3 ms·
Interesting that HGST do so well, yet are now part of WD, who do so badly. I would have expected more absorbtion+rationalisation from the takeover, yet they st
by anexprogrammer 10y ago
Interesting that HGST do so well, yet are now part of WD, who do so badly.
I would have expected more absorbtion+rationalisation from the takeover, yet they still clearly look of the IBM family than anything in WD's ranges.
IBM always had a pretty good rep for failure rates, aside from a couple of horror drives in the 90s. I wonder how they've managed to keep their rates markedly better than other makes, even under changes of ownership.
More to the point I wonder why WD haven't been able to improve rates as a result of taking over IBM/HGST.
- atYevP 10y agoYev here -> From what we can tell and have been told they are run as completely different entities. Hopefully that quality spillover will indeed happen in the future, but for what it's worth WD isn't doing all too poorly, they just tend to be slightly more expensive for us than the Seagates at the moment.
- joefkelley 10y agoThe Chinese regulatory system had been preventing any actual integration of the two companies for some time. They finally agreed to allow it to proceed in late 2015, but sales and marketing have to remain separate for another 2 years.
- snowwindwaves 10y agoAfter seeing that HGST are the best drives from back blaze reports and then seeing that WD owns the HGST and IP I bought WD shares. A reasonable dividend doesn't hurt either