Talk:Hardware-based full disk encryption: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:12, 6 September 2011

Revision as of 01:12, 17 April 2013

Line 35:

:It is always best to include a source for any material added to any article. I reworded your entry to more specifically support the sources you listed. Frankly I could not find the specific mention on the Seagate site to which you discuss. Maybe you can identify the specific entry on that Q&A page to help us also see it. The Forum talk page is not typically a valid source, but I did not want to get into a edit war with you so I left it in until we resolve the issue on the talk page here. Thanks for your consideration. [[user:Music Sorter|'''<span style="font-family:veranda,sans-serif;background:lightblue;color:Blue">&sect;&nbsp;Music&nbsp;Sorter&nbsp;&sect;</span>''']] ([[User talk:Music Sorter#top|talk]]) 09:12, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

==Neutral point of view issues==

This article seems to me to have several issues with its point of view, specifically:

* It spends a great deal of time talking about the manufacturers of hardware-based full disk encryption (HBFDE) compared to HBFDE itself.

* This is purely my own opinion, but I think it's worth mentioning: the article reads like an advertisement one might find in a magazine, that is written in a style such that it will get mistaken for a magazine article. In other words, it's an advertisement that looks like a Wikipedia article, and gets around looking like an advertisement by mentioning more than one manufacturer.

* There is no discussion of any drawbacks of hardware-based disk encryption. While I am not well-versed enough in the technology to know what those drawbacks would be, I've never come across anything that had zero drawbacks. Does this cost more? Is it more labor-intensive to install? [[User:Lioux|Lioux]] ([[User talk:Lioux|talk]]) 01:12, 17 April 2013 (UTC)