Prev: SAS RAID Controller with PCI Interface?
Next: true image skipping .tib files
From: Tony on 8 Jul 2008 18:15
"Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" <toylet.toylet(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:48439b10(a)127.0.0.1...
>
> which one is better?

I've had 4 out of 5 ST3320613AS drives fail within an hour of installation.

Tony

From: Rod Speed on 8 Jul 2008 19:14
Tony <MyEmail(a)my.isp.net> wrote
> Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) <toylet.toylet(a)gmail.com> wrote

>> which one is better?

> I've had 4 out of 5 ST3320613AS drives fail within an hour of installation.

Fark, there must be something badly wrong with the system they were installed in
or someone dropped the inadequately packaged drives before they were installed.


From: Tony on 8 Jul 2008 20:07

"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6dian5F2oi1rU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> Tony <MyEmail(a)my.isp.net> wrote
>> Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) <toylet.toylet(a)gmail.com> wrote
>
>>> which one is better?
>
>> I've had 4 out of 5 ST3320613AS drives fail within an hour of
>> installation.
>
> Fark, there must be something badly wrong with the system they were
> installed in
> or someone dropped the inadequately packaged drives before they were
> installed.

Purchasers at NewEgg apear to be experiencing high failure rates also. Check
out the product reviews there for a sampling of results. The original 2
drives indeed were packaged incorrectly (in bubblewrap) but the replacements
from the manufacturer were packaged in approved materials (2 inches of foam
all around). I've only as of yet installed Windows and ran some scans on the
drive that is still working (couldn't get that far with all the other ones)
so I'm "knocking on wood" in hopes that the drive is a good one.

Tony

From: Rod Speed on 8 Jul 2008 21:32
Tony <MyEmail(a)my.isp.net> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote
>> Tony <MyEmail(a)my.isp.net> wrote
>>> Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) <toylet.toylet(a)gmail.com> wrote

>>>> which one is better?

>>> I've had 4 out of 5 ST3320613AS drives fail within an hour of installation.

>> Fark, there must be something badly wrong with the system they were installed in
>> or someone dropped the inadequately packaged drives before they were installed.

> Purchasers at NewEgg apear to be experiencing high failure rates also.

Nothing like the failure rate that you are claiming.

> Check out the product reviews there for a sampling of results.

No thanks, the technical term for that is 'pathetically inadequate sample'

> The original 2 drives indeed were packaged incorrectly (in bubblewrap)

Funny that.

> but the replacements from the manufacturer were packaged
> in approved materials (2 inches of foam all around).

You dont know how they were treated before they got into that foam.

> I've only as of yet installed Windows and ran some scans on the drive that is still working (couldn't get that far
> with all the other ones) so I'm "knocking on wood" in hopes that the drive is a good one.

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you dont have a clue about what reliability statistics are actually
about.


From: Tony on 8 Jul 2008 22:22

"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6diiplF2piuoU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> Tony <MyEmail(a)my.isp.net> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote
>>> Tony <MyEmail(a)my.isp.net> wrote
>>>> Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) <toylet.toylet(a)gmail.com> wrote

Bozo'd! Buh-bye now. (Your defensive posture noted Rod, but your lack of
reasoning ability is just to annoying to respond to anymore).

WIth Rod now ignored maybe someone can address the original issue which
still is: why are these drives are failing so much? Will I EVER be able to
get a reliable one?

Tony

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: SAS RAID Controller with PCI Interface?
Next: true image skipping .tib files