Ext HD and Macbooks

[Marc]

My sister is looking at purchasing the following external hard drive:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00238KZPM/ref=s9_sima_gw_s1_p23_t1?pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=center-1&pf_rd_r=1V340NZWZHAS1ZD16PWH&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=467198433&pf_rd_i=468294

But someone has told her that it might not work on a 4 year old macbook. Anyone heard about this? I thought you just had to reformat before using it with a mac but she wants to be sure before she buys. Anyone know anything about this?

 

[neil_g]

depends if the macbook supports USB 2.0 i guess?

if it does then just format it on the mac and off you go..

 

[Chappers]

iBooks which were around about 4 years ago, if my memory is correct had USB2.0 connections so it should be OK. To be sure, click on the Apple symbol on the main screen and select "About this Mac" You'll get a ( very) brief description of the Mac. Click on the "More Information" tab and you'll get a lot more. Look for the USB info, prpbably at the bottom of the Hardware section. It'll list a lot of info, most of which you won't want, bit if it's USB 2.0 you'll see a SPEED section. This should be 400-480Mb/sec for USB 2

 

[Marc]

Thanks for the replies, I've passed the information on to her.

 

[cowasaki]

It WILL work no problem at all.

BUT I would get a firewire EXT hard drive if it is not much more expensive, although the head line speed figure is not much different the actual speed is better.

 

[neil_g]

It WILL work no problem at all.

BUT I would get a firewire EXT hard drive if it is not much more expensive, although the head line speed figure is not much different the actual speed is better.

depends on the kind of transfer to be honest, USB2 is better for burst transfers and FW400 is better for sustained transfer

obviously FW800 would be faster on both counts..

 

[Marc]

Cheers guys. TBH, if I confuse her mentioning FW to her I think her head will explode! She's purchased the one in the link now and I will talk her through the formatting process when she gets it.

 

[cowasaki]

I find fw400 faster than usb2 across the board really, there is too much of an overhead on usb2 but it doesn't matter though really as she has bought it now. I have a drive with fw400, fw800, usb2 and esata so did a number of speed tests on the mac.

When she formats it I would chose fat32 so that it can be used on either pc or mac. The 128gb limit on fat32 is an artificial limit set by Microsoft under windows in order to get people to use ntfs. If it is formatted in fat32 at more than 128gb it will still work on both. The mac specific formats are more secure etc but should something happen to the mac and she wants to get stuff off it this would be more helpful.

 

[nuttyboy78]

Cheers guys. TBH, if I confuse her mentioning FW to her I think her head will explode! She's purchased the one in the link now and I will talk her through the formatting process when she gets it.

The need to format will depend on whether she is going to use it with just her mac (as in Time Machine) or if it is going to be for storage (shared with a PC maybe?).

HFS for the former, FAT32 for the latter.

 

[neil_g]

yes USB has a processor overhead.

to be honest i wouldnt touch FAT32 with a bargepole anyway, its unjournaled for starters as well as having a 4gb file size limit. it also fragments more than NTFS.

 

[cowasaki]

yes USB has a processor overhead.

to be honest i wouldnt touch FAT32 with a bargepole anyway, its unjournaled for starters as well as having a 4gb file size limit. it also fragments more than NTFS.

FAT32 unfortunately is the only natively supported format available to Windows and MacOS so IF sharing of files is required it is the only reasonable choice. The non native readers do not work very well and require the software on the machine doing the reading. IF it is absolutely 100% that no PC compatibility is required then use a native MacOS format. NTFS is only READABLE under MacOS with extra software.

 

[Marc]

Well I won't even pretend to understand half of what you guys are on about. She will be using it only with the ibook so I will get her to format it accordingly. Thanks again for all the help.

 

[nuttyboy78]

NTFS is only READABLE under MacOS with extra software.

Don't you mean Writable there? NTFS is readable on OSX without any problems. You will need extra software like MacFUSE to write, though.

 

[cowasaki]

Well I won't even pretend to understand half of what you guys are on about. She will be using it only with the ibook so I will get her to format it accordingly. Thanks again for all the help.

Marc,

Sorry we do tend to over complicate things don't we I am sure it will all work out just as seamlessly as anything else

 

[cowasaki]

Don't you mean Writable there? NTFS is readable on OSX without any problems. You will need extra software like MacFUSE to write, though.

Woops, I got disturbed in the middle of that sentence :nuts: It was going to be that NTFS is only readable under MacOS to write you need extra software but when I came back to it I didn't read it

 

[Marc]

Marc,

Sorry we do tend to over complicate things don't we I am sure it will all work out just as seamlessly as anything else

I'm sure it will. Thanks Darren.

 

[Marc]

Just had this email from her:

"says 667 Mhz bus speed. i have a mac book which replaced the ibook.
it has 2 GHz intel core Duo, and a 1GB memory. it is a Mac OS X. I think it is ok?
just checking when i bought it."

 

[cowasaki]

It is likely MacOS panther. Should still be fine.

 

[Marc]

Cheers Darren