2 ms·
What does that have to do with commentary on needing to have larger cross-batch samples?
by pyre 12y ago
What does that have to do with commentary on needing to have larger cross-batch samples?
- vidarh 12y agoWhen bringing up OCZ' notorious high return rate, and using that to indicate a high failure rate for SSD's, bringing up the IBM DeathStar is a very relevant counterpoint. Larger cross-batch samples is absolutely a good idea, but the dig at SSD's applies just as much to regular harddrives. [For those who don't know, DeathStar was a nickname given to the IBM DeskStar line of harddrives after one of the models had a problem that gave them high odds of catastrophic head crashes - so bad in fact that they'd strip most of the magnetic material off the glass platters when they crashed[1] -; out of 10 IBM DeskStar drives we had at the time, all 10 failed within a week or two of each other, under a year after we bought them. The problem was is often considered to be one of the main reasons why IBM unloaded their hard drive business to Hitachi] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HGST_Deskstar#mediaviewer/File:IBM75GXP_Failed_Disks.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HGST_Deskstar#mediaviewer/File:...
- michaelt 12y agoThe problem was is often considered to be one of the main reasons why IBM unloaded their hard drive business to Hitachi Who, in a compete reversal of fortunes, now produce some of the most reliable drives [1]. [1] https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-update-september-2014/ https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-update...
- pyre 12y agoYou're missing the fact that (IIRC) prior to that DeskStar were considered some of the best drives on the market.