© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
73416ba
(Get the code!)
One thing I have *NOT* seen discussed on any of the forums is the "lesser of two evils" question:
Windows seemingly does not have this problem (or at least, doesn't have it often) because it never lets the disk alone long enough for the heads to unload. Its pretty easy to duplicate that behavior in linux - a cron job that touches some file every 5, 10, 15, or whatever seconds.
So the question is, what is really more damaging to a drive - a excessive number of load cycles, or continuous operation?
Since I haven't heard a lot of people complaining that Windows wears out their disks by never letting them park, I assume that the "Windows solution" is at least acceptable. I wonder if anyone has any concrete data about hard drives being killed by too many load cycles.