GUID vs. APM partition scheme question
 

I'm gonna be working on a G5 system and bringing hard drives with me. Is it correct that only APM partitioned drives will record with a G5 and GUID formatted drives will fail?

OK, if so, is there any downside when bringing an APM partitioned drive to an Intel mac?

Am I better off formatting the drive GUID and simply use it as a transfer drive (no recording to the drive)? THIS DRIVE WILL NEVER be a boot drive, NEVER have an operating system on it. Data only.

Is there a BENEFIT to having the drive as GUID?

Is there a down side to having the drive as APM (working on intel) ?

Does it matter -- should I just cover my ass and format as APM and keep working?

Never really thought about this before -- since I never tried to record to an external drive....

Thx in advance for the guidance.

J

Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question
 

APM is the way to go, work on both, PPC an Intel.

For some reasons you will need to record on it, so go for APM.

JC

Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question
 

Whilst this is true for a transfer only drive as the OP specified, I should point out that Digitechsupt have stated quite clearly in a number of threads that using APM partition schemes on Intel mac audio drives and vice versa can/will cause disk errors. If you have to move a drive between PPC/Intel then use APM, but for audio and system drives use APM for PPC and GUID for intel.

Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question
 

Still confused.

I see my options as:

1. make the drive GUID. ONLY use it as a transfer drive. Period.
2. make the drive APM. If I have to record to it on PPC, it will work great, but may have record issues on Intel - but works great for transfer on both platforms.

What would you do -- My HD rig is G5.
Outside studio is Intel.

We plan on tracking to their internal drives, and these external drives will only be for transfer. That's the plan right now.

SO -- maybe #2 is my better choice? IF we wanted to record to this on my G5 rig, we could, but it will definitely work for transfer, yes?

Thanks for your guidance. I have also discovered other threads around the net on this, and there are usually circumstances specific to each person's workflow. Thanks to all for sharing.

J

Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question
 

Yes I think APM is the way to go in your scenario. You shouldn't have any problems using it as a transfer drive.

I've got a number of old APM partitioned firewire drives which I've never updated to GUID and have even recorded them a few times without errors - it's just not recommended by AVID.

Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question
 

Hi Jeremy,

Since it is so easy today to format drives, and drives and enclosures themselves are so cheap, I'd just create an APM drive, do what needs doing on it and then just reformat it GUID (or preserve it for times when G5s are being used) - after xfering the data, of course. At the school where I work as a Mac Tech, we service over 100 macs iMacs and Mac Pros with PT on them, and for quick re-formats and xfers we use several of these

http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/Newer...ard_Drive_Dock

(we have the Voyager Q's) and keep stacks of raw drives of various formats. I've even been known to use the bay itself as the main connection point for record drives on my rig at home. No glitches, no problems. We've found these enclosures to be really stable, and can even be used to externally boot machines without issue. Just my 2¢!

Best

Nathan

Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question
 

Hi Nathan,

Yes, I have a couple of docks... but for transfer, I prefer to use the AWC Mercury Elite AL Pro case, since they have a quad interface, and are pretty much the sure-thing.

We also have to deliver the production drives to the label when we're done (by contract) and I don't want any FUps for a few $ saved.

I think these drives will be APM.

Thanks for all the guidance on this.

Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question
 

Ah... this changes things. And makes perfect sense. IMO, you're right - APM is the way to go, then.

Best

Nathan

Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question
 

Every project I've worked on in the last year has been APM shuttling between outside studios and my place on mostly MacIntels (I'm on a MacPro PT8.1) - I probably have 50 APM drives here, mostly large projects/high sample rate - no issues whatsoever with this formatting.

best,
rich

Re: GUID vs. APM partition scheme question
 

Just got done pulling my hair out over an upgrade to our 8 drive fibre channel raid. We had been using this raid with a G5 HD system for 4 years and a year ago moved to an Intel machine. It was APM and had no problems. Worked fine on both. HOWEVER, drive size vs the number of partitions can be a tricky variable which I found out the hard way. When we replaced the old drives with larger ones things got bad. What I found works is that you don't want to partition a large drive into more than 3 partitions. When you hit 4 or more all hell can break loose in both GUID and APM setups. We're currently GUID and it works fine on our intel. But we can work off an APM drive as well. Just be careful if you partition.