3 ms·
> based on backblaze data I don't get that at all. I've been in the WD camp since the 90s but Backblaze's data has always ranked them around "better than the
by cptskippy 7y ago
> based on backblaze data
I don't get that at all.
I've been in the WD camp since the 90s but Backblaze's data has always ranked them around "better than the worst" and slowly eroding my confidence in them.
For me, Backblaze's Stats have changed my perception of HGST who I've held in low regard since they were IBM with the whole Deskstar issue.
- mst 7y agoThe deathstars were amazing. The 60Gb ones that everybody screamed about worked perfectly if you only partitioned them out to 58Gb. Best value for money on the market at the time so long as you remembered you had a 58Gb hard drive and behaved accordingly.
- Dylan16807 7y agoCan you elaborate on that? I can't find anything else about this.
- mst 7y agoThey were well known for failing. The ones I got only failed on the outer edge. Worked out nicely cost-effectiveness wise if you didn't trigger the failure mode.