What is the best HDD in terms of Reliability/cost?

[Ron Reaugh]

Speedo wacko.

news:42ccf9ca$0$785$61c65585@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...

 

[Ron Reaugh]

Interesting discussion, but 2.5" drives are different than 3.5" drives.
They are designed for different applications. Mounting a 3.5" drive in a
small enclosure doesn't mean it is in the same environment as a larger PC
and will have the same reliability.

However if that small enclosure provides adequate cooling and isn't moved
much then one can assume that the environments are the same. The question
then becomes how any differences from that affect the reliability.

One has to consider how the product may be used as part of the system.

In response to the above "So?", here is some relevant information.
http://www.seagate.com/content/docs/pdf/whitepaper/D2c_QuietStep_062003.pdf

Nothing very interesting there.

 

[Ron Reaugh]

I work for the University of Texas.

But I am capable of extracting relevant information.

When drives cost the same, broadly perform the same, and a warranty is
longer a consumer would have to be nuts not to buy Seagate for
mainstream drive usage.

Yep. Now are Seagate ATA HDs consistently amongst the performance
leaders?

In my part of the world, Seagate actually costs
less than its competitors

In Texas....Seagate the least expensive...just NO.

and if you read the business news you would
know that the drive industry has fears that they are driving a price war.

AND??

 

[J. Clarke]

I work for the University of Texas.

But I am capable of extracting relevant information.

When drives cost the same, broadly perform the same, and a warranty is
longer a consumer would have to be nuts not to buy Seagate for
mainstream drive usage. In my part of the world, Seagate actually costs
less than its competitors and if you read the business news you would
know that the drive industry has fears that they are driving a price war.

You mean that they're using revenues from their enterprise drive sales to
allow them to artificially depress the prices of their consumer drives in
order to obtain market share?

 

[Joe Doe]

When drives cost the same, broadly perform the same, and a warranty is
longer a consumer would have to be nuts not to buy Seagate for
mainstream drive usage.

Yep. Now are Seagate ATA HDs consistently amongst the performance
leaders?

The subject of this thread is HDD reliability/cost. When the subject is
performance I will suggest something different. I usually stay on topic.

In Texas....Seagate the least expensive...just NO.

We have a Fry's in Austin that every weekend practically gives away a
drive. Last Friday through Tuesday you could get a 200 GB Seagate for
$49 after rebate. In the same Fry's ad WD 120 GB was $49 after rebate.
At any given time we have very good deals from all manufacturers.
Seagate has been good on paying its rebates in a timely fashion.

Roland

 

[wqq]

You are correct that it doesn't mean that it has the same
reliability. The point that everyone seems to be missing is that it
also doesn't automatically mean that it has a _different_ reliability.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of your
predicament better than that pathetic effort, Clarke.

I'm well aware of the difference in drive design. My "so" was in
response to the contention that this automatically resulted in a
significant difference in measured reliability between drives
installed in laptops and drives installed in manufacturer-provided
external enclosures.

Pity that comment wasnt even about laptop drives at all.

In engineering, the most dangerous thing you can do is _assume_ that
things are going to work way they "ought" to work--that's why you
test the Hell out of everything that you can.

Pity that aint feasible for the end user in the situation being discussed.

ALL we actually have is the FACT that NOT ONE hard drive manufacture
has chosen to offer a warranty of more than a single year with their
external drives and that most of them offer quite a bit better than that
with their internal drives. Seagate FIVE TIMES AS LONG.

And this has all gone very far afield from the original point,
Nope.

which was that duration of warranty is not a valid indicator of reliability.

Pity no one ever claimed it was. Having fun thrashing that straw man are you
Clarke ?

If it was then Hyundais, which have the longest warranty in the
automobile industry, would be the most reliable cars on the road.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of your
predicament better than that pathetic effort, Clarke.

There is a reason that every single hard drive manufacturer
only has a 1 year warranty on their external drives, even if
you are so stupid you cant manage to work that out for yourself.

 

[Rod Speed]

You are correct that it doesn't mean that it has the same
reliability. The point that everyone seems to be missing is that it
also doesn't automatically mean that it has a different reliability.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of your
predicament better than that pathetic effort, Clarke.

I'm well aware of the difference in drive design. My "so" was in
response to the contention that this automatically resulted in a
significant difference in measured reliability between drives
installed in laptops and drives installed in manufacturer-provided
external enclosures.

Pity that comment wasnt even about laptop drives at all.

In engineering, the most dangerous thing you can do is assume that
things are going to work way they "ought" to work--that's why you
test the Hell out of everything that you can.

Pity that aint feasible for the end user in the situation being discussed.

ALL we actually have is the FACT that NOT ONE hard drive manufacture
has chosen to offer a warranty of more than a single year with their
external drives and that most of them offer quite a bit better than that
with their internal drives. Seagate FIVE TIMES AS LONG.

And this has all gone very far afield from the original point,
Nope.

which was that duration of warranty is not a valid indicator of reliability.

Pity no one ever claimed it was. Having fun thrashing that straw man are you
Clarke ?

If it was then Hyundais, which have the longest warranty in the
automobile industry, would be the most reliable cars on the road.

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of your
predicament better than that pathetic effort, Clarke.

There is a reason that every single hard drive manufacturer
only has a 1 year warranty on their external drives, even if
you are so stupid you cant manage to work that out for yourself.

 

[Rod Speed]

wqq wrote:

<snip>

I started to give your post serious consideration, then I got to


The only proper response to that is <plonk>.

Fat lot of good that will do you, you stupid plonker.

 

[Rod Speed]

Reaugh ****wit.

 

[Ron Reaugh]

When drives cost the same, broadly perform the same, and a warranty is
longer a consumer would have to be nuts not to buy Seagate for
mainstream drive usage.

Yep. Now are Seagate ATA HDs consistently amongst the performance
leaders?

The subject of this thread is HDD reliability/cost. When the subject is
performance I will suggest something different. I usually stay on topic.

Regardless of such claims, the issue is ALWAYS price-performance.

We have a Fry's in Austin that every weekend practically gives away a
drive. Last Friday through Tuesday you could get a 200 GB Seagate for
$49 after rebate. In the same Fry's ad WD 120 GB was $49 after rebate.
At any given time we have very good deals from all manufacturers.
Seagate has been good on paying its rebates in a timely fashion.

So you base the market price of a HD on give-away specials at a few
outlets...just NO!

 

[Ron Reaugh]

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of your
predicament better than that pathetic effort, Clarke.

The only thing pathetic here is wacko speedo.

 

[chrisv]

Speedo wacko.

Is that "wacko slime cult" still stalking you, Ronnie?

 

[Rod Speed]

Ron Reaugh wrote

When drives cost the same, broadly perform the same, and a warranty is
longer a consumer would have to be nuts not to buy Seagate for mainstream
drive usage.
Yep. Now are Seagate ATA HDs consistently amongst the performance
leaders?

The subject of this thread is HDD reliability/cost. When the subject is
performance I will suggest something different. I usually stay on topic.

Regardless of such claims, the issue is ALWAYS price-performance.

Nope, not when choosing between modern ATA drives
that the user cant pick between is a proper double blind
trial without being allowed to use a benchmark.

The performances differences are very minor, stupid.

Egg all over its pathetic little face, as always.

So you base the market price of a HD on give-away specials at a few
outlets...just NO!

Even you should be able to bullshit your way out of
your predicament better than that pathetic effort, Reaugh

 

[Rod Speed]

Some terminal ****wit that's so stupid it didnt even notice
the problem with the IBM 75GXPs, even when they had
generated a full class action suit, claiming to be Ron Reaugh
desperately attempted to bullshit its way out of its predicament
and fooled absolutely no one at all. As always.

 

[Eric Gisin]

Hey Rodney, "stupid plonker" is a new one. Ever thought of writing a book on Insulting your
Opponent to Death"?

 

[Rod Speed]

Eric Gisin wrote

Hey Rodney, "stupid plonker" is a new one.

Nope just not used as often.

Ever thought of writing a book on Insulting your Opponent to Death"?

I prefer to insult them to death and let groups.google be the book.

 

[Ron Reaugh]

Ron Reaugh wrote

When drives cost the same, broadly perform the same, and a warranty
is longer a consumer would have to be nuts not to buy Seagate for
mainstream drive usage.
Yep. Now are Seagate ATA HDs consistently amongst the performance
leaders?
The subject of this thread is HDD reliability/cost. When the subject is
performance I will suggest something different. I usually stay on
topic.

Regardless of such claims, the issue is ALWAYS price-performance.

Nope, not when choosing between modern ATA drives
that the user cant pick between is a proper double blind
trial without being allowed to use a benchmark.

The performances differences are very minor, stupid.

Wacko speedo.

 

[Ron Reaugh]

I prefer to insult them to death and let groups.google be the book.

Yes, your autobiography is self indicting there.

 

[Rod Speed]

When drives cost the same, broadly perform the same, and a warranty is
longer a consumer would have to be nuts not to buy Seagate for mainstream
drive usage.
Yep. Now are Seagate ATA HDs consistently amongst the performance
leaders?
The subject of this thread is HDD reliability/cost. When the subject is
performance I will suggest something different. I usually stay on topic.
Regardless of such claims, the issue is ALWAYS price-performance.

Nope, not when choosing between modern ATA drives
that the user cant pick between is a proper double blind
trial without being allowed to use a benchmark.
The performances differences are very minor, stupid.

Wacko speedo.

****wit Reaugh.

 

[Rod Speed]

Yes, your autobiography is self indicting there.

Cant even manage a viable sentence.