InterviewSolution
Saved Bookmarks
InterviewSolution
| 1. |
Solve : Looking for a 1 TB Drive? |
|
Answer» Quote Western Digital HDDS are the best; lowest failure rate. Source ? ? And BTW i'm not knocking WD's.....there another choice of mine personally...Quote from: Linux711 on February 18, 2011, 10:57:52 AM Western Digital HDDS are the best; lowest failure rate. For some strange reason, I have this feeling that your statement is based on anecdotal, rather then empirical, evidence, making it specious at best. I haven't had any hard drive fail on me except a fujitsu and some quantum drives. That doesn't mean that the other brands I use (WD and Seagate) are impervious to failure, it just means I haven't witnessed a failure. Also, occasionally there will be "spurts" where manufacturers unknowingly start selling their drives that are sub-par or fail easily; usually of a particular model. Of course if the PEOPLE having that drive fail, they will get it replaced under warranty and get another drive of the same model, which will also fail. This happens but just because somebody managed to get drives from a BAD lot doesn't mean that that MANUFACTURER's drives have a higher failure rate; and it certainly doesn't mean that other manufacturers are impervious to such factory defects.Quote (WD and Seagate) are impervious to failure, it just means I haven't witnessed a failure. I am not saying they are impervious to failure. I am just saying that based on people I have talked to that WDs are the best. No, I don't have statistical information, but it is better than no information at all, isn't it?Quote from: Linux711 on February 18, 2011, 01:13:54 PM No, I don't have statistical information, but it is better than no information at all, isn't it? Anecdotal evidence is useless except to disprove a point. If somebody said "all WD drives fail" I could say that I have a WD drive that didn't fail. Or if they said that "no WD Drives fail" then I could say that I have one that did (I didn't, but this is a hypothetical example). In most contexts- and this one, however, anecdotal evidence is worse than useless, because it is misleading. If there were 50 people in a room, and 40 of them had stories to share about a XYZ drives failing, should we take their stories as evidence of the proposition that most XYZ drives fail or that they have a higher failure rate than other manufacturer's drives? Of course we shouldn't; we haven't heard about even a tiny fraction of people who used XYZ drives. For all we know some of the people telling stories about XYZ drive failure are citing only one specific example of a WD drive that has failed on them out of a anecdotal sample set of 50, or sometimes even 100 XYZ drives. They experienced an XYZ drive failure firsthand, but the impact was greatly and improperly amplified by their innate cognitive biases. The availability heuristic modifies our expectation of an event's frequency based on how salient the event is in our mind. Often, the perceived frequency deviates significantly from the true frequency. Anecdotal evidence is a mental shortcut for making quick decisions. It is however usually not wise to draw generalized conclusions based on such evidence. Quote from: Linux711 on February 18, 2011, 01:13:54 PM I am not saying they are impervious to failure. I am just saying that based on people I have talked to that WDs are the best. No, I don't have statistical information, but it is better than no information at all, isn't it?I don't think so, no. Two years ago Se agate had a significant issue with 1 TB drives. Just stating a fact.Quote I am just saying that based on people I have talked to that WDs are the best. This qualifies as an unqualified statement...nothing more ...nothing less. Let's move on...Quote from: patio on February 18, 2011, 02:26:35 PM This qualifies as an unqualified statement...nothing more ...nothing less.Why do you say that?sighQuote from: Allan on February 18, 2011, 02:36:36 PM sighQuote Study: Hard Drive Failure Rates Much Higher Than Makers Estimate ... Customers replace disk drives 15 times more often than drive vendors estimate, according to a study by Carnegie Mellon University.Quote Google's Disk Failure ExperienceI officially give up...Poor Geek-9pm, the first one is a study covering all drive manufacturers, and has nothing about any manufacturers being more or less reliable then others. Therefore it is entirely irrelevant. The second tells you right in the title it's anecdotal- it has the word "Experimental". Thank you BC. The StorageMojo site has important materiel. I quoted the opening words of his rant. The rest of the post is not what you WOULD expect. It is real world statistical data. But it is not chanted toward one manufacture. After reading it one might conclude that all the manufacturers are in collusion. The data indicates that the year of production is the crucial issue. |
|