, look it up! I gave you the link on a silver platter.

Lastly, what would be the point of discussing or informing that "HDDs use different spindle speeds - some work faster, some work slower". We're well past this and we're talking about WD's alleged capability to change RPM during operation. Which, clearly, they can't.

[THE_EGG]

I think we need to stop feeding the troll.

[LGV]

Originally Posted by kater

LGV, why TPU don't need to share all info about a product?

No, you mixing up "news" with " review". Its two different things.

[theeldest]

Originally Posted by kater

Austin, TX, so I guess in all probability you are American and hence a native speaker of English. Well, I'm not, and that's why I use a dictionary if I'm not entirely sure what a word means.

And "variable" in this case does not mean what you say it means. For your definition a proper word would be "different". Just look it up in the 2 links below.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/variable?s=t
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/different?s=t

Heck, even WD says it is their spec sheet. Please, look it up! I gave you the link on a silver platter.

Lastly, what would be the point of discussing or informing that "HDDs use different spindle speeds - some work faster, some work slower". We're well past this and we're talking about WD's alleged capability to change RPM during operation. Which, clearly, they can't.

*sigh* I should know better than to go troll feeding...

The RPMs are variable across the product line. But not variable for an individual drive.

It's all semantics and EVERY advertising/marketing team does this. It's an industry problem because marketers/advertisers don't understand technology.


Your original point is moot, however, because as LGV said, "you're [sic] mixing up 'news' with 'review'".

Does TPU need to put a banner on top that says "The views expressed in the aggregated news articles do not represent the views of TPU."?

Don't be ridiculous.


And to keep at least *some* of this post on-topic:
In my HTPC/server my Samsung 3.5" 2TB EcoGreen drives use about 6 watts under load & 4 watts at idle. I'd imagine these new WD drives would offer similar usage numbers to other 2.5" drives.

That would let me drop idle power down to <1 watt per drive and cut the load usage in half.

Anyone know of a mini-atx / itx chassis that will support 6 internal 2.5" drives (up to 15mm)? I see an upgrade in my future...

[blanarahul]

^^ I agree.

[largon]

I wonder if the 1.5TB version is a four platter design short-stroked or "just" three platters. Official imagery gives no clues as the pics are identical for both versions and it's showing four platters.

And is just me or why I don't see anything "new" in this drive? Same platter density (500GB/disc) as was around a year ago. SATA 3Gbps? 8MB cache?