|
Heners_UK posted:Was just wondering if eSata would be a safer bet in this regard? I dislike eSata connectors so I can never recommend it. They took the barely robust enough for internal use SATA connector, strengthened it slightly, and called it a day. And by “they” I mean the mishmash of random dodgy companies who made eSata into a de facto standard which was later picked up by the committee when it became clear that the hack was too popular to ignore and should be formalized for better interoperability.
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2019 23:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:50 |
|
|
BobHoward posted:I dislike eSata connectors so I can never recommend it. They took the barely robust enough for internal use SATA connector, strengthened it slightly, and called it a day. And by “they” I mean the mishmash of random dodgy companies who made eSata into a de facto standard which was later picked up by the committee when it became clear that the hack was too popular to ignore and should be formalized for better interoperability. I'll probably just steer clear of them then. I do find myself wishing for robust, long term attached external storage cases which are not separate NASes (i.e. what I linked to above but with a connection that's actually liked). However, I'm a fringe case that seems to like seeing just how much I can get out of one PC.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2019 23:56
|
|
|
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW posted:I live in Mustamäe, which is a poor-ish part of Estonia. There's parts of Estonia that have some of the best internet in the world, but not in my specific section. It's DSL speeds at best in my house. It's my fault for living in the middle of nowhere in a place where your odds of getting stabbed at night by a drunken teenager are 80% but that's a different story. So that's why it's not so easy for me to re-download 8TB when a drive dies. I'd guess that your Internet connection is not much worse than mine (~25/5) here in a major metropolitan area of the US (where technically there might be some faster options but I don't have FTTH as one of them) and my 4G LTE connection is indeed also likely faster than my home connection. Also, apropos of nothing, one of the game streamers I watch happens to be in/around Tallinn, so it's amusing at least that you mentioned that. WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW posted:I absolutely could take out some of those 4TB internal drives and replace them with 8TB drives. But I am not sure why that is necessary? Is it just to keep everything nice inside a case? I mean hells yeah I'd rather have that then a bunch of stupid USB drives plugged into the back of my PC. I do enjoy things looking neat and tidy. But the only computer case ever that I saw holds more than 13 drives was the Lian Li PC-D8000 which will hold 20 internal hard drives but it hasn't been available for years and the last time it was on eBay I got outbid and it ended up ending at $600 USD! For a case that used to retail for $250! So others kind of got to this first, but yeah replacing those lower-capacity drives with the higher-capacity ones you already have is for convenience/efficiency/practicality. When you're already dealing with 8+ TB HDDs, also having to work around 4 TB or lower drives just wastes bays in your desktop and creates extra complexity out of it. Having 6+ external power supplies will create issues of their own, and there is a limit to the number of USB devices that can be connected to a host, actually. It's lower for USB3 than for USB2, and isn't as simple as "127 devices" or whatever because a single piece of hardware can actually be multiple "devices" as far as the host is concerned. I haven't been able to find out more details on this subject, but I've run into the limit on my gaming desktop, which has a few hubs and quite a few devices connected (the Oculus Rift alone is 3 physical connections and likely takes up more resources than that, for example.) Limiting the number of external drives when you do have the internal space available will reduce the possible points of failure and reduce the complexity of your setup (why wouldn't you want to replace the 4 lowest-capacity HDDs with the single 10 TB drive that you already have? That would free up 3 bays in your desktop alone!) For another case, or a second PC, you don't need that 20-bay tower or any ridiculous enterprise server hardware; pretty much anything cheap will be an improvement over your current situation. For example, it's common for schools and businesses here to auction off old hardware, and an old tower that holds 8-12 3.5" bays with say a Sandy Bridge CPU would be a good, cheap start. It would be able to gobble up all the external drives you already have, for starters. Hardware that's quite that old would be hard to find nowadays, so a cheap case off eBay and almost any PC transported to it would suffice. The OS doesn't even really matter, use whatever's familiar to you. Ideally, all your "main" content would be on the current desktop running PMS, and the second system could hold, as I mentioned, backups and maybe original files for those that have been compressed. WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW posted:I don't care about having so many drives, it seems like you're mad about it for some reason? I don't care if I have 75 drives. All I wanted to know is how to use a spare drive or two to save my data if one of my drives died. I have no issues with USB 3.0 speed and I have no idea what your issues with me are. I never said I have a problem, you did in your last sentence. I don't see data hoarding as a problem. Hoarding newspapers or empty Chinese food containers is a problem. All I asked was advice on a software RAID-like solution to help me from single disk failure and you're making me out to be like I'm an rear end in a top hat or something for some reason. Just to reinforce what I was getting at above, each drive takes up space, consumes power, and requires system resources (including physical connections.) It's one thing to have and need a bunch of max-capacity drives (i.e. 14 or 16 TB) for a business purpose, but you have an easily-identified problem and solution: a bunch of low-capacity drives that can be swapped out and condensed by higher-capacity ones. It'd be one thing to consolidate every pair of 4 TB HDDs with a single 8 TB, but as above you have lower-capacity drives that can be swapped out for affordable 10 TB or greater HDDs. It's not even something that you have to do all at once: I'd definitely get those 7 external drives shucked and swapped into the desktop*, but then going forwards I count 5 more 4 TB drives that can be swapped out at your convenience. And then, as I already wrote, you can re-purpose the 4 TB drives for backups or whatever. It's actually good practice to gradually swap out older/less capacious drives, as the older ones age and you'll get your money's worth out of them while the newer ones (assuming they don't fail prematurely) go into service as you need them (as opposed to having several unnecessary drives start to accrue wear before you're ready to use them.) *I'm not even averse to USB3 drives in general, but 7 of them is excessive even for me, on top of the 13 drives already in your system. WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW posted:OK well this is my first time finding out that USB is more likely to get data corruption than SATA. So, now I understand. I assumed everyone was telling me USB was bad because it's slower. USB3 is nominally slower than SATA3, but neither is a meaningful bottleneck for any single HDD; both will bottleneck SSDs, but the only performance limitation you'll see with HDDs is when multiple drives saturate the connection simultaneously. The SMART diagnostics issue isn't really seen in "contemporary" enclosures; in my experience modern SATA-USB3 and legacy PATA-USB2 enclosures have all worked fine and passed SMART data as expected, but the PATA-USB3 cable I have does not and user comments on similar products suggests they have the same issue. 65-70° C is far higher than I've ever seen on any HDD or SSD.  Usually ~55° is on the high side. I'm assuming this has something to do with your ambient temperature, but remember each HDD draws power and radiates it in the form of heat, so having more drives than necessary also has this as a downside. In the Google study I read from about a decade ago, they actually found less of a correlation between heat and drive failure, but it was more about drive temperatures that were too low as opposed to too high (and IIRC ~60° C was the upper boundary they recorded.) Basically I'd conclude that HDDs, like any other functional component have a proper operating temperature that's a range rather than an upper boundary - but 60°+ is definitely too high.mystes posted:That's quite cheap but the glacier pricing is so complicated. How do people generally approach using it for backups? As far as I can tell it's only ideal for holding stuff you need to retain but aren't likely to have to retrieve, especially if you have other backups - Glacier seems fine as an emergency offsite backup. I work at a hospital, where we're legally required to retain some things for 5-7 years, but we never have to retrieve them unless there's an audit or something rare like that. I could see Glacier being ideal for storing things like financial records that you wouldn't need unless audited, old case files, etc. Heners_UK posted:Was just wondering if eSata would be a safer bet in this regard? I mentioned this several months ago (not sure which thread at this point) but I wasn't able to get eSATA to work at all. I tried at least 2 different PCs, both PATA and SATA drives, at least 4 different enclosures/solutions including an eSATA-USB3 cable; in no combination was any eSATA connection even acknowledged by the host PC, despite proper configuration. Even if it worked, though, it was only going to be useful for removing the bottleneck of those PATA drives by USB2 solutions; otherwise, I'd use USB3 (with UASP) even for SSDs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 02:44
|
|
|
Heners_UK posted:I'll probably just steer clear of them then. You want external SAS with an expander.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 03:15
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:They are both packetized protocols, and both detect errors by computing and checking CRC values. When a receiver gets a packet with a bad CRC, it sends a negative acknowledgement packet back, which causes the transmitter to retry. Thanks for the good info! That’s comforting to know that their error checking is comparable. Your point on the two stages of conversion is a good consideration. Having said that and as you also mention, USB’s external factor, plus USB cables being potentially dodgy, plus an enclosure being a heat trap, etc. etc. make me uncomfortable with USB as a permanent storage solution and factor into the ‘raft of reasons’ I was alluding to. I mean my experience is also with lovely enclosures, but some of those issues aren’t rectified by good ones.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 03:54
|
|
|
I'm so glad that I'm not a media hoarder anymore like when I was a kid. I've been using a RAIDZ2 setup with 5.5TB since I first set up my FreeNAS box four years ago and I'm still only at about 40% full.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 05:39
|
|
|
Heners_UK posted:I'll probably just steer clear of them then. Thunderbolt is very reliable for this if you're in the mac ecosystem. Promise Pegasus, Akitio enclosures, etc. USB4 should fix a lot of these issues, from my understanding it's rebranded/extended Thunderbolt 3 and an open standard so it'll make these enclosures a lot cheaper and widely available. e: extra word ee: maybe it is time for a new OP. the third posting is "i love mdadm  ", there's no mention of checksumming and striping two 20GB Quantum Fireballs for extra space and performance is no longer state of the art. no wonder people are asking to run a RAID5 across 12 internal and 8 external drives. 
eames fucked around with this message at 15:52 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 08:11
|
|
|
I want to thank everyone who replied to me, even if just to make fun. Especially Atomizer; your last post was awesome and informative. Yes, I've moved the externals so they are at 50 degrees or so now. I read someone say online to stack the externals one on top of the other instead of standing up as a way to reduce chance of one tipping over, but it turned out that's what made them run so hot. Now that they are standing vertical and with a few inches of space between them, they are all in the low 50s. I don't want to derail the thread any more, and I figured the least I could do was finish this mess with explaining what I am planning on doing after all of this reading and posting. I've settled on going with SnapRAID and Stablebit Scanner for my setup. From what I am reading on the SnapRAID forums, there are a lot of people in my position and they are using SnapRAID for the exact same reason I would want to: to protect me from single-disc failure. They seem to have zero issues with mixing USB and SATA, which is great. Apparently I am just supposed to set SnapRAID up to scan once a day, preferably on drives that don't have constantly-changing data, and that's pretty much it. Stablebit Scanner will send me an e-mail if it notices any SMART data reporting issues. I find that to be a huge deal, because my entire life of hoarding I've never had a Western Digital drive just die on me out of nowhere. There would always be little things I'd start noticing, like the drive being slow as hell, files not copying to it properly, Windows errors etc. and I was always able to pull 99% of my data off of it. I know this is anecdotal, but every Seagate that I had die just completely bit the dust with no warning. Like it would disappear from Windows never to be seen again. Luckily all of my hard drives are now Western Digital, so I think Stablebit Scanner is going to be a godsend. The 2nd thing I plan to do is slowly start taking all the 4tb drives out of my machine and replacing them with 8tb ones as some posters here recommended. The reason I even have a 1TB drive in my tower is because I have a couple home security camera programs that are constantly writing video files to the hard drive and I didn't want it doing that to a 4-8tb drive that had other data on it, figuring that 1tb drive isn't going to live long as it's being accessed and written to 24 hours a day. I could not care less if that drive dies, and I don't want to use anything bigger because I'm too nervous to store other files on it. As for why I am waiting a bit before swapping the 4TBs with the 8TBs, it's because I'd rather not shuck the remaining 8TB USB ones just yet because I usually snap something on the case when trying to shuck which means I void the warranty. So I'll wait about a year, then take all of the drives out of the WD enclosures, and put them in the tower. And the reason I did not just do this from the beginning was because WD for some reason charges more for internal drives than external. If the internal drives were $130USD for 8TB I would have bought all internals and took out my 4TB drives long ago. After this is all said and done I just hope my mental illness doesn't tempt me to just plug in the 4TBs externally for the extra space! frh fucked around with this message at 13:28 on Mar 29, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 12:56
|
|
|
H110Hawk posted:This is basically AWS 101. The moment you cross the boundary of AWS services out into the public it costs you an arm and a leg. Within AWS itself things are much cheaper, but it's not like that helps you in this case. Their bandwidth numbers are highway robbery. Yeah AWS is basically The Hotel California, you can check out any time you want, but you can never leave. I think all the cloud providers way overcharge for bandwidth, it's their form of vendor lock-in. Using snowball to extricate your data is decent savings though, compared to paying their bandwidth prices. 50 TB out of AWS via Snowball: $1700 50 TB out of AWS via Internet: ~$4300
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 14:53
|
|
|
Still considering going the ready-made route with one of the Synology boxes. I'm totally new to this kind of things. What are my options for having it automatically creating and maintaining an off-site backup of a couple terabytes of data?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 16:46
|
|
|
ringu0 posted:Still considering going the ready-made route with one of the Synology boxes. I'm totally new to this kind of things. What are my options for having it automatically creating and maintaining an off-site backup of a couple terabytes of data? Basically whatever you want. If you want versioning I would go with something like Backblaze B2. 1-way sync (upload only), and in Backblaze tell it to maintain versions for 30 days on the bucket. https://www.synology.com/en-global/dsm/6.2/software_spec/dsm control-f "Cloud Sync" (I don't know why they make it so hard to find.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 18:25
|
|
|
H110Hawk posted:Basically whatever you want. If you want versioning I would go with something like Backblaze B2. 1-way sync (upload only), and in Backblaze tell it to maintain versions for 30 days on the bucket. Thanks! I considered Backblaze B2, but didn't figure out if that license is separate from Backblaze desktop. Will look again. e: ... and it looks like it's a separate product. So I guess I can sign up for B2 and skip their desktop solution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 19:54
|
|
|
ringu0 posted:Thanks! I considered Backblaze B2, but didn't figure out if that license is separate from Backblaze desktop. Will look again. It's their S3 competitor. Great if you are doing things like Mac Time Machine backups to your synology, or just store all of your precious stuff on the synology directly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 20:35
|
|
|
H110Hawk posted:It's their S3 competitor. Great if you are doing things like Mac Time Machine backups to your synology, or just store all of your precious stuff on the synology directly. That's an accurate description of what I want to accomplish. B2 it is then, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 20:46
|
|
|
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW posted:I am in fact intrigued by your idea of the low-powered 2nd PC as a file server, though. Is there some sort of box that will take 8 or so hard drives that I would run Linux on or something? I know of NAS devices of course, but the reason I went with a Windows PC was because it's what I already had, I use it to run games, and I have it set up with all sorts of stuff like Handbrake and automated tasks and Steam games, so while yeah it is taking up more electricity than a NAS box, it's doing a lot more and I don't have a gaming PC on that most people do, so I feel like it evens out. What would this 2nd low-powered PC with all my external drives shucked and installed into it accomplish anyway? I am not trying to be snarky; I am genuinely asking. Is there a benefit beyond it looking nicer? You already made your decision, but I'd like to give my view on this question. Biggest reason for having a separate file server is not to be limited to Windows. You would have all these option, Unraid/FreeNAS/Linux/MDADM/LVM/ZFS, and you can choose the best storage method for your needs. Another major benefit is the ability to put it in the basement or some closet, out of sight and out of hearing. Then it won't matter that much how much noise and heat it generates or how unsightly it looks. You had a problem of finding a case that could fit all your drives. I wouldn't have even tried, I would have just split the drives in two cases, remove the side panels and but them facing each other. If I wanted to be fancy I might have bolted the cases together with hinges. Below is a picture of my setup from 11 years ago. Cheap and worked just fine for all those years. That case is still serving the same duty, but with bigger drives I could fit them all internally. I just cut a hole for 14cm fan in front of the harddrive cage. The PC doesn't need much, just enough SATA ports or PCIe slots. I've often used a left over machine after upgrading my desktop. If you at some point put the large drives internally you will have bunch of smaller drives you can use to learn alternative systems. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 20:48
|
|
|
Cursed storage
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
Saukkis posted:You already made your decision, but I'd like to give my view on this question. Biggest reason for having a separate file server is not to be limited to Windows. You would have all these option, Unraid/FreeNAS/Linux/MDADM/LVM/ZFS, and you can choose the best storage method for your needs. The perspective of that picture is perfect; for half a moment I thought you'd somehow managed to build a gigantic computer along with full-size-rack-mounted individual hard drives.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 23:24
|
|
|
Now I wanna build one too. To hell with these cases when 4 pillars screwed on a board would do. Don't even need a fan.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 00:14
|
|
|
What would be really cool is building/scavenging a 19U rack and turning the whole thing into a giant open air server. It'd be like having your own mainframe, except a million times stupider
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 02:43
|
|
|
But then you'd realize that you're wasting cooling by cooling down the hot exhaust air. So then you'd have to seal the sides of the racks and duct all the hot air out of the room.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 02:46
|
|
|
xzzy posted:But then you'd realize that you're wasting cooling by cooling down the hot exhaust air. What if you just duct yourself into an insulated bubble with AC, that'd be easier to cool
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 03:06
|
|
|
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW posted:I want to thank everyone who replied to me, even if just to make fun. Especially Atomizer; your last post was awesome and informative. Yes, I've moved the externals so they are at 50 degrees or so now. I read someone say online to stack the externals one on top of the other instead of standing up as a way to reduce chance of one tipping over, but it turned out that's what made them run so hot. Now that they are standing vertical and with a few inches of space between them, they are all in the low 50s. Drives tipping over might be a legitimate concern if you can't put them somewhere out-of-the-way, but stacking them together, even side-by-side will transfer heat between them and cause it to build up. You want space between them, even if the air isn't flowing heavily. Think about how a heatsink works, with a bunch of fins and a lot of surface area. WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW posted:The reason I even have a 1TB drive in my tower is because I have a couple home security camera programs that are constantly writing video files to the hard drive and I didn't want it doing that to a 4-8tb drive that had other data on it, figuring that 1tb drive isn't going to live long as it's being accessed and written to 24 hours a day. I could not care less if that drive dies, and I don't want to use anything bigger because I'm too nervous to store other files on it. That's totally fine, and you can continue using that drive for that purpose; just throw it in one of the enclosures from a shucked drive and use it externally. That way it's even easier to replace when it dies. WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW posted:As for why I am waiting a bit before swapping the 4TBs with the 8TBs, it's because I'd rather not shuck the remaining 8TB USB ones just yet because I usually snap something on the case when trying to shuck which means I void the warranty. So I'll wait about a year, then take all of the drives out of the WD enclosures, and put them in the tower. And the reason I did not just do this from the beginning was because WD for some reason charges more for internal drives than external. If the internal drives were $130USD for 8TB I would have bought all internals and took out my 4TB drives long ago. The laws in your country may vary (and I'd suspect the EU has some strong consumer protections regarding things like this) but in the US a product warranty can't be voided just from opening up and trying to repair your products yourself (e.g. repairing your own car, or taking it to a 3rd-party mechanic.) Companies will threaten that your warranty will be void, but that may actually be false in Estonia (like it is here.) The "internal drives are cheaper" is a known annoyance. It has something to do with: being able to charge businesses more for known drives (whereas external ones aren't guaranteed and can vary,) having surplus drives that they want to move via selling them for less as externals, etc. WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW posted:After this is all said and done I just hope my mental illness doesn't tempt me to just plug in the 4TBs externally for the extra space! Like I said you can totally continue to use the old drives, but put them in a single tower instead of continuing to deal with several externals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 07:20
|
|
|
I just bought my first NAS (DS418play) and two 8TB externals to shuck (WD My Book 8 TB). I intend to use it mainly as a plex server, and as storage for backups of my old games, I have important files stored/backed up elsewhere. I'd rather not lose a large amount of data, but it isn't the end of the world if I do. I was thinking of using Synology's hybrid raid, unless there's a better alternative. Is there anything I'm missing, or any information/advice I should know? Thanks. Full disclaimer: I have watched two episodes of that 70's show in my life, but I can assure you I will not be storing half a terabyte of the show, nor any amount of the show anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
Ohhai posted:I just bought my first NAS (DS418play) and two 8TB externals to shuck (WD My Book 8 TB). At 2 disks raid1 or shr are your options. When you get to 4 disks your maximum capacity is your 3 smallest disks (roughly) with shr or half with raid1. I would use shr.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 18:12
|
|
|
H110Hawk posted:At 2 disks raid1 or shr are your options. When you get to 4 disks your maximum capacity is your 3 smallest disks (roughly) with shr or half with raid1. I would use shr. That's what I thought/was hoping, thanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 18:23
|
|
|
Ohhai posted:Full disclaimer: I have watched two episodes of that 70's show in my life, but I can assure you I will not be storing half a terabyte of the show, nor any amount of the show anywhere. This is the packrat thread. Just you wait.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
 amazon.ca and bestbuy.ca have 8TB Elements for 199.99. Usually 229 up here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 21:12
|
|
|
It's been awhile since I did the whole packrat thing. Shucking shouldn't be a thing. Synology is good. 1080p is much larger than the SD files I use to deal with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 22:43
|
|
|
Duck and Cover posted:Shucking shouldn't be a thing. I'd rather it wasn't as it's a bit of an arse and I remember when drives cost what they cost, but can't argue with cheap hard drives
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2019 23:53
|
|
|
Duck and Cover posted:It's been awhile since I did the whole packrat thing. Shucking shouldn't be a thing. Synology is good. 1080p is much larger than the SD files I use to deal with. Shucking is just silly, but the problem is, it's by far the best way to get the best drives (HGST designed, WD branded helium filled drives) for the absolute lowest cost. I don't know why the price delta persists, but as long as it does, we'll be collecting stacks of empty Western Digital external drive enclosures.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2019 11:41
|
|
|
Its been a while since I posted in here, but I ended up selling my MD1000 Array and transferring into a SuperMicro case with a Quad AMD Opteron, its running FreeNAS Corral. Its running a Docker Plex instance for media streaming. Pretty happy with it. Its also serving iSCSI shares for my SuperMicro Quad 16 core Opteron box and my IBM Bladecenter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
Can I mount CIFS shares to folders in /media on a Synology NAS? What about local drives?
KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Apr 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 00:27
|
|
|
https://www.synology.com/en-us/knowledgebase/DSM/help/FileStation/mountremotevolume
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 01:23
|
|
|
I have decided all NAS owners be legally mandated to own a copy of Cleopatra 2525. Let me sell you on it; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2ZRSwul7cE
Duck and Cover fucked around with this message at 06:51 on Apr 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 06:42
|
|
|
Hey guys, thanks for your help, I got it all working, and only managed to cut myself once trying to shuck a drive with a Stanley knife. Time to blow a terabyte on x-files and buffy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 14:32
|
|
|
Pro-Tip right here guys: Don't use knives to shuck your drives. Instead take an old credit card and cut it up into halves or quarters. You'll get cut less this way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 15:01
|
|
|
Guitar picks also work in my experience and are useful for taking phones/tablets apart too, if you ever find yourself doing that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 15:49
|
|
|
Chinese sellers on ebay will sell you a bag full of assorted spudgers, screwdrivers, pry tools and suction cups for next-to-gently caress-all. It's worth picking some up before you need them just so you have them to hand.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 16:12
|
|
|
I held onto a few old gift cards for this purpose. Also yes, ebay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 21:50 |
|
|
100% Dundee posted:Pro-Tip right here guys: Don't use knives to shuck your drives. Instead take an old credit card and cut it up into halves or quarters. You'll get cut less this way. I still got injured.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2019 17:07
|
|