Sara Yamamoto
Adult Dragon Master
- 31
- Posts
- 13
- Years
- Age 31
- Seen Oct 19, 2015
Can anyone tell me which hard drive maker is realiable?
Their externals are hit and miss. The WD Elements are fine, but the Passports are rubbish.I have always used WD, from selecting them for internal or external.
Never let me down once.
Their externals are hit and miss. The WD Elements are fine, but the Passports are rubbish.
Samsung make the nicest casing.
Yeah, the Elements are just what they say they are, basic. Which is a good thing, as you don't pay extra for the software and "sleek" casing, that is only less sturdy. Plus, they use proprietary plugs on the USB cable, so if the cable breaks. Warranty. If the enclosure breaks, you can't just rip the drive out to pull the data off like you otherwise could, as they use a custom connection to the HDD's PCB, so there's no SATA.Oh yah, forgot about that. I only have the Elements, so it is all good!
Are we talking external drives or internal? Because the external WD drives are just horrible.
Internal: Western Digital, Samsung, Seagate
External: Samsung, Seagate.
Seagate's old 7200.11 generation had a few issues, which is why people have a grudge, but the current 7200.12 generation is fine.
Have a look to see what the closest RMA centre is or look at price. You will pay a little more for WD. No amount of wise-purchasing can beat having backups.
Can anyone tell me which hard drive maker is realiable?
WD.
I don't see why everyone is hating on seagate. I've used a few Seagates and they have lasted 5 years each. They would proably last another year, but im replacing my computer every five years as well.
Maxtor however just sucks. I've had nothing but problems with those, even the older drives.
Anecdotal. I see WDs fail over Seagates at a 3:1 ratio. The last generation was bad, but the current one is fine.Anyway, Seagate hard drives have a bad reputation for reliability with almost everyone I meet. In December, I thought I would give them a try despite the warnings and brought one. It died after a little over 6 weeks of operation. I will never buy another Seagate hard drive.
Anecdotal. I see WDs fail over Seagates at a 3:1 ratio. The last generation was bad, but the current one is fine.
Let's not get into an argument over semantics, his meaning was pretty obvious. He meant that your one case of failure isn't indicative of the brand as a whole. Based on the context of his earlier statements, he meant that older Seagate drives may have seen some problems but the newer ones are fine, or at the very least better than Western Digital drives.You might want to say what "Anecdotal" means. Simply saying "anecdotal" is ambiguous because the semantics of a single word sentence are undefined.
Also, your statement "The last generation was bad, but the current one is fine." is ambiguous. You might want to say it is you mean by "last generation" and "current one". It is not clear whether you are referring to Western Digital or Seagate.
Lastly, while your statement "I see WDs fail over Seagates at a 3:1 ratio." is meaningful, it makes no sense in the context of the quote of my post. It might have made sense in agreement with my statement that "I used to buy only Western Digital hard drives, but their quality went south about a year or two ago.", but you failed to quote that.
With those issues in mind, I do not understand what you mean. Would you please be more clear?
This is what I was referring two. Considering I'd already said it, I didn't want to be repeating myself.Seagate's old 7200.11 generation had a few issues, which is why people have a grudge, but the current 7200.12 generation is fine.
Thank you. Yes, that was what I meant.He meant that your one case of failure isn't indicative of the brand as a whole. Based on the context of his earlier statements, he meant that older Seagate drives may have seen some problems but the newer ones are fine, or at the very least better than Western Digital drives.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with either. WD's failures are more often than not the 3.5" Caviar Greens, which are poor quality, and the 2.5" Blues, which don't seem to cope well with life in a moving laptop.I disagree with you both. I find WD drives to be very good. Their internal drives are certainly superior to their external ones, though. I have a Seagate external drive that's survived nearly falling apart on me, so I can't complain about that, but I generally recommend against the brand in general due to the high failure rate I've seen personally among people coming to me with problems.
Let's not get into an argument over semantics, his meaning was pretty obvious. He meant that your one case of failure isn't indicative of the brand as a whole. Based on the context of his earlier statements, he meant that older Seagate drives may have seen some problems but the newer ones are fine, or at the very least better than Western Digital drives.
Let's leave it at that. This thread's about hard drives, not about language.
I disagree with you both. I find WD drives to be very good. Their internal drives are certainly superior to their external ones, though. I have a Seagate external drive that's survived nearly falling apart on me, so I can't complain about that, but I generally recommend against the brand in general due to the high failure rate I've seen personally among people coming to me with problems.