Inferior drives?

Andrew J. Rozsa · Aug 28, 2006

I was reading a reply to an article here in which the writer mentioned
"inferior" drives. Well, looks like I have a bunch of them (Maxtor,
LaCie). C/NET Reviews show LaCie as Editor's Best Choice.

What's a SUPERIOR drive? Or, what makes a drive superior? It used to
be MTBF. Does that still apply to 7200 or 1000 rpm drives on 24/7 and
with most of us swapping systems every 2-3 years? Are WD drives ok?
Have at least 4 of those. Just put a 160 Gig Seagate in my boy's box.

How does one know?

Best,

Andrew

Rod Speed · Aug 28, 2006

Andrew J. Rozsa said:
I was reading a reply to an article here in which the writer mentioned
"inferior" drives. Well, looks like I have a bunch of them (Maxtor, LaCie).

Yep, you do.

C/NET Reviews show LaCie as Editor's Best Choice.

Thats just on the obvious stuff, not the reliability.

What's a SUPERIOR drive? Or, what makes a drive superior?

In my opinion quiet is important, then cool runnning.

I use Samsungs for that reason.

It used to be MTBF. Does that still apply to 7200 or 1000 rpm drives
on 24/7 and with most of us swapping systems every 2-3 years?

Except in the sense that MTBF was never useful for picking reliable drives.

Are WD drives ok? Have at least 4 of those.

I avoid them myself, partly because the reliability isnt
great, and because of their stupid jumper config.

Just put a 160 Gig Seagate in my boy's box.

How does one know?

See how it shows in the storagereview reliability database.

Fabien LE LEZ · Aug 28, 2006

I was reading a reply to an article here in which the writer mentioned
"inferior" drives. Well, looks like I have a bunch of them (Maxtor,
LaCie). C/NET Reviews show LaCie as Editor's Best Choice.

Note that LaCie doesn't manufacture hard disks. They just make boxes
to transform a IDE internal hard disk into an external one.
Unfortunately, it seems that the design of these boxes is faulty,
since they don't allow enough cooling, and thus make the hard disks
overheat.

For internal hard drives, Seagate, Western Digital and Samsung seem
pretty reliable. However, whatever the brand, you might get the bad
one of the lot.
I've had trouble with a Seagate; other have had trouble with other
brands. You never know.
I have more than ten "older" (i.e. before May 2005) Maxtor hard disks
(home + work), from 120 to 250 GB, and all work well. But I've had
three post-May-2005 250-GB Maxtor hard disks (apparently from the same
line), and the three were faulty -- for two of them, I couldn't even
format them.

No hard disk is really reliable, so make frequent backups, and use
RAID when necessary.
Usually, a hard disk that has worked perfectly 24/7 for a few months
can be considered a bit more reliable than the others.

Fabien LE LEZ · Aug 28, 2006

I avoid them myself, partly because the reliability isnt
great, and because of their stupid jumper config.

Never seen a IBM hard disk? ;-)

Rod Speed · Aug 28, 2006

Fabien LE LEZ said:
Never seen a IBM hard disk? ;-)

The WDs are even more stupid with a different jumper
config for only drive on the cable and master of a pair.

Arno Wagner · Aug 28, 2006

Previously Andrew J. Rozsa said:
I was reading a reply to an article here in which the writer mentioned
"inferior" drives. Well, looks like I have a bunch of them (Maxtor,
LaCie). C/NET Reviews show LaCie as Editor's Best Choice.

C/NET shows itself to be incompetent when a more indepth appreciation
is needed to evaluate a product.

What's a SUPERIOR drive? Or, what makes a drive superior?

There are none. But there are ACCEPTABLE ones.

It used to
be MTBF. Does that still apply to 7200 or 1000 rpm drives on 24/7 and
with most of us swapping systems every 2-3 years?

Not really. The MTBFs are so high today that they are not really that
meaningful for a single-disk (or smal number of disks) installation.
The problem is that the MTBF only holds for certain operating
conditions and that some vendors are very generous in classifying
a failure.

Are WD drives ok?

No. They are so bad that WD had to create a special RAID line,
because their drives frequently take so much time for
error recovery that they drop out of RAID arrays. No other vendor
has this problem. But WD is also the only vendor besides
Samsung (who is a relative newcomer with good quality drives)
that does not manage to make SCSI disks. Of course they claim
they are not necessary today, but the is BS.

Have at least 4 of those. Just put a 160 Gig Seagate in my boy's box.

How does one know?

Experience, intuition, filtering out information from FUD in
this newsgroup.

My present take:

Maxtor: Reliable only when cooled well. Failure usualy gradual.
(personal experience, I have about 40 running for >3 years
now)
WD: Has problems. High speed, low reliability. Can fail catastrophically.
Samsung: Very quiet, overall seem to be reliable
Seagate: Not quite as quiet, seem to be reliable except for some
specific models (info from Odie, see his postings).
Hitachi: Seem reliable for the newer models. Don't know about noise.

Arno

Arno Wagner · Aug 28, 2006

Never seen a IBM hard disk? ;-)

They were very good, until the 75GXP hit the market. It seems
the newer Hitachi ones are fine too. The problem was IBM lying
about the issues.

Arno

John Turco · Aug 29, 2006

Arno said:
No. They are so bad that WD had to create a special RAID line,
because their drives frequently take so much time for
error recovery that they drop out of RAID arrays. No other vendor
has this problem. But WD is also the only vendor besides
Samsung (who is a relative newcomer with good quality drives)
that does not manage to make SCSI disks. Of course they claim
they are not necessary today, but the is BS.

<edited>

Hello, Arno:

Western Digital >did< manufacture SCSI hard disks, once upon a time.

Cordially,
John Turco <[email protected]>

Andrew J. Rozsa · Aug 29, 2006

:
:|My present take:
:|
:|Maxtor: Reliable only when cooled well. Failure usualy gradual.
:| (personal experience, I have about 40 running for >3 years
:| now)
:|WD: Has problems. High speed, low reliability. Can fail catastrophically.
:|Samsung: Very quiet, overall seem to be reliable
:|Seagate: Not quite as quiet, seem to be reliable except for some
:| specific models (info from Odie, see his postings).
:|Hitachi: Seem reliable for the newer models. Don't know about noise.

Thanks, Arno. This seems to be most people's opinion.

I guess it's time to start transferring data.

Look at this from Pricewatch:

Samsung HD400LD 400GB 7200rpm 8MB Cache EIDE Ultra ATA100 HARD DRIVE

InterProShop.com
800-226-7216
Fremont , CA

Price - $142.90
Ship - free ups ground

Is this possible, or too good to be true? This looks dirt cheap to me.
;-/

Best,

Andrew

Rod Speed · Aug 29, 2006

Andrew J. Rozsa said:
Thanks, Arno. This seems to be most people's opinion.

I guess it's time to start transferring data.

Look at this from Pricewatch:

Samsung HD400LD 400GB 7200rpm 8MB Cache EIDE Ultra ATA100 HARD DRIVE

InterProShop.com
800-226-7216
Fremont , CA

Price - $142.90
Ship - free ups ground

Is this possible, or too good to be true?

Its fine. Check it with one of the pricewatch services.

Arno Wagner · Aug 29, 2006

<edited, for brevity>

Hello, Arno:

Western Digital >did< manufacture SCSI hard disks, once upon a time.

Cordially,
John Turco <[email protected]>

Ha! I wonder why they do not anymore.

Arno

Arno Wagner · Aug 29, 2006

Thanks, Arno. This seems to be most people's opinion.

I guess it's time to start transferring data.

Look at this from Pricewatch:

Samsung HD400LD 400GB 7200rpm 8MB Cache EIDE Ultra ATA100 HARD DRIVE

InterProShop.com
800-226-7216
Fremont , CA

Price - $142.90
Ship - free ups ground

Is this possible, or too good to be true? This looks dirt cheap to me.
;-/

No, that is entriely reasonable. I recently bought one of these
for a similar price. Unfotunately I dropped it a day later :-(

Arno

Folkert Rienstra · Aug 29, 2006

Arno Wagner said:
Ha! I wonder why they do not anymore.

Thanks for showing us that you are just a kid secretly using
Mom and Dad's computer at night and when they are away.

Folkert Rienstra · Aug 29, 2006

Thanks, Arno. This seems to be

most people's opinion.

'Most' people like yourself who don't have opinions of theirselves
and just parrott what the babblebots keep chattering in their ears.

Andrew J. Rozsa · Aug 30, 2006

:|> most people's opinion.
:|
:|'Most' people like yourself who don't have opinions of theirselves
:|and just parrott what the babblebots keep chattering in their ears.

Of course I don't have an opinion. Yet! That's why I am asking. I,
unlike others, was born not knowing anything. When I will have an
opinion, I won't be asking for help, now will I?

Best,

Andrew

Fabien LE LEZ · Aug 30, 2006

Ha! I wonder why they do not anymore.

I don't know the official reason, but you can be pretty sure it's
because they think it's not profitable enough.

Folkert Rienstra · Aug 30, 2006

Of course I don't have an opinion.

Yes you do now. Else you wouldn't agree with him.

Yet!

Then don't agree (nor disagree).

That's why I am asking.

*Were* asking. *Now* you have an opinion.

I, unlike others, was born not knowing anything.

But readily agree with those babblebots who do, without questioning.

When I will have an opinion, I won't be asking for help, now will I?

No, it would indeed be rather strange if you would ask the same question again.

John Turco · Aug 31, 2006

:

Look at this from Pricewatch:

Samsung HD400LD 400GB 7200rpm 8MB Cache EIDE Ultra ATA100 HARD DRIVE

InterProShop.com
800-226-7216
Fremont , CA

Price - $142.90
Ship - free ups ground

Is this possible, or too good to be true? This looks dirt cheap to me.
;-/

Best,

Andrew

Hello, Andrew:

Grab it! I installed a pair of Samsung SP1614N (160GB PATA) OEM hard
disks, over two years ago, and have been very pleased with them. They
cost a total of $241.90, including shipping; thus, 400GB for $142.90,
is a real bargain. :-P

Good luck!

Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@@concentric.net>

John Turco · Aug 31, 2006

Fabien said:
I don't know the official reason, but you can be pretty sure it's
because they think it's not profitable enough.

Hello, Fabien:

That's probably true. As I'd intended to reply to Arno Wagner, later,
WD likely decided to concentrate on the more lucrative "commodity drive"
market (i.e., IDE), which obviously excludes expensive SCSI HDD's.

Cordially,
John Turco <jtur@@concentric.net>

Arno Wagner · Aug 31, 2006

Previously John Turco said:
Hello, Fabien:

That's probably true. As I'd intended to reply to Arno Wagner, later,
WD likely decided to concentrate on the more lucrative "commodity drive"
market (i.e., IDE), which obviously excludes expensive SCSI HDD's.

Of course the SCSI profitability is direclty tied to how well
you know how to make them.

Arno

Inferior drives?

Andrew J. Rozsa

Rod Speed

Fabien LE LEZ

Fabien LE LEZ

Rod Speed

Arno Wagner

Arno Wagner

John Turco

Andrew J. Rozsa

Rod Speed

Arno Wagner

Arno Wagner

Folkert Rienstra

Folkert Rienstra

Andrew J. Rozsa

Fabien LE LEZ

Folkert Rienstra

John Turco

John Turco

Arno Wagner