Will this drive http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10510 enable me to use the drive on my PB and PC simultaneously. Connecting the PC through USB and the PB through Firewire?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Lacie Triple Interface HDD on two computers?
- Thread starter Temujin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm not 100% sure, but have a high degree of confidence the answer is no. The first problem is formatting it. The mac and PC don't speak the same format, you'd need a 3rd party tool (they exist, but cost). 2nd issue is you won't have anything to arbitrate disk locking. They will both believe they have complete control of the disk. If they both use firewire you could take advantage of the firewire arbitration, but if one's usb and the other firewire, I think it's not going to work. The disk will just randomly become 'corrupt'.
I could be wrong however.
Cheers,
Rich
I could be wrong however.
Cheers,
Rich
So I should be looking for a network drive like this one http://www.iomega-europe.com/eu/products.aspx?productId=StorCenter_250GB_USBEthernet if I want both computers reading/writing at the same time?
Edit: I would really like to take advantage of the speed of my Firewire port on my PB. That's why I went for a triple interface drive. How fast is firewire compared to 1 giga ethernet?
Edit: I would really like to take advantage of the speed of my Firewire port on my PB. That's why I went for a triple interface drive. How fast is firewire compared to 1 giga ethernet?
Gigabit ethernet is faster than firewire, (1000 megabits vs. MAX 800megabits), but you have to keep in mind that no single HDD actually gets close to even 800 megabits, so you wont loose any performance by going for either. I would go for the one thats the most convenient and the cheapest.
As for the original question, dont think you whould be able to use 2 interfaces at the same time, might be able to use firewire on both computers though, not 100% sure about that one.
edit: seems there might be a slight miscommunication, Im saying that a HDD can transfer more data than the FW400 bus can handel, but also that the FW800 and gigabit ethernet busses are faster than a HDD, so FW800 or ethernet, either way you will get max HDD performance.
As for the original question, dont think you whould be able to use 2 interfaces at the same time, might be able to use firewire on both computers though, not 100% sure about that one.
edit: seems there might be a slight miscommunication, Im saying that a HDD can transfer more data than the FW400 bus can handel, but also that the FW800 and gigabit ethernet busses are faster than a HDD, so FW800 or ethernet, either way you will get max HDD performance.
Here's a chart I made showing interface speed as tested with xBench on my PB and LaCie Triple Interface drive:
I disagree with the above statement that a HDD cannot saturate a FW 800 bus. I think there will be a data transfer increase from Gigabit ethernet over FW800, albeit small. But I don't have one of those drives, so I can't post the results for you.
I disagree with the above statement that a HDD cannot saturate a FW 800 bus. I think there will be a data transfer increase from Gigabit ethernet over FW800, albeit small. But I don't have one of those drives, so I can't post the results for you.
You think it would fry the controller board or something? I know that setup won't work, but it may even be possible to ruin the equipment.CanadaRAM said:
Heb1228 said:
I don't believe the HDD can saturate the bus because it's limited by the chipset in the HDD <-> FW800 controller. The specification guards against saturation (which is different from full utilization). Don't forget there's a node hierarchy and a root node. I haven't looked into it in a while so I could be remembering wrong.
I think gig-E will not provide better speed in a one-host/one-drive configuration under most heavy utilization scenarios. The CSMA/CD nature of ethernet typically doesn't allow for full utilization. Further you have a protocol stack that needs to be traversed to convert the HDD data coming out into ethernet frames, and then back down at the receiver.
For most people (especially myself) you'd have a tough time noticing the difference in speed between FW800 and GigE to the same model HDD. It's when you get into the 'real time access' scenarios that FW800 will shine. Not too many things outside of medical devices need that.
Anyway, getting off topic a bit... sorry about that.
Cheers,
Rich