Discussion Forums > Technology
Western Digital or Seagate
xShadow:
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 03:10:33 AM ---xShadow, because you aren't putting much effort into your posts, neither will I.
--- End quote ---
Oh, you finally noticed? D:
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 03:10:33 AM ---Rest is just theory as to why a hard drive might be dead which will earn the HDD a 1 egg rating but is irrelevant of the HDD quality/age.
--- End quote ---
The chance of any of those happening probably isn't that high.
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 03:10:33 AM ---Only one drive I ever owned failed from "clicking". Seagate back when it was considered to be the absolute best by the way. Rest still spin up today and act as if nothing is wrong.
Customers don't know why shit fails. They can write an elaborate article and could have owned it for 20 years and still say nothing useful.
--- End quote ---
They don't need to. That's not the purpose.
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 03:10:33 AM ---One more thing, if a massive reliability problem plagues drives then you will hear about it and it won't be from the idiots at newegg feedback section because data on return rates is published. Something like a 2.5-10% return rate from a single brand or model is going to be noticed.
That's why everyone knows that Hitachi shit lives up to the Deathstar name right now.
And that WD Black 2TB (and all other 2TB drives) had high return rates... except Samsung EcoGreen and surprisingly WD20EARS.
--- End quote ---
Return rates are interesting but the problem is that it's difficult to get a page that's up to date and accurate.
CASE IN POINT
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 03:10:33 AM ---INSERT THE REST OF limefc's POSTS ABOUT WHAT YOU SHOULD GET AT 2TB AND ABOVE HERE
--- End quote ---
You've failed to take into account one very critical thing here.
December 20, 2011:
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/109825-seagate-finalizes-deal-with-samsung-to-purchase-hard-drive-division
Now, read what your own article says in the introduction:
--- Quote ---The returns rates given here concern the products sold between April 1st and October 1st 2011 for returns made before April 2012, namely after between 6 months and a year of use. Over the lifetime of a product the returns generally form a spread out U on the graph, with the end virtually flat. Our figures therefore cover the early part of the lifetime of products, where returns rates are high.
--- End quote ---
Guess what December 20 + 6 months is? It doesn't matter, because that's far past the time this study ended. I'm also a bit skeptical about "French etailer" being the sole source of all of this, but whatever.
In other words, the idiots that made this thing totally forgot that Seagate was acquiring Samsung's hard drive division DURING THEIR TESTING (fyi, they started acquisition around or before the time the study started). The only thing this is a good measure of is how hard drives USED to be. Now, Samsung practically equals Seagate (literally, even made at a different factory and whatnot, and a 1 year warranty), and WD Black is literally the only choice you have that's worth a damn.
limefc:
--- Quote ---Oh, you finally noticed? D:
--- End quote ---
Not something to be proud of.
--- Quote ---The chance of any of those happening probably isn't that high.
--- End quote ---
Misleading vividness.
--- Quote ---They don't need to. That's not the purpose.
--- End quote ---
They do for you to have a point.
--- Quote ---Return rates are interesting but the problem is that it's difficult to get a page that's up to date and accurate.
--- End quote ---
It's impossible because day one returns are an useless statistic and values must be collected for products sold at least 6 months before publishing because otherwise you'll just record all damaged/defective products that go out of the gate and bad QC/handling is not that telling.
--- Quote ---You've failed to take into account one very critical thing here.
--- End quote ---
Means nothing in short term.
--- Quote ---Now, Samsung practically equals Seagate
--- End quote ---
Nope.
And by that Logic, WD makes the most unreliable drives now because they bought Hitachi.
You could further reinforce the validity of that logical train of thought by referencing Seagate's acquisition of Maxtor. Maxtor made what were universally considered bad drives and after acquiring Maxtor, Seagate was the one quickly becoming known for bad drives.
Then, perhaps, if you applied that logic over to the acquisition of Samsung by Seagate - clearly Seagate must make the most reliable drives right now because they bought Samsung, the previous king of reliable drives.
Stupid logic like that isn't going to work and it's easy to twist it to support even more retarded conclusions than the one you managed to come up with.
Also I'd like to point out that those "idiots" never tested anything, they took returns data for products sold 6 months to a year ago from the date of publishing the article and compiled it into statistics.
xShadow:
--- Quote ---Misleading vividness.
--- End quote ---
It's called thinking realistically, not pessimistically.
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 05:37:07 PM ---They do for you to have a point.
--- End quote ---
No, for the last fucking time. All they need to know is that it did fail, and then report it. I didn't ask for a click of death.
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 05:37:07 PM ---It's impossible because day one returns are an useless statistic and values must be collected for products sold at least 6 months before publishing because otherwise you'll just record all damaged/defective products that go out of the gate and bad QC/handling is not that telling.
--- End quote ---
Yep.
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 05:37:07 PM ---Means nothing in short term.
--- End quote ---
You don't know that.
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 05:37:07 PM ---Nope.
--- End quote ---
Yep.
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 05:37:07 PM ---And by that Logic, WD makes the most unreliable drives now because they bought Hitachi.
You could further reinforce the validity of that logical train of thought by referencing Seagate's acquisition of Maxtor. Maxtor made what were universally considered bad drives and after acquiring Maxtor, Seagate was the one quickly becoming known for bad drives.
--- End quote ---
WD's drives are still made the same way they always have been. Samsung's are not.
Totally different.
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 05:37:07 PM ---Then, perhaps, if you applied that logic over to the acquisition of Samsung by Seagate - clearly Seagate must make the most reliable drives right now because they bought Samsung, the previous king of reliable drives.
--- End quote ---
Nope, doesn't work that way.
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 05:37:07 PM ---Stupid logic like that isn't going to work and it's easy to twist it to support even more retarded conclusions than the one you managed to come up with.
--- End quote ---
And I suppose the one you came up with, based on no up to date evidence, is completely reliable.
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 05:37:07 PM ---Also I'd like to point out that those "idiots" never tested anything, they took returns data for products sold 6 months to a year ago from the date of publishing the article and compiled it into statistics.
--- End quote ---
I know.
limefc:
--- Quote ---No, for the last fucking time. All they need to know is that it did fail, and then report it. I didn't ask for a click of death.
--- End quote ---
And what is this information if it's not checked by a technician? Anecdotal at best.
--- Quote ---WD's drives are still made the same way they always have been. Samsung's are not.
Totally different.
--- End quote ---
I am taking the liberty of replying to what you said with something else you said. Behold.
--- Quote ---You don't know that.
--- End quote ---
Truth is, I actually do know to which you replied with that - and so should you.
--- Quote ---And I suppose the one you came up with, based on no up to date evidence, is completely reliable.
--- End quote ---
It seems to me like you completely missed the implication of that paragraph.
Besides, you don't have any evidence, up to date or not, to back up your statements.
--- Quote ---I know.
--- End quote ---
Then you shouldn't imply otherwise. You even put the phrase "during their testing" in all caps as to emphasize it.
xShadow:
--- Quote from: limefc on August 28, 2012, 06:29:26 PM ---
--- Quote ---No, for the last fucking time. All they need to know is that it did fail, and then report it. I didn't ask for a click of death.
--- End quote ---
And what is this information if it's not checked by a technician? Anecdotal at best.
--- End quote ---
Apparently you have such a low opinion of common people that you think they don't know something's wrong when files on their hard drive are constantly getting corrupted or something. Moreover, to tell if there's something truly wrong with a drive (and further, to be able to tell what it is) it would take a lot more than a simple "technician". Lol.
You realize this is the internal drive division, right? People that put these things in are either good enough to fuck around with computer parts themselves, or know someone they can. Guess what they'll do when their hard drive is fucking up? They'll either know or call someone that knows.
Please stop thinking that you're so far above an average person when it comes to noticing that your hard disk is failing.
--- Quote ---It seems to me like you completely missed the implication of that paragraph.
--- End quote ---
It was a silly one.
--- Quote ---Besides, you don't have any evidence, up to date or not, to back up your statements.
--- End quote ---
I suppose you missed the entire part where I was talking about reviews, yeah?
--- Quote --- N/A
7/5/2012 8:09:05 AM
Tech Level: High
Ownership: more than 1 year
Verified Owner
1 out of 5 eggsBait and Switch
Pros: None
Cons: I am running several of the Samsung HD204UIs in a storage environment, and none have yet failed. I ordered three more from Newegg, and much to my disappointment, I was sent rebranded Seatgate (ST2000DL004) hard drives, of which past user reviews have been less than stellar. I would not have made this purchase if I had known these were not the real HD204UI from Samsung.
Other Thoughts: Shame on Seagate (and Newegg) for selling a product as something else. I have been buying from Newegg since the early 2000s, and this is the first time I have been disappointed by their actions. Newegg, you need to wipe the user reviews clean for this product so that it accurately reflects the product now being sold.
16 out of 18 people found this review helpful.
--- End quote ---
Yes, it's one of your much-hated reviews, but it's a hell of a lot more than you have, which is an outdated study whose testing period practically started a year back.
--- Quote ---Then you shouldn't imply otherwise. You even put the phrase "during their testing" in all caps as to emphasize it.
--- End quote ---
"during their testing" = "during their data collection period"
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version