Guest Lil' Dave Posted August 6, 2008 Posted August 6, 2008 Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set for quick removal in device manager by XP. The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is set for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and write caching, all is well for image file verification. Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? How come the disparity in device manager disk drive setting, quick removal vs. performance for proper operation? -- Dave
Guest R. McCarty Posted August 6, 2008 Posted August 6, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement Is the new enclosure a multi-technology type ? ( USB, eSATA & FW ). If so, then the enclosure may have some type of translation hardware to accommodate the various supported interface types. The new hardware detection may be that translation chip which XP cannot correctly ID. "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. > > The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software > and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set > for quick removal in device manager by XP. > > The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never > finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive > entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the > firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard > disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file > verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is set > for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and write > caching, all is well for image file verification. > > Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. > > How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? > > How come the disparity in device manager disk drive setting, quick removal > vs. performance for proper operation? > > -- > Dave > >
Guest Lil' Dave Posted August 6, 2008 Posted August 6, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement Yes, its also has USB2 capability. The old one was also firewire/USB2. I can't find any pure firewire/1394A version enclosure anymore. That may explain the bogus thing in device manager not finding a driver, although its not connected via USB. It don't explain the need for setting the hard drive for performance rather than quick removal. Original was a Startech IDECASE35U2F. Replacement is an Irocks ir-9410-si. Both have firewire port, and passthrough firewire port, one USB2 port. Reason for replacement was the negative side 12V wire came out of the modular plug when I was attempting to temporarily move the hard drive. Some googling found that this is not unusual on some Startech enclosures. -- Dave "R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:unZz3479IHA.224@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Is the new enclosure a multi-technology type ? ( USB, eSATA & FW ). > If so, then the enclosure may have some type of translation hardware to > accommodate the various supported interface types. The new hardware > detection may be that translation chip which XP cannot correctly ID. > > "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message > news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >> >> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software >> and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set >> for quick removal in device manager by XP. >> >> The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never >> finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive >> entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the >> firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard >> disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file >> verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is >> set for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and >> write caching, all is well for image file verification. >> >> Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. >> >> How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? >> >> How come the disparity in device manager disk drive setting, quick >> removal vs. performance for proper operation? >> >> -- >> Dave >> >> > >
Guest R. McCarty Posted August 6, 2008 Posted August 6, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement I'd run some type of "Throughput" benchmark on the drive just to see what type of performance you're getting on the external enclosure. Do the tests with both operating modes - Cached and Quick Removal for comparison. "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message news:%23lQq8Z89IHA.1196@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... > Yes, its also has USB2 capability. The old one was also firewire/USB2. I > can't find any pure firewire/1394A version enclosure anymore. That may > explain the bogus thing in device manager not finding a driver, although > its not connected via USB. It don't explain the need for setting the hard > drive for performance rather than quick removal. > > Original was a Startech IDECASE35U2F. > Replacement is an Irocks ir-9410-si. > > Both have firewire port, and passthrough firewire port, one USB2 port. > > Reason for replacement was the negative side 12V wire came out of the > modular plug when I was attempting to temporarily move the hard drive. > Some googling found that this is not unusual on some Startech enclosures. > -- > Dave > > "R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote in message > news:unZz3479IHA.224@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> Is the new enclosure a multi-technology type ? ( USB, eSATA & FW ). >> If so, then the enclosure may have some type of translation hardware to >> accommodate the various supported interface types. The new hardware >> detection may be that translation chip which XP cannot correctly ID. >> >> "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message >> news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >>> >>> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software >>> and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set >>> for quick removal in device manager by XP. >>> >>> The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never >>> finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive >>> entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the >>> firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard >>> disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file >>> verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is >>> set for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and >>> write caching, all is well for image file verification. >>> >>> Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. >>> >>> How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? >>> >>> How come the disparity in device manager disk drive setting, quick >>> removal vs. performance for proper operation? >>> >>> -- >>> Dave >>> >>> >> >> > >
Guest smlunatick Posted August 6, 2008 Posted August 6, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement On Aug 6, 2:06 pm, "Lil' Dave" <spamyours...@virus.net> wrote: > Yes, its also has USB2 capability. The old one was also firewire/USB2. I > can't find any pure firewire/1394A version enclosure anymore. That may > explain the bogus thing in device manager not finding a driver, although its > not connected via USB. It don't explain the need for setting the hard drive > for performance rather than quick removal. > > Original was a Startech IDECASE35U2F. > Replacement is an Irocks ir-9410-si. > > Both have firewire port, and passthrough firewire port, one USB2 port. > > Reason for replacement was the negative side 12V wire came out of the > modular plug when I was attempting to temporarily move the hard drive. Some > googling found that this is not unusual on some Startech enclosures. > -- > Dave > > "R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSp...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > > news:unZz3479IHA.224@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > > > Is the new enclosure a multi-technology type ? ( USB, eSATA & FW ). > > If so, then the enclosure may have some type of translation hardware to > > accommodate the various supported interface types. The new hardware > > detection may be that translation chip which XP cannot correctly ID. > > > "Lil' Dave" <spamyours...@virus.net> wrote in message > >news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > >> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. > > >> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software > >> and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set > >> for quick removal in device manager by XP. > > >> The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never > >> finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive > >> entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the > >> firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard > >> disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file > >> verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is > >> set for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and > >> write caching, all is well for image file verification. > > >> Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. > > >> How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? > > >> How come the disparity in device manager disk drive setting, quick > >> removal vs. performance for proper operation? > > >> -- > >> Dave Several "external" device categories usually have problems for XP to locate them after XP has started. The "Plug & Play" (aka Plug & Pray) system seems to have problems with detecting devices. Unless you are reconnecting the drive enclosure to different ports, the "Found New Hardware" should not come up all the time. You might need to reset the Firewire "ports" by: 1) Removing all the Firewire device drivers from Device Manager 2) Disconnect all Firewire devices 3) Remove the Firewire controller card from Device Manager 4) Reboot Once XP reboots, it should refresh the Firewire controller card drivers and reset the Firewire device ID enumeration process. Then, you should be able to have the Firewire device successfully detected. (NOTE: As with all Windows XP, no two PCs are ever the same and the "resetting" of the Firewire "device" might not help.)
Guest Paul Posted August 6, 2008 Posted August 6, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement Lil' Dave wrote: > Yes, its also has USB2 capability. The old one was also firewire/USB2. I > can't find any pure firewire/1394A version enclosure anymore. That may > explain the bogus thing in device manager not finding a driver, although its > not connected via USB. It don't explain the need for setting the hard drive > for performance rather than quick removal. > > Original was a Startech IDECASE35U2F. > Replacement is an Irocks ir-9410-si. > > Both have firewire port, and passthrough firewire port, one USB2 port. > > Reason for replacement was the negative side 12V wire came out of the > modular plug when I was attempting to temporarily move the hard drive. Some > googling found that this is not unusual on some Startech enclosures. The fact that the new enclosure has USB2 or SATA, as well as Firewire, should not make any difference. In the Firewire path, the same information is going to be seen by Windows, and the same protocol stack used. One thing I could see happening though, is if Windows uses the serial number of the hard drive, for uniquely identifying what is plugged in, then it will have seen both the Startech and the Irocks, with the same drive serial number. But I don't know enough about Firewire, to say whether that is responsible for your symptoms or not. I'm still "batting a big zero" when it comes to finding utilities to enumerate Firewire. In terms of showing what is on the Firewire bus, the Macintosh has a nice display in System Info, that shows a "tree" for a network of Firewire devices. In Windows, I was barely able to get some info from Sisoftware Sandra. The last experiment I did, was to place a CDROM in a Firewire case, as a test, and this is what I got. Device Manager - This is the chip on my motherboard, that does the Firewire The second entry is the enclosure, using SBP2 (SCSI) protocol. The "repeater" is probably mentioning the passthru connector. IEEE 1394 Bus host controllers VIA OHCI Compliant IEEE 1394 Controller (drivers = 1394bus.sys, ohci1394.sys) DVD/CD-ROM drives ADS Technologies_ Inc. 1394 Storage+Repeater IEEE 1394 SBP2 Device (drivers = cdrom.sys, redbook.sys, storprop.dll) Sisoftware Sandra Lite (free) is able to get the ident string from the drive. But no other information. So if there was a serial number or a shoe size, it cannot be seen. And it could be, that the SBP2 protocol, being a SCSI stack, hides any other info. For example, I wouldn't expect to get SMART info from the drive, if it was running over Firewire. Matshita CD-ROM CR-588 So that was my last experiment with Firewire. Still no closer to getting a free utility that can get more info. There is a utility in a commercial development package, but its usage could be keyed to the whole package being installed. Paul
Guest Patrick Keenan Posted August 6, 2008 Posted August 6, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. > > The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software > and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set > for quick removal in device manager by XP. You really can't do this reliably or safely with FireWire devices. It's supposed to work, but it is known to lead to port destruction, the host or remote port or both. You need to power *everything* off before connecting or disconnecting FireWire devices, and turn the peripherals on first. > > The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never > finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive > entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the > firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard > disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file > verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is set > for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and write > caching, all is well for image file verification. > > Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. > > How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? Possibly due to damage to the port caused by hot-plugging. You may also need to replace the port on the host PC. HTH -pk > > How come the disparity in device manager disk drive setting, quick removal > vs. performance for proper operation? > > -- > Dave > >
Guest M.I.5¾ Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message news:uFW3Jz$9IHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message > news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >> >> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software >> and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set >> for quick removal in device manager by XP. > > You really can't do this reliably or safely with FireWire devices. > > It's supposed to work, but it is known to lead to port destruction, the > host or remote port or both. > > You need to power *everything* off before connecting or disconnecting > FireWire devices, and turn the peripherals on first. > Absolute rubbish. Firewire connectors are specifically designed to be hot plugged. The supporting software is written specifically to detect hot connected and disconnected peripherals. >> >> The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never >> finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive >> entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the >> firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard >> disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file >> verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is >> set for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and >> write caching, all is well for image file verification. >> >> Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. >> >> How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? > > Possibly due to damage to the port caused by hot-plugging. You may also > need to replace the port on the host PC. > The port cannot be damaged by hot plugging. It is designed precisely to be used in this manner.
Guest Lil' Dave Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "smlunatick" <yveslec@gmail.com> wrote in message news:4251a4b0-79de-4039-a49a-3cc84303d4b3@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... On Aug 6, 2:06 pm, "Lil' Dave" <spamyours...@virus.net> wrote: > Yes, its also has USB2 capability. The old one was also firewire/USB2. I > can't find any pure firewire/1394A version enclosure anymore. That may > explain the bogus thing in device manager not finding a driver, although > its > not connected via USB. It don't explain the need for setting the hard > drive > for performance rather than quick removal. > > Original was a Startech IDECASE35U2F. > Replacement is an Irocks ir-9410-si. > > Both have firewire port, and passthrough firewire port, one USB2 port. > > Reason for replacement was the negative side 12V wire came out of the > modular plug when I was attempting to temporarily move the hard drive. > Some > googling found that this is not unusual on some Startech enclosures. > -- > Dave > > "R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSp...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > > news:unZz3479IHA.224@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > > > Is the new enclosure a multi-technology type ? ( USB, eSATA & FW ). > > If so, then the enclosure may have some type of translation hardware to > > accommodate the various supported interface types. The new hardware > > detection may be that translation chip which XP cannot correctly ID. > > > "Lil' Dave" <spamyours...@virus.net> wrote in message > >news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > >> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. > > >> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging > >> software > >> and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set > >> for quick removal in device manager by XP. > > >> The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never > >> finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive > >> entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the > >> firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard > >> disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file > >> verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is > >> set for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and > >> write caching, all is well for image file verification. > > >> Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. > > >> How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? > > >> How come the disparity in device manager disk drive setting, quick > >> removal vs. performance for proper operation? > > >> -- > >> Dave Several "external" device categories usually have problems for XP to locate them after XP has started. The "Plug & Play" (aka Plug & Pray) system seems to have problems with detecting devices. Unless you are reconnecting the drive enclosure to different ports, the "Found New Hardware" should not come up all the time. You might need to reset the Firewire "ports" by: 1) Removing all the Firewire device drivers from Device Manager 2) Disconnect all Firewire devices 3) Remove the Firewire controller card from Device Manager 4) Reboot Once XP reboots, it should refresh the Firewire controller card drivers and reset the Firewire device ID enumeration process. Then, you should be able to have the Firewire device successfully detected. (NOTE: As with all Windows XP, no two PCs are ever the same and the "resetting" of the Firewire "device" might not help.) Thanks. The 2 firewire ports are onboard the motherboard. I always use the same firewire port for this external and the previous one as well. Using the same 6 wire firewire cable in both instances. My normal motis operandi is to allow XP to finish booting including when after the XP desktop comes up by monitoring the HD LED activity. When done, I turn on the firewire HDD enclosure. Before shutting down XP, I stop the firewire enclosure with the option in the system tray for same. Then, turn off the enclosure. I was curious, and found that XP still finds new hardware when leaving the enclosure on all the time, and restarting. That is, if I remove the instance in device manager where no drivers were found for this unknown device before restarting. Irregardless, there is an entry for SBP devices for it, and, an entry in hard disk drives in device manager for the enclosed hard drive. All drivers for motherboard are installed from motherboard CD. Before changing to the new enclosure, all was uneventful, and flawless using quick disconnect option (default) for the hard drive. -- Dave
Guest Lil' Dave Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "Paul" <nospam@needed.com> wrote in message news:g7cgda$309$1@aioe.org... > Lil' Dave wrote: >> Yes, its also has USB2 capability. The old one was also firewire/USB2. >> I can't find any pure firewire/1394A version enclosure anymore. That may >> explain the bogus thing in device manager not finding a driver, although >> its not connected via USB. It don't explain the need for setting the >> hard drive for performance rather than quick removal. >> >> Original was a Startech IDECASE35U2F. >> Replacement is an Irocks ir-9410-si. >> >> Both have firewire port, and passthrough firewire port, one USB2 port. >> >> Reason for replacement was the negative side 12V wire came out of the >> modular plug when I was attempting to temporarily move the hard drive. >> Some googling found that this is not unusual on some Startech enclosures. > > The fact that the new enclosure has USB2 or SATA, as well as Firewire, > should not make any difference. In the Firewire path, the same information > is going to be seen by Windows, and the same protocol stack used. > > One thing I could see happening though, is if Windows uses the serial > number > of the hard drive, for uniquely identifying what is plugged in, then it > will > have seen both the Startech and the Irocks, with the same drive serial > number. > But I don't know enough about Firewire, to say whether that is responsible > for your symptoms or not. I'm still "batting a big zero" when it comes to > finding utilities to enumerate Firewire. > > In terms of showing what is on the Firewire bus, the Macintosh has a nice > display in System Info, that shows a "tree" for a network of Firewire > devices. > In Windows, I was barely able to get some info from Sisoftware Sandra. > > The last experiment I did, was to place a CDROM in a Firewire case, as a > test, > and this is what I got. > > Device Manager - This is the chip on my motherboard, that does the > Firewire > The second entry is the enclosure, using SBP2 (SCSI) > protocol. > The "repeater" is probably mentioning the passthru > connector. > > IEEE 1394 Bus host controllers > VIA OHCI Compliant IEEE 1394 Controller > (drivers = 1394bus.sys, ohci1394.sys) > > DVD/CD-ROM drives > ADS Technologies_ Inc. 1394 Storage+Repeater IEEE 1394 SBP2 Device > (drivers = cdrom.sys, redbook.sys, storprop.dll) > > Sisoftware Sandra Lite (free) is able to get the ident string from the > drive. But no other information. So if there was a serial number or > a shoe size, it cannot be seen. And it could be, that the SBP2 protocol, > being a SCSI stack, hides any other info. For example, I wouldn't > expect to get SMART info from the drive, if it was running over Firewire. > > Matshita CD-ROM CR-588 > > So that was my last experiment with Firewire. Still no closer to getting > a free utility that can get more info. > > There is a utility in a commercial development package, but its usage > could > be keyed to the whole package being installed. > > Paul > > > That information is available in device manager in XP on my system for the SBP device, the firewire port, and the hard drive within the enclosure. -- Dave
Guest Lil' Dave Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message news:uFW3Jz$9IHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message > news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >> >> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software >> and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set >> for quick removal in device manager by XP. > > You really can't do this reliably or safely with FireWire devices. > > It's supposed to work, but it is known to lead to port destruction, the > host or remote port or both. > > You need to power *everything* off before connecting or disconnecting > FireWire devices, and turn the peripherals on first. > You misinterpreting. I don't simply turn off the enclosure when done. XP, by default, sets the hard drive in the firewire enclosure for quick removal. This is under the policies tab in device manager for that hard drive. I use the standard routine for turning off the hard drive enclosure via system tray stop procedure. The point I was trying to make is with the original enclosure, with policy set to quick removal, all worked fine. The replacement enclosure, in operation, has problems with that. That is, image file verification fails. The replacement does well when the policy is set for performance AND checking write caching. The latter policy is normally done with an onboard, rather than a removable hard drive. >> >> The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never >> finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive >> entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the >> firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard >> disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file >> verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is >> set for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and >> write caching, all is well for image file verification. >> >> Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. >> >> How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? > > Possibly due to damage to the port caused by hot-plugging. You may also > need to replace the port on the host PC. > > HTH > -pk > > >> >> How come the disparity in device manager disk drive setting, quick >> removal vs. performance for proper operation? >> >> -- >> Dave >> >> >
Guest Patrick Keenan Posted August 7, 2008 Posted August 7, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message news:489acc9b$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... > > "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message > news:uFW3Jz$9IHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message >> news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >>> >>> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software >>> and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set >>> for quick removal in device manager by XP. >> >> You really can't do this reliably or safely with FireWire devices. >> >> It's supposed to work, but it is known to lead to port destruction, the >> host or remote port or both. >> >> You need to power *everything* off before connecting or disconnecting >> FireWire devices, and turn the peripherals on first. >> > > Absolute rubbish. I wish it was. Unfortunately, personal experience and research into FireWire equipment failures has shown me otherwise. > Firewire connectors are specifically designed to be hot plugged. The > supporting software is written specifically to detect hot connected and > disconnected peripherals. Yes, these things are true as far as design specifications are concerned. But as described below, reality does not quite seem to adhere to these particular design specifications. > >>> >>> The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never >>> finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive >>> entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the >>> firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard >>> disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file >>> verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is >>> set for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and >>> write caching, all is well for image file verification. >>> >>> Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. >>> >>> How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? >> >> Possibly due to damage to the port caused by hot-plugging. You may also >> need to replace the port on the host PC. >> > > The port cannot be damaged by hot plugging. Yes, it can. I have sent many FireWire devices to the trash, and for repair if they were expensive, for precisely this reason. And I know that I am not alone in this. > It is designed precisely to be used in this manner. Yes, it is. Unfortunately, FireWire port failures are well documented. One possible cause can be static discharge *while* hot-plugging. http://www.wiebetech.com/whitepapers/FireWirePortFailures.php "3. FIREWIRE FAILURE SCENARIO A typical failure scenario is as follows: The user attaches a FireWire storage device to the computer. The user expects the device to mount on the desktop, but this does not occur. Repeated attempts to mount the storage device (usually by connecting and disconnecting the FireWire cable) produce the same results. Ultimately, the user attempts to mount other FireWire devices on the same port without success, and consequently verifies that the port is no longer functional. Various attempts to resolve the situation may be attempted, all without success. This may include machine rebooting, Parameter RAM resetting, power disconnection for extended periods of time, etc. It's worth noting that the host FireWire port may be on the motherboard (as is the case for most Apple computers) or it may be on a PCI FireWire host adapter card. The result is the same; the particular port no longer works. The port may still be capable of supplying power to the attached FireWire device, but the device is no longer seen on the desktop or in the various disk management utilities. The failure of the host's FireWire port can produce a very bad day for the user. The knowledge of possible damage (and consequential repair cost / hassle) to the computer is compounded by the frustrating inability to mount and use external storage devices." http://lowendmac.com/misc/03/0421.html "I just read the above article, and I too agree it's ironic that the highly touted "hot swap" advantage of FireWire technology is actually a disadvantage when considering the cost of replacing or repairing damaged equipment. In my case the situation has proved extremely costly. I manage the Center for Digital Media at the San Francisco Art Institute, where we run a couple Mac networks with approximately 40 FireWire enabled computers and roughly 7 or so FireWire peripherals. These peripherals include video decks, CD burners, and peripheral hard drives. Of these, three Panasonic video decks now have burnt out motherboards from hot-swapping to and from Apple G4 towers (the decks cost $900 new, and $1,200 to replace the motherboards). Our JVC video deck has been in for repairs to the FireWire bridge three times at approximately $400 per repair. Two FireWire peripheral hard drives have fried, and four peripheral FireWire CD burners have burnt-out bridges, making the cases useless (we have since loaded those CD burners as internal units in the towers). This puts the grand total of damaged and repaired FireWire devices at roughly $3,500. Quite a nut for the convenience of hot-swapping, wouldn't you say?" I've personally seen a number of devices destroyed this way. I stopped buying FireWire hard disk cases because they consistently failed after hot-plugging. I have, and use, a FireWire audio interface, and it still works because it is never moved. I've sent back for service (replacement) a $1500 interface that was damaged by hot-plugging; the Powerbook it was with got a PCMCIA FireWire card because the ports on the board are fried and motherboard replacement was out of the question. This defect is why manufacturers of FireWire audio interfaces caution against hot-plugging. For example, http://www.m-audio.com/index.php?do=support.faq&ID=c9d161aac920b52a508de3167730a7ae&setlocale=en_us "Caution: Do Not Hot-Plug FireWire Devices Reports have come to our attention of isolated problems when hot-plugging IEEE 1394 (aka "FireWire") devices. (Hot-plugging refers to making 1394/FireWire connections when one or more of the devices-including the computer-is on.) When hot-plugging, there are rare occurrences where either the FireWire peripheral or the FireWire port on the host computer is rendered permanently inoperable. While M-Audio products adhere rigidly to the FireWire industry standard and pass stringent internal testing, the possibility remains that hot-plugging your M-Audio FireWire interface with some computers may result in the type of problem described here. We strongly encourage you to protect your equipment by refraining from hot-plugging any bus-powered FireWire device, including the M-Audio family of FireWire products. Connect your FireWire device while both the computer and FireWire device are powered off. Power on the FireWire device, then turn the computer on last. If you are using bus power (systems with IEEE1394 6-pin connectors) make sure you make the cable connection first, then turn the FireWire device power switch on, and turn the computer system on last." As you can see, this problem is not imaginary. HTH -pk
Guest M.I.5¾ Posted August 8, 2008 Posted August 8, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message news:eVbbiWO%23IHA.4196@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > > "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message > news:489acc9b$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... >> >> "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message >> news:uFW3Jz$9IHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>> "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message >>> news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >>>> >>>> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging >>>> software and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no >>>> problems. Set for quick removal in device manager by XP. >>> >>> You really can't do this reliably or safely with FireWire devices. >>> >>> It's supposed to work, but it is known to lead to port destruction, the >>> host or remote port or both. >>> >>> You need to power *everything* off before connecting or disconnecting >>> FireWire devices, and turn the peripherals on first. >>> >> >> Absolute rubbish. > > I wish it was. Unfortunately, personal experience and research into > FireWire equipment failures has shown me otherwise. > >> Firewire connectors are specifically designed to be hot plugged. The >> supporting software is written specifically to detect hot connected and >> disconnected peripherals. > > Yes, these things are true as far as design specifications are concerned. > > But as described below, reality does not quite seem to adhere to these > particular design specifications. > [snipped for brevity] I have used firewire devices of various flavours (including bus powered) both professionally and at home. I have never had a failure of either a peripheral or a port. I do not know anyone else who has either. The way the firewire connector is designed, it is not possible for any of the known interface failure scenarios to cause either half of the interface to fail. It would be possible if the 6 pin connecter were to be inserted upside down, but it would require more force to get it to insert this way (though I gather it's not impossible). You must be doing something wrong, though I have no idea what it is.
Guest Pavel A. Posted August 8, 2008 Posted August 8, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement There were several reports that firewire hard drives do not work well with Windows, because of defective drivers. Maybe this is the time for switch to ESATA. Regards, --PA "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... > Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. > > The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software > and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set > for quick removal in device manager by XP. > > The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never > finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive > entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the > firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard > disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file > verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is set > for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and write > caching, all is well for image file verification. > > Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. > > How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? > > How come the disparity in device manager disk drive setting, quick removal > vs. performance for proper operation? > > -- > Dave > >
Guest Patrick Keenan Posted August 10, 2008 Posted August 10, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message news:489be82d$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... > > "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message > news:eVbbiWO%23IHA.4196@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> >> "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:489acc9b$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... >>> >>> "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message >>> news:uFW3Jz$9IHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>> "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message >>>> news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >>>>> >>>>> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging >>>>> software and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no >>>>> problems. Set for quick removal in device manager by XP. >>>> >>>> You really can't do this reliably or safely with FireWire devices. >>>> >>>> It's supposed to work, but it is known to lead to port destruction, the >>>> host or remote port or both. >>>> >>>> You need to power *everything* off before connecting or disconnecting >>>> FireWire devices, and turn the peripherals on first. >>>> >>> >>> Absolute rubbish. >> >> I wish it was. Unfortunately, personal experience and research into >> FireWire equipment failures has shown me otherwise. >> >>> Firewire connectors are specifically designed to be hot plugged. The >>> supporting software is written specifically to detect hot connected and >>> disconnected peripherals. >> >> Yes, these things are true as far as design specifications are concerned. >> >> But as described below, reality does not quite seem to adhere to these >> particular design specifications. >> > > [snipped for brevity] > > I have used firewire devices of various flavours (including bus powered) > both professionally and at home. I have never had a failure of either a > peripheral or a port. I do not know anyone else who has either. The absence of this problem from your experience does not mean that the problem does not exist. > The way the firewire connector is designed, it is not possible for any of > the known interface failure scenarios to cause either half of the > interface to fail. It would be possible if the 6 pin connecter were to be > inserted upside down, but it would require more force to get it to insert > this way (though I gather it's not impossible). > > You must be doing something wrong, though I have no idea what it is. I used them as intended. They failed. Note that at least one manufacturer of FireWire devices has run into the problem enough times to have found the need to issue a support bulletin advising against hot plugging, because it can cause permanent port damage to devices at both ends of the cable. It sure isn't just me. If you've been lucky enough to avoid it, well, you've been lucky. Might I suggest lottery ticket purchases. -pk
Guest M.I.5¾ Posted August 11, 2008 Posted August 11, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message news:%23bVaVRz%23IHA.4816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > > "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message > news:489be82d$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... >> >> "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message >> news:eVbbiWO%23IHA.4196@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> >>> "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message >>> news:489acc9b$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... >>>> >>>> "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message >>>> news:uFW3Jz$9IHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>> "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message >>>>> news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>>> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >>>>>> >>>>>> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging >>>>>> software and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no >>>>>> problems. Set for quick removal in device manager by XP. >>>>> >>>>> You really can't do this reliably or safely with FireWire devices. >>>>> >>>>> It's supposed to work, but it is known to lead to port destruction, >>>>> the host or remote port or both. >>>>> >>>>> You need to power *everything* off before connecting or disconnecting >>>>> FireWire devices, and turn the peripherals on first. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Absolute rubbish. >>> >>> I wish it was. Unfortunately, personal experience and research into >>> FireWire equipment failures has shown me otherwise. >>> >>>> Firewire connectors are specifically designed to be hot plugged. The >>>> supporting software is written specifically to detect hot connected and >>>> disconnected peripherals. >>> >>> Yes, these things are true as far as design specifications are >>> concerned. >>> >>> But as described below, reality does not quite seem to adhere to these >>> particular design specifications. >>> >> >> [snipped for brevity] >> >> I have used firewire devices of various flavours (including bus powered) >> both professionally and at home. I have never had a failure of either a >> peripheral or a port. I do not know anyone else who has either. > > The absence of this problem from your experience does not mean that the > problem does not exist. > >> The way the firewire connector is designed, it is not possible for any of >> the known interface failure scenarios to cause either half of the >> interface to fail. It would be possible if the 6 pin connecter were to >> be inserted upside down, but it would require more force to get it to >> insert this way (though I gather it's not impossible). >> >> You must be doing something wrong, though I have no idea what it is. > > I used them as intended. They failed. > > Note that at least one manufacturer of FireWire devices has run into the > problem enough times to have found the need to issue a support bulletin > advising against hot plugging, because it can cause permanent port damage > to devices at both ends of the cable. > > It sure isn't just me. If you've been lucky enough to avoid it, well, > you've been lucky. Might I suggest lottery ticket purchases. > I am reminded by a colleage, that we have a firewire interface built into one of our aircraft. In this case, the connection is via a standard aircraft style connector so should be ripe for failure. It can only be connected hot, and no known failure has occured.
Guest M.I.5¾ Posted August 11, 2008 Posted August 11, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message news:%23bVaVRz%23IHA.4816@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > > "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message > news:489be82d$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... >> >> "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message >> news:eVbbiWO%23IHA.4196@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> >>> "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message >>> news:489acc9b$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... >>>> >>>> "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message >>>> news:uFW3Jz$9IHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>> "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message >>>>> news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>>> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >>>>>> >>>>>> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging >>>>>> software and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no >>>>>> problems. Set for quick removal in device manager by XP. >>>>> >>>>> You really can't do this reliably or safely with FireWire devices. >>>>> >>>>> It's supposed to work, but it is known to lead to port destruction, >>>>> the host or remote port or both. >>>>> >>>>> You need to power *everything* off before connecting or disconnecting >>>>> FireWire devices, and turn the peripherals on first. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Absolute rubbish. >>> >>> I wish it was. Unfortunately, personal experience and research into >>> FireWire equipment failures has shown me otherwise. >>> >>>> Firewire connectors are specifically designed to be hot plugged. The >>>> supporting software is written specifically to detect hot connected and >>>> disconnected peripherals. >>> >>> Yes, these things are true as far as design specifications are >>> concerned. >>> >>> But as described below, reality does not quite seem to adhere to these >>> particular design specifications. >>> >> >> [snipped for brevity] >> >> I have used firewire devices of various flavours (including bus powered) >> both professionally and at home. I have never had a failure of either a >> peripheral or a port. I do not know anyone else who has either. > > The absence of this problem from your experience does not mean that the > problem does not exist. > >> The way the firewire connector is designed, it is not possible for any of >> the known interface failure scenarios to cause either half of the >> interface to fail. It would be possible if the 6 pin connecter were to >> be inserted upside down, but it would require more force to get it to >> insert this way (though I gather it's not impossible). >> >> You must be doing something wrong, though I have no idea what it is. > > I used them as intended. They failed. > > Note that at least one manufacturer of FireWire devices has run into the > problem enough times to have found the need to issue a support bulletin > advising against hot plugging, because it can cause permanent port damage > to devices at both ends of the cable. > > It sure isn't just me. If you've been lucky enough to avoid it, well, > you've been lucky. Might I suggest lottery ticket purchases. > I can only assume that there items around that are not properly designed. Anything designed to the letter of the IEEE-1394 (either a or b) should not fail due to hot plugging. I do know that there are suppliers that try their best to *interpret* these things to try and save a cent ot two.
Guest M.I.5¾ Posted August 11, 2008 Posted August 11, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "Pavel A." <pavel_a@12fastmail34.fm> wrote in message news:uHFLehZ%23IHA.4784@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > There were several reports that firewire hard drives do not work well > with Windows, because of defective drivers. > Maybe this is the time for switch to ESATA. > I have not encountered that. In fact firewire drives actually work much better than USB2 drives for a variety of reasons. This is so even though the numerical speed of Firewire (400 Mbps) would appear to be less than the numerical part of USB2 (480 Mbps). The practical upshot for hard disc drives is that the firewire version works between 30 and 50% faster. There was a brief period when hard disc drives were available that had firewire ports built into the bare drive, but these were somewhat specialist items and unlikely to be encountered in the mainstream market. > Regards, > --PA > > > "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message > news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >> >> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging software >> and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no problems. Set >> for quick removal in device manager by XP. >> >> The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never >> finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive >> entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the >> firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard >> disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file >> verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is >> set for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance and >> write caching, all is well for image file verification. >> >> Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. >> >> How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? >> >> How come the disparity in device manager disk drive setting, quick >> removal vs. performance for proper operation? >> >> -- >> Dave >> >>
Guest Walter Wall Posted August 11, 2008 Posted August 11, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message news:489be82d$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... > > "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message > news:eVbbiWO%23IHA.4196@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> >> "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:489acc9b$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... >>> >>> "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message >>> news:uFW3Jz$9IHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>> "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message >>>> news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>>> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >>>>> >>>>> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging >>>>> software and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no >>>>> problems. Set for quick removal in device manager by XP. >>>> >>>> You really can't do this reliably or safely with FireWire devices. >>>> >>>> It's supposed to work, but it is known to lead to port destruction, the >>>> host or remote port or both. >>>> >>>> You need to power *everything* off before connecting or disconnecting >>>> FireWire devices, and turn the peripherals on first. >>>> >>> >>> Absolute rubbish. >> >> I wish it was. Unfortunately, personal experience and research into >> FireWire equipment failures has shown me otherwise. >> >>> Firewire connectors are specifically designed to be hot plugged. The >>> supporting software is written specifically to detect hot connected and >>> disconnected peripherals. >> >> Yes, these things are true as far as design specifications are concerned. >> >> But as described below, reality does not quite seem to adhere to these >> particular design specifications. >> > > [snipped for brevity] > > I have used firewire devices of various flavours (including bus powered) > both professionally and at home. I have never had a failure of either a > peripheral or a port. I do not know anyone else who has either. > > The way the firewire connector is designed, it is not possible for any of > the known interface failure scenarios to cause either half of the > interface to fail. It would be possible if the 6 pin connecter were to be > inserted upside down, but it would require more force to get it to insert > this way (though I gather it's not impossible). > I too am unaware of any firewire failure of a port being hot plugged *where the port conforms to the official specification*. I am aware of failures where parts of the specification have been ignored so they don't count.
Guest Walter Wall Posted August 11, 2008 Posted August 11, 2008 Re: Firewire enclosure replacement "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message news:eVbbiWO%23IHA.4196@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > > "M.I.5¾" <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote in message > news:489acc9b$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net... >> >> "Patrick Keenan" <test@dev.null> wrote in message >> news:uFW3Jz$9IHA.3840@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>> "Lil' Dave" <spamyourself@virus.net> wrote in message >>> news:Oqkdky79IHA.2332@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>>> Recently had to replace a firewire hard drive external enclosure. >>>> >>>> The original, I simply turned it on while in XP, ran my imaging >>>> software and let it verify the image when done. All was normal, no >>>> problems. Set for quick removal in device manager by XP. >>> >>> You really can't do this reliably or safely with FireWire devices. >>> >>> It's supposed to work, but it is known to lead to port destruction, the >>> host or remote port or both. >>> >>> You need to power *everything* off before connecting or disconnecting >>> FireWire devices, and turn the peripherals on first. >>> >> >> Absolute rubbish. > > I wish it was. Unfortunately, personal experience and research into > FireWire equipment failures has shown me otherwise. > >> Firewire connectors are specifically designed to be hot plugged. The >> supporting software is written specifically to detect hot connected and >> disconnected peripherals. > > Yes, these things are true as far as design specifications are concerned. > > But as described below, reality does not quite seem to adhere to these > particular design specifications. > >> >>>> >>>> The replacement, keeps bringing up a bogus new hardware found. Never >>>> finds any driver including internet. I tried removing the hard drive >>>> entry and the SBP entry in device manager. After reboot, I turn the >>>> firewire enclosure on, and it does the same thing all over again. Hard >>>> disk and SBP entries are there, same bogus new hardware. Image file >>>> verification fails everytime on that hard drive when device manager is >>>> set for quick removal for that hard drive. When set for performance >>>> and write caching, all is well for image file verification. >>>> >>>> Same hard drive and firewire cable used on both enclosures. >>>> >>>> How come the new hardware found everytime I turn the enclosure on? >>> >>> Possibly due to damage to the port caused by hot-plugging. You may >>> also need to replace the port on the host PC. >>> >> >> The port cannot be damaged by hot plugging. > > Yes, it can. > > I have sent many FireWire devices to the trash, and for repair if they > were expensive, for precisely this reason. And I know that I am not > alone in this. > >> It is designed precisely to be used in this manner. > > Yes, it is. Unfortunately, FireWire port failures are well documented. > One possible cause can be static discharge *while* hot-plugging. > This would be a clear case of a port not complying with the specification then. The firewire ports are specified as being protected against high levels of static damage. Maybe not quite a lightning strike, but enough for almost every normally encounted scenario.
Recommended Posts