User reports and that they are "RAID Enabled Drives" and they really are and not just the RE-series we use to see.
Using inside, no, using running on ATTO etc (and 2TB variety might be perfect for Apple's Pro RAID card).
WD Red 3 TB NAS Hard Drive: 3.5 Inch, SATA III, 64 MB Cache - WD30EFRX
wish i could agree with your comment on techtool pro 7, but it just damaged my 3.92TB startup volume when it was trying to optimize it. gory details can be found at http://caringcostsextra.org/category/vendors/micromat/
My method for "optimzing" is first, don't , and second, make a clone.
And if you made a clone, the clone is or could be the optimized volume.
Old school we used ditto dump to do disk to tape and back or later I woudl do disk to disk, old disk was pulled and was a backup.
There are uses for testing and such. I never said to optimize. TTP has always had the ability to scan media for bad sectors. That is not optimizing.
Hope you ask the folks at MicroMat, they are the ones to talk to.
I had SpeedDisk trouble back in its day and never used it again.
Besides when I tested Drive10 - those things that read and write to same disk drive are slow and should never be used.
This is something you chose to do, were not asked to, and fallls under the operator error.
Wish you had asked "is optimizing good" or how to do so – like using CCC with checksums instead.
sorry, hatter, i was not asking for your advice.
your comment said "TechTool Pro 7 for safety investment $100 towards reliability." perhaps i'm not reading the sentence properly; it sounds to me like you're suggesting that TTP7 is an investment toward reliability. but it's not a grammatically correct statement so perhaps i misunderstood the meaning. i apologize if that's the case.
i was simply disagreeing with my understanding of your statement, based on my negative experience using the tool. i was not asking for your advice.
i don't care about how you did things old school. there are plenty of things i used to do that are no longer correct or relevant. (plus, your usage of "old school" is incorrect, please look it up; "back in the day" would have been appropriate, however.)
i did not interpret your comment to mean that you were suggesting i optimize my volume (indeed, i didn't read your comment until after i had attempted optimization, so it's a rather moot point.)
your comment says "TTP has always had the ability to scan media for bad sectors. That is not optimizing."
no-one asked for your opinion on the difference between a sector scan and optimization. in addition to surface scans, techtool pro also claims that it can perform file and volume optimization. so mentioning surface scans here is irrelevant.
good for you that you've used speeddisk, but no-one asked about it; mentioning it is irrelevant to the discussion. and good for you that you've used drive10, but no-one asked about it; it is irrelevant to the discussion.
you state "This is something you chose to do, were not asked to, and falls under the operator error."
no, it is not "the operator error". the tool is specifically designed for file and volume optimization, among other things, and when used to analyze a volume the tool indicates whether or not it would be beneficial to run the tool. who was supposed to ask me to run the tool? micromat? you? i used a tool for its intended purpose in the prescribed manner and it damaged a volume. period. don't blame the victim. and, again, i was sharing my experience, not asking for your advice.
if i was asking someone "is optimizing good" (and i wasn't) it would not have been you. i've read too many of your comments to others that are condescending (not unlike your comment toward me). you're a faux pro; please don't assume to know anything more about my experience than the two sentences i've shared here. and, again, i was sharing my experience, not asking for your advice.