From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: Seagate 3TB hard drive class action lawsuits
Full headers:
From: nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Subject: Re: Seagate 3TB hard drive class action lawsuits
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 10:29:37 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <291020171029377094%nospam@nospam.invalid>
References: <> <ot4crk$qeb$> <ot4ng7$bnm$>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info:; posting-host="165483f2a3a2da85db80fc3ac9d07d60";
logging-data="12335"; mail-complaints-to="";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18fhEI0idYdhTPPagSEac42"
User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:qhlxkJs+mnrthO0g1oJrnasSVM4=
Print Article
Forward Article
In article <ot4ng7$bnm$>, Mayayana<mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:

> |  I don't know about the 3TB ones but my 1TB Barracuda is going still
> | stable after 3 years
>    I remember reading, awhile back, about a group
> of drives where only particular sizes were bad. I
> don't remember whether that was Seagate.

the 1.5tb and 3tb seagates were *awful*. 


>    This week I'm repairing a laptop for a friend.
> The WD Blue disk drive died after only 3 years. The
> WD diagnotic software says, "Too many errors to
> continue. Replace the drive."

it has a lot of bad blocks. 

> A lemon? A mistreated
> drive? Maybe a Windows program that never stopped
> accessing the disk? The last possibility I can probably
> plan for when I set up the new system. But lemons?
> Unfortunately, those are usually only known when it's
> too late, if even then.

stop guessing. what does smart say?

> | My main drive is a class 5
> | Intel SSD, with win 10 my ssytem boots in less than 20 secs! (Hope I'm
> | not opening a can of worms, though).
>   I'm also using SSD for main drive and disk drive
> for secondary, with redundant storage. The SSDs
> are quick, but reported to often go without
> warning when they do go. 

hard drives can also fail without warning.

the difference is that if an ssd fails, it often fails to read-only,
whereas a drive failure is usually not usable anymore, or at best, some
files corrupted.

ssds are also *much* more reliable.

not that it matters, because with proper backups, the interruption is
minor, no matter what type of device.