2 ms·
Backblaze's article points out that sometimes they will buy drives that are less reliable but cheaper, as that makes sense for their business model. The top le
by Macha 4y ago
Backblaze's article points out that sometimes they will buy drives that are less reliable but cheaper, as that makes sense for their business model.
The top level commenter points out that this strategy may not make as much sense for the individual consumer where you don't have backblaze levels of drives to amortise the failure probability and deal with it.
That's it, that's the point. It's not a rebuttal of the backblaze post at all, nor is it intended to be. The top level commenter was simply pointing out "don't buy mostly seagate drives because backblaze does" as backblaze explained their strategy in drive selection and some people may not consider the differences between their use case and backblaze's.
- tjoff 4y agoThe whole point of the statistics is that you can pick what you want. Why would you dismiss the statistics and buy what backblaze does? Defeats the entire point of the statistics and article in the first palce. Top level comment: >This means that these stats may not be a very meaningful indication when purchasing a few drives from a retailer. That doesn't follow.
- Dalewyn 4y ago>Why would you dismiss the statistics and buy what backblaze does? You assume people read the fine print and consider fine details. The vast majority of Joes are going to ask who/what Backblaze is and what they're buying most and buy that, screw the details.