• El Barto@lemmy.worlddeleted by creator
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is this true? I remember them being very reliable in the past.

    • Ernest@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think people say this because there was one specific 6TB model that does really poorly in BackBlaze reports, combined with a generally poor understanding of statistics (“I bought a Seagate and it failed but I’ve never had a WD fail”).

      I will also point out that BackBlaze themselves consistently say that Seagate and WD are pretty much the same (apart from the one model), in those exact same reports

      • El Barto@lemmy.worlddeleted by creator
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Heh. In my case, one WD SSD failed miserably on me.

        Thanks for the explanation.

      • MangioneDontMiss@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve had at least 6 seagate drives over the past 20 years. none of them survived more than 2 or 3 years. Meanwhile, i have two almost 15 year old WDs sitting on my desk still going strong.