Western Digital

>>55480176
Saying the same things over again doesn't make your point any more meaningful. If you're going to speak English; learn it

>>55480234
WD shill spotted

Why do you care fagface? fuck off

>>55480176
Why is the failure rate for HGST so much lower than WD, given that WD owns HGST? Can't WD just ask them how to make HDs that aren't festering dogshit?

File: Insert_meme_here.png (66KB, 997x775px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 997x775px

>>55480176
>calling an arbitrary thing a meme

B-b-b-but /gee/ told me Seagate drives were trash! How could this be?!

My all 14 Seagate drives have failed, none of 10 WD drive haven't.
Thats why

>>55480675
The HGST in question are enterprise drives.
The WDs are consumer grade.

>>55481186
oh

>>55481186
Also the sample size is different for each brand and each year, and each manufacturer has different sizes and models which are all combined into single points on the chart. So yeah, the chart is rubbish.

>>55481255
>>55481186
or rather... so I thought.
Looking at the data that OP is taken from, a large number are Deskstars, ie consumer grade.
>https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-q3-2015/

Most recent data.
>https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-stats-q1-2016/

I've never had a Seagate drive fail me. That said, I've never had any computer part fail me except for a 4gb stick of mushkin ram.

>>55480176
How did Seagate's failure rates drop that much?

>>55481431
Because BlackBlaze are idiots.

>>55480176
who did this statistics? different use cases, different failure rate.

>>55481442

If you don't read their stats properly, you are the idiot. If I'm not mistaken, they run a successful business which is heavily based on hard disks.

>>55481449
no, they use all 1000s of HDDs for exactly the same purpose...

>>55481404
I had a seagate literally start vibrating louder and louder over the course of 3 minutes until it suddenly died. My OS kept going. That was an interesting day.

>>55480176
> Outdated graph comparing consumer grade HDDs

>>55481659
They run a cloud storage facility. Their statistics are based on all kinds of HDDs regardless of quality, brand, sample size, source of HDDs or even comparable conditions. Yet they tend to create simplistic charts just as the one in OP.

Their findings can be useful, but definitely shouldn't be trusted unconditionally.

File: SamLFreeman.jpg (11KB, 260x194px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 260x194px

>>55480176
>Why do people buy into the Intel meme, they cost more than AMD, are less reliable and cost more than AMD.

>Why do people buy into the Razer meme, they cost more than Corsair, are less reliable and cost more than Corsair

>Why do people buy into the Nvidia meme, they cost more than AMD, are less reliable and cost more than AMD

>Why do people buy into the Apple meme, they cost more than Android, are less reliable and cost more than Android

>Why do people buy into the Play Station meme, they cost more than the Xbox, are less reliable and cost more than Xbox

>Why do people buy into the Ford meme, they cost more than Honda, are less reliable and cost more than Hona

>Why do people buy into the your mom meme, they cost more than your sister, are less reliable and cost more than your sister.


See anon...it works with everything.