Slashdot Mirror


A Year After Thailand Flooding, Hard Drive Prices Remain High

crookedvulture writes "Last October, Thailand was hit by massive flooding that put much of the world's hard drive industry under water. Production slowed to a crawl as drive makers and their suppliers mopped up the damage, and prices predictably skyrocketed. One year later, production has rebounded, with the industry expected to ship more drives in 2012 than it did in 2011. For the most part, though, hard drive prices haven't returned to pre-flood levels. Although 2.5" notebook drives are a little cheaper now than before the flood, the average price of 3.5" desktop drives is up 35% from a year ago. Prices have certainly fallen dramatically from their post-flood peaks, but the rate of decline has slowed substantially in recent months, suggesting that higher prices are the new norm for desktop drives."

59 of 214 comments (clear)

  1. Why not? by Severus+Snape · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they can get away with charging the extra, they are hardly going to reduce their profit margins now.

    1. Re:Why not? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It kind of reminds me of the practices of local gas pumps...well, some of them anyway. When the prices on the international crude oil market go up, they raise their prices. Whey they go down again, they reduce their prices. Only the latency in the former case is noticeably smaller. ;) Bastards.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:Why not? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Interesting

      why didn't they just "charge extra" before the floods?

      They didn't have an excuse they could fall back on if they ramped them up with no reason?

      No excuse is needed. Public companies have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders to maximize profits. If they were knowingly selling for less that the market would bear, without a sound strategic reason, they would be guilty of misconduct. Since most (all?) of these drives are imported, selling below the fair market price could also be illegal under various "anti-dumping" laws.

    3. Re:Why not? by Nadaka · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The market is much less willing to bear arbitrary price jacking than price jacking related to a major event.

    4. Re:Why not? by Smallpond · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Because the equiibrium was lower. Now one of the few players would have to charge less, but they have no incentive to do so. Game theory at work.

      Exactly. When their costs went up they all had to raise prices but when costs go down they can all wait for someone else to lower prices first. No collusion or cartel is required.

    5. Re:Why not? by oxdas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Public companies do NOT have a fiduciary duty to maximize profits, only to follow the company charter. Even in the most often cited case creating fiduciary responsibility to maximize profits, Dodge v. Ford Motor Company (1919), the court said this in regards to Henry Ford's desire to reduce the price of his cars for his stated, purely altruistic, motives (and in doing so cancel a special dividend to his shareholders):

      " We do not draw in question, nor do counsel for the plaintiffs do so, the validity of the general proposition stated by counsel⦠that although a manufacturing corporation cannot engage in humanitarian works as its principal business, the fact that it is organized for profit does not prevent the existence of implied powers to carry on with humanitarian motives such charitable works as are incidental to the main business of the corporation."

      My primary problem with your position is not that it is factually wrong (even though it is), but that "maximizing profits" is a purely subjective term and an impossible goal. Short-term and long-term profits have mutually exclusive components. For example, cutting r&d or laying off staff raises profits in the short term, but may lead to declining profits in the long term. Depending on your point of view, any corporate action could be construed as not maximizing profits.

    6. Re:Why not? by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Because they actually had real competition before? Before the flood there were FOUR hard drive manufacturers, Seagate, WD, Samsung, and Hitachi, now there is only WD and Seagate. Since there is only two they will simply watch and match each other's prices, nice way to have a duopoly.

      But this is why competition is so important, just look at how quickly prices are falling and sizes growing in SSDs whereas with HDDs they seem to be stagnant, that's because as long as they simply match each other's prices they don't have to worry about price wars since its only the two of them.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    7. Re:Why not? by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But where this model fails is in the standard assumption that volume never changes, and this is wrong. Pre-flood I bought a 2 TB external HDD for my DirecTV DVR for ~$90. My 1 TB external HDD that I use for backups has been at it's limit for a while; in fact, I've been having fun finding all the stuff that I really don't need to backup. A few weeks ago I found archives that were truly worthless and saved myself about 300 (uncompressed) MB. If the price of a 2 TB external HDD had fallen to it's previous level, I would have just bought one and not bothered. I suspect I'm not the only person doing these kinds of activities. Yes, I realize I am a minority of the market, but in sum, we're probably talking about a substantial total volume of HDDs not being purchased.

      --

      I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

    8. Re:Why not? by Dogtanian · · Score: 2

      But this is why competition is so important, just look at how quickly prices are falling and sizes growing in SSDs whereas with HDDs they seem to be stagnant, that's because as long as they simply match each other's prices they don't have to worry about price wars since its only the two of them.

      Isn't part of the lack of competition in the HDD market due to the fact that many companies see SSD as being the long-term future, and therefore wouldn't want to get into, or want to get out of, the HDD market, nor invest money in something they perceive as having no long-term future?

      Of course, if the price of HDDs remains too high, then it will almost certainly hasten the demise of that market in the face of SSDs' increasing popularity, even if there will remain a smaller market for people who *need* the larger capacities that SSDs won't reach in the near future.

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    9. Re:Why not? by MMC+Monster · · Score: 2

      My thought is that if they don't raise the price at the pump now, they can't afford the next shipment of gas.

      As for bringing the price down, they have to hedge their bets on how much that next shipment is going to cost them.

      I wonder if they have any insurance on this sort of thing, or some buffer in case they make a mistake in their estimates?

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    10. Re:Why not? by cranky_chemist · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's called "static up, elastic down" pricing, and it's one of the basic tenets of economics.

    11. Re:Why not? by wisty · · Score: 2

      Presumably there was a lot of overcapacity. No-one wants to be in the hard drive business. PCs are dying, and everything else is going SSD. Would *you* build a hard drive factory?

      The flood wiped out a lot of the extra factories which were keeping prices low. No-one's going to replace those factories, because they have better things to do with their money.

    12. Re:Why not? by adolf · · Score: 2

      It's called "static up, elastic down" pricing, and it's one of the basic tenets of economics.

      See also: Edgeworth price cycle, which explains the sawtooth shape of retail gasoline price trends.

    13. Re:Why not? by mcrbids · · Score: 2

      When their costs went up they all had to raise prices but when costs go down they can all wait for someone else to lower prices first. No collusion or cartel is required.

      Not necessarily. It's likely that there profits were lost, and the cost of rebuilding factories and destroyed equipment would also drive up prices. They'll charge whatever they think will maximize their profits, so if yields still haven't completely caught up or embedded costs prevent them from dropping prices in order to get a volume advantage over their competitors you can bet that prices will remain high.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  2. What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Before the flooding, I bought a 1TB drive for ~$85. During the flooding, I saw those jump to ~$135. Last week, I bought a 1TB for $70.

    They're still high?

    1. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      You overpaid pre-flood. Pre-flood, you could get 2TB 3.5" 7200RPM for around $60-$70. Now it's about $90-$100 and usually with a shorter warranty duration than pre-flood.

      All I'm gonna say is these higher prices better result in the new technologies (HARM/BPM/etc) coming to market.

    2. Re:What? by tloh · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I have been watching prices as well and I've observed that, although slightly inconsistent, they do seem to be normalizing. Last week, I snagged a deal at newegg for less than $45/TB for a 3TB external. Some in the comments revealed that upon cracking open the enclosure, the actual drive is one of the vendor's fastest model. Bought separately, the bare drive would have costed $30 more. It is unclear to me at this point what is actually happening, but I'm happy to have bought a HD at a reasonable price.

      --
      Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
    3. Re:What? by YodasEvilTwin · · Score: 2

      You got a bad deal beforehand, I was buying my 1 TB drives for $50.

    4. Re:What? by gman003 · · Score: 2

      The price of the same drive has dropped, but the average price has not. Logical conclusion then is that people are buying more expensive drives than before.

      It actually makes some sense given the rise of SSDs. People who would have been satisfied with a small hard drive are now opting to get a similarly-sized but far faster SSD. So the bottom end of the market has shrunk, moving the average up.

      That's just my conjecture, but it seems logical. The best way to test would be to compare similar market segments - compare the prices and volume of the current highest-capacity 7200RPM drive to the 2011 highest-capacity 7200RPM drive, and so on. If sales of the small (250GB) drives, particularly 2.5" 5400RPM models, has slowed, it might explain why the average has increased.

    5. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If it's a Seagate 7200.14 then no, they're not the same.
      The variant they put in external enclosures is crippled via firmware to 150MB/s max transfer rate and has ~24ms average access time.
      The noncrippled ones do >200MB/s on the outer cylinders and ~18ms avg access time.

    6. Re:What? by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 3, Informative

      I bought a pair of WD 3TB drives just before the flood. They cost me about euro 125 each, and the cheapest price hereabouts today is almost euro 140. Note that these prices are not exactly comparable to the US prices, due to currency exchange and high VAT.

      --
      Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    7. Re:What? by patchmaster · · Score: 2

      Pre-flood, you could get 2TB 3.5" 7200RPM for around $60-$70.

      Nonsense. I was building a big server around that time and was keeping a very close eye on prices. The cheapest I ever saw was $89, and that was for a 5400RPM drive, not a 7200RPM. And the $89 was a sale.

    8. Re:What? by Applekid · · Score: 4, Funny

      You're all overpaying. I stole all my hard drives.

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    9. Re:What? by guruevi · · Score: 2

      You may be confusing access times but even if you aren't, your SCSI drive was probably a single-platter (which was common back then) while the current beasts are 4 platters. I think the current maximum is 1TB/platter and you'll find 4 of those in the 4TB drives.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    10. Re:What? by Gaygirlie · · Score: 2

      My SCSI 160 drives deliver a 2ms access time.

      I'd love to see a mechanical HDD with such speeds. You are confusing something there, mate.

  3. Not Actually...$0.058 per GB Isn't Bad... by ilikenwf · · Score: 2

    Sale is over, but Newegg sold 1TB Hitachi DeskStars, which actually are reliable now (I have some that have been spinning nonstop for 2 years) for $60 apiece. That's around $0.058 per gigabyte before formatting...not bad at all. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822145304

    Yes, while the regular price is $80, you've always had to get drives when they're on sale if you want a really good deal, anyway. Same actually goes for SSDs.

    1. Re:Not Actually...$0.058 per GB Isn't Bad... by ilikenwf · · Score: 2

      There were 1.5TB WD Green drives for $65...I just didn't want a slow green drive...and I heard they aren't as good for RAID.

      By the way, my DeskStar has 5 year warranty...

    2. Re:Not Actually...$0.058 per GB Isn't Bad... by rnturn · · Score: 2

      "and I heard they aren't as good for RAID."

      Yep. WD used to not support the Blue, Green, and Black drives in RAID setups. (I ran into this about a year ago.) WD now seems to support RAID0 and RAID1. RAID5 still doesn't appear to be officially supported by WD and I'm not sure what Seagate's current policy is on consumer class drives and RAID. I had nothing but headaches trying to get a pair of Green drives to work in a RAID1 setup. The raidset would go offline at the drop of a hat. The problem was related to a "feature" in the drive firmware and the way it dealt with a bad block. (The remapping could take quite a while and play havoc with Linux "md" raidsets.) At the time both vendors were saying that you had use "enterprise" class drives like, say, WD "RE" and Seagate Constellation ES, if you're going to use them in a RAID configuration. Of course, they cost a fair amount more than the consumer oriented disks.

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    3. Re:Not Actually...$0.058 per GB Isn't Bad... by timeOday · · Score: 2

      I'm surprised 1TB drives are still even relevant; they've been available since 2007 - five years ago. Six years before that, in 2001, 100 GB drives were the latest thing. Go back another 5 years to 1996 and 2.5 GB was it! The 1990s, those were the days for PCs. Your $3000 PC was obsolete by the time you un-boxed it.

  4. But SSD prices failing every week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Good old mechanical hard drives will be around for a long time but at least the flood sparked some serious competition with pricing in the SSD market.

  5. They're not coming down by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I feel sorry for the people who think prices will go back to what they were.

    1. Re:They're not coming down by jandrese · · Score: 2

      I don't see why not. The flood didn't knock any of the companies out entirely AFAIK, so the same market forces that originally pushed hard drives down to bargain basement prices are still there. It does take time, and the companies involved probably can't slash their prices quite as much right now because they have to pay for repairing flood damage and missed sales. Give it another year or two and prices should settle back into the old pattern I bet.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
  6. Yes, accurate. by DarthVain · · Score: 3, Informative

    I bought a 2TB WD for 69.99 pre-flood. They are still about 100$ right now (95.99$). So yeah, 30-35% over what they used to cost.

    About the only glimmer of hope is that the 3TB has come down in price to about 130$ (129.99$).

    So the 3TB is 0.043 a GB and the 2TB is 0.05 a GB whereas it was 0.035 for a 2TB pre flood.

    So in larger format drives it is still approching the older pricing at a somewhat faster rate.

    That said, the unwritten rule about just about ANY computer technology is that wait a few months and whatever it is will be cheaper. HD's have bucked that trend due to the flood, and the (all) companies profiteering from it. That is what you get when you have an industry that has consolidated and consolidated until there are only a few companies out there. The BIG question out there is if there is any intentional collusion going on to keep prices high, much like just about everyone suspects of oil, but nothing is ever done.

    1. Re:Yes, accurate. by alen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      not collusion but more like why spend all this money to rebuild a factory or bring a flooded factory to 100% of pre-flood capacity if the prices will only drop?

      they rebuilt enough capacity to just meet demand and that's it

    2. Re:Yes, accurate. by ByteSlicer · · Score: 2

      That said, the unwritten rule about just about ANY computer technology is that wait a few months and whatever it is will be cheaper.

      Not entirely accurate. You will get more (bytes, pixels, features) for the same price.
      Items that were sold before will get cheaper, but will disappear from the market as soon as they hit some threshold price and are replaced by the next generation.

  7. Lack of competition, recapitalization by Giant+Electronic+Bra · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think it is just a sign that the market is no longer really competitive. There are too few vendors left in the business (basically what, 3 actual manufacturers are left now at this point).

    Frankly I doubt this is going to continue for long. With more and more storage moving online (much more efficient use of drives on average), less desktops, movement of desktop and laptop storage to SSDs with falling SSD prices there is just not going to be the demand long-term. In fact the increased prices right now may just represent a need for these businesses to recapitalize and drive R&D. The only justification for hard drives is going to be sheer size (IE mb/$, mb/m^3, mb/watt) and that requires a lot of R&D to keep driving those numbers in a positive direction.

    --
    "Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
    1. Re:Lack of competition, recapitalization by dinfinity · · Score: 2

      Yep: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_hard_disk_manufacturers
      And Toshiba has only about 10% of the market: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/wd-seagate-toshiba-hdd-hard-drives,17227.html

      I'm not so sure about the imminent demise of the spinning platter. Homemade video (didn't GoPro release a 1080p60-cam recently?) and high-res photo's are still on the rise and the existing data isn't going anywhere. Well, the stuff that people really care about, at least. I wouldn't trust any childhood memories to the cloud.

      Of course, other high data density technologies (which flash is not, or so I've been told) could supplant the spinning platter. I'm not aware of any commercially viable ones, though.

    2. Re:Lack of competition, recapitalization by Solandri · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think it is just a sign that the market is no longer really competitive. There are too few vendors left in the business (basically what, 3 actual manufacturers are left now at this point).

      Arguably, the state of the HDD industry before the flooding was that it was too competitive. It had some of the lowest margins in the tech industry, resulting in big research names like IBM deciding it wasn't worth it and jettisoning its entire storage division (sold it to Hitachi, who after a decade decided the same and sold it to WD).

      So the pricing we're seeing now may actually be closer to where prices should have been for a thriving industry. We're not down to 2.5 manufacturers (Toshiba doesn't make 3.5" drives) because of some grand conspiracy to corner the market on HDDs. We're there because HDD prices were too low for all the other manufacturers to stay afloat, resulting in them merging and being acquired. The extremely low margins meant the process overshot, and there are now fewer manufacturers than you'd expect in a healthy industry.

  8. Sometimes Companies Never Recover by carrier+lost · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's quite possible that there might have been some HDD or sub-assembly mfgrs who were just hanging on, what with the constant shrinking in the desktop market.

    The flood might have just pushed some of them over the edge, so to speak.

  9. Inflation by hackus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you are pricing the hard drives in Federal Reserve notes, you are going to find that although the floods did have a market response to prices, something has also happened in the past several months.

    The Federal Reserve Note is dying. Purchasing power of the dollar is being cut drastically in just about all areas not just hard drives.

    I doubt it will improve any time soon. One use to be able to track gold and silver to get a pretty good guess on the health of a fiat currency. Now, that is pretty much impossible to do due to the enormous amount of corruption in the exchanges going on during the past several years since the crash.

    In fact I would expect the prices to not return to last years levels, and actually increase like many items that are currently doing the same thing.

    -Hack

    --
    Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
    1. Re:Inflation by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Federal Reserve Note is dying. Purchasing power of the dollar is being cut drastically in just about all areas not just hard drives.

      Inflation is very low by historical standards. Since the floods, the dollar has been flat against the baht and yen, and has risen against the euro. We haven't been doing quite as well against the Swiss franc, but we don't buy HDDs from Switzerland.

    2. Re:Inflation by Maltheus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Throughout most of America's history there was hardly any inflation at all. Now, you'd be hard pressed to find a food or energy product (necessary basics) that hasn't doubled in price over the past 10 years.

      The CPI calculations were so heavily rigged by the Carter and Regan administrations, that they no longer have any basis in reality.

    3. Re:Inflation by sdguero · · Score: 2

      It is only at historically low levels if you look at the "official" numbers which report ~2% inflation. If you look at CPI inflation, which takes gas, food, and the things that normal people actually buy (vs multi-millionaires' investments and employee salaries) into consideration, inflation is currently around 6% and has spiked over 10% during the last 4-5 years.

      It's not a pretty picture and a topic that the federal reserve and politicians (other than a few independents) have been avoiding like the plague. As someone that drives V-8 (well mostly ride a motorcycle now because gas is so expensive) and worked in grocery stores for years, I am particularly sensitive to price increases in those areas and they have been pretty intense.

      Don't be fooled by government statistics, just take a picture of 100 random items in a grocery store this week and check again in a year. Even with all the government subsidies on our food, they will average much more than a 2% increase in twelve months.

    4. Re:Inflation by Soldrinero · · Score: 2

      You're very wrong. The CPI is exactly what you suggest we do - they check prices of common consumer goods in real stores. If the government bogeyman scares you, look at MIT's billion price index. It's an online survey of many prices, updated in real time. And it matches the CPI very accurately.

      --
      I would rather be killed by a terrorist than enslaved by my government.
  10. Its the economy by randomErr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In the US we has some thing called QE2 and QE3. QE stand for Quantitative Easing. The practice is to have a central bank but up assets of a failing companies and print money to pay for it. Printing the money causes inflation. This probably is the easiest way to explain was inflation.

    Our money is worth less now. So it takes more cash to buy the same amount of goods. The cost is compounded by other factors like shipping and labor.

    Unfortantley for the United States QE3 is now unlimited. QE1 and QE2 both had ceiling so we could only cause so much inflation on ourselves. But with QE3 our central bank, The Federal Reserve, has an unlimited ability to print as much money as it wants.

    --
    You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
    1. Re:Its the economy by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Informative

      Our money is worth less now.

      No it isn't. Most HDDs are made in Japan and Thailand. Since the floods, the dollar has not declined against either the yen or baht. US domestic inflation is very low, and Japan has actually had deflation (negative inflation) since the flood. So a dollar should buy more, not less.

    2. Re:Its the economy by TopSpin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      QE3 is $40E+9 per month. Helicopter Ben is monetizing (printing) about 37% of our deficit. This eventuality has been predicted for the US for decades. Buy gold with cash and hide it.

      However, that's probably not the reason for the pricing histogram in the linked story. The prices of some models have fallen while others have remained high. That differential wouldn't exist if it were exclusively due to currency; exchange rates make no distinction between popular 2.5" disks and everything else.

      The models where prices have fallen are the high volume models that OEMs install in laptops and DVRs. Everything else remains expensive.

      That actually makes a lot of sense. OEMS buy those 2.5" drives under contract in large quantities. These are the lines that got highest priority to recover after the flood, so the supply of these parts recovered quicker and prices have fallen faster.

      Basically the flood caused a realignment of resources and this is reflected in the prices we see now.

      --
      Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
    3. Re:Its the economy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      But that doesn't fit his distrust of The Federal Reserve! How dare you provide real facts!

  11. a page from the oil companies' book by technosaurus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Its a pretty simple strategy. Buy out as much of the competition as possible to help control supply. If anything causes increased demand or short supply, raise prices immediately and then only lower them when absolutely necessary to keep regulators off your back. Does this sound like gas prices? I think so. Remember when diesel prices were lower than gas at least all summer? It may not be a monopoly, but when a few major companies own the market and have an unwritten non-compete agreement, it may as well be (recall a similar issue the lcd monitor price fixing case)

    1. Re:a page from the oil companies' book by green1 · · Score: 2

      Just to be clear, I agree with your overall point, but your view of diesel vs gas seems to be skewed. Diesel prices should be lower than gas, diesel takes less work to refine than gasoline. Around here diesel is cheaper than gas all summer, but equal price or more expensive all winter (the same production lines used to refine diesel are used to refine heating oil for the east coast, so demand goes up in the winter)

  12. Also warranties suck now by citylivin · · Score: 5, Informative

    I have also noticed that you are paying a huge premium now for even a 3 year warranty. Most seagate drives now come with a ridiculous 1 year warranty on them, so I wont even look at them any more. WD is not much better, with their green drives being 1-2 years. If you want 3-5 year you are paying 50% more for the drive. For example a 2tb WD black (5 year warranty) has a non sale price of $199 ( http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=58376&vpn=WD2002FAEX&manufacture=Western%20Digital%20WD&promoid=1230 ) whereas the same drive albeit "green" with a 2 year warranty is $119 non sale price ( http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=62047&vpn=WD20EARX&manufacture=Western%20Digital%20WD&promoid=1230 ).

    Its a shame because I was looking at old invoices and in 2010 I was buying 2tb drives with 3 year warranties standard for 80 bucks.

    Sure they claim to have more "features" with their different colour codes, but it does seem like they just decided 3 years should no longer be industry standard for a warranty. Probably some sort of collusion as they all pretty much changed their warranties at the same time. With seagate, they used to pride themselves in having 5 year warranties. And having recently RMA'd a 1TB drive from 2008, I am glad for that.

    Most HDD's die within 3-5 years. So a 1 year warranty is useless except for straight off the truck failures. Arguably, this is more sensible for the company, however it sucks ass for consumers who are used to having a standard 5 year warranty, an artifact of the storage wars of the mid aughts.

    So I am not surprised, but not many people are talking about this, which is surprising. Glad to see a slashdot article about it!

    --
    As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
    1. Re:Also warranties suck now by gman003 · · Score: 4, Informative

      There's more difference than just the warranty between the Green and Black.

      WD has three "labels" for consumer drives: Green, Blue, and Black. Green drives are 5400RPM "power-efficient" drives, and new capacities generally show up here first as it's easier to increase density at low speeds. Blue and Black drives are both 7200RPM*, but Black usually has larger cache and is marketed at "enthusiasts", while Blue is aimed at "mainstream".

      So I guess they also consider a lengthier warranty to be an "enthusiast", not "mainstream", feature.

      * I think on their mobile side it's different, with notebook Blue drives still being 5400RPM, but I don't recall for sure and don't feel like checking.

    2. Re:Also warranties suck now by Maltheus · · Score: 2

      Most HDD's die within 3-5 years.

      Hmmm. I've had many hard drives and plenty that arrive dead or fail within the first three months, but I'm not sure that I've ever had one that failed, after it's proven itself for more than a year. I've gotten to the point where I won't even use a drive, unless it's proved itself (as a backup HDD) for at least a year.

    3. Re:Also warranties suck now by MozeeToby · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is now also "Red" which have some NAS features and a 3 year warranty.

  13. Re:Pine for the old days... by hjf · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm 100% certain Facebook and Google don't need the RAW SPEEDZ 10k SAS gives, but the sheer size and small price of 3.5 SATA

  14. Re:Cost-based Pricing vs. Value-based Pricing by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

    "Free Market" capitalism requires cost plus pricing only. If value pricing exists, you do not, by definition, have a free market. People get confused about "free market" all the time.

  15. Re:Hard drives have been a money losing business by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

    Bah, in the 80s I paid $400+ for a 20 MB HD, and was glad to have that over the 10 MB that was $300+

  16. Re:Pine for the old days... by jedidiah · · Score: 2

    The Cloud isn't fast enough or reliable enough for your Post-PC fantasy to be a reality at this point. Non-trivial amounts of local storage are still needed.

    Even if it were otherwise, you still might not be comfortable with a government that claims you have no ownership interest in files.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  17. Kryder's Law actually by Comboman · · Score: 4, Informative

    What does Moore's law have to do with this? There are not a large number of transistors on the hard drives they are talking about here.

    The equivalent for hard drive storage is Kryder's Law, but the concept is essentially the same as Moore's Law.

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.