[ubuntu-uk] Bug #1 and onwards....

[Gareth France]

A brutal viewpoint however it does end in a classic 'I told you so' moment.

On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Barry Drake <ubuntu-advertising at gmx.com>wrote:

> On 12/11/11 17:03, alan c wrote:
>
>> Yes, sorry, I was too vague, SMART errors. I explained to her at the time
>> that we were not looking at her Windows, and this was information from the
>> drive itself. And then later her son connected remotely, to Windows
>> presumably, looked at the file system, saw nothing untoward, and rubbished
>> Ubuntu.
>>
> I came across this last year.  I bought a secondhand drive from Amazon.
>  Ubuntu immediately condemned it - it had close to the maximum of relocated
> sectors.  Windows, however, didn't tell me anything!  Obviously I got in
> touch with Amazon who gave me a full refund and told me to dump the drive.
>  The seller seems to have disappeared from Amazon's list!  They would have
> got away with it if I were a Windows user, as a few folk still seem to be.
>
> I'm told by a friend who was a developer on NTFS that it is an excellent
> filesystem, misused by the overarching operating system.  It only fragments
> because its potential was never properly implemented.  I tend to believe
> this.
>
> Maybe your friend ought to have been allowed to ignore the SMART test.
>  The Ubuntu knocker would have had egg on his face in a month or two when
> the drive dies catastrophically!
>
> Regards,        Barry.
>
> --
> Barry Drake is a member of the the Ubuntu Advertising team.
> http://ubuntuadverts.org/
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-uk at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/**mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk<https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/**UKTeam/ <https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-uk/attachments/20111112/1d24747b/attachment.html>