Hard drive evolution could hit XP

[Tha Bloo Monkee]

^ They don't have to but you see, companies are driven by profit. And if they don't make stuff compatible with the operating system that is used by 50% of the market, they are killing off a lot of customers therefore losing profit. It only makes sense to.

[Mr. Gibs]

^ They don't have to but you see, companies are driven by profit. And if they don't make stuff compatible with the operating system that is used by 50% of the market, they are killing off a lot of customers therefore losing profit.

I can understand that, and I know its not going to change anytime soon. But it is still those people that are holding back technological advancements.

Take 64bit for example. It provides huge amounts of benefit over 32 bit, performance and security being the major ones. But companies are reluctant to code 64bit apps because of the people who are still on 32bit. So instead of us moving forward and embracing new technologies, we keep having to return to the past. And as a result, we and the rest of the tech world is held back.

[carmatic]

hmm maybe im confusing this with a file system, but isnt NTFS already 4096 bytes per sector by default?

from the anandtech article

"NTFS, EXT3, and HFS+ all default to 4KB clusters on modern hard drives. So 4KB physical sectors map perfectly with 4KB file system clusters, which in turn map perfectly with 4KB memory pages. And hence 4KB is the largest practical size for a hard drive sector at this time."

[Tha Bloo Monkee]

The 64-bit app debate is different. They aren't coding for it because of the 32-bit users.

However, this debate we're having is about a new hard drive being back-compatible. I don't see the issue with this, as it's still new technology for new computers that also work on older ones.

[carmatic]

also... the performance problems that comes from 512 byte writes being emulated in a 4k block, couldnt that be solved with clever firmware in the hard disk like what they do on SSD's , as well as modified file defragmentation which takes the 4k blocks into account?

[hagjohn]

I can understand that, and I know its not going to change anytime soon. But it is still those people that are holding back technological advancements.

Take 64bit for example. It provides huge amounts of benefit over 32 bit, performance and security being the major ones. But companies are reluctant to code 64bit apps because of the people who are still on 32bit. So instead of us moving forward and embracing new technologies, we keep having to return to the past. And as a result, we and the rest of the tech world is held back.

That's why Microsoft will need to only make a 64bit release soon. To force the change.

[Tha Bloo Monkee]

That's why Microsoft will need to only make a 64bit release soon. To force the change.

When the time comes that the cost of making a 32-bit version outweighs the profit it's bringing in, they'll stop making it.

[Kirkburn]

When the time comes that the cost of making a 32-bit version outweighs the profit it's bringing in, they'll stop making it.

As long as you're viewing "profit" and "cost" as deeper variables than immediate numbers on the balance sheets, yeah. (i.e. why would anyone ever develop anything new if it was solely about current profit and cost?)

Most of the questions being in the thread are already answered in the topic. It won't be that the drives won't work on XP, but they won't work as well. There's only so much you can do with emulation and drivers.

[Growled Member]

That's why Microsoft will need to only make a 64bit release soon. To force the change.

It's sad but many users have older computers and yet they expect new hardware and new operating systems to work just fine on their old junk. At some point in time it's time to move on to newer stuff.

[carmatic]

jumping on the offtopic bandwagon myself...

but isnt microsoft beginning the split of current gen hardware with 'classic' hardware, with their mobile OS strategy? as in windows phone 7 , and windows phone classic...

so if this was brought over to the desktops, all the outdated computers will still run a new OS, but it will be stripped down and pretty miserable compared to the '64 bit' OS that has all the latest features and all that...

[Black Leopard]

Will BSD, FreeDOS, ReactOS and Haiku be ready for this (all four are opensource OS's)?

[carmatic]

Will BSD, FreeDOS, ReactOS and Haiku be ready for this (all four are opensource OS's)?

why dont you ask the communities which develop them?

[Linkinfamous]

Hard drives are in dire need of an update, the technology is as dated sounding as Floppy Disk. :p

Some of the technology used in a hard drive is pretty damned modern. The nobel prize in physics was only just awarded for giant magnetoresistance a couple years ago, which is a relatively cool quantum effect which modern drives use in their heads.

[bjoswald]

We'd go a lot further with innovation if we would stop hand-holding the decade-impaired people who refuse to adopt change. With PC prices the lowest they've been in ages, there's no excuse anymore. If your business is important enough to depend on computers, then you're doing yourselves--and your customers--a disservice by sticking to obsolete software, because it's dangerous and counterproductive.

[+KibosJ Subscriber²]

O.O Didn't even realise, I have one of these drives.

I've been using them at work for a few weeks too in new builds.

[markwolfe Veteran]

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

Because they want to encourage people to ditch XP and buy a new copy of Windows 7. ;)

XP had its place, but if you are throwing good money into your old PC by buying a hard drive, maybe it is time to also invest in a modern OS (or a free one, if you really *hate* to spend money that much)

[ahhell]

Let XP die already.

It's already 2 OSs behind....it's time to move on already.

[Denis W. Veteran]

Will BSD, FreeDOS, ReactOS and Haiku be ready for this (all four are opensource OS's)?

For now, no.

After reading this article earlier last night, I began to entertain the idea of getting a WD10EARS (I've been wanting to get a backup hard drive for some time now), and came across posts with people stating that parted currently cannot align the partition correctly (there is a workaround posted).

So for now, it appears that only WinNT 6.x can initialize drive correctly and easily.

[XP_2600]

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 ?!

[Tryckee]

There is a thread for this topic already here.

[Xenomorph]

Simple way of putting it:

Windows XP allows logical 4 K Clusters.

The new drivers use physical 4 K Clusters.

(Or something like that).

The new "4K" drives are physically different from everything else that came out in the past 20-30 years.

[Xenomorph]

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!

* 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.

* 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.

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

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

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

* 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.

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

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

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

* 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.

Get it? XP IS OLD. It is out-dated. It is a relic of an OS that doesn't take advantage of any of the new technologies available.

If it doesn't support "YET ANOTHER" new technology. Who cares? It's like crying that Windows 98SE won't take advantage of it either, or that your VCR can't play a Blu-Ray Disc.

People who run ancient operating systems probably aren't the type that go out and buy new technology anyway. If you can't seem to purchase a new version of Windows, why would you purchase an SSD, 4K drive, DX11 video card, or anything else remotely "modern"?

Don't complain that you can't use some new piece of hardware, XP users seem to be stuck in some sort of time warp and become more of a joke with each passing day.

[KeeperOfThePizza]

I'm all for it. If Microsoft can't get users to drop IE6/XP.. let the hard drive makers force it.. i mean its just a hard drive...

[Singh400]

Tomshardware had a really good article on this:

Toms - 4K Sectors

Thanks for that, I had no idea about this!

[Astra.Xtreme]

Windows XP is ancient.

People who run ancient operating systems probably aren't the type that go out and buy new technology anyway.

This exactly! :yes: