sixthofmay

Yet more Maxtor and IBM drive failures...

Recommended Posts

Most maxtor drives use a Breather hole in the top cover. I cannot see the pictures posted in this thread (link is FNF), so I cannot verify that we're all talking about the same things.

However, the suggestion that Maxtor (or anyone else) might be intentionally blocking the Breather to cause early failure is absurd. Businesses simply don't operate this way, at least not for long and/or in secret. Like the fabled "100MPG Carbuerator" that the car manufacturers have been "hiding" for the last 40 years. Nice for the conspiracy theorist, really gets the blood pumping, but not a realistic accusation supported by evidence.

Without being able to see the picture, I can't be sure of what it is you're actually looking at. If you can get the link alive again so I can see, I'll be happy to let you know what's what!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most maxtor drives use a Breather hole in the top cover.  I cannot see the pictures posted in this thread (link is FNF), so I cannot verify that we're all talking about the same things. 

Assuming he's talking about the white label I think he is, he's complaining that the actuator assembly mounting screw is covered up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. I checked. The Breather on Diamond Max 16 HDDs is integrated through the bottom of the base casting. This is under the PCBA and is NOT visible to the end user.

Any stickers on the top of the HDD are there to cover openings for screws and those stickers SHOULD NOT BE REMOVED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.

Whatever these particular users are seeing, it not what they think!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this is kinda old, but I'm shopping for a new hard drive and remembering the Maxtor drive that failed.

I had a Maxtor drive (30GB, 52000RPM), and it failed after 1 year of use when the warranty ran out. It was a weird failure, too. The data is sometimes readable, sometimes not (when it's not readable the whole computer freezes and make some kind of noise). It was very hard to recover the data since I keep having to restart the computer. I try format the hard drive afterwards, but it freezed the computer.

After that I bought a Western Digital (80GB, 7200RPM), but it also failed after 1 year. But I was able to recover some of the data and reformat it. I'm still using it though with a couple megabytes of bad sectors.

Before anyone say it's my computer, all this time I have an old Western Digital 20GB that I begin with this computer. This hard drive have no problems whatsoever for 5 years (still no problems now). There was also this Segate 1.2 GB that's been running for 8 years on my old computer.

So, now I'm staying away from new Maxtor and Western Digital drives. I'm looking at the Hitachi drives (I know about the IBM thing, but I hope they won't repeat the same mistake) or some other Japanese brand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I had a Maxtor drive (30GB, 52000RPM), and it failed after 1 year of use when the warranty ran out.

201538[/snapback]

One might have heard overrevving ain't good for a car engine, but that probably is true for brusless electric motors also... ^____^

I'm also feeling a bit uneasy with using Maxtors since even some "enterprise quality" drives like MaxLine +II have a terrible reliability rating here on StorageReview's reliability survey. Also some subperforming (at least when it comes to access times) MaxLine IIIs have been shipped to the consumers. (Especially the older generation) OneTouch external hard drives are toasters without adequate cooling... and combined with the end user comments on DiamondMax +9 and MaxLine +II running hot even in actively cooled environment, having one in a fanless aluminum case is starting to make me really nervous... And the fact that one OneTouch 300GB (MaxLine II, 5400rpm) already died on me (or actually just started to die, but I intend to RMA it anyway since I cannot run ANY diagnostics for it because the drive is in a USB case) even without having any heat problems. 1200000 hours MTBF with both MaxLine II and MaxLine +II? At least SR's reliability survey doesn't support such figures.

I don't really have blind confidence on other manufacturers as well. One Samsung 40GB drive, having the XP os installed on it, has some uncorrectable bad sectors. Luckily, so far no system halts. One U-series Seagate (Win98SE installed on it) makes occasionally strange noises when seeking, sometimes halts and afterwards recalibrates, still SMART does not show problems and no bad sectors. And damn U-series Seagate is SLOW. Makes me wanna compare it with my Bigfoots.

There might be a reliability issue with 300GB and 400GB Seagate 7800.8. Also I do not trust the performance specs given for Seagate drives. While some of MaxLine IIIs doesn't meet the specs, Seagate have had drive models in the past without a single specimen meeting the access time specs... and not even coming close to the specs (for exaple with Seagate U Series 5: 8.9 claimed versus 13.8 when tested by retailers (no AAM used). That's not just an error in specs nor a slightly optimistic value, it was a pure LIE, a lie that went on and on for generation of drives to the next.

Next time when I decide to buy more capacity, I'll probably go for Hitachi DeskStars and a do-it-yourself external enclosure. I know about the issues with 75GXP "DeathStars" but I believe Hitachi is not in the position to let such catastrophe to happen again. And I know IBM used to lie about the problem to the OEMs. Lying was just as systematic as with Seagate and it's claimed access times... Seagate just managed to avoid making a scandal since their drives continued to work from year after another (even though they're working performance was always way out of specs). 7800.8 has a claimed random seek time of 8 ms. Added with the average latency of 4.2 ms gives random access time of 12.2 ms. Here in SR forum there's been some posts with benchmark data... they say that random access times are over 14 ms... even over 15 ms ( http://forums.storagereview.net/index.php?...ndpost&p=189495 ). Do we have yet another subperforming Seagate in the market? I'm curious if that might be the case. Hopefully SR has the new testbench up and running soon so that we may see a review on these drives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"7800.8" means of course 7200.8... the 8th gen Barracuda. I mistype that one quite often, I guess. Also there's some other mistyping but you'll probably manage to understand my post anyway so I'm not going to correct them in this post (editing possibility has time-outed a loooong time ago).

And I have to emphasize that this quote

One Samsung 40GB drive, having the XP os installed on it, has some uncorrectable bad sectors. Luckily, so far no system halts. One U-series Seagate (Win98SE installed on it) makes occasionally strange noises when seeking, sometimes halts and afterwards recalibrates, still SMART does not show problems and no bad sectors.
has only my personal experiences in it. I do not believe it to have any greater meaning to it than the fact that every drive fails, sooner or later, and that no manufacturer makes perfect drives.

It's hard not to judge a manufacturer by personal experience. I know, since having the MaxLine II fail, the image of Maxtor didn't really get polished from my point of view. :lol:

If reviews on the net show reason, giving second chances to drive makers like Maxtor, Seagate or Samsung is totally possible. Currently I value performance over silent operation, so choosing Hitachi instead of Samsung. Reliability is a thing that goes without saying. Variance in performance is usually a better indicator than performance itself. MaxLines have much variance. Seagate has bad performance. Seagate might still be reliable? Still, I prefer a manufacturer who promise it's products realistic values.

http://www.tweakzone.nl/extreviews/4580

15/16.5 ms average access times? When substracted the 4.17ms latency, it's still 11...12 ms per randon seek. Seagate promises 8 ms (that's ½ ms less than for Hitachi 7K250). If Seagate CEO had been made of wood, he'd probably have a nose long enough to reach the moon...

Edited by whiic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: Haha. But I wouldn't give Maxtor/WD a second chance until I find Hitachi or some other brand to be much worse than Maxtor. I think as customers, we cannot give out second chances or the manufacturers will never care. The only way they'll care is through their pockets -- not your lost data or hard work. And we can make them care by not buying another hard drive from a manufacture that fails to deliver. They won't care if they know even though today's hard drives have problems, customers will still buy the next bigger and faster and maybe more problematic hard drive that comes out.

And I've some more time to read the other posts. I must admit I'll take everything that MaxtorSCSI say with a grain of salt (nothing personal, but it's hard for me to believe MaxtorSCSI opinion is unbiased -- intentional or not).

I don't know how MaxtorSCSI can make any kind of comparison between a hard drive and a car, or between the conditions on a hard drive and the conditions on a fighter jet pilot. I would let those that are interested check how much force is exerted on the hard drive compare to the pilot base on the numbers given. There's also something weird about the way MaxtorSCSI calculate the hours of operation for the hard drive and the difference between the car (I'll let the others check :)

MaxtorSCSI also said that the OEM hard drive return rate is 1-2% but but never mention the return rate of all hard drives. That post seems to have a lot of numbers that don't really mean anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I normally don't respond to taunts, but I'm in a cranky mood today and I feel a need to point out that "meanie", a conference member that joined TODAY, with a total of 2 posts at the time he posted his "analysis" of my comments, is hardly in a position to critique anything I might say here.

There is no question that I have a bias towards Maxtor product. I make no bones of the fact that I work for Maxtor (my signature, on each and every post, clearly states the fact) and it would be foolish to think that I wasn't biased in favor of my employer.

However, I don't allow my bias to extend to any criticism of my competitors products. Read my posts, you won't find any comments to the effect of "mine's better than theirs". There are plenty of "I think mine's great because" comments (typically including a clear qualifying statement to the effect that I'm "selling" so you readers won't confuse my comments with the technical elements of my post), but never any direct comparisons to anyone elses product, since I don't have any inside information on competitors products and any such comments would be grossly inappropriate.

That being the case, there are some things that are fundamental to the design, construction, and operation of HDDs. Everyone, no matter the manufacturer, is subject to the same "laws of physics". If I make a statement about disk drives in general (as opposed to one that says "Maxtor drives all have..."), you can be sure that I'm making a statement of fact that applies to a reasonably equal degree to everyone's HDDs.

As for the specific criticism leveled at my posts by "meanie", I can only say I am amazed. He states that there's something "weird" about the numbers I quoted earlier in this thread, but the comment "I'll let others check" clearly indicates that he hasn't made an effort to do the math himself (like he can't just multiply 24*365 to compute hours/year, and then multiply that by 60 to compute Minutes/year, and then multiply that by RPM to compute spidle revolutions/year, which in the case of 10K RPM drives comes out to 24*365=8760 * 60 = 525600 * 10000 = 5.256 * 10^9 which is exactly what I'd stated).

I've been in the disk drive design/manufacturing industry for nearly 20 years, as part of both the engineering development, customer support, and quality organizations. It would be nice if, before someone ridiculed my comments, that they at least detailed their "curriculum vitea" to demonstrate that they have the qualifications to make the critique meaningful!

Sheesh!

'Nuf said. I shant rise to the bait a second time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you putting emphsis on the day I joined and the number of posts I made? So since I'm new to the board, I'm cannot make credible "analysis" (your word) of your post? That was not a taunt. I'm pointing out mistakes in your post. I never said you posted one brand is better than other. I'm simply implying that people naturally defend their own line of work.

As the things I say others can check, I know exactly what the answers are, but just thought people should see it by now ... if not, they won't really get it even if I posted the answers. I just posted the hints.

1. Comparison of force on fighter pilot and a hard drive. What's the force on hard drive (60Gs) vs. the force on the pilot (7Gs)? Illogical comparison here in any case.

2. Why is the comparison of the hours of operation for a hard drive is 24 hours a day 7 days a week while the operation of a car is not? Why is the basis of comparison completely different? Also illogical to make this comparison even with the same operational hours.

3. Why post the OEM return rates, not the return rates of all drives.

I don't work for a hard drive manufacturer, but I'm educated as an engineer. Please don't throw those numbers around if they don't make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And I have run on a UPS the entire time...  So handling and/or source should not be an issue...
Hah! UPS is about as careful with packages as the Army is with artillery targets. I've had so many packages destroyed by their incompetance that I refuse to have anything delicate shipped by them. Where do you think they got their nickname, UPS = "OOPS"? :)

UPS sucks.

61873[/snapback]

UPS = Uninterpretable Power Supply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@meanie: personally I doubt that you're an engineer. If you don't understand that

1. OEMs buy much more drives than single users and have a keen eye on cost and therefore on RMAs (time is money, reliability saves money and time)

2. OEMs have technical stuff having a keen eye on their equipment in contrast to single users who understand that their hdd has died when it stops to work completely (not when SMART rings neither when bad blocks develop)

3. you of course can compare an engine running 24/7/365 to a hdd, but you simply don't understand that this comparison would be far worse (actually worse for the engine) than that MaxtorSCSI did

4. the comparison between the hdd and the pilots simply show what giant forces are normal in a modern hdd

then I just say, you aren't an engineer, or if you are, I don't understand what stops you from understanding these numbers, nor what stops you from posting more clear answers with more in detail written arguments.

It's more than obvious that MaxtorSCSI's comparisons are not biased towards hdds. To be honest I would say compare the data as you said with identical running times and you see what bunch of crap an engine is.

Cheers, Hannes

PS:

@MaxtorSCSI: thanks for your postings. It's very interesting to get detailed infos about those beasts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be honest I would say compare the data as you said with identical running times and you see what bunch of crap an engine is.

It depends how we compare them.

Running time: a HDD can run several years without problems

Maintenance: ...and without maintenance. (No oil changes.)

Precision: some drives' heads have a flying height of 10 nanometers. Can't really compare any part in a car engine to have such precision.

Reliability: HDDs are required to function without making any errors. Having a (non-recoverable) error rate of 1 in 10E14 is quite common. Car engines misfire on quite a regular basis. As long as they don't misfire on every revolution, one cannot even see the change in operation of the engine.

But why are car engines "unreliable"?

Power: HDDs ~8 W. Car engine ~100000 W

Source of that power: electricity (from outside, regulated source) vs. internal combustion and exhaust fumes.

Amount of moving parts: HDD's just have spindle motors and head assemblies. Compare them to all the moving parts in a car engine.

Operation conditions: HDD can be used in temperatures of 5-55'C. Which car manufacturer prohibits starting the car engine with ambient temperature lower than +5'C?

Etc, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a_h:

I'm educated as an engineer. I understand those numbers, but they don't make any sense with what he's trying to imply (hard drives are so hard to manufacture, we're lucky to get a working one -- I exaggerate a bit here :P). But you may think as you wish, I care not. On the 'net, everyone can claim to be what ever.

1. I don't know that OEMs are the ones that buy the most drives. If you can show me the numbers and the sources, I will concede.

2. As for the car comparison, I think whiic above cover it very well. One more thing I would add is the fact that hard drives are running in a very isolated and controlled environment.

3. As for the pilot comparison, since you didn't bother (or know how) to calculate the force, I'll do it using the numbers he provided.

I'll calculate the ratio with weight of the hard drive being 1.3lbs with 60Gs and average weight of pilot being 175lbs with 7Gs:

(175*7)/(1.3*60) = 1570% As you can see, the force on the pilot is 1570% greater than that's on the hard drive. But such comparison is not logical to begin with. There're no "giant forces" on the hard drives as the numbers suggest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanie, your problem is that you have taken my *analogies* too literally.

The metaphors I used (and often use in this conference) were intended to simplify the message in a way that non-technical readers would be able to intuitively comprehend the basic concept without needing to understand the underlying engineering. They were not intended to withstand the rigors of technical critique and to be honest, I never considered that anyone with technical knowledge would fail to recognize the analogies for what they were, i.e., analogies.

That's probably my bad.

"Whiic" is absolutely correct in his critique of the car engine analogy. Heat is a primary contributor to failure, and a car engine dissipates a substantially greater amount of power than a HDD. And of course, the number of parts is also a primary contributor to failure, and a car engine has a lot more moving parts than a HDD.

It doesn't change the fact that a HDD is a marvel of modern engineering, a mechanical device with tolerances measured in fractions of a microinch, that is designed to operate continuously for years on end without ever even having an error (never mind an outright failure).

You are, I'm afraid, absolutely wrong in your critique of the Pilot analogy. Though I will admit that my analogy was fundamentally flawed, so throwing stones is of questionable morality.

A disseratation on the nature of static and dynamic forces would be inappropriate for this conference, so I won't bother trying to provide much detail. Suffice it to say that your analysis doesn't consider the dynamics of the acceleration (the rate at which the acceleration is applied to the system, AKA "jerk"). A pilot in a high-rate turn sees G-forces come on at a very slow rate compared to the forces applied to a HDD when dropped to the surface of a desk. The impact with the surface of the desk takes only a few milliseconds whereas the pilot's high-G turn takes many seconds to reach "peak". A Pilot in a high-rate turn can withstand a much higher level of G-force without harm than if he were dropped from a height to the ground. You also fail to consider the yield strength and compliance/elasticity of the materials being stressed (the Pilot's rear-end is quite "plastic" and is able to absorb a lot of stress induced deformation without damage, returning to it's original shape when the forces are removed. But the metals used for disk and bearing surfaces inside the HDD stay are quite the opposite and if the force exceeds the yield strength of the materials, they stay dented once the forces are removed).

Because it's the rate at which the acceleration is applied that ultimately matters, G-shock specs are usually specified as an acceleration over time (for example, an HDD non-op shock spec might be 250Gs@1ms).

A drive will "see" these kinds of high accelerations with drops of only a couple of inches to a hard surface.

In spite of their apparent high G-ratings compared to, say a Pilot, a HDD is actually a very fragile thing. The most accurate metaphor from my previous posts was the NitroGlycerin analogy. Treat your HDD like it'll explode at the slightest provocation and you're maximizing the reliabilty of the device.

You can either trust me on this based on my long experience in the HDD industry or not, it's your critical data you're gambling with!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can either trust me on this based on my long experience in the HDD industry or not, it's your critical data you're gambling with!

201865[/snapback]

Interesting comment, since in my experience in buying Maxtor IDE drives, you are indeed gambling with your data...

I might have a little more respect for them if they actually honored their warranties...

But, that said, I got Spinrite 6 a little bit ago. I now run it on drives before I Ebay 'em to check 'em for problems...

I was amazed at all of the ECC corrections that were happening on the Maxtor drives I was testing... Corrections are going on THAT often behind the scenes on these drives? Wow... It blew me away... Hundreds, thousands, sometimes 10K+ ECC corrections going on, just to scan the drive for errors...

I mean, the drive works, and passed the tests I threw at it, but I was still amazed at the #s...

And then...

I decided very recently to sell all of my Samsung 160GB drives that have been running 24/7 in RAIDs for over a yr...

So, they all get tested...

Behold, after scanning 12 of them, nine have passed the same tests WITHOUT A SINGLE NEED TO USE ECC DATA, and the other three? One needing a whopping 10 ECC corrections (crap, double-digit time already Samsung?), the other three, and the other just one...

After experiencing this, and knowing I still have ~10 Samsungs and ~24 Maxtor drives that I could still test to see what Spinrite has to say about those drives, I've already come (yet again) to the same conclusion:

I AM NEVER, EVER BUYING (OR ACCEPTING) A stinker-QUALITY MAXTOR PRODUCT AGAIN...

I do consider my data critical... My experience tells me Maxtor is a game of Russian roulette...

So, MaxtorSCSI, take that nugget of experience and shove it down your piehole...

Yes, it's amazing that these things work, given all the engineering it takes to get it right...

But, the fact is: other manufs are getting it right...

Sorry, but yes, shove that down your piehole. and choke on it a bit...

I do have to say I am amazed, though. I was willing to assume I have something to do with my Maxtor problems... But, all of these drives have run in the same machines, with the same PSUs, on the same configs... Personally, I even feel the Samsungs were shipped to me under-packaged...

But, behold, Samsungs are proving to me what quality engineering can mean...

And, stinker, did I mention they typically cost ~10% less than Maxtor crap?

Shove that in your pipe and smoke it...

But, seriously, and unfortunately, I don't see much hope in my ever allowing a Maxtor product in my machines again... WD/Seagate/Samsung/Hitachi would all have to crash and burn for that to happen...

By that time, maybe we won't even be using hard drives anymore...

Lastly, sorry for the rant, everyone.

And, MaxtorSCSI, it's nothing personal. I just think you suck...

(I have noted though that Maxtor started sucking the big one shortly after the Ford/Firestone controversy... Kinda made me wonder if Maxtor starting hiring all of them fired so-called tire engineers because they had that "engineer" title in their resume?)

Lastly, I wouldn't be so bitter if it wasn't for their once being a time when I would swear by Maxtor product, only to be burned by 'em for supporting their product...

(Then again, if I'd have had Spinrite back then, I would have realized Maxtor drives SPINWRONG, and dropped support before they crashed and burned, so maybe my bad for having some trust in them...)

For anyone still reading: I am not talking about one bad drive, or a few bad drives. I am talking about running tests on ~four DOZEN Maxtor drives, and every test coming up that the drive (at the least) sucks, or just fails completely... They also came from a variety of suppliers for me to get to that #... So, if suppliers are to blame, you'd think I'd get a good one in there somewhere... No?

FWIW: My Samsungs all came from Newegg or Zipzoomfly, in case the supplier really is the problem/solution in the equation...

Then again, my Maxtors from Newegg suck... So who knows?

Either way, kinda blows away the supplier/handling variable in the equation...

Uggh, I cannot believe my hatred of Maxtor allows me to waste my time with these posts... I need to get a life...

I need to buy only quality hard drives...

Even if the quality drives are cheaper, I must stay the course... Even if it means savings hundreds of $$$ in the process...

And never again purposely gambling with my critical data...

Sorry, MaxtorSCSI, but for some reason you sound like the type that when I worked for HP, I would be instrumental in seeing them shown the door...

I'll never forget the one, who on paper, was highly educated, with the "20-yr" bullshit and everything... until he gets on the floor, and you have to let him know he doesn't know what he's doing... Which he reacts childishly to, with the verbal threats of ass-kickin' that "may be today, may be tomorrow"...

Can ya believe the stupid mofo was actually surprised when security walked him out of the building?

I piece of paper stating your education and abilities is only as good as the ass you wipe it with... Sorry...

Then again, as Dennis Miller would say: "Ah, happy fellow it. Who wants pie?!"

MaxtorSCSI: I'll save ya a slice. (shove that down your hole...)

And, no, I'm not an engineer... I just know how to take parts and throw them in a machine and make it all work...

But, to use one of MaxtorSCSI's analogies:

If I buy 40 Fords, and they all have the same f-ing problem, you may sympathize with my comment "Ford sucks the big one!"

BUt...

If I then buy 20 Hondas, a few Toyotas and a Mercedes (I own some Seagate and Hitachis, not previously mentioned...), and they all run brilliantly and smoothly...

Does that now perhaps QUALIFY me to make the statement: "Ford sucks the big one!"

?

Enough of this: I'm gettin' some pie...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. I don't know that OEMs are the ones that buy the most drives.  If you can show me the numbers and the sources, I will concede.

201809[/snapback]

I can't give you numbers, but I think that as a general point nearly everyone in the business acknowleges that the OEMs buy way more than ~90% of the drives sold, simply because so few people actually build their own PCs. You can think about all the DIY-builders that you see at LANfests - but then think that Pepsi Co. buys 10 times that amount on a single order to Dell. Among home users, OEMs definately have a substantial lead - but when you throw in corporate PC sales, the OEMs have 99% of that market, and it's just huge. End result is that the OEMs really do have the bulk of the market...and by a wide margin.

FWIW - that ratio IS changing - the lifespan of corporate PCs is getting longer (how much processing power do you need to run Word, PowerPoint, and Project?), and the new generation of teenagers would rather build a SLI-equipped, RAID 0 gaming machine than supercharge a V8 in their daddy's garage. But the OEMs still win, and probably always will...

Future Shock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been following this thread, as I tend to avoid "this drive sucks" threads in general. IMHO, having been around PCs for over two decades, all drives are subject to failure, and each manufacturer has several models with worse than average reliability - if you think about it, they HAVE to: not every drive design can be "above average"!

However, as a mod, I am becoming concerned with both the tenor and verbage in this thread. Personal attacks are never productive, and targetting someone for personal attacks just because you don't agree with their POV or they work for a manufacturer that you have decided to avoid is beyond the pale. I hope that various posters to this thread have been cranky, drunk, or similary out of sorts, and that this behavior will not be ongoing. What I find particularly upsetting is that the posters involved here are people that I know to be generally responsible and reasonable. Please "shake hands" and let's continue in a more moderate tone.

Future Shock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, yes, every drive is going to fail, but I don't expect to buy 3 drives and 2 drives fail just after a year. If the manufacturers have models that have worse reliability, then they shouldn't label them with such high MTTF/MTBF.

I'm not really mean as my username suggests. I thought my tone was pretty moderate, but I guess it could be taken personally, and I apologize if anyone is offended. I'm only here to share what I know and learn what I don't. I'm sure most people are here for the same reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same story here... Maxtors failing left and right.. Highest failure rate of all brands in my place. They tend to fail suddenly most of the time (also prematurely and spectacularly as well). The silmline drives have the most failed, and also quite a lot of DM9s too. <_<

Problems are (most common to least common):

1. Boot failure - missing partition and boot record, missing or corrupted system files and folders, thousands of slow and bad sectors out of nowhere... Ocassionally reformatting revives the drive (temporarily).

2. Keeps restarting upon startup - when disabled restart on errors then BSODs appear, thousands of slow and bad sectors out of nowhere (again! as abovementioned.. includes missing and corrupted system files and folders)

3. System hangs - boots into desktop but system freezes and/or extremely slow, clicking anything takes nearly forever to move... Originally many people here attributed this problem to viruses but after checking, it was the drive's fault..

4. Corrupt files - cyclic redundancy errors and/or BSODs when copying/moving files, corrupted files, inaccessible file or folders.. When happens, it involves not single or few files BUT many files and/or multiple folders together. Reformatting will freeze or reveal missing and bad sectors.

5. Noisy drive - scraping/ringing/mechanical/ticking/clunking sounds, total failure and cannot be detected

6. BIOS detects wrong drive name - usually a sign of firmware corruption

7. No spin-up - no seek or spin-up sounds whatsoever, BIOS could not detect drive

A lot of DM9s suffer problems #2 and #3. Again most of these appear suddenly, sometimes without any SMART errors/alerts. :rolleyes:

Btw, recently serviced a PC with a dead slimline Maxtor which was 2+ years old.. had HDD replaced. Anyway during those 2 years the owner had reformatted/reinstalled many times due to boot failure (his friends mentioned it was a "common problem" anyway), but this time he couldn't format (takes long time and system freeze) and brought it to my attention.. Diagnosis: drive failed (detectable in BIOS but inacessible, PowerMax couldn't save it either..). :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

there are grading system for hdd.

there are the system integrators OEM like dell, hp, acer or lenovo, ibm, fujitsu, etc. they orders in huge numbers. 30 000 a week. usually one yr wty and they get prime hdd, the best.

there are also the distr OEMs like ebay, directron that distributes or sell to anyone like you and me and any small size pc assembly company. these hdd are 5 yr wty. basically anyone can be an oem distr, just buy more than 1000 hdd and get discount and distrubute yourself. they get basically any hdd tha seagate sells to them and no quality control and qualification for them. whatever lot gets reject by HP is decon to oem distr.

and there is also the retail which seagate sells direct by usually online. they get the worst hdd. any hdd left over in the factory.

for staff section, get the rework a few times and finally pass hdd. so these will die very fast. so what can you expect staff price.

system intergrator OEMs and distribution OEMs ratio are nearly equal. can check from hdd financial report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hdd and distribution OEMs are partners in business out to make money from you and me. they will not bother and just go ahead and repair the hdd regardless of the size of failures.

but its a different for system int OEM like HP and dell very personal customer and failure analysis attention.

the best data to get is from the repair centre. that is where the failed hdd are being repaired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Consumption of drives where I work is something like 30,000+ a month on a busy month.

Maxtor drive failures in the usual models here-- Diamondmax 9, Diamondmax 10, Maxline Plus II, and Maxline III all show the expected 0.5-to-2% failure rate. We have had a few spikes to 4-5% but they were confined to drives purchased at the same time and hence from the same lot.

Hitachi, Seagate, and Western Digital show similar failure rates from our data, with similar occasional spikes as well as a bad batch or two crops up. We've been fairly pleased the last 2 years, no maker has had a real "lemon" of a design. (aside from the WD firmware issues with RAID. heh.)

According to failure analysis done by several vendors, including Maxtor, of returned drives to them, improper drive handling causes something like 50-60% of drive failures. I believe this rate has gone down somewhat as we have made some minor changes that Maxtor suggested.

FWIW we haven't had any Maxtor guys here from Longmont in a few months, so my personal observations here could be out of date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Consumption of drives where I work is something like 30,000+ a month on a busy month.

Maxtor drive failures in the usual models here-- Diamondmax 9, Diamondmax 10, Maxline Plus II, and Maxline III all show the expected 0.5-to-2% failure rate. We have had a few spikes to 4-5% but they were confined to drives purchased at the same time and hence from the same lot.

Hitachi, Seagate, and Western Digital show similar failure rates from our data, with similar occasional spikes as well as a bad batch or two crops up. We've been fairly pleased the last 2 years, no maker has had a real "lemon" of a design. (aside from the WD firmware issues with RAID. heh.)

According to failure analysis done by several vendors, including Maxtor, of returned drives to them, improper drive handling causes something like 50-60% of drive failures. I believe this rate has gone down somewhat as we have made some minor changes that Maxtor suggested.

FWIW we haven't had any Maxtor guys here from Longmont in a few months, so my personal observations here could be out of date.

202003[/snapback]

you intergrate hdds into systems. your concern is only shipping to the customers in good conditionfor first few mnths, so call quality issues. What happens after 6 mnths , one year where the real reliability issues kicks in. this is where the repair centre comes in. unfortunately most system intergrators only provide 1 yr wty. thus data after one yr or 6 mnths is not collected. the hdd just get replaced by the new owners after one yr.

but OEM distr hdds that most of us owned ara used for 3 yrs or 5 yrs wty.

so i still think repair centre is a better gauge of reliability of hdd, six mnths, one yr , two years, 3 years. and now seagate going to test 5 yrs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

another factor is the seashell cases like seagate's. unfortunately now they are shipping in ESD bag. so their claim of how seashell can reduce hdd handling damage is now back to square one, esd bags.

samsung, hitachi now ships hdd in transparent protective cases like seashell.

maxtor and wd still using esd bags and so seagate now seagate back to esd bags. why, is it money problem? i feel very secure when i am holding purchased hdd in a seashell case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
now seagate back to esd bags.  why, is it money problem?  i feel very secure when i am holding purchased hdd in a seashell case.

202092[/snapback]

Yes I totally agree, it shouldn't add more than a few cents to the price to ship in the plastic shells should it? I'm almost paraniod now about how my drives were handled prior to my receiving them. It's very frustrating when you know that you've treated the drive more carefully than an egg shell but still get higher than expected failure rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now