Sorry but, though that was true at one time, it is certainly not true now. Yes, at some levels of complexity, a drive may choke, but for casual use it is not a problem and, in any event, wouldn't result in corruption. Bus speeds are so great now that most modern computers can handle a huge amount of data transfer to drives. Seek times have similarly improved and, with a large enough buffer in the drive, simply aren't an issue. And, of course, with SSDs, seek times aren't a factor at all. Nonetheless, it is still good practice to keep audio and video data on a separate drive.
Oy. First of all, eSATA means "external SATA." You meant just "SATA," which is the standard in current computers. You also meant 7200 rpm (as opposed to 5400 rpm). However, rotational speed doesn't give a true picture of how quickly a drive can read and write data. Other factors include bus speed (SATA can range from 1.5 to 6 gbps), seek time and buffer size.
It might, depending on the factors I mentioned about. There are some 7200 rpm SATA drives that perform poorly compared to some 5400 rpm SATA drives. "eSATA" refers to the type of port, not the drive. And, as I mentioned "external eSATA" is redundant.
Ah, a Mac user. That explains a lot.
That is utter nonsense. Firewire was a video standard for more than a decade, and has lost favor only because of the additional costs associated with the interface. USB 2.0 is perfectly adequate for many applications, and USB 3.0 is faster than 3 Gbps SATA and only slightly slower than 6 Gbps SATA. All these interfaces -- SATA, Firewire and USB -- are stable, reliable and will function perfectly well for real time recording.
Thank you PT'
I was a bit suspicious of the original post but being more valve jockey than PC guru I was loathe to comment.
Dave.
