>What you're seeing is not the most reliable, but the most reliable under their particular set of bad conditions. The reliability under your circumstances might

>What you're seeing is not the most reliable, but the most reliable under their particular set of bad conditions. The reliability under your circumstances might be wildly different. You do have a valid point but I also wanted to add that my harddrive failures in my gentle home environment matches BackBlaze's more hostile environment. I have 50+ harddrives in various capacities from 2TB to 10TB and my differences from BB include drives being iso-mounted on rubber grommets and they also do not run 24/7. (I only power them up when I need archived files off of them.) Even with those stark operational differences, my harddrive failures exactly match the generalization of Backblaze's data: More failures with WD Green and Seagates especially the 3TB drives. My HGST drives purchased over the last 4 years have zero failures so far.