Hard Drive S.M.A.R.T data

[Bob_McBob]

Meh, guess I'll try asking here.

Does anyone know of software that can read the SMART data from drives in USB enclosures? Is it even possible? I would like to be able to check the fitness of a drive without having to plug it in directly, especially 2.5" drives.

Another question: I am concerned about the fitness of my primary drive. The raw read error rate has been around 48 since I last started monitoring it, and it flits around between 48 and 49, sometimes going up to 52. This is a Seagate drive, and I assume 100 is the maximum value. Of course, I have no idea whether Seagate is doing some weird shit with the values. I compared my drive to another identical one and many of the "low" values were close or exactly the same (for instance, 81/60 for seek error rate).

[SixDOF]

Howzit,

You can go to www.passmark.com and download "DiskCheckup" for free. Here it will give you the values as well as the threshold. For instance my Western Digital has a Read Raw Error Rate value of 200, worst is 198, and the threshold is 51. As yours is a Seagate, I don't know whether each manfacturer has different value sets. It wouldn't make sense if they did. That being said, your values are way low and I would say that it would be safe to go ahead and do a total backup and purchase yourself a new HDD. Find the lowest price with the greatest capacity for your budget here: www.pricewatch.com This should be the first website you ever go to when on the prowl for new components. I hope this all helps!

Respectfully, SixDOF

[n_maher]

Respectfully, SixDOF

SixDOF,

Respectfully, if you bump another two plus year old thread your time here will be short. Read more, post less, welcome to Head-Case and all that.

[guzziguy]

But thanks for trying to help. That's better than a lot of first posts.

For all newbies, the posts don't time out and, if you haven't read them, will be on your list of unread posts. So spend the first week (or three) reading posts and getting the lay of the land. It will go much smoother for you than resurrecting old, very dead posts.

[SixDOF]

SixDOF,

Respectfully, if you bump another two plus year old thread your time here will be short. Read more, post less, welcome to Head-Case and all that.

Sorry n_Maher,

That particular post actually came up as a first result during a search and I neglected to catch the actual post date. As this info is still pertinent, there should be "no harm, no foul" in resurrecting an old post. Even though you had replied "Respectfully", I am a little steamed that on my first post with Head Case you felt the need to threaten me with my "time here will be short" for bumping the old thread to the fore front. Pretty disappointing that your reply is for all to see that may read this thread for helpful direction. Not too "User-Friendly"...

[Voltron]

I guess you didn't catch the one rule around here is: don't be an asshat, and you have broken it twice. You didn't pay enough attention to the date, so you dredged up a thread by another guy who hasn't been active here in months or years about a problem he had 2 years ago that wasn't all that interesting in the first place. Nate, a moderator, called you on it and suggested that there are better ways to introduce yourself here. Your thin-skinned response shows you don't really belong here. Buh-bye.

[n_maher]

Not too "User-Friendly"...

Hmm, I thought I was actually pretty nice about it. I did say welcome, didn't I and even offered advice for how you might find life more comfortable here. While your information was good, the thread was ancient and not many (if any) would come here seeking that kind of information. I suspected you were excited to find a topic that you felt knowledgeable about and posted hastily, hence my pretty pleasant response. Your second reply to this thread is perhaps worse than the first since it shows you didn't really take my advice. So I stand by and slightly amend my previous advice, read more and post carefully if you'd like to have any longevity. That's not a threat, just a fact.