Samsung 1TB drives?

[A. J. Moss]

Is there any reason for me to be suspicious
or worried about using the Samsung HD103UJ?

I've seen no hard evidence against them, but
they are the only drives on the market with
more than 250GB/platter (a third more, in
fact), and they've entered the market quite
late and at a very low price.

I suppose it's possible that Samsung have
over-reached themselves with these drives'
areal density, but it's probably futile to
try to predict their likely failure rates.

I'm asking because I have a computer with
ten 750GB Seagate 7200.10 disks (not Chinese
ones, I hasten to add) arranged in RAID-0
pairs, with each pair as a separate logical
drive. This uses the eight SATA and two PATA
master channels on the motherboard (with a
DVD writer connected as a PATA slave); even
though the SATA interfaces are on the PCI
bus rather than PCI-E, it's fast enough for
my needs.

It's a chore to keep all this data backed up
properly, so I'm considering assembling a
similar machine with eight 1TB Samsungs, and
connecting it to the first machine with a
gigabit Ethernet connection for transferring
files. My existing back-up arrangements would
be relegated to longer term, less frequent
updates.

I'm thinking of 1TB disks, since it's easier
to find SATA controllers and large cases for
eight drives than it is for ten, and Samsungs
because they're a different brand to what I'm
already using, and much cheaper than Hitachi.

Comments?

Also, has the recent spate of failing Seagate
hard drives been restricted mainly to the
7200.11 and the Chinese 7200.10 models?

 

[Arno Wagner]

Is there any reason for me to be suspicious
or worried about using the Samsung HD103UJ?

I've seen no hard evidence against them, but
they are the only drives on the market with
more than 250GB/platter (a third more, in
fact), and they've entered the market quite
late and at a very low price.

I suppose it's possible that Samsung have
over-reached themselves with these drives'
areal density, but it's probably futile to
try to predict their likely failure rates.

I'm asking because I have a computer with
ten 750GB Seagate 7200.10 disks (not Chinese
ones, I hasten to add) arranged in RAID-0
pairs, with each pair as a separate logical
drive. This uses the eight SATA and two PATA
master channels on the motherboard (with a
DVD writer connected as a PATA slave); even
though the SATA interfaces are on the PCI
bus rather than PCI-E, it's fast enough for
my needs.

It's a chore to keep all this data backed up
properly, so I'm considering assembling a
similar machine with eight 1TB Samsungs, and
connecting it to the first machine with a
gigabit Ethernet connection for transferring
files. My existing back-up arrangements would
be relegated to longer term, less frequent
updates.

I'm thinking of 1TB disks, since it's easier
to find SATA controllers and large cases for
eight drives than it is for ten, and Samsungs
because they're a different brand to what I'm
already using, and much cheaper than Hitachi.

Also, has the recent spate of failing Seagate
hard drives been restricted mainly to the
7200.11 and the Chinese 7200.10 models?

It seems in the forst generation of the 1TB Samsungs, there
was some firmware issue. If there was, then it is solved in
the current version.

As to the chinese Seagates, yes, thay are bad, but it
seems to mainly be bad Q/A, so individual disks might
be perfectly fine. Probably a cultural problem with
the chinese managers unable to get a decent yield and
then lying about it by allowing defective drives to
be shipped.

Arno

 

[Rod Speed]

Is there any reason for me to be suspicious
or worried about using the Samsung HD103UJ?
Nope.

I've seen no hard evidence against them, but
they are the only drives on the market with
more than 250GB/platter (a third more, in
fact), and they've entered the market quite late

Thats very commonly seen with Samsung.

and at a very low price.

They arent unusually low priced for a 1TB drive.

I suppose it's possible that Samsung have
over-reached themselves with these drives'
areal density, but it's probably futile to
try to predict their likely failure rates.

I'm asking because I have a computer with
ten 750GB Seagate 7200.10 disks (not Chinese
ones, I hasten to add) arranged in RAID-0
pairs, with each pair as a separate logical
drive. This uses the eight SATA and two PATA
master channels on the motherboard (with a
DVD writer connected as a PATA slave); even
though the SATA interfaces are on the PCI bus
rather than PCI-E, it's fast enough for my needs.

It's a chore to keep all this data backed up
properly, so I'm considering assembling a
similar machine with eight 1TB Samsungs, and
connecting it to the first machine with a
gigabit Ethernet connection for transferring
files. My existing back-up arrangements would
be relegated to longer term, less frequent updates.

I'm thinking of 1TB disks, since it's easier
to find SATA controllers and large cases for
eight drives than it is for ten, and Samsungs
because they're a different brand to what I'm
already using, and much cheaper than Hitachi.

Comments?

Sounds like a very viable approach.

Also, has the recent spate of failing Seagate
hard drives been restricted mainly to the
7200.11 and the Chinese 7200.10 models?

Nope, there's also a problem with rebranded Maxtors.

 

[A. J. Moss]

PS. Sorry about the lack of paragraph spaces. A cut+paste
from notepad to snot-groups seems to have gone awry.

 

[Ken]

Is there any reason for me to be suspicious
or worried about using the Samsung HD103UJ?

I've seen no hard evidence against them, but
they are the only drives on the market with
more than 250GB/platter (a third more, in
fact), and they've entered the market quite
late and at a very low price.

I suppose it's possible that Samsung have
over-reached themselves with these drives'
areal density, but it's probably futile to
try to predict their likely failure rates.

I'm asking because I have a computer with
ten 750GB Seagate 7200.10 disks (not Chinese
ones, I hasten to add) arranged in RAID-0
pairs, with each pair as a separate logical
drive. This uses the eight SATA and two PATA
master channels on the motherboard (with a
DVD writer connected as a PATA slave); even
though the SATA interfaces are on the PCI
bus rather than PCI-E, it's fast enough for
my needs.

It's a chore to keep all this data backed up
properly, so I'm considering assembling a
similar machine with eight 1TB Samsungs, and
connecting it to the first machine with a
gigabit Ethernet connection for transferring
files. My existing back-up arrangements would
be relegated to longer term, less frequent
updates.

I'm thinking of 1TB disks, since it's easier
to find SATA controllers and large cases for
eight drives than it is for ten, and Samsungs
because they're a different brand to what I'm
already using, and much cheaper than Hitachi.

Comments?

Also, has the recent spate of failing Seagate
hard drives been restricted mainly to the
7200.11 and the Chinese 7200.10 models?

How does one tell the Chinese-produced models from other models?

 

[Arno Wagner]

How does one tell the Chinese-produced models from other models?

A big label of doom containing the senctence
"Made in China" on the disk.

Arno

 

[Squeeze]

Ken wrote in news:[email protected]

How does one tell the Chinese-produced models from other models?

That is such a good question.
Glad that there is still a few smart people
around here to ask intelligent questions.

 

[Ken]

A big label of doom containing the senctence
"Made in China" on the disk.

Arno

So what you are saying is that one cannot tell until the box is opened? ??

KK

 

[Squeeze]

Ken wrote in news:[email protected]

A. J. Moss wrote:
Is there any reason for me to be suspicious
or worried about using the Samsung HD103UJ?
[snip]
How does one tell the Chinese-produced models from other models?

A big label of doom containing the senctence
"Made in China" on the disk.

Arno

So what you are saying is that one cannot tell until the box is opened? ??

Is that a problem, Ken?