Hard drive evolution could hit XP

[kaffra]

A nice list that doesn't bring any solid reasons why an existing XP machine needs to be retired.

Windows XP is ancient.

It is going on NINE YEARS OLD. This is in a world where the average life cycle is around 3 years. It may have been able to last 5 or 6 years because of the time Microsoft took on Vista, but that still is no reason to keep using it for 9 years!

ok its old, but still usable

* The home version is 32-bit only and can't take advantage of 4 Gigs or more RAM.

It's common to find many systems with well over 8 Gigs RAM now. Valve reports almost a 3rd of its users have 4 Gigs or more of RAM.

Gamers should go for the latest and greatest, but they arnt the majority of computer users. 2 - 4Gb works pretty well for avg use.

* Windows XP does not support partitions larger than 2 TB.

Guess what? 2 TB drives have been out and are very affordable, and many NAS boxes that use RAID have well over 2 TB partitions available. "Not supported by Windows XP" is a sticker that has been made for drives already.

This is just inaccurate, the 2TB limitation is from the bios, nothing to do with xp. with this bios limitation you cant boot from it but xp can read it just fine if its a slave drive.

* Windows XP does not support 4K physical clusters and can not take advantage of newer drives without hacks.

refer to the tomshardware article, http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd-4k-sector,2554-10.html. No performance gain.

* Windows XP is not "SSD aware" and will not take proper advantage of newer drive features and speed enhancements.

This is a personal opinion, but SSD is still immature in my opinion with the data loss issues, reliability and price. A ssd would not really bring much performance to an old computer running xp.

* Windows XP does not natively support SATA drives or any of the speed enhancements and features of such drives.

xp installs just fine on sata drives, check on your motherboard chipset for problems

* Windows XP does not support security features like UAC or account elevation; something that has existed in Mac OS X and Linux for many, many years.

no uac, but you could always run as administrator from a non administrator account, problem was people were running the system as administrator all the time.

* Windows XP does not support 3D acceleration of the Desktop.

looks nice, but nothing essential. In fact it cause problems with the old games like starcraft, age of empires.

* Windows XP is based on some very old technology and is incredibly insecure by default.

most of the security issues affecting windows NT5.1 also affect NT6 or NT6.1

* Windows XP is now several versions behind on DirectX, and cannot take advantage of the newest gaming technologies.

only gamers really care about it, which should be on newer hardware anyway

* New hardware components like 64-bit, Dual-Core+ processors, 2+ Gig RAM kits, and fast DX10+ video cards are incredibly affordable, more so than ever before.

new hardware is always available, most people getting new hardware are already on vista or 7. Those on xp right now probably bought they system with it, and dont have any need for a hardware upgrade yet.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

A nice list that doesn't bring any solid reasons why an existing XP machine needs to be retired.

If you've got an XP machine that runs fine, then leave it alone, but if you're stuffing new hardware in it or building a new one, don't start complaining that it doesn't properly support all the new hardware that's out ;)

[Growled Member]

If you've got an XP machine that runs fine, then leave it alone, but if you're stuffing new hardware in it or building a new one, don't start complaining that it doesn't properly support all the new hardware that's out ;)

Totally agree. We run mainly XP at work and we basically leave things alone. When one of them breaks down we plan on upgrading to a newer OS. No way would I insist on XP and newer hardware.

[Kirkburn]

A nice list that doesn't bring any solid reasons why an existing XP machine needs to be retired.

"Gamers should go for the latest and greatest, but they arnt the majority of computer users. 2 - 4Gb works pretty well for avg use. "

except you can't use 4GB, because some is used as shared memory. So the limit is more like 3.5GB.

"This is just inaccurate, the 2TB limitation is from the bios, nothing to do with xp. with this bios limitation you cant boot from it but xp can read it just fine if its a slave drive."

So far as I can see from searching, no, it is an XP and Server 2003 limit.

4K update - "No performance gain."

Uh, that's not what the article you linked says. In any case, the change is more about size gain, not performance. It does impact performance retroactively, because XP would need some emulation.

"This is a personal opinion, but SSD is still immature in my opinion with the data loss issues, reliability and price. A ssd would not really bring much performance to an old computer running xp."

Your opinion of SSD isn't relevant, tbh. The issue is whether XP supports them properly, not whether you like them. SSD drives exist, and are used.

"no uac, but you could always run as administrator from a non administrator account, problem was people were running the system as administrator all the time. "

I don't believe UAC is the same as running XP from a non-admin account. Certainly it would be a lot more painful to do so.

Desktop acceleration - "looks nice, but nothing essential. In fact it cause problems with the old games like starcraft, age of empires."

It causes problems with old games? Really? I've not heard of this issue, and it switches itself on/off as necessary. Of course it's not "essential", but it is a big improvement over XP.

"Most of the security issues affecting windows NT5.1 also affect NT6 or NT6.1"

Got stats on that?

[ThePitt]

quick!. GO and buy and new a HDD with this "new" technology and a new OS that support it!. Go now before its too late!!.

Give me a break. Again forcing the ppl to buy BOTH. Well, actually thats the idea, microsoft release a new OS and the ppl MUST buy a new hardware. At least thats what they want you to do.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

Vista was released in 2006, it's not exactly new.

[Denis W. Veteran]

quick!. GO and buy and new a HDD with this "new" technology and a new OS that support it!. Go now before its too late!!.

Give me a break. Again forcing the ppl to buy BOTH. Well, actually thats the idea, microsoft release a new OS and the ppl MUST buy a new hardware. At least thats what they want you to do.

Guess the whole concept of backwards compatibility went over your head...

(and yes, I did just buy one of those hard drives :D)

[Kirkburn]

quick!. GO and buy and new a HDD with this "new" technology and a new OS that support it!. Go now before its too late!!.

Give me a break. Again forcing the ppl to buy BOTH. Well, actually thats the idea, microsoft release a new OS and the ppl MUST buy a new hardware. At least thats what they want you to do.

Quick! Leap to conclusions and make egregious exaggerations in an attempt to troll!

• No one is being forced to buy anything.
  
• XP support comes from emulation, they'll just experience a performance hit.
  
• This update is basically needed for the future, especially as drives continue to increase in size.
  
• This update has little do with the OS, except regarding support being added. As just mentioned Vista and Win7, plus most other recent OSes, have it.
  

[goretsky Supervisor]

Hello,

It is 4KiB (4,096 byte) for the sector size. Previously, they were typically 512 bytes in length. I seem to recall some SCSI hard disk drive controller cards allowing the use of 576 byte sectors, though, with the additional 64 bytes being used for ECC data.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

[goretsky Supervisor]

Hello,

Western Digital has a set of Advanced Format Hard Drive Download Utility programs available to allow customers to size their Microsoft Windows XP installation's NTFS file system with 4KiB sectors:

WD Align CD

(powered by Acronis) -

creates a bootable CD for both x86 and x64 versions of Microsoft Windows

WD Align System Utility (x86)

(powered by Paragon) -

installable software for 32-bit versions of Microsoft Windows

WD Align System Utility (x64)

(powered by Paragon) -

installable software for 64-bit versions of Microsoft Windows

Presumably, other hard disk drive manufacturers who sell 4KiB sector hard disk drives will provide similar offerings to their customers.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

[ObiWanToby]

Dont see why MS cant/wont release a patch for that tbh :p

So they can finally let XP die.

[Raa]

I wonder if this means it'll slow down normal access to drives (Eg: Windows 7)? Any performance tests yet??

Desktop acceleration - "looks nice, but nothing essential. In fact it cause problems with the old games like starcraft, age of empires."

Probably the only slightly accurate claim that i've seen. Then again, that's not an issue because of Windows XP Mode now.

[Denis W. Veteran]

Speaking about the EARS drives...

Over in this thread there's a guy who ran HD Tune on a WD10EARS (the drive I got earlier this evening). Last night I ran HD Tune on my WD6400AAKS, which is currently serving as my OS/games/data drive. The maximum speed and average speed of WD6400AAKS was obviously faster, but the other results were comparable between the two drives.

Does cache make that much of a difference, is it because of WD's IntelliPower that makes up for the Green drive's slower rotational speed, (is it variable, or close to 5400 RPM?) or is it because of the larger platter size (6400AAKS has 2 320 GB platters; this one has 2 500 GB platters)?

edit: maybe this question would be best asked in Hardware Hangout.

[kjx]

This news coming from BBC:

Hard drive evolution could hit Microsoft XP users

While WinXP support the 4kb cluster!

am i miss something ? or they mean the default format value ?!

There is a difference between sector size and cluster size. Cluster size is logical, sector size is physical. Cluster size is an integral multiple of sector size.

[Colin-uk Veteran]

topics merged

[ilev]

Is this is a conspiracy by Microsoft and disk manufactures to force XP users into buying Win7 and new PCs ?

[Vice]

I don't know if anyone has already mentioned this but what about Windows Server 2003? Is this affected also? If it is, has Microsoft committed to a Patch?

[ilev]

I don't know if anyone has already mentioned this but what about Windows Server 2003? Is this affected also? If it is, has Microsoft committed to a Patch?

Yes, it affects server 2003 as well. It seems like there won't be any patches from Microsoft as they want you to move to server 2008

[zhangm Supervisor]

I don't know if anyone has already mentioned this but what about Windows Server 2003? Is this affected also? If it is, has Microsoft committed to a Patch?

Why worry about it? Chances are, by the time this technology actually replaces "classic" hard drive specifications, you'll be due for an upgrade anyway. Its not as if once this technology comes out, Windows XP and Windows 2003 will magically stop working. Expect to have a pretty easy time finding replacement hardware for another decade or so.

[Hawkeye666]

Drivers to support IS emulation have heaven sakes. That's what makes it slower on XP. They are doing it people and they are saying it will be slower. Emulation is always slower because a DRIVER is making the operating system think hardware is different than it really is.

[Vice]

Why worry about it? Chances are, by the time this technology actually replaces "classic" hard drive specifications, you'll be due for an upgrade anyway. Its not as if once this technology comes out, Windows XP and Windows 2003 will magically stop working. Expect to have a pretty easy time finding replacement hardware for another decade or so.

I am worried about it because my server is Windows Server 2003 and I have no intention to pay for Windows Server 2008. I don't want to go in to details here but this is worrying to me as I am going to have to move to an operating system that I do not like and is not compatible with my software and hardware and I have to pay for it.

[Joshie]

I am worried about it because my server is Windows Server 2003 and I have no intention to pay for Windows Server 2008. I don't want to go in to details here but this is worrying to me as I am going to have to move to an operating system that I do not like and is not compatible with my software and hardware and I have to pay for it.

Uh, only if you buy one of the new hard drives, you mean. Like the post you're responding to said, it's not like your computer will refuse to turn on at some point in January.

Not to mention, with a new standard coming out, old drives will have slashed prices--stock up, right? That'd take care of you for quite a few years into the 2010s, and a few more versions of Windows will be released. If, by Windows 9, however, you still feel crotchety about giving up 2003, well, I'm sorry you got off the technology train.

[Vice]

Uh, only if you buy one of the new hard drives, you mean. Like the post you're responding to said, it's not like your computer will refuse to turn on at some point in January.

Not to mention, with a new standard coming out, old drives will have slashed prices--stock up, right? That'd take care of you for quite a few years into the 2010s, and a few more versions of Windows will be released. If, by Windows 9, however, you still feel crotchety about giving up 2003, well, I'm sorry you got off the technology train.

It isn't quite that simple. I'm using a server with hotswap bays which I intend to fill with larger capacity drives through 2011. I'll need to upgrade my operating system if 3TB or higher drives start arriving that are all 4K sector only. And I am also not aware of how my RAID card will handle this. I wonder what happens if you mix 4K sector drives with normal ones in a single array.

[Kirkburn]

It isn't quite that simple. I'm using a server with hotswap bays which I intend to fill with larger capacity drives through 2011. I'll need to upgrade my operating system if 3TB or higher drives start arriving that are all 4K sector only. And I am also not aware of how my RAID card will handle this. I wonder what happens if you mix 4K sector drives with normal ones in a single array.

What's the issue with moving to Server 2008, though?

[Newinko]

Two things to note:

- True, Windows XP doesn't support GPT partitions, therefore you cannot have a boot partition > 2TB. True, Windows 7 supports booting off a GPT partition. But you'll need an EFI motherboard to boot off a GPT partition, and there's a high probability that you don't have an EFI motherboard. (It's virtually impossible to find a notebook that uses EFI.) So XP isn't any more "obsolete" than your motherboard is in that regard.

- The BBC's article is misleading. Windows XP is perfectly capable of using an advanced format drive without performance penalty, but the drive needs to be realigned, either by using a jumper or (preferred) by using WD's Align utility, as pointed out by goretsky.

Therefore, when the article states:

To help Windows XP cope, advanced format drives will be able to pretend they still use sectors 512 bytes in size.

It seems to imply that under XP, the drive performance will take a hit. That is not true. Yes, WD's 4K sector advanced format drives emulate themselves as 512B, but they do so blindingly; they are emulated as 512B drives under all operating systems, not just XP. And benchmarks (whether with a properly aligned drive under XP or 7) do not show a significant erformance difference either way.