Tue Feb 27, 2007 3:46AM EST
See Comments (13)
In the wake of Google's eye-opening report on hard drive failure comes this follow-up from Ars Technica, which states rather flat-out that the curious problem of drives that fail without warning isn't going to get better any time soon.
The problem? No one really knows why drives fail, and while certain drives failures can be traced to SMART errors, other variables have been elusive in pinpointing what exactly makes hard drives crash. Even within SMART errors, only a small subset (four, in fact) were found to be of much importance in determining whether a drive was headed south.
Additional information has surfaced, thanks to more expert testimony and another large-scale study, this one from Carnegie Mellon. The results are unfortunately contradictory: The CM study found no special tendency for drives to fail early in their lives, while drives over five years old were found to be 30 times more likely to fail than usual.
But we can debate drive failure causes day and night; unfortunately no one cause (SMART, age, heat) can pinpoint any drive's impending doom with any degree of reliability. The real issue, according to the story, is that no one really much cares about building drives that never crash. Although the piece rightly notes that hard drives have become a kind of disposable commodity (with a two-year lifespan), it doesn't mention that old drives quickly become so limited in capacity relative to their newer brethren that no one wants them, whether they're working or not. So older drives eventually find themselves upgraded, failure or no. Acceptable? Not really. But it's a reality.
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
I guess people are more vocal about hard drives because when your RAM or motherboard die, they don't take your data with them. Since we know people never make backups, hard drive failures get them riled up... Just a hunch.
Question? Does it make a difference if the hard drive is in the laptop or desk? Could it be over heating?
I have a hard drive that lasted about 5 years. It is now my backup drive. I have to say, this scares the crap out of me. I had a friend who has both his backup a current drives crash at the same time. Uggg!!! I guess my point is that I do not replace my drive every 2 years. I really hope drive makers keep trying to make drives more reliable.
current hard drives are built on 1994 tech. design. all still have same arm drive circuit. unless you use 12,000 rpm drives, 7,200 current drives are too slow for cpu chip speeds above 1.2 gigs. The smart driver program will slowly eat away electronic limits in 1994 componets. note change of hard drive position from flat to vertical. I have all 20 Gig hard drives manf. in 2000-2002. 7 pc total combined cap. 360 gig. loss of hard drives since 1982, 3...1-power problem, 1-virus attack, 1- overloaded. All are Maxtors.
The Blackberry Pearl is your office on the go: swank design, slim profile (4.2 x 2 x 0.6 inches; 3.2 ...
| Computers | Home Office | Wi-Fi & Networking | Phones & PDAs | Cameras & Camcorders | TV & Home Theater | Portable Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 Posted by shutrbug@sbcglobal.net on Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:41AM EST Report Abuse
Why is everyone harping on hard drive failures? I've had lots of other solid state components crap out as well, like a Lexar USB drive that just plain died for no reason, a USB flash reader and iPod charger that both lasted two uses, and a motherboard that failed in the 13th month of a 12 month warranty. At least the HDD makers are giving a reasonable warranty on their products.