Are Seagate HDD's really that bad?

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by newtekie1

Holy f*ck! What is up with the RAID Edition drives?! Aren't those supposed to be WD's most reliable?

Well given that you get redundancy with RAID ... CONSPIRACY!

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

Well given that you get redundancy with RAID ... CONSPIRACY!

The funny thing was that I have a co-worker that only buys the RE drives. He doesn't run them in RAID, but buys them because they are supposed to be better. He shit himself when I showed him that.

[Sinzia]

The only drive I've ever had issues with was from a Compaq notebook bought back in 2002. It was one of those custom jobs so I had assumed they tested everything before shipping.

Turns out it was sent with a bad 40 GB drive, died in less than a week, but I can't remember who was the OEM for Compaq.

I've run every brand, Maxtors, Toshiba, Seagate, WD, and so on. Most of the time they were in raid arrays getting the crap knocked out of them. I consider myself lucky, but I subscribe to the "they're all the same now" train of thought.

[drdeathx]

Originally Posted by Melvis

Yes there realy that bad, out of all the drives myself and all my friends have had Seagate has died more then any other hands down. The last Seagate i had lasted 6weeks =/

LOL, if you have multiple drives fail, I would look at the owner to tell you the truth. Any drive can fail. It is plain and simple. I have never had a seagate drive fail.

[LAN_deRf_HA]

I switched to seagate after WD stopped making quiet drives, and it's been pretty flawless, not to mention cheaper.

[Widjaja]

It's luck of the drawn in my opinion.

If you have bad experience with one brand try the other.

[Melvis]

Originally Posted by drdeathx

LOL, if you have multiple drives fail, I would look at the owner to tell you the truth. Any drive can fail. It is plain and simple. I have never had a seagate drive fail.

That could be true as my m8 only buys Seagate drives, he hates any other brand and he has had many of them fail (all brand new bought) Where ive had just two Seagates fail but after my m8 having just a bad run and seeing alot more people on here complain about Seagates i moved to WD (most bought second hand) and none of them have failed on me (this includes ones i sell and are pre installed into customers computers) So for me personally im sticking with WD as here ive seen way more Seagates die then WD, just my personal preference.

[TRWOV]

On desktops I've only had an old Maxtor 30GB and a WD 80GB IDE drive die on me. Still using a 6GB Seagate in a POS PC. *knocks wood*

For laptops each one has had to have its HDD replaced at least once.

I have no favorite brand, I buy whatever gives me more GB/$

[LAN_deRf_HA]

I think it's funny samsung showed as having a low failure rate because I believe it was their entry into the market that drove down the quality of other brands overall. Their prices were hard to compete with.

[manofthem]

Originally Posted by TRWOV

I have no favorite brand, I buy whatever gives me more GB/$

This is a good philosophy IMO, and I pretty much go by it.
Currently running an old Seagate 500gb hdd on WCG, and it's still going strong. My newer yet not new 1.5tb barracuda has reported a few errors, but I haven't bothered to RMA it because I think it passed their test. My hitachi is fine too.

I'd purchase the best deal, as long as the reviews weren't 1-egg/1-star or the equivalent for trash

[trickson]

Seagates suck plain and simple. WD all the way!

[timta2]

Originally Posted by Frick

Thank you for posting sense. Alse, here's a more recent link.

The problem I have with those articles is that they don't mention numbers of drives sold and returned, only percentages, and minimums of numbers of drives. Statistically that can be deceptive. 10% of 10,000 is a lot more than 10% of 500. It's unlikely that the drives were sold in even numbers, but they expect you to compare the percentages evenly.

"The statistics by brand are based on a minimum sample of 500 sales and those by model on a minimum sample of 100 sales, with the biggest volumes reaching tens of thousands of parts by brand and thousands of parts by model."

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by timta2

The problem I have with those articles is that they don't mention numbers of drives sold and returned, only percentages, and minimums of numbers of drives. Statistically that can be deceptive. 10% of 10,000 is a lot more than 10% of 500. It's unlikely that the drives were sold in even numbers, but they expect you to compare the percentages evenly.

"The statistics by brand are based on a minimum sample of 500 sales and those by model on a minimum sample of 100 sales, with the biggest volumes reaching tens of thousands of parts by brand and thousands of parts by model."

The percentages are all that matter, actual numbers don't matter at all, beyond a certain minimum sample size. Obviously a larger sample size gives a more accurate percentage. However, the percentage is still all that matters. The point is that if a drive was returned 3% of the time, it doesn't matter if 500 drives were sold and 15 were returned, or 5,000 drives were sold and 150 returned. The important thing is that if you buy the drive, there is a 3% chance you'll have to return it.

[H82LUZ73]

I have used Quantum drives then when Maxtor bought them out,I started using Maxtor`s,Then about 5-6 years ago Seagate bought Maxtor.I have had 1 HD fail in all that time.And it was from a bad firmware.

As for the RE-WD drives those numbers could be inflated from the flood at the plants.I see no difference between WD/Seagate,In performance/reliability,I do see about $20-$30 more for WD drive.

[trickson]

All I can say for sure is that the 2 WD driver I have now I have had since 2005, 7 years now and not one problem at all. Just unbelievable! Before that I had used seagate and I had 2 of them got out.