Opinions regarding Western Digital

[IDIDIT]

In the last 7 months I've lost 3 over 200 G WD drives. One heavily
used as C drive, 2 plugged in and accessed only occasionally, perhaps
10 - 15 hours in a couple years, used for photo back up. I swear that
when they were purchased I picked WD because Maxtor only had a 1 year
warranty while WDs was 3 years. The mfg date on all is within the
past 2 years but only one is less than 1 year which I was informed is
covered by warranty and was replaced with a refurbished unit.
My question is: Is WD considered a good brand compared to other units
in the same price range? I have a good # of the other top selling
brand drive and so far so good. Am I losing my memory big time as to
the warranty period having been 3 years and when did it go to one
year? TYIA.

 

[Rod Speed]

In the last 7 months I've lost 3 over 200 G WD drives. One heavily
used as C drive, 2 plugged in and accessed only occasionally, perhaps
10 - 15 hours in a couple years, used for photo back up. I swear that
when they were purchased I picked WD because Maxtor only had a 1 year
warranty while WDs was 3 years. The mfg date on all is within the
past 2 years but only one is less than 1 year which I was informed is
covered by warranty and was replaced with a refurbished unit.
My question is: Is WD considered a good brand compared to other units
in the same price range?

Nope, not currently, for just that reason.

I have a good # of the other top selling brand drive and so far so good.

Yeah, I prefer the Samsungs myself.

Am I losing my memory big time as to the warranty
period having been 3 years and when did it go to one year?

Its been that way for quite a while now, 3 years only applys
to a subset of their drives, 8MB cache, and not all of those.

Samsung has 3 years on everything, so as far as I am concerned WD can
take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine, sideways.

 

[Ian Roberts]

Big Snip...

Gosh you have had some bad luck.

I have put WD drives in various machines for friends over the past few years
and never had a problem. I have 4 in use myslef (WD1200JB, WD2500JB) since
they first came out - so thats a few years now.

Maybe you should check your power supply. To have so many drives fail in
such a short time is very odd. Do you have a Hot or dusty environment? Have
they ever been dropped? Did you take static precautions while fitting them?

Of course YMMV but yours seems to have a bit more than usual!

I can understand having had 3 fail you'd want to steer clear. But given my
positive experience I have no hesitation in buying WD again. Now considering
2 x Raptor 74GB SATA!

Cheers.

Ian

 

[Odie Ferrous]

In the last 7 months I've lost 3 over 200 G WD drives. One heavily
used as C drive, 2 plugged in and accessed only occasionally, perhaps
10 - 15 hours in a couple years, used for photo back up. I swear that
when they were purchased I picked WD because Maxtor only had a 1 year
warranty while WDs was 3 years. The mfg date on all is within the
past 2 years but only one is less than 1 year which I was informed is
covered by warranty and was replaced with a refurbished unit.
My question is: Is WD considered a good brand compared to other units
in the same price range? I have a good # of the other top selling
brand drive and so far so good. Am I losing my memory big time as to
the warranty period having been 3 years and when did it go to one
year? TYIA.

The BB series are fairly useless. The JB series I have found to be
quite reliable.

Best around at the moment are Seagates. (From a reliability point of
view.)

I haven't yet collated sufficient data on drives larger than 200GB so
can't comment on reliability issues.


Odie

 

[Guest]

I know it's clear that WD sells 100x the drives
that Samsung (Lucky Goldstar, or to whatever state-
run conglomeration it belongs), and it's clear that
WD fails in probably equal proportions. Let it be
known (hear me now): the last drive I've had fail
before it was taken out of commission was a Seagate
-- an ST250. MFM. It's fossilized. And I've had,
and have, all kinds of drives. The point is, if a
failure happens to you, you complain. I don't think
you could find 10 people here that use Samsung (too
small, for one), yet I would not be surprised if
1000 or more reading this use WD.

 

[IDIDIT]

Nope, not currently, for just that reason.


Yeah, I prefer the Samsungs myself.


Its been that way for quite a while now, 3 years only applys
to a subset of their drives, 8MB cache, and not all of those.

Samsung has 3 years on everything, so as far as I am concerned WD can
take their drives and shove them where the sun dont shine, sideways.

I'll second that at this point. The one that died, no motor function,
is a 2 MB cache used only for photo storage. As far as power, Im
using a 525 watt Power Supply and Cooling unit which I regulary check
with a Fluke meter. ALL my drives operate behind cooling fans and
after intensive use are hardly warm, I'd guess 90-100 degrees. The
temp in this room has not been much above 70 since October and I
operate with the side cases off. It's sad as these units are not
exactly cheap, they are made in a cheap labor country from evidently
parts as cheap as the labor. I guess the main motivating factor of
some of these companies is GREED and screw the customer and all the
information lost. I'm sort of supprised they won't repair the bad
motor or controller in the drive when I offered to pay.

 

[Derek Baker]

The BB series are fairly useless. The JB series I have found to be
quite reliable.

Best around at the moment are Seagates. (From a reliability point of
view.)

I haven't yet collated sufficient data on drives larger than 200GB so
can't comment on reliability issues.


Odie

My pair of WD800JBs have been totally reliable - over 10000 hours each now.
Though I will probably replace them with Samsungs for low noise.

 

[Guest]

DB- [Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:22:50 -0000]:

My pair of WD800JBs have been totally reliable - over 10000 hour
Though I will probably replace them with Samsungs for low noise.

Samsung spec on its "low noise" model (160 GB ATA)
:SpinPoint P Series SP1604N
:Acoustic (Average Sound Power) Idle 2.7 Bel
:Random Read/Write 2.8 Bel

WD spec on its regular, everyday WD1600JB model
:Idle Mode 26 dBA (average)
:Seek Mode 0 31 dBA (average)
:Seek Mode 3 27 dBA (average)

So, according to the specs, the WD is quieter at idle (26
vs 27 dB), and quieter in seek (27 dB in mode 3 (o) vs 28).
But, and it really is a big but, if these noise levels
bother you, you need to get out of that zero-gravity,
anechoic chamber because a pin drop is louder.

A dB (decibel) is a tenth of a Bel. Samsung doesn't
specify a weighting (assumed also to be A-weighted).
I suppose "mode 3" is a quiet/slow-seek mode.

 

[Derek Baker]

DB- [Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:22:50 -0000]:

My pair of WD800JBs have been totally reliable - over 10000 hour
Though I will probably replace them with Samsungs for low noise.

Samsung spec on its "low noise" model (160 GB ATA)
:SpinPoint P Series SP1604N
:Acoustic (Average Sound Power) Idle 2.7 Bel
:Random Read/Write 2.8 Bel

WD spec on its regular, everyday WD1600JB model
:Idle Mode 26 dBA (average)
:Seek Mode 0 31 dBA (average)
:Seek Mode 3 27 dBA (average)

So, according to the specs, the WD is quieter at idle (26
vs 27 dB), and quieter in seek (27 dB in mode 3 (o) vs 28).
But, and it really is a big but, if these noise levels
bother you, you need to get out of that zero-gravity,
anechoic chamber because a pin drop is louder.

A dB (decibel) is a tenth of a Bel. Samsung doesn't
specify a weighting (assumed also to be A-weighted).
I suppose "mode 3" is a quiet/slow-seek mode.

Firstly this my model:
http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=32:

Idle Mode 35 dBA (average)
Seek Mode 0 39 dBA (average)
Seek Mode 3 37 dBA (average)

Secondly dBA and Bel are not directly comparable.

 

[Guest]

DB-[Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:30:39 -0000]:

Secondly dBA and Bel are not directly comparable.

A decibel is a tenth of a Bel. That's what "deci"
means -- a tenth. That dBA (A standing for A-weighted)
better describes the measure as heard by ears does
not negate that fact. That some HD makers use Bel
instead of the common dB doesn't change anything
(move the decimal point to the left one place, and
use dB instead of bel), either. It's all marketing
in the end. Consider the plain fact that Samsung's
"low-noise" drive is noisier than an everyday WD
(as shown before).

 

[Derek Baker]

DB-[Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:30:39 -0000]:

Secondly dBA and Bel are not directly comparable.

A decibel is a tenth of a Bel. That's what "deci"
means -- a tenth. That dBA (A standing for A-weighted)
better describes the measure as heard by ears does
not negate that fact. That some HD makers use Bel
instead of the common dB doesn't change anything
(move the decimal point to the left one place, and
use dB instead of bel), either. It's all marketing
in the end. Consider the plain fact that Samsung's
"low-noise" drive is noisier than an everyday WD
(as shown before).

http://forums.silentpcreview.com/viewtopic.php?p=137156&highlight=

 

[J. Clarke]

DB-[Tue, 22 Mar 2005 12:30:39 -0000]:

Secondly dBA and Bel are not directly comparable.

A decibel is a tenth of a Bel. That's what "deci"
means -- a tenth. That dBA (A standing for A-weighted)
better describes the measure as heard by ears does
not negate that fact. That some HD makers use Bel
instead of the common dB doesn't change anything
(move the decimal point to the left one place, and
use dB instead of bel), either.

This would be true if they were using exactly the same measurement
methodology. Generally speaking if the drive manufacturer reports the
noise level in bels he's using a different methodology from one that
reports in decibels. There was a time when some manufacturers reported
both and stated the methodology but this seems to be something that they're
assuming to be understood these days.

 

[J. Clarke]

I know it's clear that WD sells 100x the drives
that Samsung (Lucky Goldstar, or to whatever state-
run conglomeration it belongs),

Samsung belongs to Samsung. Samsung and LG (hasn't been "Lucky Goldstar"
for a long time) are competitors. LG is hoping to be "the next Samsung".

What leads you to believe that either is a "state run conglomeration"? Both
are publicly traded companies.

Perhaps you are laboring under the misconception that South Korea is a
socialist country?

 

[Guest]

DB- [Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:23:34 -0000]:

http://forums.silentpcreview.com/viewtopic.php?p=137156&highlight=

That still has nothing to do with bel and decibel. A dB
is a tenth of a bel. However, it may be that WD is using
SPL (not noted by WD; could be PWL) while Samsung says it's
using PWL. Nevertheless, a Bel is still 10 dB. Your
argument is sound pressure level versus sound power.

Notice in this web-snatch (bottom) that either is expressed
in, and I quote, "decibels" (dB). Bel is arcane, and
obviously not commonly (used outside of some HD makers'
specs). Consider a PS fan; these usually run 40 to 50dB
at 1m, and CPU fans easily louder (typical AMD fans are
70 dB). You'd need a several dozen HDs all running together
to reach that loudness: 30 dB + 30 dB = 33 dB (SPL). + 30 dB
+ 30 dB = 36 dB (i.e., two pairs of 33 dBs are 3 dB louder
than the one pair), and so on.

Sound POWER Level (PWL):
The sound power of a source is the total sound energy radiated by
the source per unit of time. The Sound Power Level (PWL) of a
sound source describes the power of the sound radiating from the
source. The PWL is expressed in decibels and is dependent upon
the number of watts to which the source is referenced.
Reference power level is 10(-12) watt.

Sound Pressure Level (SPL):
The sound pressure is the instantaneous pressure measures in a
sound wave; i.e. the variation from atmospheric pressure. The
Sound Pressure Level (SPL) of a sound source is a measurement of
sound expressed in decibels at a specified location. The SPL is
dependent upon the sound source PWL, the distance from the sound
source and the environment around the sound source. The PWL of
the sound source remains the same, but the SPL decreases
approximately 6 decibels for every doubling of distance from the
sound source.
Reference pressure = .0002 microbar

 

[Derek Baker]

DB- [Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:23:34 -0000]:

http://forums.silentpcreview.com/viewtopic.php?p=137156&highlight=

That still has nothing to do with bel and decibel. A dB
is a tenth of a bel. However, it may be that WD is using
SPL (not noted by WD; could be PWL) while Samsung says it's
using PWL. Nevertheless, a Bel is still 10 dB. Your
argument is sound pressure level versus sound power.

Notice in this web-snatch (bottom) that either is expressed
in, and I quote, "decibels" (dB). Bel is arcane, and
obviously not commonly (used outside of some HD makers'
specs). Consider a PS fan; these usually run 40 to 50dB
at 1m, and CPU fans easily louder (typical AMD fans are
70 dB). You'd need a several dozen HDs all running together
to reach that loudness: 30 dB + 30 dB = 33 dB (SPL). + 30 dB
+ 30 dB = 36 dB (i.e., two pairs of 33 dBs are 3 dB louder
than the one pair), and so on.

My CPU fan is 22dBA full speed - currently at 70% of that..

 

[Derek Baker]

DB- [Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:22:50 -0000]:

My pair of WD800JBs have been totally reliable - over 10000 hour
Though I will probably replace them with Samsungs for low noise.

Samsung spec on its "low noise" model (160 GB ATA)
:SpinPoint P Series SP1604N
:Acoustic (Average Sound Power) Idle 2.7 Bel
:Random Read/Write 2.8 Bel

WD spec on its regular, everyday WD1600JB model
:Idle Mode 26 dBA (average)
:Seek Mode 0 31 dBA (average)
:Seek Mode 3 27 dBA (average)

This shows that any modern drive with fluid dynamic bearings will be a lot
quieter than my ball-bearing WDs.

 

[J. Clarke]

DB- [Tue, 22 Mar 2005 13:23:34 -0000]:

http://forums.silentpcreview.com/viewtopic.php?p=137156&highlight=

That still has nothing to do with bel and decibel. A dB
is a tenth of a bel. However, it may be that WD is using
SPL (not noted by WD; could be PWL) while Samsung says it's
using PWL. Nevertheless, a Bel is still 10 dB. Your
argument is sound pressure level versus sound power.

Yes, that is _exactly_ the argument. Nobody is contesting the fact that all
else being equal a bel is ten decibels. However it is customary in the
disk industry to use decibels for one measurment method and bels for the
other.

If you don't like this state of affairs then petition the disk makers to
establish a unified standard acoustic testing methodology. Arguing about
it here accomplishes nothing other than to raise tempers.

 

[Rod Speed]

I know it's clear that WD sells 100x the
drives that Samsung (Lucky Goldstar,

Nothing to do with LG at all, they are competitors in fact.

or to whatever state-run conglomeration it belongs),

Neither is state run either.

and it's clear that WD fails in probably equal proportions.

Its nothing like clear. You dont have the stats.

Let it be known (hear me now):

Pathetic, really.

the last drive I've had fail before it was taken out of
commission was a Seagate -- an ST250. MFM. It's
fossilized. And I've had, and have, all kinds of drives.

The technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'

The point is, if a failure happens to you, you complain.

The point is that some drives fail at a higher rate than others.

One obvious example is the infamous
IBM DeathStars and the Fugitsu MPGs.

 

[Rod Speed]

The BB series are fairly useless. The JB series I have found to be
quite reliable.

Best around at the moment are Seagates.
(From a reliability point of view.)

You dont have the data to be able to say that.

I haven't yet collated sufficient data on drives larger
than 200GB so can't comment on reliability issues.

You dont on the ones below 200G either.

 

[Rod Speed]

DB- [Tue, 22 Mar 2005 11:22:50 -0000]:

My pair of WD800JBs have been totally reliable - over 10000 hour
Though I will probably replace them with Samsungs for low noise.

Samsung spec on its "low noise" model (160 GB ATA)
:SpinPoint P Series SP1604N
:Acoustic (Average Sound Power) Idle 2.7 Bel
:Random Read/Write 2.8 Bel

WD spec on its regular, everyday WD1600JB model
:Idle Mode 26 dBA (average)
:Seek Mode 0 31 dBA (average)
:Seek Mode 3 27 dBA (average)

So, according to the specs, the WD is quieter at idle (26
vs 27 dB), and quieter in seek (27 dB in mode 3 (o) vs 28).

Those numbers are completely useless.

I have both those drives and there is no
comparison with the idle noise you hear.

But, and it really is a big but, if these noise levels
bother you, you need to get out of that zero-gravity,
anechoic chamber because a pin drop is louder.

Wrong with the idle noise the WDs make.