1 |
William Kenworthy wrote: |
2 |
> ... |
3 |
>> This thread has been interesting tho. At least I know that a Sandisk |
4 |
>> card at least tries to fail in a way that I can get the data off that |
5 |
>> did get written to the card. Hey, that's a lot better than some I |
6 |
>> guess. :-D I've had some other brands that when they die, they dead. |
7 |
>> You get nothing at all. |
8 |
>> |
9 |
>> Dale |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> :-) :-) |
12 |
>> |
13 |
> From memory (I found some articles describing what was happening when |
14 |
> investigating a while back) - its common with other brands too so |
15 |
> might be part of the specification - if it detects a failure, it |
16 |
> forces permanent read only mode to enable data recovery. Some cards |
17 |
> may be put back into write mode by software but not all and I wouldn't |
18 |
> trust it anyway. I have Kingston, Samsung and Sandisk cards - I |
19 |
> regard Samsung as very slightly better but not enough to go out of my |
20 |
> way and pay more for them. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> BillK |
23 |
> |
24 |
> |
25 |
> |
26 |
> |
27 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
I tend to buy Sandisk and Kingston as well. I'll add Samsung to my list |
30 |
tho. |
31 |
|
32 |
In the past, most have failed and I lose whatever was on the card. I |
33 |
think this is the first time one failed in this way. I guess it depends |
34 |
on how it fails tho. |
35 |
|
36 |
Dale |
37 |
|
38 |
:-) :-) |