Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [Waaay OT] Defrag tool for windoze
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 17:09:41
Message-Id: AANLkTim1a=vFHfPE7-VSzFb7Daxj4QRZ9V0yG_FmjVsc@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [Waaay OT] Defrag tool for windoze by Alan McKinnon
1 On 16 November 2010 16:20, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote:
2 > Apparently, though unproven, at 17:34 on Tuesday 16 November 2010, Grant
3 > Edwards did opine thusly:
4 >
5 >> On 2010-11-16, J. Roeleveld <joost@××××××××.org> wrote:
6 >> >> spinrite claims to make the head do other things than what the drive
7 >> >> firmware makes it do.
8 >>
9 >> I'm afraid I'll have to call bullshit on that.  I don't see how some
10 >> bit of PC software can make a drive head move.  The firmware on the
11 >> drive controller board is the only thing that can make the head move.
12 >> Does spinrite claim they _replace_ the drive firmware with their own
13 >> custom version?
14 >
15 > Firmware is nothing more than high-level software that wraps low-level
16 > commands on the drive. High and low are to be taken here within the context of
17 > a drive and it's controls, so don't be thinking it's on the same level as
18 > fopen()
19 >
20 >
21 > SOMETHING makes the head move. That something is the servos, and they are
22 > under software control (how could it be otherwise?) If the registers and
23 > commands that control that can be exposed, fine control is possible. The
24 > firmware does not itself define the only things the head can do, in the same
25 > way that a file system does nto define the only things that can be written to
26 > a disk
27 >
28 >> Where does Spinrite's claim they can do override drive firmware?
29 >
30 > I have not read the site in many years - Gibson's prose is simply too much to
31 > bear. What I recall being there may not be there any more.
32 >
33 > I never said that spinrite claims to override (or as you mention below
34 > "replace") the firmware. A sensible reading of what I wrote will show I meant
35 > "bypass"
36 >
37 > In any event it's all moot. Gibson is rather renowned for vast flowery
38 > language and liked to fly off on tangents. spinrite had a very good reputation
39 > years ago but it's possible that Gibson over-inflated his claims.
40 >
41 > Everything I said before is just my understanding of what Gibson claimed his
42 > software could do. It's hard to prove one way or the other for several
43 > reasons, first being that the thing is written in assembler.
44
45 Gibson's specialism is Marketing. He's not an IT bod, never has been.
46 Most of his writings are spreading FUD and exaggerations which
47 misinform people who do not know better.
48
49 That said I do not know if spinrite is a good product.
50 --
51 Regards,
52 Mick