Subject: Re: Seagate 3TB hard drive class action lawsuits
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Mayayana<email@example.com> 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
ssds are also *much* more reliable.
not that it matters, because with proper backups, the interruption is
minor, no matter what type of device.