13 ms·

The problem is you can't trust a model number of SSD. They change controllers, chips, etc after the reviews are out and they can start skimping on components.

• infogulch 5y ago
  This needs to be cracked down on from a consumer protection lens. Like, any product revision that could potentially produce a different behavior must have a discernable revision number published as part of the model number.
  • sokoloff 5y ago
    While I agree with the sentiment, even a firmware revision could cause a difference in behavior and it seems unreasonable to change the model number on every firmware release.
    • jay_kyburz 5y ago
      I don't think its unreasonable to just add a date next to the serial number that has when the firmware was released. It's 6 extra numbers
      • yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
        But firmware can be updated after the unit was shipped; a date stamped on the hardware can't promise accuracy.
        • lillecarl 5y ago
          Is this the definition of whataboutism?
          • yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
            Er, no? Whataboutism is an attempt to claim hypocrisy by drawing in something else with the same flaw. This is pointing out a way for this exact proposal to fail.
            • lillecarl 5y ago
              Okay, I thought it was something along the lines of argumenting against a proposal that is better but not perfect because "what about this edge case". Had a colleague who was a master at this craft and managed to get many good ideas shot down this way.
              • robertlagrant 5y ago
                Well, edge cases can be bad. If you didn't have an answer for those edge case problems then why do you think the ideas were good? Whataboutism is like this: "Russia invading Ukraine is bad" "What about the US? They invaded Iraq!" The latter is used to justify the former, when it shouldn't.
          • robertlagrant 5y ago
            No, it's not.
          • mardifoufs 5y ago
            Whataboutism is not pointing out flaws in a proposal, no. But I guess the word is so overly used these days that the definition becomes blurry.
          • coldtea 5y ago
            It's not even tangentially related to what the word means...
        • jay_kyburz 5y ago
          Yeah, buy you would know if you are buying the same thing as what was reviewed or tested.
      • pezezin 5y ago
        It's 8 extra numbers FTFY, unless you use the YYYY-WW date format. But please don't use just two digits for year numbers, we should have learn from Y2K years ago.
        • rswail 5y ago
          Batch numbers have been in use for ages, both for tech equipment and the milk you buy at a store.
    • matheusmoreira 5y ago
      It seems unreasonable to me that there is unknown proprietary software running on my storage devices to begin with. This leads to insanity such as failure to report read errors or falsely reporting unwritten data as committed. This should be part of the operating system, not some obscure firmware hidden away in some chip.
  • metalliqaz 5y ago
    usually the manufacturers are careful not to list official specs that these part swaps affect. all you get is a vague "up to" some b/sec or iops.
  • mjw1007 5y ago
    Right. And no switching the chipset to a different supplier requiring entirely different drivers between the XYZ1001 and the XYZ1001a, either. If I ruled the world I'd do it via trademark law: if you don't follow my set of sensible rules, you don't get your trademarks enforced.
    • toss1 5y ago
      Years ago, that kind of behavior got Dell crossed off my list of suppliers I'd work with for clients. We had to setup 30+ machines of the exact same model number, and same order, and set of pallets -- yet there were at least 7 DIFFERENT random configurations of chips on the motherboards & video cards -- all requiring different versions of the drivers. This was before the days of auto-setup drivers. Absolute flaming nightmare. It was basically random - the different chipsets didn't even follow serial number groupings, it was just hunt around versions for every damn box on the network. Dell's driver resources & tech support even for VARs was worthless. This wasn't the first incident, but after such a blatant set of quality control failures I'll never intentionally select or work with a Dell product again.
      • ClumsyPilot 5y ago
        Is this like 5 years ago or more li3le 20? Trying to judge relevance today
        • iforgotpassword 5y ago
          As they mention no automatic driver downloads and talk about Chipset drivers I'd say at least before Windows 7. So a thing or two might have changed.
          • toss1 5y ago
            Yes, this was pre-Win7 What has changed is that most of the drivers are self-updating, so they can configure that at the factory. So, yes, the basic configuration has gotten better. What has not changed is that Dell basically does grab-bag components in their systems and just because you have two machines of the same model# and rev#, does NOT mean that you have the same two machines. This means that Dell has substandard abilities to 1) control their supply chain, 2) track and fix problems, 3) diagnose problems in the field, 4) prevent problems. But sure, because Microsoft is now doing a far better job of auto-configuration in it's OS products, the setup problem is mitigated. I avoid Dell like the plague, and advise everyone else to do the same. Sure, you may know someone who got away with it for a long time — there's usually some good items in a grab-bag — but the systemic reliability is just not there.
  • closeparen 5y ago
    The PC laptop manufacturers have worked around this for decades by selling so many different short-lived model numbers that you can rarely find information about the specific models for sale at a given moment.
    • gjs278 5y ago
    • renewiltord 5y ago
      True. It’s the Gish Gallop of model numbering. Fortunately, it is the preserve of the crap brands. It’s sort of like seeing “in exchange for a free product, I wrote this honest and unbiased review”. Bam! Shitty product marker! Asus GL502V vs Asus GU762UV? Easy, neither. They’re clearly both shit or they wouldn’t try to hide in the herd.
      • gruez 5y ago
        >Shitty product marker! Asus GL502V vs Asus GU762UV? Easy, neither. They’re clearly both shit or they wouldn’t try to hide in the herd. Is this based on empirical evidence or something? My sample size isn't very big, but I haven't really noticed any correlation between this practice and whether the product is crappy. I just chalked this up to manufacturers colluding with retailers to stop price matches, rather than because "clearly both shit or they wouldn’t try to hide in the herd".
      • closeparen 5y ago
        Which laptop makers (other than Apple) don’t do this?
      • infogulch 5y ago
        I agree that long model numbers can be used to obscure a product, but a wide product line with small variations between products sensibly encoded in the model number isn't necessarily bad for the consumer. MikroTik switches and routers have long model numbers but segments of it are interpretable once you get to know them, and the model number is also the name of the product with a discoverable product page that describes its features in detail. Don't throw the "meaningful long model numbers"-baby out with the "intentionally opaque model numbers"-bathwater.
  • gruez 5y ago
    >Like, any product revision that could potentially produce a different behavior must have a discernable revision number published as part of the model number. AFAIK samsung does this, but it doesn't really help anyone except enthusiasts because the packaging still says "980 PRO" in big bold letters, and the actual model number is something indecipherable like "MZ-V8P1T0B/AM". If this was a law they might even change the model number randomly for CYA/malicious compliance reasons. eg. firmware updated? new model number. DRAM changed, but it's the same spec? new model number. changed the supplier for the SMD capacitors? new model number. PCB etchant changed? new model number.
    • Siira 5y ago
      The model should be required to be “most prominently displayed.”
      • gruez 5y ago
        Okay, suppose the packaging looks like: 980 PRO MZ-V8P6T0B/AM No fine prints. The first line is the same font size as the second line. You think that's going to help the average joe figure whether it's been component swapped or not? Oh, by the way, "MZ-V8P6T0B/AM" isn't the model number from the last comment. I swapped one digit. Did you catch that? If you were already on the lookout for this sort of stuff, you'd be already be checking the fine print at the back. This at best saves you 3 seconds of time. It also does nothing for the "randomly changing model numbers for trivial changes" problem mentioned earlier. In short, the proposed legislation would save 1% of enthusiasts 3 seconds when making a purchase.
        • ClumsyPilot 5y ago
          Actually yea, a random joe will be able to see that 980 isn't the whole deal, and if he does care, might dig in. Most people dont even realise that this is a possibility
          • gruez 5y ago
            >Actually yea, a random joe will be able to see that 980 isn't the whole deal, and if he does care, might dig in. If that works that'll probably be because of the novelty factor. Once it wears off everyone will just tune out the meaningless jumble of letters and only look at much memorable marketing name. See also: prop 65 warnings.
  • alerighi 5y ago
    It's complicated. Nowadays we have shortage of electronic components and it's difficult to know what will be not available the next month. So it's obvious that manufacturers have to make different variants of a product that can mount different components.
    • kevincox 5y ago
      Nothing wrong with that, but give them different model numbers.
      • alerighi 5y ago
        That complicates a lot of things. You are basically making a new product, with all the complications (and costs) associated with it. And where do you stop? What decides if it has impact or not? If I change the brand of a capacitor do I need a new model? Of course not. If I change the model of a switching controller? Well, still shouldn't change anything, but let's obvious. If I change another integrated circuit (i.e. a small SPI flash used to hold the firmware, or a i2c temperature sensor, or a supporting microcontroller)? Likely doesn't impact that much.
  • duped 5y ago
    I don't want to live in a world where electronic components can't be commoditized because of fundamentally misinformed regulation. There are alternatives to interchangeable parts, and none of them are good for consumers. And that is what you're talking about - the only reason for any part to supplant another in feature or performance or cost is if manufacturers can change them !
  • OJFord 5y ago
    What if it's not a board revision, just a part change? What if it wasn't at the manufacturer's discretion; the assembler just (knowingly or unknowingly) had some cheaper knock-off in?
• n00bface 5y ago
  This practice is false advertising at a minimum, and possibly fraud. I'm shocked there hasn't been State AG or CFPB investigations and fines yet. Edit: Being mad and making mistakes go hand in hand. FTC is the appropriate organization to go after these guys.
  • R0b0t1 5y ago
    It's definitely fraud. The only reason to hide the things they do is to mislead the customer as evidenced by previous cases of this that caused serious harm to consumers.
  • gruez 5y ago
    >or CFPB investigations and fines yet >CFPB "The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is an agency of the United States government responsible for consumer protection in the financial sector. CFPB's jurisdiction includes banks, credit unions, securities firms, payday lenders, mortgage-servicing operations, foreclosure relief services, debt collectors, and other financial companies operating in the United States. "
    • blacksmith_tb 5y ago
      Right, presumably they meant to say the FTC[1]. 1: https://www.usa.gov/stop-scams-frauds https://www.usa.gov/stop-scams-frauds
      • n00bface 5y ago
        Thanks. You got it.
  • oceanplexian 5y ago
    What do you expect? These companies are making toys for retail consumers. If you want devices that guarantee data integrity for life or death, or commercial applications, those exist, come with lengthy contracts, and cost 100-1000x more than the consumer grade stuff. Like I seriously have a hard time empathizing with someone who thinks they are entitled to anything other than a basic RMA if their $60 SSD loses data
• TheJoYo 5y ago
  this is even worse in automotive ECUs. this shortage is only going to make things more difficult to test and forget about securing.