Sent refurbished item to replace faulty itme

visidigi

Zandoni wrote: »

Sorry, I don't understand.

Very simple.

You introduced some HDD example and then said because HDD's fail mainly due to how long they are used for. And that on the whole thats the reason apparently, according to your posts.

I was asking for proof of these statements.

visidigi

Zandoni wrote: »

I don't need to as HDDs fail more as they age along with. any other components. It's also unlikely that a refurbished HDD would be used in a refurb laptop or PS3 for example.

Proof of these statements? (there's an echo in here...)

DevCoder

Zandoni wrote: »

I don't need to as HDDs fail more as they age along with. any other components. It's also unlikely that a refurbished HDD would be used in a refurb laptop or PS3 for example.

Umm the 3 and 5 year failure statistics would mean you'd be better off with a 1 year old Hitachi refurb then a new Seagate.

If the reason the laptop was refurb'd was because the HDD failed then of course a refurbished HDD would be a likely candidate.

Also the HDD failures in the PS3 and Xbox were replaced with refurbed HDD (unfortunately in most cases of the same make and model, but if you were lucky you'd avoid the green caviar drives as they were phased out).

DevCoder

PS : I can back my claims up with proven stats, back blaze have circa 40K drives constantly spinning (150 petabytes of data being read and written) and under monitoring. They are considered an industry leader in providing statistics on HDD reliability. Heres some recent (Sept '14) stats for example.

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-update-september-2014/

You know, I'd still plump for that refurbished Hitachi m probably even up to 2 years old over a new Seagate.

visidigi

krisdorey wrote: »

PS : I can back my claims up with proven stats, back blaze have circa 40K drives constantly spinning (150 petabytes of data being read and written) and under monitoring. They are considered an industry leader in providing statistics on HDD reliability. Heres some recent (Sept '14) stats for example.

https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-update-september-2014/

You know, I'd still plump for that refurbished Hitachi m probably even up to 2 years old over a new Seagate.

Damn you, that was my proof :rotfl:

DevCoder

And those poor HP SAN customers are still wondering why you'd recommend brand new SAN drives which will take their array down, not because of a mechanical failure but a software firmware "feature"

frugal_mike

I may be completely wrong with this, but i would intuitively expect a 1 year old device to be more likely to last its intended lifespan than a brand new one (of the same make). If it lasts a year then it is probably less likely that it has a serious inherent fault than a brand new device.

DevCoder

Well the actual critical period for a HDD is considered to be 3 months, this was highlighted by Carnegie Mellon University in an industry report, after this period the failure rate drops off significantly until 3 -5 years later.

Of course you can offset the pain with RAID , JBOD and even SMART helps iron out "soft" hardware issues, but it's accepted that if the drive lasts beyond the 3 month period then it'll more than likely last > 3 years.

Anyway, I wish everyone here season greetings but I have a 9 year old to put to bed!

Zandoni

krisdorey wrote: »

Well the actual critical period for a HDD is considered to be 3 months, this was highlighted by Carnegie Mellon University in an industry report, after this period the failure rate drops off significantly until 3 -5 years later.

Of course you can offset the pain with RAID , JBOD and even SMART helps iron out "soft" hardware issues, but it's accepted that if the drive lasts beyond the 3 month period then it'll more than likely last > 3 years.

Anyway, I wish everyone here season greetings but I have a 9 year old to put to bed!

So if you are palmed off with a 2 year old HDD it's only a year away from that 3 to 5 year period, which is my point. The 3 month failure can be less of a problem because it will be covered under warranty.

visidigi

Zandoni wrote: »

So if you are palmed off with a 2 year old HDD it's only a year away from that 3 to 5 year period, which is my point. The 3 month failure can be less of a problem because it will be covered under warranty.

*facepalm*