Slashdot Mirror


Samsung HD Unit Bought By Seagate

nanoflower followed up on a recent story about the unpredictable future of data storage. That story talked about Western Digital buying Hitachi, leaving just 4 players. Now: "Yet another hard drive company is going by the wayside, as Seagate is buying the Samsung HDD unit. Seagate is buying the unit for $1.375 billion (half in stock, half in cash)."

153 comments

  1. Merge by mehrotra.akash · · Score: 1

    When will Seagate and WD merge now?
    buying out toshiba's HDD division would not be too difficult for them

    1. Re:Merge by CokoBWare · · Score: 3, Insightful

      God please no.

    2. Re:Merge by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      They probably will about the same time an acceptable alternative technology becomes available from competitors. They will rebrand as "Seagate Digital Old Timey Mechanical Spinning Storage". Motto: "You can actually hear the platters go 'round and 'round."

    3. Re:Merge by Hero+Zzyzzx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh god, please no. I have had nothing but horrible experiences with Seagate drives recently under linux:

      • this bug hit me,
      • I had at least 4 RMAs on the same drive due to a similar "click of death",
      • I had a "click of death" on an iomega external HDD that was actually - you guessed it - seagate inside.

      I don't get it. Seagate used to be great - WHY did they engineer drives to not work properly under linux? The idea of an HDD that doesn't work under linux is just wrong - like you have to actually try to make something that crappy.

      I ended up just replacing the still under warranty Seagate drives with Western Digitals. Problems since then? Zero. LEAVE WESTERN DIGITAL ALONE!

      PS: I must be dumb. Slashdot is not styling my bulletted list properly.

    4. Re:Merge by v1 · · Score: 1

      oh don't say that. this rolling wreck of a hard drive brand will tank samsung like every other brand in their wake, and all we're going to be left with is toshiba and WD.

      It's really all a shame. I remember when seagate was a good brand, and so was quantum. WD and toshiba were both crap. Amazing how things revolve. Back then I had a very tight budget and would buy seagates for their warranty and quality because I couldn't afford backup drives. Now the only thing seagate has going for them is their longer warranty, and by god you're probably going to get to use it, more than once.

      I have backups now, but that's not an excuse to buy crappy drives, I don't need that kind of headache. I have enough drives around here now to have to RMA/replace a drive every now and then as it is.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    5. Re:Merge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Remember when Seagate bought Maxtor in 2006? You are really having trouble with Maxtor drives that are now branded Seagate. I'm going to guess you bought the less expensive ones. Before Maxtor and Seagate merged, I had about 12 drives in machines in my house. 5 of them were Maxtor and all of those failed within 18 months. Some of the others are still going. (Original Seagate and WD drives). Unfortunately it is hard to know if you are going to get the "good" or the "bad" Seagate drives now.

    6. Re:Merge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yea, I don't think I'll ever get a Seagate again. First I got a refurbished HDD, which Seagate apparently likes to do. So you'll never know whether you'll get a used or a new one. The replacement was new. However after using it as a backup drive for hardly a year, I realised that the SMART report contained loads of errors and defects. That's a bit scary for a drive that's only used once a week and is supposed to keep my data safe.

      Too bad Seagate bought Maxtor. They had some great drives that still work flawlessly after over half a decade of daily use. Oh well, what do you expect? If people always only buy the cheapest shit, that's going to be the only thing that survives.

    7. Re:Merge by psm321 · · Score: 2

      And I say "oh God please no" for the opposite reason... horrible luck with WD drives. So I feel "LEAVE SEAGATE ALONE!" Let's just keep them separate and keep everyone happy :-D

    8. Re:Merge by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      So Seagate is like the Broadcom of hard drive manufacturers? Good to know.

      In the mid '90s I'd had a lot of WD drives die on me and was kind of turned off of them, but I've slowly been using more since the early 2000s and they've all been very reliable. Now I'm running all WD drives in all of my computers (that have hard drives) and they've been very reliable, I've only had one drive made since 2000 fail, and it was run hard and then left in a box for at least 7 years, and failed when I tried to dump the data off last year (it was the only drive from an old Win98SE gaming machine, I wanted to turn it into a VM...got most of the files back but it failed before it got to the Windows folder so I lost my heavily customized OS, D'oh!!!).

      My home server is actually running its OS from an ancient 8GB WD drive that runs very hot but it still works fine. So I guess WD is my go-to hard drive manufacturer now.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    9. Re:Merge by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      Just remembered: Actually that drive that failed was a Maxtor drive. So there you go.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    10. Re:Merge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, me too. I've been using both Seagate & WD drives in a hot-swap backup system using rsnapshot, and the WD drives have died on me repeatedly--RMA them, get a replacement, and the replacement dies within days. Meanwhile the Seagates are still chugging along. So now instead of returning drives that are still under warranty, I've been buying new Seagates to replace the WD's as they die off.

    11. Re:Merge by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Nowadays a lot of them are quite crap and it's not easy to tell which batches/vendors are good.

      So what some people do is buy the drives that don't lie too much, even if they are actually less reliable.

      e.g. when the SMART stuff says there are errors, the drive is going to die soon.

      When the SMART stuff says things are hunkydory, the drive is very very unlikely to die soon.

      --
    12. Re:Merge by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      I head a 500GB seagate drive fail on a brand new laptop after 2 weeks of use. Fuck seagate. They were good 20 years ago.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    13. Re:Merge by datapharmer · · Score: 1

      Forget both... I'm really upset because samsung was the only drive brand I've had 100% reliability with. Not saying they haven't put out bad drives before but I see a ton of bad WD and Seagate drives and haven't had a single samsung fail on me. I switched to Samsung a few years back when seagate started going to crap and haven't looked back. My only hope is maybe seagate will learn something from samsung and start making good drives again. Between the two: use seagate in 2.5" and wd in 3.5" and stay away from anything over 500GB. The WD passports are particularly unreliable and anything seagate that uses the perpendicular writes is almost guaranteed to fail in my recent experience.

      --
      Get a web developer
    14. Re:Merge by DurendalMac · · Score: 1

      Um...how is the click of death (a hardware problem) related to Linux?

    15. Re:Merge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seagate used to be great - WHY did they engineer drives to not work properly under linux?

      You might as well ask - WHY doesn't the Linux USB driver stack gracefully handle drives with automatic spindown?

      The reason why they implemented the feature at all is obvious: it provides value on Windows. The reason why it didn't work on Linux out of the box is also obvious: they don't test consumer USB drives under Linux. The reason why they don't do that is, once again, obvious: Linux desktop marketshare is a rounding error.

    16. Re:Merge by Life2Death · · Score: 0

      The only WD drives that have worked for me are the Black line. Blue and green croak like the rest of them. Samsung had both fast and seemingly reliable drives, so I was considering jumping ship, but now that seagate has them, no way

    17. Re:Merge by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      Remember when Seagate bought Maxtor in 2006? You are really having trouble with Maxtor drives that are now branded Seagate.

      Oh, SNAP!

      I was about to suggest the same thing, because I remember prior to the takeover Seagate seemed to be going through a phase of being pretty reliable- even their cheaper drives- and I was quite happy to buy them. Whereas Maxtor's reputation was... not so good.

      When the news came through, my first thought was "uh, oh...", because I knew that exactly what you described was going to happen. Namely that drives from the former-Maxtor factories were going to be rebranded as Seagate, and it would be hard to be sure in advance whether you would get a "true" Seagate or something from the ex-Maxtor plants when ordering. It put me off Seagate.

      I was helping my Dad choose replacement drives for his antique computer a year or two back, and it was getting hard to get IDEs even then. Seagates were the only ones easily available in the capacity he was after, so despite my misgivings- which were only theoretical and based on the above reasoning at this point- he went for them, and of course, both failed sooner rather than later. The Western Digitals he currently has seem to be fine.

      Of course, the takeover was years ago now, and you'd have expected the two operations to be more fully merged now and the distinction less meaningful. Though one would have hoped that Seagate would bring the ex-Maxtor's standards up, it looks like Maxtor dragged Seagate down...

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    18. Re:Merge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yea, I don't think I'll ever get a Seagate again. First I got a refurbished HDD, which Seagate apparently likes to do. So you'll never know whether you'll get a used or a new one.

      Erm, do you mean you got a refurbished one when you RMAed a broken drive? If you're complaining about that, I'd like to know which widget makers you've found who always send you brand new widgets as RMA replacements. Refurb is the norm, industry wide (and not just for hard drives). Typically you'll only get a new replacement unit if the RMA center is out of refurbs.

      If you got a refurb when you thought you were buying a new drive, then you were defrauded. Probably by the retailer, not Seagate.

      The replacement was new. However after using it as a backup drive for hardly a year, I realised that the SMART report contained loads of errors and defects. That's a bit scary for a drive that's only used once a week and is supposed to keep my data safe.

      How did you determine that the SMART report contained lots of errors and defects?

      No, that's not an a-hole question, it's a serious one: lots of SMART reporting tools are pretty deficient in that they mark very innocuous things as warning signs or impending disaster. Most of the time the only way to get sane interpretation of your drive's SMART data is to download the drive vendor's proprietary SMART based utility.

    19. Re:Merge by mattmarlowe · · Score: 1

      The black line has been nothing but problematic for me(2TB, SATA 3Gbps).

      Purchased 2 of them, both failed, RMA on the first has been working reliably, had to RMA the 2nd 3 times and it kept failing...no point in RMA'ing any further. Yes, I switched cables, power, and controllers to ensure it was the drives fault. From what I've read, western digital is doing only a minimal job on repairing RMA'd drives and then just sending them back out as re-certified and truncating warranties on rma'd drives down from the 5yr original guarantee to just 90 days.

      Strangely enough, not a single problem with the either the seagate enterprise constellation drives (2TB) or the western digital RE4 enterprise drives (also 2TB). Dozens of these in production, some for a year now, and smartmon shows no issues except that while the western digital firmware is not 100% compatible w/ some controllers, seagate is compatible but trades that off for slightly less performance.

    20. Re:Merge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are dumb. The page says the problem is that the USB bridge in the Free Agent drives can't cope with drives that spin down.

      So, Seagate didn't engineer the drives to be incompatible with Linux. The drives are fine. It's the USB bridgeboards that suck. And those arn't engineered by Seagate, but rather probably some taiwanese company.

    21. Re:Merge by Hero+Zzyzzx · · Score: 1

      Old, but I'll reply anyway. I am NOT a hardware engineer, forgive any garbled terminology.

      Apparently there is something about how Seagate implemented power saving (in some desktop drives) that makes it so that it only works properly under windows. The drive will spin down at odd times while linux thinks it can still write to it, and that'll create a bad sector with a high amount of frequency. Apparently the best fix is to disable the power saving altogether, but that pretty much sucks.

      So seagate took a pretty well understood interface and screwed it up to make it windows only. They have also advertised (I'm pretty sure, don't quote me) that these drives with this messed up power management were linux compatible when they clearly weren't.

      This seems related, and explains the issue I saw almost exactly. Of course, it could just be that the drives are shit and the click of death would've happened under any OS.

    22. Re:Merge by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      This whole thing puzzles me greatly because I've been using Seagate drives since the ST-225 and Maxtor drives since drives were measured in megabytes, not gigabytes, and I have had vastly more problems with Seagate drives than Maxtor ones. The only Maxtor drive I've ever had go out on me was a 6GB disk that didn't fail until drives were well over 60GB. In fact we used to call Seagate "Seizegate" because everyone who owned them was well-acquainted with the "whack it with a screwdriver handle" trick. Sometimes I'd have to pull and whack my ST-225s twice a month. Meanwhile I had a full-height Quantum that predated them by some time which never stuck.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    23. Re:Merge by psm321 · · Score: 1

      I haven't gotten to use my Samsung drives much yet because I'm still waiting for them to put out a firmware update for the HD204UI that increments the revision number in addition to fixing the IDENTIFY bug (so the fix can be confirmed). Was supposed to be out months ago...

      http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/smartmontools/wiki/SamsungF4EGBadBlocks

  2. Well crap by FrozenFOXX · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've actually been a fan of my Samsung hard drives. So far they've outlasted every other drive manufacturer I've tried. Now I know that technically they all usually have roughly similar failure rates, but at least from personal experience right about every Samsung product of any kind I've bought I've always gotten great service on and great reliability from, something important for me with hard drives.

    Seagate? Not so much. Well, guess it doesn't matter now as like it or not that's who we're getting. Still, I can't imagine a shrinking consumer drive market is very good for the consumer.

    --
    "Just a fox, a whisper."
    1. Re:Well crap by lsllll · · Score: 2

      I remember when Seagate used to be the king of the HD market with such super drives as the ST-225 and ST-4096. Nowadays I avoid Seagate like the plague. They've put Maxtor to shame.

      --
      Is that a roll of dimes in your pocket or are you happy to see me?
    2. Re:Well crap by afidel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps their low end line is bad *because* they bought Maxtor. Their enterprise line is still just fine, been cruising at ~1.5% AFR here for the last 5 years with ~90% Seagate disks.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    3. Re:Well crap by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Me too. I bought 4 Samsung drives 3 or 4 years ago for an array, and all of them are still working fine in the various machines I've moved them to. I upgraded the array with 4 1TB WD drives, and one of them has already died after about 9 months. It was replaced with a Samsung.

    4. Re:Well crap by Spykk · · Score: 2

      The really great thing about Samsung is that they don't artificially make their entry level disks useless for RAID by disabling TLER. I have an array of spinpoints in my personal server and they do a great job for cheap.

    5. Re:Well crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here, long time customer and fan of Samsung HDDs. Maybe SSDs are mature and affordable enough by the time i need to replace my current lineup.

    6. Re:Well crap by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      I've generally been a fan too. Never had a Samsung drive permanently fail on me. Closest I cam was a 2TB drive that would stop responding until a reboot. Reboot, it'd come back for a while. I copied all my data off of it thinking it was failing. Then after looking at the SMART report I noticed that the max temperature of the drive was clocked in at 115 degrees Celcius. Turns out the front intake fan on the case had died and all my drives were getting warm. Replaced that and the issue went away completely.

      Even though it was "failing", I still think it a testament to good design that the drive was able to withstand those temps without any apparent permanent damage.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    7. Re:Well crap by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      If you are using software RAID, then lack of TLER won't matter.

      If you are using a proper RAID controller, than being cheap about your drives is a bit of a contradiction.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:Well crap by hedleyroos · · Score: 1

      Never thought of it that way. I hope you're right.

      From experience my Samsung drives run slightly quieter than my WD and Seagate drives, and a lot cooler than both. In my HTPC (which has excellent cooling) the Samsung is at 27 C, and the Seagate at 35 C. In South Africa in summer.

    9. Re:Well crap by cskrat · · Score: 2

      What does the 'I' in RAID stand for again?

      --
      My God! It's full of eval()'s.
    10. Re:Well crap by yoghurt · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, the "I" in "RAID" stands for INEXPENSIVE.

      --
      Yoghurt
    11. Re:Well crap by TheLink · · Score: 1

      The Samsung drives I bought run at 5400RPM.

      These run cooler and quieter than 7200 rpm drives, but have slower random seek times.

      --
    12. Re:Well crap by A+Friendly+Troll · · Score: 1

      Ditto.

      I'm a huge, HUGE fan of the Samsung F3 drives - they are extremely quiet, and pretty fast given the (lack of) noise. Nobody else offers anything like it; the second quietest drives are WD Greens, and those aren't very speedy.

      I'm honestly contemplating buying a couple more F3's before Seagate craps them out :(

    13. Re:Well crap by lsllll · · Score: 1

      Perhaps their low end line is bad *because* they bought Maxtor. Their enterprise line is still just fine, been cruising at ~1.5% AFR here for the last 5 years with ~90% Seagate disks.

      1.5% AFR on enterprise drives? Is that averaged over the 5 year period? If not, that's very high. Even is it is, it's still high.

      The funny thing is that Seagate AFR on their low-end SATA is lower than their Enterprise SATA (0.34 vs. 0.73, see here and here (ES) section 2.12. I understand that they assume that enterprise drives are used more than the desktop drives, but nowhere do they say so. In fact, they say the low-end SATA is perfect for desktop RAID.

      --
      Is that a roll of dimes in your pocket or are you happy to see me?
    14. Re:Well crap by afidel · · Score: 1

      BS, no real world statistics I've seen are anywhere near that.The Internet Archive's rate is 2% (was as high as 6% at one point), MS says 5% AFR for nearline SATA and 2.75% for nearline SAS, Google's numbers were between 2% and 6% depending on the age of the drive. Also the ES drives are nearline not low end and they spin at a much lower speed so if both were built to the same standards I would expect they would have a MUCH lower AFR but they aren't.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    15. Re:Well crap by swalve · · Score: 1

      Only an issue if you already have a bad disk. if it is remapping sectors, it is bad.

    16. Re:Well crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. I've seen plenty of WD drives drop out of an Intel RAID1 (motherboard fake-raid via ICH) because of no TLER. It's very common. Even WD will state the problem will go away if you purchase their RAID edition.

      Fuck em. Stick with Hitachi and and you wont have those problems.

    17. Re:Well crap by dysfunct · · Score: 1

      Independent...

      --
      :/- spoon(_).
  3. More interesting... by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 2

    "In addition, the agreement will expand the strategic relationship between the two companies, as Samsung will be providing Seagate with a NAND flash memory for its solid state drives, solid state hybrid drives and other products.

    Meanwhile, Seagate will supply disk drives to Samsung for PCs, notebooks and consumer electronics. "

    That seems more interesting to me. With more exclusive partnerships and more efficient organization, maybe we'll see costs come down on some of their notebooks/ssd's.

    --
    while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    1. Re:More interesting... by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      With more exclusive partnerships and more efficient organization, maybe we'll see costs come down on some of their notebooks/ssd's.

      "Exclusive partnerships" always send up a monopoly warning flag for me. That usually means higher profits for producers, and higher costs for the end user.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:More interesting... by O('_')O_Bush · · Score: 1

      I don't see how... they aren't the only tech companies offering those products to the market. Look at AMD/ATI buyout/partnership. Nvidia and Intel are still in the game...

      So is Hitachi and a bunch more electronics manufacturers.

      I would only be worried if Seagate now has exclusive partnerships with almost *all* PC/notebook manufacturers like Intel did for a while.

      --
      while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
    3. Re:More interesting... by hedwards · · Score: 3, Informative

      Hitachi GST is in the process of being acquired by WD, so if in the mean time Seagate is acquiring Samsung's HDD lines, then we've seen the amount of choice shrink greatly in only a few months.

    4. Re:More interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Look at AMD/ATI buyout/partnership.
      Well, yeah. There are two broad types of buyout/merger/partnerships. One, buying someone who does the same thing - explicitly to keep the good bits of both, discard other parts, and lay off all the now-duplicate-task workers. The hard drive buyout is like that. The other type is buying someone who does something you DON'T do, instead of developing an equivalent in house; then the point is to keep the same or greater production. That's what the AMD/ATI thing was for. Or for other examples, many of the google purchases are synergy-type. Cellphone network mergers are the like-buying-like type.

    5. Re:More interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cellphone company mergers are a bit of both really, since a lot of the buyouts were driven by buying out competitors with complementary coverage maps and retail presences. Buying out a competitor that largely covers different areas provides synergy just like buying a competitor with a related but different product line.

      Really it was a mixed bag for consumers too. A lot of smaller, more consumer friendly cellphone companies were bought out, but coverage and roaming charges are better now.

  4. Why!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the beginning, Seagate was awesome. They bought Maxtor, and Maxtor's suckiness followed them into Seagate. Now they are buying Samsung. Are they expecting the average quality to go up?

    What is the point of buying out competitors, when their products are not even in the same ballpark of quality?

    (Although since the Maxtor purchase, maybe Samsung is a good match)

    I used to own Seagate stock. I'm glad I jumped ship.

    1. Re:Why!?!?! by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What is the point of buying out competitors, when their products are not even in the same ballpark of quality?

      Because people are paid bonuses, and bonuses are based on short term gains.

      This applies to modern capitalism in general.

    2. Re:Why!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maxtor used to be decent until they bought Quantum; remember the Big Foot? I had some Maxtor drives that lasted years (4.3GB and 17GB). Then they had that DiamondMax 9, I think it was: saw systems go through lots of those drives with the black shells. Usually the motor bearings would make lots of noise and fail.

      Now that I think of it, all those IBM DeathStar drives I went through all those years ago had black shells too. Maybe black anodized aluminum shells are a bad omen for hard drives.

      I've generally had good luck with Seagate, though.

    3. Re:Why!?!?! by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Not just bonuses. When companies merge there is an excess of executive managers who will get nice golden parachutes, and to avoid making being fired looked good, the managers that stay gets even bigger cash-prizes for not quiting. The negotiation for how to translate stocks in the merger is also a good opportunity for executive managers to get awarded a nice percentage of the new company (if they don't already have one). All in all this makes merging the most profitable move possible for any CEO. The effects it has on the rest of company are less clear-cut.

    4. Re:Why!?!?! by thoromyr · · Score: 1

      Youngsters. Once upon a year, Seagate was well known for selling dodgy drives, but they cleaned up their act and built up a reputation. So, did Maxtor's suckiness follow Seagate? Or did Seagate simply revert?

    5. Re:Why!?!?! by Maltheus · · Score: 1

      Are they expecting the average quality to go up?

      Perhaps they are. I used to be a Seagate only guy before they went down the toilet with that whole firmware fiasco. Been buying Samsung and WD ever since. I guess I'll have to grab a few more Samsungs before Seagate starts screwing them up too.

  5. Aha! by dimethylxanthine · · Score: 4, Funny

    Nobody expects a Seagate acquisition!

    1. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well their chief weapon is surprise, you know.

    2. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I was very surprised when the HD started to make weird noises and died, I will give them that.

    3. Re:Aha! by Barryke · · Score: 1

      Surprise! I'm failing, making ticking noises, making tea, and mostly not working like a very robust Samsung HDD does!

      --
      Hivemind harvest in progress..
    4. Re:Aha! by game+kid · · Score: 1

      Yes of course, the Holy Hard Drive of Antioch! It's one of the sacred relics Steven Ballmer carries with him!

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    5. Re:Aha! by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Well, at least the Seagate drive had the common decency to make the click-of-death noise, to let you know it failed. Imagine if they simply stopped working! Where would you be then?

    6. Re:Aha! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      LMAO, mod parent Funny. That was truly unexpected XD

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    7. Re:Aha! by dimethylxanthine · · Score: 1

      I mean they probably do...
      How many HD makers now - 2?

    8. Re:Aha! by lrobert98 · · Score: 1

      Surprise and fear (of data loss). Their TWO chief weapons are surprise and fear. And a fanatical devotion to the bottom line. Their THREE...I'll come in again.

  6. Seagate has been flirting with Samsung for awhile by calagan800xl · · Score: 3, Informative

    Back in 2008, Seagate was already fitting its FreeAgent Go 500GB USB HDD with Samsung hard drives: http://forum.notebookreview.com/hardware-components-aftermarket-upgrades/301553-seagate-freeagent-go-500gb-disassembly-samsung-hd-upgrade-laptop.html

  7. Darn! by shic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seagate and Samsung are my favourite two drive manufacturers at the moment... I'd have preferred they remain separate.

    If I'm thinking about my data, I want - above all - for it to be reliably stored. With the best will in the world, eventually every drive fails... So... I tend to buy different makes of drives in pairs - from different suppliers... the logic is that it is far less likely that both drives will fail simultaneously - leaving my raid-1 data intact.

    If Seagate and Samsung share manufacturing/storage/distribution, then the independence of Seagate and Samsung drives vanishes... forcing me to go to another less-preferred vendor.

    I wonder when these consolidations will stop being a good idea? I definitely hope that it will be possible to buy independently manufactured drives in future.

    1. Re:Darn! by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 1

      I wonder when these consolidations will stop being a good idea?

      Good idea for who? For you, me and every other buyer they never were a good idea. For high level execs and investors of the buyee who get golden handshakes and massive buyouts, and for the would-be-monopolists of the buyer then they'll never stop being a good idea.

      --
      Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    2. Re:Darn! by rolfwind · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I wonder when these consolidations will stop being a good idea?

      Long before this. There definitely needs to be more than 3 HDD manufacturers in the world. I wouldn't even consider 7 an especially healthy number.

      Unlike the car market, computer component makers aren't especially under pressure from the used market. Almost any used car the last 40+ years goes highway speeds. Other things are a bonus most of the time. Can't say the same with computers - a drive from 5 years ago is beyond suspect in terms of reliability and often just doesn't cut it in terms of speed and capacity. Other than reliability, the same goes with all other components except maybe monitors and cases/psu.

      Continually chiseling down manufacturers is not a good thing. Only thing worse is the CPU market but thankfully arm CPUs became viable for more than dumb phones within the last decade. Small comfort if Intel were to kill AMD but at least an alternate route.

    3. Re:Darn! by tlhIngan · · Score: 0

      I think it's out of evolution. Spinning rust HDDs are only really good at one thing - massive capacity. With the rising popularity of SSDs (despite their cost), it's the only thing that a hard disk really has over an SSD.

      Capacity growth of hard drives is slso slowing down (faster than Moore's Law still) but even then it isn't sustainable.

      The HDD market isn't big enough anymore to sustain so many players, and even things that once used hard drives may start using SSDs. For example, take a few years ago the iPod Mini which got bested by the iPod Nano. Or how the iPod Classic is basically stagnating (Toshiba only recently started manufacturing a 250GB hard drive in that form factor - but the 120GB will be done in by an iPod Touch wielding 128GB of flash).

      Hard drives are a very mature technology - they'll still be around, but much of the growth is gone, and the big players will start consolidating as companies migrate to other growth areas.

    4. Re:Darn! by Kjella · · Score: 2

      a drive from 5 years ago is beyond suspect in terms of reliability and often just doesn't cut it in terms of speed and capacity

      It's been well over 4 years since the first 1TB drive came and we're currently at 3TB with no significant improvements in sight. They're still at 7200 RPM with only minor performance differences due to higher density - in terms of IOPS they're almost the same. I would say the capacity and speed is just fine, only the reliability is questionable. But then nobody really cares as long as the solution is to buy a new, much bigger and much cheaper HDD. But if new disks stop being significantly better, then we'll start caring more about how long they last. Though personally I'm more concerned about how how long my SSD will last...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:Darn! by Kittenman · · Score: 1

      Unlike the car market, computer component makers aren't especially under pressure from the used market.

      Good work on the car analogy.

      --
      "The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
  8. So who do I buy drives from now? by leathered · · Score: 1

    Almost every HD manufacturer has had their ups and downs with their product with regards to relibility but Samsung have always seemed to me to be one of the better ones; even if their performance doesn't quite match their competitors. Seagate went to shit after they acquired Maxtor so I'm hoping that Samsung will rub off on Seagate and not the other way 'round.

    --
    For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
    1. Re:So who do I buy drives from now? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      WD enterprise line (5-year support) with sandforce/intel SSD's for booting.
      Then add more ssd's as price drops or speed needs go way up.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    2. Re:So who do I buy drives from now? by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 1

      Almost every HD manufacturer has had their ups and downs with their product with regards to relibility but Samsung have always seemed to me to be one of the better ones; even if their performance doesn't quite match their competitors. Seagate went to shit after they acquired Maxtor so I'm hoping that Samsung will rub off on Seagate and not the other way 'round.

      Agreed, hard drive manufacturers have been very cyclical over the years. I've also noticed that there really is not good way to tell if a drive will be good from a specific manufacturer. This seems to be more dependent on the luck of the individual. Personally I've owned drives from every manufacturer currently in existence, and many that no longer are.

      In my case I've had every WD drive fail earlier than expected with the exception of one. In several cases I've had the same model fail so many times under warranty that I was up "upgraded" to a better line by WD. I will give WD credit for their customer service. They were always responsive when I've had issues with their drives while under warranty.

      IBM/Hitachi have been a mixed bag. Of the last three IBM Deskstars I owned, one failed.suddenly and another started clicking prior to me retiring all of them. I also used two Hitachi SATA drives of which one failed early. I have an IBM SCSI drive that is close to a decade old and is still kicking.

      Seagate has been pretty good for me. Of the dozens of drives I purchased over the years, I just recently sent a USB powered external in for warranty replacement. Otherwise they've all lasted as long as expected. I currently have at least a dozen running within my network.

      Samsung has been good as well. I purchased 7 or 8 of their drives in the last couple of years, and so far none have failed.

      Maxtor and Fujitsu have both been about 50/50 for me. Although I have a 12 GB Maxtor in my firewall that has been kicking for over a decade now.

      Quantum made a fantastic product IME. I still have several in boxes that I retired. I also have a 15K RPM SCSI that is fairly old in a system.

      I think my favorite HDD company was Micropolis though. I never had a drive problem with them and they performed great.

    3. Re:So who do I buy drives from now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you for this HD reliability anecdotal evidence, which will be added to the huge database of such stories.

      I once had a Seagate drive fail, therefore they suck. I've never had a WD fail, therefore they are incredibly reliable!

    4. Re:So who do I buy drives from now? by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 1

      Like I said, it seems to have more to do with the luck of the individual than anything. I also know people that have never had issues with WD drives. Thanks just not been my experience.

  9. I *was* a Samsung HDD fanboy, Seagate hater. by Barryke · · Score: 1

    This is not funny.

    --
    Hivemind harvest in progress..
    1. Re:I *was* a Samsung HDD fanboy, Seagate hater. by hedwards · · Score: 1

      My next HDD was probably going to be a Samsung, but mainly because only them and Seagate have had the stones lately to offer a 5 year warranty on their drives. That was a bit ago, but Seagate had that bad batch of 1tb drives so I'm not sure how much faith I have in them.

  10. Flash memory milestones? by It's+the+tripnaut! · · Score: 1

    This goes to show that Samsung could quite possibly have just reached milestones in their flash memory production, which is why they are willing to let go of their HD unit.

  11. A shame by chihowa · · Score: 1

    Well that blows. Samsung drives were great for reliability while still running cool and quiet. Somehow I doubt Seagate will up their quality with the Samsung tech.

    On a side note, I remember when Seagate drives were top notch. What happened to them? With Samsung out of the picture and the alternatives being WD and Hitachi, I guess they are at the top again...

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    1. Re:A shame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I bought an 80GB Hitachi Travelstar to my Amiga once. It is still working fine.

      Never heard anything good about WD.

  12. Cream rising, Crap sinking by mauriceh · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Seagate and Samsung HDD merge = Crap gets bigger
    WD and Hitachi GST merge = Cream gets better.

    I will tell you where this goes:
    Seagate goes broke within 18 months

    --
    Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
    1. Re:Cream rising, Crap sinking by Rolgar · · Score: 1

      I like Samsung hardware. When I built my machine 5 years ago, I went with 2 160GB low noise Samsung drives (SATA 1.0 when it was rather rare), and I love them. It's a shame that this is happening. I really think we as customers would be better off if mergers and acquisitions by a competitor or conglomerate were prohibited.

    2. Re:Cream rising, Crap sinking by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Mergers haven't been about the consumer in a very long time. Chances are that if you're hearing about a merger and aren't deeply embedded in a regulatory agency or on Wall Street that it's not something that's going to be good for the consumers.

      Mergers are like sending jobs offshore, it's got nothing to do with providing a better product or one that's cheaper, it's all about lining the pockets of the executives that did it.

    3. Re:Cream rising, Crap sinking by mauriceh · · Score: 1

      Mergers are inevitable.
      Some companies/divisions win, some lose.

      Samsung could not make money with HDDs, probably economy of scale.
      Plus they tried ( and failed) to crack the enterprise space.

      --
      Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
  13. OT: Whatever happened to Quantum ? by Fireshadow · · Score: 1

    Whatever happened to Quantum? Reason I ask is I recently did a data recovery off an old Quantum 40 Gb drive. Drive came from a Gateway desktop that had an Intel CPU and RAMBUS RAM.

    --
    "It's one thing to talk about the poetry of machines. Quite another to listen to it for yourself."
    1. Re:OT: Whatever happened to Quantum ? by Teese · · Score: 1

      According to wikipedia, they where bought by Maxtor in 2001, then Maxtor was bought by Seagate in 2005.

      --
      "I'm a Genius!"*


      *Not an actual Genius
    2. Re:OT: Whatever happened to Quantum ? by joe_garage · · Score: 1

      "In April 2001, Maxtor Corporation acquired our hard disk drive division..."

    3. Re:OT: Whatever happened to Quantum ? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Bought out by Maxtor, I believe.

  14. Talk about HD mfgr here by vlm · · Score: 0

    Could someone comment on hard drive manufacturing?

    In some areas of mass production, there exists precisely one manufacturing plant in the world, located in mainland China. Then, worldwide, fifty (no exaggeration) importing and marketing companies order microscopically different batches of the same model, slap a localized sticker on it, and pretend it's theirs. An example I'm well aware of is the small metal lathe market specifically the 7x14 and its much bigger brothers. Its always comical to watch people whom don't know anything about the manufacturing situation argue how their importer's model is oh so superior to another importer's model, not knowing they're basically the same. Like arguing the build quality at one Toyota dealership is orders of magnitude better than another Toyota dealership, as if each dealership has their own assembly line in the back room.

    Are hard drives like that, where one big ole factory in China makes ALL of them and Seagate / Samsung / WD / Hitachi just slap stickers on them and watch the /.ers argue over which is "better"?

    Yes yes I know that in 1965 the only mfgr was IBM in the USA, who cares I'm talking about current production...

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:Talk about HD mfgr here by herojig · · Score: 1

      All our Seagate Barracudas are made in Thailand. The failure rate for the >1tb has been below norm (none), and for 1tb, about average (occasional). Darn good iron, if that's your thing.

      --
      I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
    2. Re:Talk about HD mfgr here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for a big HDD manufacturer. At least Seagate and WD have their own separate factories in China, among other places. All HDDs are not made in the same place. Overall both companies are highly vertically integrated having internal heads, media, etc production.

      Samsung on the other hand had to buy most components from vendors and had poor vertical integration.

    3. Re:Talk about HD mfgr here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most hard disks these days come from farm-reared robots, for top quality disks you need to hunt wild robots.

    4. Re:Talk about HD mfgr here by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      They're separate manufacturers. They all have similar technology, but they're most certainly not manufactured in the same plant and just shipped around.

  15. How much did Seagate actually pay by Fireshadow · · Score: 5, Funny

    after the mail in rebate ?

    --
    "It's one thing to talk about the poetry of machines. Quite another to listen to it for yourself."
    1. Re:How much did Seagate actually pay by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      They mailed in the receipt, the UPC from the box, and the required form and expect an 8 - 10 week turnaround on the $30 check. There is an optional Visa gift card option, but it reduces the total value to $22, so they opted for the check.

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    2. Re:How much did Seagate actually pay by White+Flame · · Score: 1

      It was listed as $1.375 billion, but was actually only $0.975 billion after formatting.

    3. Re:How much did Seagate actually pay by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Ya, what they failed to read in the small print, is that they would be require to fill out separately every single UPC for every hard drive currently in production and in stock to enable the mail in rebate.

      Hint: Even if they did, it is being handled by a 3rd party broker who will simply refuse to pay it out no matter what.

  16. What did you expect from an Iomega drive? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_of_death

  17. Mac OS X too! by david.emery · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not just Linux! I've had 50% failure rate (3 of 6 over the last 18 months) on Seagate 3.5" 1tb drives in a RAID enclosure connected to my Mac. I'll also note the continuing problems with the Momentus XT 2.5" hybrid drives; apparently the drive is optimized for Windows and works poorly at best (or fails more frequently) under Linux or Mac OS X. And Seagate's firmware update is basically a Windows solution that requires lots of extra effort to work on any other OS.

    1. Re:Mac OS X too! by glebovitz · · Score: 2

      I have had a 100% with my Samsung drives with WIndows. They don't seem to withstand fists pounding on the laptop keyboard when trying to use the Microsoft Developer Tools.

    2. Re:Mac OS X too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've also had the click of death issue with 50% of my Seagate hard drives. I used to buy Seagate drives exclusively until a few months ago when my RAID-1 array, made up of two 1.5TB Seagates, had one of the drives get the "click of death", which would make it click 3 to 5 times in a row every 20 to 40 seconds. Most annoying. Despite all this, the drive wasn't reporting any errors and seemed to work.

      Anyway, I bought a new Seagate to replace it, and while I was replacing it, the other drive started the click of death. Fortunately, it was still able to read the data too, although it was stuttering a bit. So I while it was replicating to the new Seagate, I promptly ordered two Western Digital drives and swapped out both Seagates over the course of a weekend. Now, it runs quieter and cooler. The new Seagate drive is now sitting on a shelf as a cold spare.

      Cool story bro.

    3. Re:Mac OS X too! by Cwix · · Score: 1

      Thats funny, I had a similar issue with a hard drive failing due to fist pounding lol. I was just trying to get damn drivers working properly.

      --
      You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
    4. Re:Mac OS X too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have also destroyed a computer trying to simply get a wifi card working under linux.

    5. Re:Mac OS X too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In 2000 our company bought 2000 Compaq desktops. 850 of those needed to have the hard drives replaced because they were a brand new and faulty model of Seagate.

    6. Re:Mac OS X too! by Life2Death · · Score: 0

      I have a box of seagates that reported fine to the very, crispy end (they melted a drive enclosure tray for hot swap) but weird things like they'd show 0 bytes free disk space when I had over 100GB free, and other crazy things. SMART never failed once, and seatools said they were good (imagine that)

    7. Re:Mac OS X too! by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      What we have here is an excellent demonstration of why drives in a RAID array should never under any circumstances be purchased at the same time, from the same lot, from the same manufacturer.

      Sadly, the odds of losing a second drive while you're replacing a drive in a RAID-5 set are not exactly small. The odds are a lot higher than the statistics suggest they should be. In a RAID set, you are using theoretically identical drives to perform nearly identical operations (ignoring the subtle difference between reading and writing on a given track) under nearly identical thermal, acoustic, and vibration conditions. Thus the odds are remarkably good that every drive will fail after nearly identical periods of use. More accurately, any departure from near-simultaneous failure is evidence of a manufacturing flaw in the failed drive.

      Ideally, you should buy drives for a RAID array one at a time, spaced a couple of months apart, using them regularly as desktop drives until you're ready to RAID them. You should then move everything off of those drives onto a temp drive or two, build the RAID set, and copy the data back. In this way, you significantly reduce the odds of losing the RAID set because of multiple drives failing just a few hours apart.

      Ideally, you should also buy the drives from multiple manufacturers. Sure, this may leave a little wasted space on the larger drives due to slight size variations, but it significantly reduces the risk of data loss.

      This is also a great example of why RAID arrays are not backups. Glad you didn't lose any data. :-)

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    8. Re:Mac OS X too! by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Were you using ES drives that are meant to more actively handle the vibrations inherent in a disk array, or were you using slightly cheaper desktop drives that aren't? If the latter, you have little to complain about.

    9. Re:Mac OS X too! by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

      well you are unfortunate.

      We operate about over 180 seagate drives ranging from older Barracuda 500Gb to ES.2 1.5Tb, and we are quite satisfied. At one point we had 7.6% annual failure rate, but it only happened with older Cudas, which were at least 2.5years old at the time or so. Quite old drives in anycase. With newer drives we have very low annual failure rate right now.

      Hell, i'm expecting some failures at home tho! I got 4 Barracudas (3xfew months old 7200.12 500G, +years old 7200.11 500G which already showed signs of potential failure) just stacked on top of each other in a RAID array, only insulation being the antistatic wrappers, and the only mounting being the cabling. I even manage to occasionally bump the drives as they are on bottom shelf of my desk, and they are running at over 50C now and then. Yet, this setup has been working for the past 4months flawlessly now. New drives usually have higher failure rate (less than 6month drives have almost same failure rate as 3+ yo drives due to manufacturing defects).
      What i'm trying to say: They can take quite an abuse too, and still work reliably.

      Maybe i'm lucky, but few hundred drives lucky? ...

      WD drives we have tho... Quite different story! They keep dropping out of RAID with no apparent reason, and failure rate seems higher. We don't have WD drives in the hundreds tho, so there's no proper statistical probability to be calculated here. Also we have only 2Tb models in use.

      I got my hands on a few Hitachi 3Tb drives for testing, anxious to get to see how they perform!

    10. Re:Mac OS X too! by david.emery · · Score: 1

      The maker of my RAID enclosure insisted on the opposite, that you MUST use all the same brand/model drive in the enclosure. For what it's worth, the 4 Toshiba 3.5"/1tb drives that replaced the failed Seagate drives have worked perfectly over the last 9 months.

  18. Sign of the times? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given the current SSD prices and sizes, I will give the hdd technology another 3-4 years depending on how far they still can push the storage space forward then it is end of life. Could this be the end of the road for the given hdd manufacturers. Samsung and Hitchachi probably sold out because they saw an end of the road for perpendicular recording and did not want to invest into the next follow up technology anymore given how fast the ssd market is growing.
    Seagate and WD either want to stay in the market because they have something up their sleeves or want to milk the cow and can see another return on investment. Either way the writing for then end of classical hds is on the wall. Not this year not next year, but within the next five years.

    1. Re:Sign of the times? by Elviswind · · Score: 1

      Can someone that manages enterprise storage comment on this? Not counting the initial investment in $/GB since that should improve with time, do SSD's make the most sense in all applications? What about a disk that is used to store a lot of very small files (less than the SSD block size) that are regularly modified? I guess what I'm asking is: is there a hypothetical enterprise application where the expected lifespan of a HDD is better than an SSD?

      My gut tells me that EOL for rotational media is a lot further out than three to four years, but I'm not familiar enough with enterprise storage applications to back up this belief. Otherwise, I don't understand why the traditional "big iron" HDD manufacturers are spending all this cash to consolidate if the required manufacturing capacity to satisfy the HDD market is going to monotonically decrease over the next three to four years. It's not as though that manufacturing expertise translates very well into making a profit on SSD's where the most important components are designed and manufactured by someone else. That's going to be a tough market to be in.

  19. CHINESE DISK MAKER BUYS CHINESE DISK MAKER !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whoopdeedodah !! More chinese crap for the masses. I'll stick with my AMERICAN MADE Conner until they stop running, then I'll build my own !!

  20. 4 Players? by vlado4 · · Score: 1

    Summary says there are 4 HDD companies left. Who are the 4? I can think of Seagate, WD, Toshiba.....

    1. Re:4 Players? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Summary says there were 4 left after WD bought Hitachi.

      Seagate, WD, Toshiba, Hitachi, and Samsung were the 5.

      Then WD bought Hitachi, so there were 4.

      And after Seagate buys Samsung there will be 3.

    2. Re:4 Players? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Summary says there are 4 HDD companies left.

      Who are the 4?

      I can think of Seagate, WD, Toshiba.....

      The summary says there were four companies left after WD bought Hitachi. So the fourth one was Samsung.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    3. Re:4 Players? by hedwards · · Score: 2

      According to the wikipedia that fourth is TrekStor. Never heard of them myself. And if you're being somewhat more liberal with the term HDD, then there are others which deal exclusively in SSDs, which isn't what you were getting at, but should be imporatant in the future. With the list getting that short of manufacturers it's probably that we'll start to see stagnation. Whereas up until now it seems to mostly just be quality that's been suffering instead of performance and capacity.

    4. Re:4 Players? by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      The largest SSD I could find is 2TB and costs $8200. If it follows Moore's law, then the price of that drive should hit $70 -- achieving parity with *today's* 2TB magnetic media drive -- in about 10 years.

      The fact that manufacturers are consolidating, and hence various avenues of R&D are becoming fewer, is very much a bad thing, not only for the price we're paying for storage capacity directly, but indirectly through all the web-based services we enjoy as well. Sure, multi-TB seems like a lot today, but the same was true of multi-GB fifteen years ago, and multi-MB thirty years ago. But there are many among us who have no trouble filling that capacity and more, and when it comes to technology, today's corner case is frequently tomorrow's norm.

  21. Back at Ya by BSalita · · Score: 5, Funny

    $1.375 billion or $990 million formatted.

    1. Re:Back at Ya by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Is that Mac or PC formatted?

    2. Re:Back at Ya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Binary or decimal millions?

  22. Consolidation of failures? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let's roll back the clock a bit
    Maxtor (which made terrible drives) bought Quantum (which made good drives)
    Seagate (which also makes terrible drives) bought Maxtor (which made better drives than pre-Quantum maxtor)
    Seagate then starts making less terrible drives, and buys Samsung (which makes passable drives)
    So the end result is we've had a consolidation of drive manufacturers which make low-end drives. Maybe that will squeeze some of the low-priced-low-reliability drives out of the market since they're no longer competing.

    I'm not suggesting that segate and samsung intentionally make bad drives, but rather the drives they sell in the low-priced segment tend to be the loudest, slowest, least reliable drives I've ever had to deal with. One drive in my system right now, the error counter in the S.M.A.R.T system is incrementing by the thousands, where as the WD drives aren't incrementing at all. The drive seems to work, and isn't reporting that it's going to fail, but this just doesn't seem right.

    Yes I see the inevitability of drives with moving parts disappearing, but not until a fundamental change in OS design happens.
    1) No more swap files. This is the largest reason why we can't move to SSD's, because computers don't yet come with enough RAM, and OS's like Windows and Linux throw data into the swap file continuously. FreeBSD on the other hand you can have an uptime of 2 years and never consume any pagefile out of the box. They keyword here is "out of the box."
    2) No more temporary files. How I see this working is that future "high end" SSD drives come with two partitions, a large writeable partition that is directly writeable, and a smaller RAM based copy-on-write partition that only commits changes to the NAND upon shutdown or power loss. In *nix'isms this would be the /var/run , /tmp and maybe the swap partition. Low-end drives would omit the BBU and have smaller/slower RAM, so that accidental power loss would just wipe the pagefile/temporary storage, and tout it as a security feature.
    3) Changes in filesystem design to support wear leveling. None of the current file systems are any good at this, particularly with journaling. The best I could see happening is that all the OS manufacturers agree to support a single file system standard for NAND devices, unfortunately that's probably not what's going to happen. The problem with current file system's is the need to change so many bits uselessly (eg Access time and Modify time) while doing absolutely nothing to the file. Every time you "Search" for a file you end up wearing down every file on the hard drive. This has got to stop. As with #2, file modification/access time's need to be stored in a RAM section of the drive and written only when shutting down.

    1. Re:Consolidation of failures? by mikechant · · Score: 1

      This is the largest reason why we can't move to SSD's, because computers don't yet come with enough RAM, and OS's like Windows and Linux throw data into the swap file continuously.

      My moderately crappy 3+ year old Dell 530 desktop system has only 2Gb RAM and I've *never* seen it use any swap (running Ubuntu 10.4 at present). I only have a swap partition in case I want to use 'hibernate' (which is pretty much never).

      I can have the following running with no swapping: Firefox (about 6 tabs), music player, Video rendering (standard def), DVD burner, CD ripper, OpenOffice.

      I'm sure I *could* get it to swap if I added some more demanding applications, but I think the above shows that Linux at least does not require swap any more for most people's typical needs.

    2. Re:Consolidation of failures? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      You remember things differently than I do. First Quantum made shitty drives, which was bought by Maxtor which made decent drives. Maxtor became shitty, and was bought by Seagate which made decent drives. Then Seagate started making shitty drives, and got bought by Samsung. Following this trend I see no reason to believe Samsung won't become shitty as well.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Consolidation of failures? by mikechant · · Score: 1

      The problem with current file system's is the need to change so many bits uselessly (eg Access time and Modify time) while doing absolutely nothing to the file.

      The 'noatime' parameter has been available and widely used for Linux ext2/3/4 filesystems (particularly large data partitions) for years to prevent access time updates.
      Normally there would be no real gain from turning off modify time updating since you're typically updating other data in the same disc block anyhow (e.g. file size) when you modify the file. (Unless you've got some peculiar broken filesystem that updates modify times even when the file hasn't changed?)

    4. Re:Consolidation of failures? by Vegemeister · · Score: 1

      Six tabs? Six? Apparently you do not actually use your computer.

    5. Re:Consolidation of failures? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) No more swap files. This is the largest reason why we can't move to SSD's, because computers don't yet come with enough RAM, and OS's like Windows and Linux throw data into the swap file continuously. FreeBSD on the other hand you can have an uptime of 2 years and never consume any pagefile out of the box. They keyword here is "out of the box."

      Not to start yet another FreeBSD vs Linux flamewar here, but I've never had any trouble with Linux OOM conditions for months with no swap with an untuned kernel. While there is debate in the Linux community about how and when swap should be used and there are tunables that some people futz over, those debates only enter in when swap can or will be used (and whether some should be available). If Linux simply has no swap turned on at all, it obviously isn't going to swap at all and the default config is designed to handle this ok. I haven't had a problem with either home-built vanilla kernels or debian vendor kernels... pretty much ever. I have had no problems running vanilla Linux in 64M RAM, NOR flash only (no swap) embedded systems. Sorry, but Linux doesn't inherently use much more memory than FreeBSD for most everyday tasks, and memory use is dominated by the userland apps. Get enough RAM for your apps, and Linux vs FreeBSD just isn't a factor, their kernel memory caching infrastructure is more similar than different. Windows is a different story.

    6. Re:Consolidation of failures? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Six tabs and no Photoshop (or Maya or 3DS or Final Cut or $3D_Graphics or $Video application). Some software really does push hardware limits.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    7. Re:Consolidation of failures? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhm? I've had much better luck with Samsung than WD (I've RMAed more than enough WD drives). Significantly quieter, too.

    8. Re:Consolidation of failures? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      My moderately crappy 3+ year old Dell 530 desktop system has only 2Gb RAM

      Really? I would have thought you'd have had more than 256MB in a system that new.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:Consolidation of failures? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You remember things differently than I do. First Quantum made shitty drives, which was bought by Maxtor which made decent drives.

      Nope. First Quantum made good drives, then they slipped, and then they were bought by Maxtor. Remember all those doorstop macs? They all have Quantum drives. Most of them STILL work. Quantum was unable to make the MB->GB transition gracefully, though. That was about when I started using Seizegate again after being turned off by them in the ST-506 days, and they were good for a while. Now I use WD, some people have had issues with them but I never have. I suppose I will eventually.

      Anyone out there have four decent WD disks of about 500GB each they will let me have cheap? I'm suffering for I/O and don't have budget for SSD :)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  23. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  24. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  25. please god no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    :(

    I finally found a HD brand that doesn't suck and then this happens!!!! :(

  26. Windows as well, Seagate External Drives are bad by Azarman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I recently had a 1.5TB External Seagate drive. it worked for a few months then started clicking and within 2 weeks the thing failed. I did some google searching and really REALLY wish i had done more research before buying the drive because it is a very common problem. I even got a replacement and the same thing happened. I have read of someone having 5 replacements in 6 months. Seagate are aware there is a problem as they replace the drive instantly but no public recall.

    Google Link to LOTS of web pages details the issues http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=Seagate+External+drive+clicking
    Seagate Forums
    http://forums.seagate.com/t5/Other-External-products/Seagate-Expansions-producing-loud-clicking-sound/td-p/30962/page/3
    http://forums.seagate.com/t5/Maxtor-OneTouch-Products/Maxtor-External-Hard-Drive-Clicking-Noise-Not-Working/td-p/16446
    http://forums.seagate.com/t5/Other-External-products/Solution-Seagate-Expansion-Desktop-External-Drive-clicking/td-p/49865

    I could supply more links, but from a personal view NEVER use seagate for anything but Throw away data. I was using it as a backup for my PC and in the end lost 500gb of data in the process.
    Do not by Seagate hard drives

  27. About even.... by scharkalvin · · Score: 1

    I've had both good and bad luck with BOTH Seagate and WD. I am currently using a Seagate Momentus in thinkpad and it works fine (except for the fact that the thinkpad bios checks for an IBM watermark and won't directly boot anything BUT a drive with IBM firmware, there is a work around for this that involves two keystrokes during powerup but that's another story). I had a WD go bad on me (it failed gradually enough to give me time to save my data) and I had a Seagate 3.5" model fail due to a firmware bug. Seagate did repair this on their nickel.

  28. Samsung by Grindalf · · Score: 0

    I think Samsung toys are good. Their kit has (in my humble experience) rock solid performance under adverse radio / heat / vibrational conditions. Almost mill spec. I think it would be good for both parties.

    --
    The purpose of existence is to make money.
  29. I'm disappointed. by whovian · · Score: 1

    I have refused to buy Seagate since I became uncomfortable with their apparent lack-to-slow response to their user forum about reports of HDD bricking. Granted, there were several manufacturing sites and firmware versions about. Quality control issues AFAICT. I own one of the affected drives (I *think* so, since there are conflicting reports) but am afraid of using it for anything critical. Since then I've needed to buy ~10 TB in HDD -- all Samsung drives in fact, and they have given me zero problems thus far. In the past, I've not had problems with WD, but that was back in the day with 80 GB IDE HDD. Anyway, I fear what market consolidation will bring.

    --
    To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
  30. Oligopolies Suck by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    In general you need at least 7 players to have sufficient competition. The industries often claim they need to scale large to be efficient, but with a few exceptions, this is a bogus claim.

    On the flip side, sucky hard-drives will likely trigger advances in solid-state drives (which I hope also don't oligopolate on us too).
       

    1. Re:Oligopolies Suck by Elviswind · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you're making the claim that storage is now an oligopoly. Certainly, rotational media storage is, but that is a decreasing share of the overall storage market. Looking at the storage market as a whole and you should include all the SSD manufacturers like Intel, OCZ, and Crucial. I think you get to seven significant players pretty quickly, although I suspect there will be some consolidation with SSD's too sooner than later.

      Over the past 10 years or so, HDD manufacturers have been on a race to the bottom in terms of $/GB. I think that's the exact reason you get batches of lousy consumer drives out on the market. Consolidation isn't going to be good for prices, but maybe in a less price sensitive market we can expect to see more consistent reliability from lot to lot for a given SKU.

  31. Reason for click by bjb_admin · · Score: 1

    Does anyone here know what is actually causing the clicking? Thrown head? Bad board on the drive? Miniscule error on track 0 of the disk? I know of a person who had the click of death on their hard drive and sent it in for data recovery. It took about a week but the recovery company was able to recover 99% of the data (I don't know why 1% was missing, perhaps just junk files that didn't matter, but all the documents were there). Cost was about $1800.00 for the 200Gb worth of data.

    1. Re:Reason for click by cforciea · · Score: 1

      Frequently it is either the drive head hitting the edge of its available movement space because it misses track 0 and keeps going, or the needle itself making contact with the platter. If the needle hits platter, it ends up ruining data wherever it lands, which could explain the 1% data loss.

  32. Wondering by ideaz · · Score: 1

    now what would people rant about on the deal sites

  33. Re:Windows as well, Seagate External Drives are ba by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    Nothing beats vigilance.

    Run checks on the disks on a frequent and ongoing basis and dump them when they look like they are about to die.

    You will flee from some brand to another and one day be bit in the arse when that next brand has it's next "moment in the limelight".

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  34. Not all that bad from a competition standpoint by bobdotorg · · Score: 1

    Losing two major players in a five firm industry is usually a bad thing with respect to competition / antitrust.

    However, in this case it's not that bad - the recent entrance of additional companies (such as Intel) making SSDs will, over time, mitigate the effects.

    --
    __ Someday, but not this morning, I'll finally learn to use the preview button.
  35. one word by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

    Noooooooooooooo! :-(

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  36. I had a Samsung 250gb die on me, model #SP2504C by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bought on clearance @ CompUSA before they pulled up the rugs (left) the local mall, it was a very good deal, price-wise (& I got a 160gb model with it too, still works though)...

    The thing "cut out" on me around 6 months after I bought it!

    Still - I'll admit that my experience w/ hdd's has been like this, imo + experience @ least, & from my having been around PC's since 1990 - that's how it is w/ HDD's: Either they DIE nearly right off, or, run "forever"

    (E.G.-> I've got 4 IDE WD "Caviar" disks, 212mb - 420mb still runnable here, for example, from iirc, circa 1991-1994).

    Still - I don't know if this was just "bad luck" or, manufacturing issues, though.

    However - I do know that an acquaintance of mine said to myself, in regard to this particular Samsung diskdrive model:

    "Don't stack that drive too close to others, let it 'breathe', because that model's got known issues with heat"

    I took that with a "grain-of-salt" because the guy's not exactly "super-tech", but still... his 'prophetic words' came out right!

    APK

    P.S.=> No warranty was offered, CompUSA or Samsung on this one, because it was "clearance/closing doors" sale stuff... but, ticked me off some: I lost 250gb of storage (it's a 7,200rpm model - not exactly a "speed-demon" compared to say, WD Raptors/Velociraptors or SSD's, but... it was my "chevy truck" for storage purposes, that bit it!)... apk

  37. Slashtag by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Buggywhips.

  38. Qualified Amen by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    I've had three Seagates crash on me (note to self: stop buying OEMs from NewEgg!) so I switched to WD only to have one crash within the year (thankfully still under warranty).
    Hard drive quality is seemingly worse - either 1 TB is just too damn big to be reliable or they've all given up trying as they see their SSD doom on the horizon.

  39. Re:Windows as well, Seagate External Drives are ba by thoromyr · · Score: 2

    Are you sure. Seagate is ahead of you. Four of my drives (no longer in use) were Seagate (or Maxtor brand, but post Seagate takeover and afflicted by the Seagate issues). They ranged from 500MB to 750MB. They have a firmware bug (that Seagate never admitted to) that if the internal drive logging, which is a circular buffer, happens to be full when the drive is powered on... tough luck, it will not work unless/until someone connects to the drive's serial port and clears it.

    Nothing wrong with the media, nothing wrong with the file system. Nothing for anything to detect. Effectively randomly on a power up it will simply and permanently (barring obtaining special equipment or paying Seagate) die.

    Not only did Seagate never acknowledge the issue, they provided firmware updates that bricked some drives. And silently replaced the bad firmware update with a new one having the same revision number. The original and subsequent updated firmware having the same revision number, and never a comment from Seagate about it being a problem, had different hashes. Given the silent replacement with a different firmware it is clear that Seagate was aware of the firmware being a problem for some drives but never admitted it and those unfortunate enough to be bit by it were out of luck -- Seagate's policy is uniformly "your fault if you update the firmware and anything goes wrong."

    I was never foolish enough to attempt flashing my drives. I didn't (and still don't) have enough excess capacity to pull the data off of them so they sit powered off waiting for such time. And I'm hoping that they power up fine. They probably will (per boot up the risk is fairly low), but is definitely not guaranteed.

    I can't be bothered to provide a google link to the issue, but it was all over Seagate's forums and was mentioned on slashdot. The explanation, by the way, was provided anonymously by someone claiming to be a Seagate engineer. So it may not be true, but it very much fit the seemingly random nature of the failure and the method of fixing the drives (which some individuals did do) worked.

    If you value your data do not use Seagate.

  40. Excrement indeed. by dwalsh · · Score: 1

    Yes, in the last five years, Samsung have been the drive of choice for the discerning gentleman. Now? I don't know where to turn.

    --
    ${YEAR+1} is going to be the year of Linux on the desktop!
  41. Re:Windows as well, Seagate External Drives are ba by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They have a firmware bug (that Seagate never admitted to) that if the internal drive logging, which is a circular buffer, happens to be full when the drive is powered on... tough luck, it will not work unless/until someone connects to the drive's serial port and clears it.

    Nothing wrong with the media, nothing wrong with the file system. Nothing for anything to detect. Effectively randomly on a power up it will simply and permanently (barring obtaining special equipment or paying Seagate) die.

    Not only did Seagate never acknowledge the issue, they provided firmware updates that bricked some drives.

    Never acknowledged or admitted? I followed that story and the entire reason you know the bug had something to do with internal logging is that Seagate ultimately not only acknowledged the bug, they described the failure mechanism. (Also, it wasn't triggered by being full, it was triggered by being at a multiple of 320 (or some such weird number) entries long at powerup. Basically every time you powered down the drive you were spinning the roulette wheel.)

    Yeah, they flubbed a lot of things related to letting customers know what was going on at first, how they issued firmware updates, and so forth. The saga was a great case study in how not to handle critical firmware bugfixes. Seagate learned a hard lesson about how to communicate with customers about problems and issue firmware updates to them. Much of the way they compounded the problem was due to panic-rushing out new firmware images delivered inside updater programs which were never designed to be safe for the general public to use. But it's a bit strange that you're insisting up and down that they never so much as acknowledged the bug, when they clearly did.

    Also, you didn't have to pay Seagate. Pretty sure I remember them offering to fix any firmware-'bricked' drive for you, for free, without data loss barring real damage to the drive. Actually if they had tried to make you pay for this service they'd have been sued into the stone age, as all the drives in question were by definition still under warranty (it was a fairly new product family and I don't think any of them could have been out of warranty yet).

  42. Re:Windows as well, Seagate External Drives are ba by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

    We operate hundreds of Seagate drives and our annual failure rate is rather low. WD drives are giving grief tho dropping constantly out of RAID etc.

    Almost every seagate drive that fails is years old already, and been in 24/7 usage in a server.

    Hell, i even got some seagates getting quite an abuse on RAID, and still no failures despite they get occasionally kicked, are stacked on top of each other with only mounting being the cabling etc. Tho i am expecting them to fail at ANYTIME, they are getting that bad of an abuse.

    I would suspect your usage pattern is causing some major abuse to the drives, operating near magnetic sources? Vibration? Do not have external drives on your desk, as it's going to have multiple types of vibration (speakers, typing on keyboard etc.). Or maybe you just keep dropping them while they are running?