Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 11:28:50 -0700 From: "Scott T. Smith" <scott@gelatinous.com> To: "Jason A. Crome" <crome@devnetinc.com> Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Hitachi vs Seagate: Opinions wanted Message-ID: <1088533730.12038.49.camel@tinny.home.foo> In-Reply-To: <20040629173234.281A82000302@beowulf.devnetinc.com> References: <20040629173234.281A82000302@beowulf.devnetinc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 11:22, Jason A. Crome wrote: > I can't imagine a higher failure rate than we've had with Hitachi drives. > Of the 15 or so servers we've built for customers using Hitachi drives over > the last 2 years, 6 of them came back after about a year of operation with > catastrophic drive failures. And unfortunately it wasn't just a bad batch > of drives - they were manufactured at entirely different times. > > Sooooo, I guess give the two options, I'd say Seagate ;-) Isn't the current Hitachi drive business just IBM's old drive business, which they offloaded a couple years back when they were having the high failure rates of the DeskStar 75? http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/04/0050238 http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002may/gee20020605012041.htm Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1088533730.12038.49.camel>