I remember seeing something years ago about their 3.5tb drives being bad because they were actually repackaged 4tb drives that didn't meet spec. Not sure if this is the same.
Doesn't really answer the question. In reliability engineering the probability density function would be the portion of the initial number of drives that failed in a given time period, while the hazard function is the chance of it failing in a given time period provided that it has survived until that time. They are very different measures.
Still doesn't answer the question.
Suppose you have 100 hard drives, and 25 fail each year (so 4 years of 25 fails per year) the probability density function would be:
year 1: 25%
year 2: 25%
year 3: 25%
year 4: 25%
While the hazard function would be:
year 1: 25% (25 of the 100)
year 2: 33% (25 of the remaining 75)
year 3: 50% (25 of the remaining 50)
year 4: 100% (25 of the remaining 25)
I'm asking which measure they used for reliability, since the image doesn't specify.
>mfw I own multiple 3Tb barracudas and a 4TB toshiba.
>own multiple HSGT 4T drives
>my model number isn't listed
I'm not sure if this is fear or elation.
I haven't had a disk failure since the late 90s (WD 45GB under warranty). Still I hold backups of every single byte I have. Given that Backblaze combined failure percentage is 4.81% I think the best strategy continues to be buying hdds from different manufactures and batches and keep simple backups.
>Your external hard drives need to be connected to your computer and scanned by Backblaze at least once every 30 days in order to keep them backed up.
Yeah fuck that. Make it 6 months and I will consider wasting a weekend doing this but once every 30 days is a no go. This is nothing more that a cloud backup of online data. Anything that isn't on the system is not considered data unless you let it sniff it once every 30 days. THAT IS A BIG CATCH.
They give you a client to install in your system. Files older than 30 days that cannot be accessed by the client (say on a offline hdd or on a external hdd) are deleted from their backup.
I wonder what will happen if the fiber is cut on your side and the ISP takes more than 30 days to fix it. Will they delete all you data then?
As I said this is NOT unlimited backup. This is backup of online data. It may still be worth it. I do have circa 10TB of online data but given that I would still have to manage offline data backups what is the fucking point of paying them if I still have to manage backups on my side.
Maybe quoting people who know how to properly conduct test would better help your argument.
Backblaze took the scientific process, ate it, shat it out, stirred it with poo from the loo, and made charts with the results.
Seagate makes the drives with the very highest failure rate in this report, along with the drives with the 5th highest failure rate.
I have a Seagate 2TB external on my desk, bought on a massive sale just for price. I haven't abused it and use it rarely and it's failing anyway.184 End-to-End_Error 0x0032 099 099 099 Old_age Always FAILING_NOW 1
187 Reported_Uncorrect 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
188 Command_Timeout 0x0032 100 099 000 Old_age Always - 1 1 1
189 High_Fly_Writes 0x003a 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel 0x0022 052 039 045 Old_age Always In_the_past 48 (24 181 59 40 0)
191 G-Sense_Error_Rate 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
192 Power-Off_Retract_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 46
193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 030 030 000 Old_age Always - 141945
194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0022 048 061 000 Old_age Always - 48 (0 17 0 0 0)
197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0012 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0
198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0010 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0
199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x003e 200 200 000 Old_age Always - 0
240 Head_Flying_Hours 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age Offline - 1858h+16m+27.035s
241 Total_LBAs_Written 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age Offline - 17500925678
242 Total_LBAs_Read 0x0000 100 253 000 Old_age Offline - 7783972267