Have hardware prices gone crazy during Covid?

On 29/06/2020 05.58, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 at 21:33:26, Mayayana wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| No, programmers will not eliminate that advantage. On the contrary,
| they will make use of it and expect that everybody has an SSD. Same as
|
| That _is_ eliminating the advantage. If, in a few years' time,
softwares
| run no faster even if you are using an SSD than they do now if you're
| not, then the advantage has been eliminated.

Â*I don't think it's really a big factor. The main bloat
is wrappers. When you've got something like Java or
.Net, or javascript posing as software, you're very
far removed from the actual operations. The trouble

As a _user_, I am not really that bothered whether it's real or
"pretend" software. I know enough (just) about concepts, like
assemblers, compilers, linkers, and so on, as well as general
programming, to have some idea what people are talking about: but
really, I just want it to do it. I know enough to appreciate efficient
code like IrfanView.

is that things are so fast now that people don't care
about doing a good job. They care about easy. An

Indeed. They're lazy (or, under pressure to produce results quickly that
are good _enough_).

Or neither. It is about the business case. The "boss" is not going to
pay for reinventing the wheel when there exists libraries or call them
whatever that already do everything they need. So they will use ready
made frameworks even if huge or not optimized. Saves money, they are tested.




--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 29/06/2020 03.33, Mayayana wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| No, programmers will not eliminate that advantage. On the contrary,
| they will make use of it and expect that everybody has an SSD. Same as
|
| That _is_ eliminating the advantage. If, in a few years' time, softwares
| run no faster even if you are using an SSD than they do now if you're
| not, then the advantage has been eliminated.

I don't think it's really a big factor. The main bloat
is wrappers. When you've got something like Java or
.Net, or javascript posing as software, you're very
far removed from the actual operations. The trouble
is that things are so fast now that people don't care
about doing a good job. They care about easy. An
SSD is really only going to be a factor with intensive
disk operations, like moving a lot of files.

Maybe not that intensive.

Consider a database operation based on disk, where the tools need many
thousands of seeks, but only retrieve minimal amounts of data. This type
of operation runs hundreds or thousands of times faster on SSD than on
rotating rust.

Of course, a designer that develops the code on a normal disk detects
the problem when testing himself, so he will design the algorithms
appropriately to compensate. But a designer that has an SSD himself will
not notice the problem, and when the software is distributed will play
down the issue. Just buy an SSD, he will say.

Yes, I have seen this.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 29/06/2020 10.39, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 6/29/2020 1:13 AM, Paul wrote:
There was the ReFS file system, but it was canceled
(not available on the usual desktop SKUs).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReFS

ExFAT is good for NAND flash. I don't know if it's good
for the OS feature set.

Â*Â*Â* Paul

Microsoft should just adopt one of the Linux filesystems, they seem to
be very happy promoting Linux nowadays.

Well, the attribute/permission set is different, which affects both
directions. Maybe more issues? Legal?


--
Cheers, Carlos.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| I don't think it's really a big factor. The main bloat
| is wrappers. When you've got something like Java or
| .Net, or javascript posing as software, you're very
| far removed from the actual operations. The trouble
|
| As a _user_, I am not really that bothered whether it's real or
| "pretend" software. I know enough (just) about concepts, like
| assemblers, compilers, linkers, and so on, as well as general
| programming, to have some idea what people are talking about: but
| really, I just want it to do it. I know enough to appreciate efficient
| code like IrfanView.
|

I think it's worth understanding. And it's not
always bad. Often it's just convenience. Sometimes
it's for security, like with phone apps. But the farther
one is from the CPU, the slower it will be. An SSD will
mostly be noticeable at boot and when moving 2 GB
from one partition or disk to another.

Example: If you're in IView, or another graphics program,
and you want to sharpen a 30 MB image, that will
probably be relatively slow. But it has nothing to do
with the disk. The image is in memory. The operation is
millions of mathematical comparisons. In IView, compiled
to native code, those operations are probably direct calls
to the CPU itself. If you have a graphics library then you
have calls to the library, which calls the CPU. If that library
is not in the same process then each call will be slowed.
If you have Java or .Net then you have semi-interpreted
code, which calls the Win32 libraries, which calls the CPU.
If you have javascript in a "web app", one of Microsoft's
store apps, or something like that, then you have
interpreted code, calling a library, calling Win32, calling
the CPU. Every single time. Millions of times over. Interpreted
code means it can't make a direct call. Another program
reads the instruction and acts on it, like script or a BAT
file.

Imagine an old style bucket brigade where you have to
pass the bucket to an extra, superfluous person. It gets
slowed down. With interpreted code, you can't even pass
the bucket yourself. You have to ask someone else to do it
for you. With every bucket.

I don't mean to say that's bad. It provides a lot of
convenience and it has its place. The trouble is that
the more efficient the hardware gets, the more people
figure it's OK to use another wrapper and save themselves
some work. And at the same time, the more people can
write software without knowing what they're doing.

So if you work as a graphic artist and edit photos all
day, you want lots of RAM, top quality software (not
Java or .Net wrappers. Definitely not Python
or javascript.), and a fast CPU. The disk will be all but
irrelevant. The operations are not happening on the disk
unless you don't have enough RAM to hold the data.

|
| My concern is that if it happens to C: - which is where an SSD's speed
| advantage would show best - it's like cutting the power; cloning such a
| disc would I fear have at least some chance of not restoring a working
| system. Most of the time, I imagine it'd just come up with a "Windows
| did not shut down properly" message and fix itself, granted.
|

I wouldn't expect a problem, but I haven't faced that
scenario so far.

| So far I haven't lost one, and given the cost I probably
| won't keep them running for their expected life. I'm not
| a person who needs 2-6 TB. An $80 500 GB is ample
| for my needs, and I mirror everything except the
| actual OS on a second disk.
|
| I'm managing on a 1 TB (HD); I image the C: part of that, and copy the
| D: part.

I do that, too. I keep disk images of basic C with software
installed. I back up to a second disk and to DVD. Once in
awhile I also make a current disk image of C. But I try to have
it set up in such a way that if it fails I just need to reinstall
a basic disk image, copy over app data, do any needed
program updates, and be ready to go again. Though it can
take a couple of hours to do all of that. Just adjusting prefs
and reinstalling extensions in Firefox is a bear of a job. (Though
I back up copies of prefs.js and keep copies of all extensions.)

"Carlos E.R." wrote

| Consider a database operation based on disk, where the tools need many
| thousands of seeks, but only retrieve minimal amounts of data. This type
| of operation runs hundreds or thousands of times faster on SSD than on
| rotating rust.
|

Maybe. If the database is too big to be loaded into memory.
And if you really need to do that many seeks. That's a lot of
maybes. Most people are not doing that.
There will always be operations where newer and more expensive
hardware can make a difference, but in general, for most uses,
people won't see much difference except at boot.

Most common desktop software will not be noticeably affected
by an SSD, because writing to disk is not the bottleneck. (It
still takes 4 seconds for Firefox to wake itself up on my
system, with an SSD and fast CPU. Why? It's a mess. It's
not because it takes 4 seconds to load the program. But
it might be connected to the fact that Mozilla are using
a giant C++ wrapper, the CRT "stub API", which seems to
be a superfluous wrapper isolating the actual Win32 API. And
there's probably also a lot of built-up crud. Then there are
the features removed in Pale Moon/New Moon, making those
much faster, but which can't be disabled in FF. (Things
like parental controls that most people won't use.)

In my experience, things that slow down code can be
very much unexpected. But generally, any extra steps,
external to the EXE, will slow things down. Once it's all
loaded into memory an SSD won't help that.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

Most common desktop software will not be noticeably affected
by an SSD, because writing to disk is not the bottleneck.

not true. most software is i/o bound and will benefit from an ssd, as
will virtual memory, giving an overall performance improvement to just
about everything.

the difference in performance with an ssd is *substantial*, especially
with nvme, which removes the sata bottleneck.

(It
still takes 4 seconds for Firefox to wake itself up on my
system, with an SSD and fast CPU. Why? It's a mess. It's
not because it takes 4 seconds to load the program.

something is very clearly a mess if it's taking 4 seconds. it should be
*much* less than that.

But
it might be connected to the fact that Mozilla are using
a giant C++ wrapper, the CRT "stub API", which seems to
be a superfluous wrapper isolating the actual Win32 API. And
there's probably also a lot of built-up crud. Then there are
the features removed in Pale Moon/New Moon, making those
much faster, but which can't be disabled in FF. (Things
like parental controls that most people won't use.)

nope. something else is causing the delay.

nospam wrote:

it might be connected to the fact that Mozilla are using
a giant C++ wrapper, the CRT "stub API", which seems to
be a superfluous wrapper isolating the actual Win32 API.

It's the sort of approach you need to make software run across multiple
platforms ...

"Andy Burns" wrote

| it might be connected to the fact that Mozilla are using
| a giant C++ wrapper, the CRT "stub API", which seems to
| be a superfluous wrapper isolating the actual Win32 API.
|
| It's the sort of approach you need to make software run across multiple
| platforms ...

That can sometimes be a factor. In this case,
I don't know much about CRT, but it seems to be
more of a lockout wrapper. It's Windows C++ runtime,
not a cross-platform runtime. It wraps the Win32 API,
not a cross-platform API. If they'd written it
in an earlier version of Visual Studio, or with non-MS
tools, it wouldn't have that limiting bloat.

In the case of Java, Python, etc, it's true that one
reason it's often used is to make cross-platform
software more easily produced. But that's not really an
excuse. Like webpage scripting, those things are not
truly cross-platform. They just employ similar
wrappers to wrap different APIs on different platforms.
Python is becoming an epidemic problem in that respect.
People want a shortcut to "cross-platform" and want
they produce just ends up being bloated script.

So it can be convenient, but it's not "needed". Just
like you have different kinds of pans to cook different
dishes, there are different APIs on each platform. You
can cook anything with a microwave oven, but that's
not a "cross recipe solution". It's just trading options
and flavor in favor of simplicity and speed.

Carlos E.R. wrote:


But you have made me curious to find out how SmartMonTools work in Windows.

What about that new toolset in Windows 10 that allows to run bash?

I don't think there is a /dev/sda1 layer in Bash shell on Windows 10.

They provide /mnt/c/users/username/Downloads as an example
of a namespace for your home directory. They pretend all the
drive letters are mounted.

But the device layer is not exposed, so calls to devices should
not work.

fdisk /dev/sda # should not work, and needs elevation anyway

Maybe that will change with WSL2. As if WSL2 is enabled,
it's supposed to have something to do with Hyper-V.

Paul

I need to buy a 3.5" HDD SATA for a ten year old desktop.

I've been meaning to go to Frys for weeks, but I have been sheltering in
place more than ever.

I rarely buy online, except when it's not in the brick and mortar shops,
but maybe it's time to buy my first online HDD.

If you know of an online source with a good price for a 1TB or 2TB
(or so), let me know!
--
Usenet is a polite public potluck of purposefully helpful advice.

On 29/06/2020 14.54, Mayayana wrote:
"Carlos E.R." wrote

| Consider a database operation based on disk, where the tools need many
| thousands of seeks, but only retrieve minimal amounts of data. This type
| of operation runs hundreds or thousands of times faster on SSD than on
| rotating rust.
|

Maybe. If the database is too big to be loaded into memory.

It can be. (In the case where I experienced the issue).

And if you really need to do that many seeks. That's a lot of
maybes. Most people are not doing that.

Well, it happened to me, and to thousands of people using that
particular software :-)

There will always be operations where newer and more expensive
hardware can make a difference, but in general, for most uses,
people won't see much difference except at boot.

Another example.

Computer with 8 gigs of ram, using 10 gigs with virtual memory on hard
disk. Slow as hell, specially Firefox. Replace disk with SSD, result was
very tolerable handling even up to 16 gigs of virtualized memory.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 29/06/2020 18.07, Paul wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:


But you have made me curious to find out how SmartMonTools work in
Windows.

What about that new toolset in Windows 10 that allows to run bash?

I don't think there is a /dev/sda1 layer in Bash shell on Windows 10.

They provide /mnt/c/users/username/Downloads as an example
of a namespace for your home directory. They pretend all the
drive letters are mounted.

But the device layer is not exposed, so calls to devices should
not work.

Oh.


Â*Â* fdisk /dev/sdaÂ*Â*Â*Â*Â* # should not work, and needs elevation anyway

Maybe that will change with WSL2. As if WSL2 is enabled,
it's supposed to have something to do with Hyper-V.

Ah, yes, heard something of it.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Full context kept for reference:]

Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 29/06/2020 00.50, Paul wrote:
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 28/06/2020 22.16, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 at 21:36:43, Carlos E.R.
wrote:

Maybe. Use SMART.

Hmm. Anyone care to comment on that? Especially when I specify
_reliably_ (including not false positives)?

Sorry, I don't have advice about using SMART under Windows. I use it
on Linux. I know you can, but I don't know exactly how.

Reliably? Somewhat. Sometimes it fails to warn. Most times it does
warn. False positives I have seen none (I suppose you mean warning
about an impending failure that doesn't happen).

SMART exists in SSD proprietary toolbox softwares.

SMART exists in HDTune, but that's only for HDD and not SSD.

SMART exists in SmartMonTools (Linux), but is it ported to
Cygwin or not ? Devices are exposed in Cygwin as /dev/sda
instead of using Windows own namespace for them, so *maybe* it
works. When I use the Cygwin version of disktype.exe, the
output is not exactly the same as a "native" version on another
platform.

It is a shame if there is no native Windows tool to at least show SMART
data on Windows, but the preferred thing would be some type of timer job
and alert.

Cygwin no longer works on WinXP.
Cygwin no longer receives funding.
Volunteers keep it going now.

All my (personal) machines that have Windows also have Linux, so I have
little need to install Cygwin for my personal use. And on the jobs, if
the machine is not administered by me, I can't install it. Result is I
know little about Cygwin.

But you have made me curious to find out how SmartMonTools work in Windows.

What about that new toolset in Windows 10 that allows to run bash?


You don't have to keep the entire Cygwin tree on your disk.
You can grab the runtime DLLs, plus the executable package
and that becomes a "portable Cygwin tool". You can carry those
items to another machine and use the executable.

For example, this is my portable (runs in Windows) version of disktype.

disktype.exe
cygwin1.dll
cyggcc_s-1.dll

And Cygwin keeps web pages about packages.

https://cygwin.com/packages/summary/...tools-src.html

** Paul

https://www.smartmontools.org/

I don't know the first thing about Smartmontools, but I just followed
your URL and the page says:

"About Smartmontools
...
Sourcecode tarballs and precompiled packages for Darwin (macOS) and
Windows are available at the project page at Sourceforge."

The 'project page at Sourceforge' link points to

https://sourceforge.net/projects/smartmontools/files/smartmontools

That page lists all the smartmontools versions and if you click on the
newest (7.1), it will bring you to

https://sourceforge.net/projects/smartmontools/files/smartmontools/7.1

which lists

smartmontools-7.1-1.win32-setup.exe

So AFAICT, there *is* a 'native' Windows version of smartmontools and
hence no need to go the Cygwin (nor Chocolatey) route.

Hope this helps.

N.B. Paul, Carlos, other(s), can you check if this is indeed
usable/working under Windows?

[Rest of context kept:]

There seems to be something called "Windows Choco" download, and Cygwin
download.

https://chocolatey.org/packages/smartmontools

To install smartmontools, run the following command from the command
line or from PowerShell:
choco install smartmontools

This is completely new to me.


https://cygwin.com/packages/summary/smartmontools.html

Installs a Linux like file tree.

Arlen Holder wrote:
I need to buy a 3.5" HDD SATA for a ten year old desktop.

I've been meaning to go to Frys for weeks, but I have been sheltering in
place more than ever.

I rarely buy online, except when it's not in the brick and mortar shops,
but maybe it's time to buy my first online HDD.

If you know of an online source with a good price for a 1TB or 2TB
(or so), let me know!

At my computer sto

1) They make you wash your hands at the entrance to the store.
2) A sales rep accompanies you around the store. No browsing!
You take a list with you, and select items.
3) Only CC at cash.

Still, I can do a return on an item within 30 days.
And that's more convenient, than doing it with an
e-tailer.

Part of the disk drive price is the warranty.

A company seeking to offer "deals", buys gray market
drives from another country, ones without warranty when
checked via the web site, and that's how you save money.

Anything cheaper than that, could be a refurb. During the
flooding that caused production of hard drives to slow,
Newegg offered a lot of refurbs for sale. At it's peak,
maybe half their items were refurbs.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020...r-hard-drives/

I would think a 1TB drive would be safe.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/wd...smr-techNOLOGY

https://www.techspot.com/news/84973-...wing-user.html

You would expect such a drive to be about $50.

https://www.newegg.com/blue-wd10ezrz...82E16822235014

Paul

Frank Slootweg wrote:


I don't know the first thing about Smartmontools, but I just followed
your URL and the page says:

"About Smartmontools
...
Sourcecode tarballs and precompiled packages for Darwin (macOS) and
Windows are available at the project page at Sourceforge."

The 'project page at Sourceforge' link points to

https://sourceforge.net/projects/smartmontools/files/smartmontools

That page lists all the smartmontools versions and if you click on the
newest (7.1), it will bring you to

https://sourceforge.net/projects/smartmontools/files/smartmontools/7.1

which lists

smartmontools-7.1-1.win32-setup.exe

So AFAICT, there *is* a 'native' Windows version of smartmontools and
hence no need to go the Cygwin (nor Chocolatey) route.

Hope this helps.

N.B. Paul, Carlos, other(s), can you check if this is indeed
usable/working under Windows?

[Rest of context kept:]

Presumably command line ?

There is one field in the smartmontools dump output,
which "rates" the drive. I don't always agree with the
rating, but if you have a fixation on the declarations
of others, there's a place it can tell you the drive
is "FAILED" or the like :-)

What I worry about is when a drive gets a rating
of "PASS" or "Cool and Groovy", when it's obvious in
the table that the drive has become a bit smelly. It
depends on your tolerance for trouble, as to when
to pull such a drive out of service.

I've pulled drives with perfectly good SMART out of
service, when the drive develops a "bad spot", a swath
of 50GB of compromised, error-riddled storage which
benchmarks at 5MB/sec. This is why I like to read bench
the drives, to see if there are any large areas with
abnormally low read rates.

Using that SmartMonTools rating field, avoids the user/viewer
of the output from having to interpret tables of numbers.

Where FAILED means "compromised in some way" or "in danger
of passing away soon". As SMART is intended to help
predict that something bad is about to happen, without
knowing how many hours and seconds it might take.

I have compromised drives here, that five years later still
run, but that doesn't mean they've "earned my respect"
over those five years either :-) Those drives stay in the
sin bin, and only come out for short-term installs.
If a short-term install fails, it's not the end of the
world.

A few of the other tools, just give you some table of
numbers, and leave the interpretation to you. For example,
HDTune (ten year old free version) has several yellow
marks on brand new drives. These are some sort of bogus
interpretation. Now, if you were a believer in the color
scheme, you might be panicking at seeing yellow marks
on your new drive. When everything gets those yellow
marks and the drive is actually fine. That's where the
"table interpretation" can kinda drive you nuts - when you
first try your hand at it, you'll likely be "scared" by
some field which isn't behaving the way it should.

Paul