×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Seagate Acknowledges Problems With 1.5-TB HDD

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the sorry-for-the-inconvenience dept.

Data Storage 239

AnInkle writes "Seagate's 1.5TB Barracuda has been available for a couple months from multiple retailers. But shortly after release, reports of random freezes appeared on several sites. The hang apparently occurs in Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows Vista when streaming video or transferring files at low speeds. After a couple of weeks of silence, Seagate has finally officially acknowledged the problem. In a response to The Tech Report, they say they're investigating the 'issue' affecting 'a small number of Barracuda 7200.11 hard drives.' Acknowledging the 'inconvenience' is a start, but most users expect at least average performance and prompt service from the capacity king of data storage." In a related story, reader Lucas123 plugs a ComputerWorld piece examining the question of Seagate's plans to stay relevant at a time when SSDs increasingly capture OEM mindshare.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

239 comments

Half baked (5, Interesting)

bjb (3050) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726819)

I've been looking to buy a large second drive for my Mac and ALMOST hit the buy button on this drive a week ago. However, I noticed some 1-star comments on Amazon's reviews of the drive and have been watching this ever since.

The problem appears to manifest itself in lockups for 30 seconds or so at a time which kills music streaming, video streaming, etc. The only reports of success appear to be from people who are using it for an archive disk and thats it. Some people claim the problem can be avoided somewhat by disabling the write cache, but naturally you get a serious performance hit from that (especially since the memory cache is 32MB!)

Reading the forums, it appears that Seagate has not only thus told people that the drives aren't meant for a RAID environment, but even gone so far as to tell people that RAID doesn't stand for Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks, but rather "Independent Drives". Hmm. Seems that time has changed this definition (FOLDOC and Wikipedia seem to claim the change in name as well).

I'm rather disappointed since now that I have a taste for a 1.5TB drive, I'm not looking to buy "just" a 1TB. Hopefully one of these companies can resolve this.

On a more serious note, I read something in Maximum PC this month that there are thermal reliability issues with perpendicular storage technology? Does this mean that all perpendicular drives are less reliable?

Re:Half baked (4, Informative)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726967)

On a more serious note, I read something in Maximum PC this month that there are thermal reliability issues with perpendicular storage technology? Does this mean that all perpendicular drives are less reliable?

This link [wikipedia.org] might be of use to you in that regard.

Echoes of Intel... [tomshardware.com]

Re: SV35.3 (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727019)

thats why i buy only from seagates sv35 line of hard drives optimized for video streams.
and they arent more expensive than the regulars and come with larger warranties and 1tb capacities.

Re: SV35.3 (1)

gparent (1242548) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727227)

No matter whether a hard drive is made for "streaming" or not, it's ridiculous that it freezes doing it. No other hard drive does so, and I own some SeaGate ones.

Re:Half baked (0)

Obfuscant (592200) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727193)

... RAID doesn't stand for Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks, but rather "Independent Drives".

The name hasn't changed. RAID has never had anything to do with the price of the disks. You've always been able to make a RAID set out of expensive disks, and the biggest RAID packages usually are made up of expensive disks.

Re:Half baked (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727337)

Patterson, David; Gibson, Garth A.; Katz, Randy (1988). "A Case for Redundant Arrays of Inexpensive Disks (RAID)" (PDF). SIGMOD Conference: pp 109â"116.

http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/1987/CSD-87-391.pdf

right....

Re:Half baked (1, Insightful)

dotgain (630123) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727785)

Well, while the original intention might have been to get big money disk performance out of relatively cheap disks, these days I would think most people mean 'independent' instead. When we built our RAID, we used some of the most expensive FC disks going. Inexpensive has no meaning in RAIDs of today, if it ever did.

If a single pair of disks matching the performance of my RAID could be had (for say, twice as much money) then yes, my disks would be "inexpensive". But such a disk set doesn't exist (or didn't at the time), and saving money was certainly not our intention.

Re:Half baked (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25728051)

Inexpensive has no meaning in RAIDs of today, if it ever did.

I can't believe that even after being shown incontrovertible proof by the guys who created the acronym and described in detail how the first 5 levels work, we still have some dipshit here saying "if it ever did".

Re:Half baked (4, Informative)

koko775 (617640) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727565)

I actually talked with Randy Katz about RAID, as I was in one of his classes at Berkeley. As late as last May, it still meant "Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks".

Sorry to burst your bubble.

Though.. (4, Funny)

Junta (36770) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727813)

I think it shouldn't matter the definition, either way Seagate has no excuse. That out of the way..

But the whole theory of RAID doesn't dictate anything about price nor, in my opinion, even require them to be 'disks'. Maybe 'inexpensive disks' is the term coined by the originator, but I think the originator should recognize the more general applicability of the concept.

For ultimate wrongness with respect to the declared meaning, how about a RAID-0 of high-capacity SSDs. A non-redundant array of expensive non-disk things.

Re:Half baked (1)

Eugene (6671) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727697)

back in my time.. the I in RAID always means Inexpensive. but time has changed and people want to stick with the same ancronym, so they come up with another explanation.

Re:Half baked (4, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728209)

... RAID doesn't stand for Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks, but rather "Independent Drives".

The name hasn't changed. RAID has never had anything to do with the price of the disks. You've always been able to make a RAID set out of expensive disks, and the biggest RAID packages usually are made up of expensive disks.

Yes, you could, but then you'd be missing the point. MAny did miss the point, in fact.

Independent Disks is a sort of marketing revisionism because they were tired of customers pointing out that "this isn't really inexpensive, is it?".

Re:Half baked (0)

midwich (729042) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727221)

If you want some large drives, I bought a couple of these Freecom 2TB drives a few months ago, and have had no trouble with them: http://www.saverstore.com/productinfo/Product.aspx?product_id=20022272&rstrat=1 [saverstore.com]

Re:Half baked (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727387)

Interesting since there isn't a company out there that actually makes a 2TB disk drive. I don't speak metric, but I'm guessing that enclosure actually houses 2 1TB drives.

Re:Half baked (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727583)

...The problem appears to manifest itself in lockups for 30 seconds or so at a time which kills music streaming, video streaming, etc.

Reading the forums, it appears that Seagate has not only thus told people that the drives aren't meant for a RAID environment...

A Seagate Engineer replies: RAID environment? Of course not. The lockup feature was devloped for an RIAA'd environment.

Re:Half baked (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727759)

Slightly off-topic, perhaps, but who in their right mind makes decisions based on the [now wholly predictable] crapflood of 1-star reviews the geek in full mob force posts to Amazon.com?

Re:Half baked (4, Informative)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727777)

I stopped buying Segate a few months ago when I bought a set to upgrade my G5 editor. I purchased 5 750gig drives and 2 of the 5 were defective. They are getting as bad as the IBM deathstars were back in the late 90's/ early 00's. I have had to do data recovery on many drives this past year and over 1/2 were seagates.. Seagate used to be the drives that NEVER failed. and now they are sending low grade refurbs for any warranty replacements and the warranty replaced drives have only 90 days on them so that nice 5 year warranty turns into a 90 day warranty when the drive dies and is replaced.

I only do HD video editing so I can get away with tiny 750 gig drives, but I dont like having them fail on me like segates have been lately.

As for the SSD drive remarks.. I cant see SSD drives getting near the capacities and speed I need for HD video editing within the nest 3 years.

Re:Half baked (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727819)

Some people claim the problem can be avoided somewhat by disabling the write cache, but naturally you get a serious performance hit from that (especially since the memory cache is 32MB!)

It's always a good idea to disable the write cache, in the event of power loss before the data is written to the disk surface.

Re:Half baked (2, Funny)

AmberBlackCat (829689) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727911)

The problem appears to manifest itself in lockups for 30 seconds or so at a time which kills music streaming, video streaming, etc.

Maybe they got their firmware from Comcast...

Re:Half baked (2, Informative)

Master of Transhuman (597628) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728047)

Just check the reviews of these drives - indeed, most 1TB drives as well as the Seagate 1.5TB drives - on Newegg or TigerDirect. These drives die regularly - they have an astronomical rate of failure, regardless of what the manufacturers claim. Some are DOA from the store (some people blame this on the OEM packaging - but the reviews vary from drive company to drive company, suggesting the packaging is not the culprit.) Of course, I know that negative reviews on such sites tend to outweigh positive reviews - but when you see the overall ratings dropping low, it's best to bypass that make and model, especially if there are a lot of reviews in total and the percentage of negative is way up there.

I was considering these drives for a client, but based on my research, there's no way I would touch them with a ten foot pole. Seagate 1TB drives aren't much better according to the reviews. Samsung drives seem to be better - considerably more positive reviews than negative. Even Hitachi 1TB drives are getting better reviews than Seagate or Western Digital these days - and I've stayed away from them since back when IBM sold them their defective Deskstars.

If you need more than 2TB in your box, best make sure you have enough drive bays to hold multiple 1TB or 750GB drives, because using 1.5TB is not a good idea. Either that or go for an eSATA external enclosure or NAS box with multiple drive bays. I'm considering an eSATA enclosure or an iSCSI SAN for the above mentioned client since some of his machines are Dells with not enough bays for the storage space we need for an individual workstation.

Seagate is good (3, Insightful)

FredFredrickson (1177871) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726823)

I've never had too many problems with seagate, and consider them to be a great brand. I also like western digital, but when I have a choice, I go seagate for the 5 year warranty.

As for SSD drives, I'm not exactly sure what everybody's worried about here. I don't see any affordable SSD drives, let alone any in the 1TB range.

Re:Seagate is good (1)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726987)

I've never had too many problems with seagate, and consider them to be a great brand. I also like western digital, but when I have a choice, I go seagate for the 5 year warranty.

I've always disciplined myself with the thought, "It's not a matter of if a drive is going to fail, but when...". But oddly enough I have had tremendous success with long term hard disc usage. In fact Maxtor is the only brand that's failed thus far. 7 years of usage was pretty good tho!

Re:Seagate is good (3, Informative)

mapsjanhere (1130359) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727305)

Guess you never bought any of IBM's Deskstar disaster series. I have a drawer full of these, none made it past 3 years. The drives were so bad, IBM sold the division, to Hitachi I think.

Re:Seagate is good (2, Interesting)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727715)

How many were made in Hungary? I'm betting very few to none. We had a huge lot of 20 gig drives die on us, all from Singapore (or something?) but none of the Hungarian ones died. To me this means it was not a design issue, but rather a quality in production issue.
-nB

Re:Seagate is good (5, Interesting)

dhanson865 (1134161) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727007)

I keep reading about people going Seagate over Western Digital "for the 5 year warranty".

If you think that WD doesn't offer a 5 year warranty on any drives you are wrong. If you think there is only "the" 5 year warranty instead of "those" 5 year warranties then maybe I'm going to be a grammar nazi too.

http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=488 [wdc.com] will get you started on 5 year warranty drives from WD.

WD1001FALS = 1TB
WD7501AALS = 750GB
WD6401AALS = 640GB (I'd recommend this drive)
WD5001AALS = 500GB

People are so quick to look to the top end but there is a reliability/speed/power/noise benefit to buying the sweet spot drive. Cost is in the eye of the beholder as the 640GB drive is lower in purchase price but won't be the best price per GB. Myself I'm willing to use the smaller drives, but then I'm the type that can still make out on a 250GB drive without being low on disk space.

As a single drive or in an array as long as you don't run out of space you gain performance using smaller drives so long as you buy carefully. In RAID more spindles equal more speed. As a single drive you can pick and choose the highest density platters (320/333/334 as the desired platters currently vs the 250GB platters that are still floating around the supply chain in so many drives)

Re:Seagate is good (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727735)

Yes Western Digital has some drives with a five year warranty, but they also still sell drives with only one or three year warranties. (Source Newegg. Model WD1600AAJS 3 yr & Model WD5000KSRTL 1 yr) When I buy a Seagate drive I don't have to search to find out if this one has a five year warranty instead of a one year warranty. Even the laptop drives are a five year warranty.

When WD goes all 5 year I'll buy & recommend them. Until then I'm not playing their musical warranty game.

Stupid thought of the day (1, Informative)

Moryath (553296) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727173)

Sony Vaio Laptop. Someone in my company almost bought one. Thankfully they came to me for advice before sinking money on their "new" personal machine.

I pointed out the following: the SSD drive was a mere 32 GB.

A standard installation (infection?) of Windows Vista (and no XP-downgrade option, Sony won't give you the drivers) eats up a good 12 of that. Office 2007 (yeah yeah I know, I work with what they use), another 6 easily. Miscellaneous preloads, drivers, "service" software, and of course the (ugh) "restore partition" eat up another 4-5. Swap file eats another 1-2.

Functionally, their "32 GB SSD drive" has about 7 GB of usable space before it maxes out in which they have to fit all their programs, utilities, miscellaneous pictures/video of the kids, games... or they can buy a normal laptop and we can get them a 500 GB internal drive and they're good to go for a decently long while.

And THAT is why the SSD's, even though OEM's would love to use them for marketroid reasons, are going to be a long time in making anything obsolete. I wouldn't use anything less than a 500GB drive for a machine today, whether laptop OR desktop, and the largest commercial SSD currently is a mere 128 GB.

Re:Stupid thought of the day (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727287)

STFU.

Honestly. A decent Linux Distro with all the trimmings maxes out at a couple of GB total. A 32GB SSD would go a long way for those not arching mp3s/movies on their drive.

How about you point your finger at the software vendors who sell bloatware?

Re:Stupid thought of the day (3, Informative)

jebrew (1101907) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727395)

I call shenanigans on this. I'm running on a 32Gb SSD using XP pro with all the trimmings, VS2005 SP1 (With full MSDN install), Office 2007, VMWare, Firefox, Chrome, Picasa, GIMP, Photoshop CS3, and Cygwin (just to name the largest programs). I've still got 12GB of free space.

Throw in some external storage in the form of a USB drive and I've got a system that boots in ~10 seconds, restarts in ~15, and cut my compile time by a factor of 10.

Not to mention all the apps open a lot more quickly. I don't know if I can go back to a non-SSD setup honestly. I've got one at home and I almost never use it anymore...need to switch that one over.

Re:Stupid thought of the day (0)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728145)

I call shenanigans on this. I'm running on a 32Gb SSD using XP pro with all the trimmings...

You call shenanigans on his assessment of Vista (on a unit that you can't install XP Pro on because the drivers aren't available) by giving a counter example that uses XP?

Fail.

Re:Stupid thought of the day (1)

Enderandrew (866215) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728213)

Vista uses a few gigs for the install as opposed XP, and the recovery partition for Vista adds another few gigs.

Started going downhill after acquiring MAXTOR (1)

cyclocommuter (762131) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727537)

Seagate appears to have started going downhill after acquiring Maxtor. First there was the infamous AAKS firmware bug that was discussed at length here in /. that made a specific model of Seagate drive underperform. In various web forums, people have also started complaining about more noise when Seagate harddrives perform seek operations, along with other firmware related bugs affecting burst speed performance. Seagate also now appears to be behind Western Digital in terms of performance on its line of desktop hard drives. All these happening after the Maxtor acquisition.

Large storage solutions? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25726825)

Why is a good large storage solution nowadays?
I am having corruption problems with my My Book external USB drives.

Running Linux? (0, Troll)

The_Abortionist (930834) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726921)

ext-3 is known to have serious issues with very large partitions due to its implementation of journaling...

I recommend Windows Vista 64-bit + NTFS for your large storage needs.

Re:Running Linux? (2, Insightful)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727219)

CIte your authority. NTFS is partially journaled as well.

I smell a rat.

FS like ext3 can be partitioned in any number of usable ways for streams; a 1.5TB drive isn't that large.

And it wasn't that long ago that NTFS couldn't be used on a volume larger than 4GB.... then 32GB.

And additionally, take your 235 Microsoft patents violated and cite them, too.

What issues? (1)

Junta (36770) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728105)

We have an 8.8 TB ext3, no problems. It admittedly takes a while to mkfs, but that is a small small slice of the lifecycle of a filesystem. This FS has been in service for over two years.

Re:What issues? (1)

postbigbang (761081) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728195)

I think the parent is either a dark humorist, or a shill for Microsoft. Ambiguous, but seems to be a lipfarter propagandist. Now that the election is over, there are many out of work.

Re:Running Linux? (1)

Walpurgiss (723989) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727303)

I've been using ext3 & LVM with mdadm on a raid5 array that is 6+1par+1hotspare x 1TB drives.
I'm just guessing, but I'd guess that that would count as a 'very large partition' yet I've had no problems with journaling over the last year.
Cite a source, or at least.. some kind of elaboration on the "serious issues"
I'd like to read about it, not saying its false or anything, just I've been looking into other options.

Re:Running Linux? (1)

NFN_NLN (633283) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728095)

I've been using ext3 & LVM with mdadm on a raid5 array that is 6+1par+1hotspare x 1TB drives.

You'd be better off running RAID-6 or RAID-DP. Less risk for the same amount of disks. Sorry, I'll take any excuse to say RAID-DP.

It's always fun to bring up DP in a meeting with a straight face then follow it up with, "as in RAID-DP, why what did you think I meant?"

Re:Large storage solutions? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727215)

Why is a good large storage solution nowadays?

I don't know. Third base!

Re:Large storage solutions? (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727825)

Warehouses generally are reliable as large storage solutions, however if 24 is any indication, they are magnets for terrorist operations, so buyer beware.

Capturing Mindshare... (3, Interesting)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726851)

Where are SSDs "capturing mindshare" anywhere other than the portable market?

Re:Capturing Mindshare... (2, Insightful)

QuasiEvil (74356) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726905)

I have no idea - wake me up when an affordable SSD can hold 1TB or so. Until then I'll stick to spinning magnetic media everywhere but maybe my laptop.

Re:Capturing Mindshare... (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726917)

Database admins are also showing interest.
SSDs may well become the standard but when a 1 TB drive is only $100 it really is hard to look longingly at an SSD.

Re:Capturing Mindshare... (2, Insightful)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727129)

I'd worry about a SSD being destroyed too quickly with certain database loads.

If its mostly read then yeah the SSD would kick butt but throw in frequent writing and I'd get worried.

Re:Capturing Mindshare... (1)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727181)

We've done database servers with SSD and RAID1+0. Amazingly fast, and the power savings aren't bad either.

Re:Capturing Mindshare... (1)

SQL Error (16383) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728237)

Depends on the SSD, the database, and the usage pattern. I wouldn't want to run a frequently-updated database on MLC flash, that's for sure. But at work we just put out production database on a Fusion-io ioDrive [fusionio.com], which quotes a 24-year lifespan with 5TB of writes a day. The performance is amazing. Of course, now everything is CPU-bound...

Re:Capturing Mindshare... (1)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727029)

Where are SSDs "capturing mindshare" anywhere other than the portable market?

Anyone who cares about the performance of the parts in their computers has been thinking of SSDs for some time now, and in a positive light. The same "mindshare" that WD Raptor's [wikipedia.org] built will eventually turnover to one SSD or another.

Re:Lifespan... (1)

srmalloy (263556) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727121)

Given that the effective useful life for flash memory in thumbdrives seems to vary between 10,000 and 100,000 write cycles, what does this bode for the long-term performance of SSDs as the primary mass storage device, particularly for, say, the dedicated swap space for the OS? Any computing that hits the swap space heavily is going to be thrashing the lifespan of the drive. SSDs can be faster and have lower power consumption, but if you have to replace them more often, they're going to have to be cheaper than platter drives to make them better.

Re:Lifespan... (1)

Facegarden (967477) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727233)

Given that the effective useful life for flash memory in thumbdrives seems to vary between 10,000 and 100,000 write cycles, what does this bode for the long-term performance of SSDs as the primary mass storage device, particularly for, say, the dedicated swap space for the OS? Any computing that hits the swap space heavily is going to be thrashing the lifespan of the drive. SSDs can be faster and have lower power consumption, but if you have to replace them more often, they're going to have to be cheaper than platter drives to make them better.

Thumb drives are cheap and use cheap chips. It's my understanding that SSD's are made with flash that is better made for frequent writes. If it wasn't, i don't even see why they make SSDs, since CompactFlash cards already use a standard IDE interface.
  Anyone have some info on this?
-Taylor

Re:Lifespan... (3, Interesting)

mapsjanhere (1130359) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727355)

There are two different technologies for SSDs, single and multicell. The former is used in the $600 for 32 GB enterprise drives, the later in the $100 for 128 GB cheapos. The MC drives are the ones with the low write cycles. But if you use your SSD in a fast read-little write application like a database server it lasts forever and you can take advantage of the blazing read spead (most write performance I've seen isn't much ahead of a good HD array).

Re:Lifespan... (1)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727553)

They have started to use MLC chips in a lot of things to drive the cost per GB down faster, and MLC has a lower rated write lifetime.

Re:Lifespan... (1)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727531)

Swap is a compromise, and ram is cheap now. You don't actually need swap at this point if you get enough ram. The only exception being Linux distros apparent obsession with using the swap file/partition for hibernation by default.

Get enough RAM and you can make your storage decisions based on the things that actually matter, speed, space and reliability over time.

Re:Capturing Mindshare... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727569)

Anyone who cares about the performance of the parts in their computers has been thinking of SSDs for some time now, and in a positive light.

Actually, anyone who cares about HD performance is looking at things such as http://www.hyperossystems.co.uk/ [hyperossystems.co.uk] *grin*

Re:Capturing Mindshare... (1)

jebrew (1101907) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727409)

I'd say it's capturing it from anyone who's used a system with a good one. I can't stand my home system anymore. My work system uses an SSD.

Re:Capturing Mindshare... (2, Interesting)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727713)

Give it time, SSDs were nowhere on the consumer market before the last year.

Also, I notice hard drive capacity just isn't increasing at the rate it used to (early 2000s). I think last year the biggest was 1TB already and now it's just hovering at 1.5TB. OTOH, for about $49 two years ago got you a 1GB usb drive at walmart (micro cruzer). Same brand 8GB/16GB costs $25/$59 respectively. Can get a generic 32GB online. Not a bad rate of increase.

I suspect once capacity gets within 2/3 of harddrive space, you'll see a jump from mechanical to SSD bigtime. I think it will happen within 5 years.

Capturing Advantages... (1)

Ostracus (1354233) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727979)

"I suspect once capacity gets within 2/3 of harddrive space, you'll see a jump from mechanical to SSD bigtime. I think it will happen within 5 years."

I suspect even sooner you'll see hybrid HDD/SSD drives.

Raptors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25726853)

I buy only raptors. Therefore, hard drive technology is currently at 300GB.

I can see SSD being safer than hard drives, but are they not a lot lower?

What I would do... (2, Insightful)

Paul Pierce (739303) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726893)

Put it as my secondary Hard drive. Unless that is your only drive, I would tend to not put such a big hard drive as my main. Then the entire OS wouldn't slow down at once.

The comments on that page are pretty harsh. I've never had a problem with Seagate and would still put it with WD as my favorites, but I am curious as to what is causing this, more cache needed?

Re:What I would do... (1)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727149)

Possibly buggy firmware. Its only when reading files slowly so it must fill the read buffer and then forget to refill it when it gets empty?

My theory anyway from the limited information.

Harsh Comments (5, Interesting)

MaxwellEdison (1368785) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727291)

HDD manufacturers will always face a large amount of negative press. The reason is simple. If your DVD drive breaks...ho-hum I'm out $XX and need a new one. Guess I'm not watching Kung Fu Panda tonight. If your HDD breaks...OMFG!!!I had 5 years of tax returns, 20000 hours of music, 1000s of irreplaceable pictures!...and I'm out $XX!!!

Simply put, the cost of failure for a storage manufacturer is an order of magnitude above the rest of the industry. People don't just lose money, they lose memories, they lose costly business information. Of course you and I know that we should back up our data. But its hindsight talking, because we've probably lost data before too.

Harsh Constraints. (1)

Ostracus (1354233) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727899)

"But its hindsight talking, because we've probably lost data before too"

Yeah, I've lost several years of insightful posts from MaxwellEdision. Seriously it's easy to say backup. But when the drives in question are Terabyte drives. What are you going to back them up to, and if it's another Terabyte drive then you are right back to the reliability problem that prompted the backup policy in the first place?

Guide To The Barack Obongo Presidency (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25726919)

Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger! If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.

INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.
You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model. Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e. chained together. Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever. Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them. This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud. House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape. At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name. Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data. Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger. If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima. Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke. Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes. These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.

CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGER
Owing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords. Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular. However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue. Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much. Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway. Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's). This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boat

HOUSING YOUR NIGGER.
Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars. Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through. The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage. So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers. You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground. Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage. Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now. In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape. As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put. Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.

FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.
Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon. You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it. Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water. Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc. Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day. Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives. He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result. You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained. You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton. You really would. Coffee beans? Don't ask. You have no idea.

MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.
Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind. The nigger's most prominent anatomical feature, after all, its oversized buttocks, which have evolved to make it more comfortable for your nigger to sit around all day doing nothing for its entire life. Niggers are often good runners, too, to enable them to sprint quickly in the opposite direction if they see work heading their way. The solution to this is to *dupe* your nigger into working. After installation, encourage it towards the cotton field with blows of a wooden club, fence post, baseball bat, etc., and then tell it that all that cotton belongs to a white man, who won't be back until tomorrow. Your nigger will then frantically compete with the other field niggers to steal as much of that cotton as it can before the white man returns. At the end of the day, return your nigger to its cage and laugh at its stupidity, then repeat the same trick every day indefinitely. Your nigger comes equipped with the standard nigger IQ of 75 and a memory to match, so it will forget this trick overnight. Niggers can start work at around 5am. You should then return to bed and come back at around 10am. Your niggers can then work through until around 10pm or whenever the light fades.

ENTERTAINING YOUR NIGGER.
Your nigger enjoys play, like most animals, so you should play with it regularly. A happy smiling nigger works best. Games niggers enjoy include: 1) A good thrashing: every few days, take your nigger's pants down, hang it up by its heels, and have some of your other niggers thrash it with a club or whip. Your nigger will signal its intense enjoyment by shrieking and sobbing. 2) Lynch the nigger: niggers are cheap and there are millions more where yours came from. So every now and then, push the boat out a bit and lynch a nigger.

Lynchings are best done with a rope over the branch of a tree, and niggers just love to be lynched. It makes them feel special. Make your other niggers watch. They'll be so grateful, they'll work harder for a day or two (and then you can lynch another one). 3) Nigger dragging: Tie your nigger by one wrist to the tow bar on the back of suitable vehicle, then drive away at approximately 50mph. Your nigger's shrieks of enjoyment will be heard for miles. It will shriek until it falls apart. To prolong the fun for the nigger, do *NOT* drag him by his feet, as his head comes off too soon. This is painless for the nigger, but spoils the fun. Always wear a seatbelt and never exceed the speed limit. 4) Playing on the PNL: a variation on (2), except you can lynch your nigger out in the fields, thus saving work time. Niggers enjoy this game best if the PNL is operated by a man in a tall white hood. 5) Hunt the nigger: a variation of Hunt the Slipper, but played outdoors, with Dobermans. WARNING: do not let your Dobermans bite a nigger, as they are highly toxic.

DISPOSAL OF DEAD NIGGERS.
Niggers die on average at around 40, which some might say is 40 years too late, but there you go. Most people prefer their niggers dead, in fact. When yours dies, report the license number of the car that did the drive-by shooting of your nigger. The police will collect the nigger and dispose of it for you.

COMMON PROBLEMS WITH NIGGERS - MY NIGGER IS VERY AGGRESIVE
Have it put down, for god's sake. Who needs an uppity nigger? What are we, short of niggers or something?

MY NIGGER KEEPS RAPING WHITE WOMEN
They all do this. Shorten your nigger's chain so it can't reach any white women, and arm heavily any white women who might go near it.

WILL MY NIGGER ATTACK ME?
Not unless it outnumbers you 20 to 1, and even then, it's not likely. If niggers successfully overthrew their owners, they'd have to sort out their own food. This is probably why nigger uprisings were nonexistent (until some fool gave them rights).

MY NIGGER bitches ABOUT ITS "RIGHTS" AND "RACISM".
Yeah, well, it would. Tell it to shut the fuck up.

MY NIGGER'S HIDE IS A FUNNY COLOR. - WHAT IS THE CORRECT SHADE FOR A NIGGER?
A nigger's skin is actually more or less transparent. That brown color you can see is the shit your nigger is full of. This is why some models of nigger are sold as "The Shitskin".

MY NIGGER ACTS LIKE A NIGGER, BUT IS WHITE.
What you have there is a "wigger". Rough crowd. WOW!

IS THAT LIKE AN ALBINO? ARE THEY RARE?
They're as common as dog shit and about as valuable. In fact, one of them was President between 1992 and 2000. Put your wigger in a cage with a few hundred genuine niggers and you'll soon find it stops acting like a nigger. However, leave it in the cage and let the niggers dispose of it. The best thing for any wigger is a dose of TNB.

MY NIGGER SMELLS REALLY BAD
And you were expecting what?

SHOULD I STORE MY DEAD NIGGER?
When you came in here, did you see a sign that said "Dead nigger storage"? That's because there ain't no goddamn sign.

The real problem with these (2, Insightful)

sith (15384) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726923)

The real problem with these drives, or the scary problem, is the folks using these in RAID arrays, or things like the Drobo. The drive freaks out, so the array marks it bad. You pop the drive out and put in a new one, or even the same one again, to start a rebuild. But another drive freaks out during that process, array says "oh crap, another bad drive!" and your data goes to /dev/null. Even though no data was ever actually lost... just bad drives.

Re:The real problem with these (2, Informative)

cheater512 (783349) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727171)

Thats with RAID 5, RAID 6 can reduce the possibility of data loss even further and if your data is critical then RAID 10 would be *extremely* to fail completely.

Re:The real problem with these (2, Insightful)

dhanson865 (1134161) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727225)

If the rebuild time exceeds the average time of the problem behavior it doesn't matter what RAID level you use or how many drives are involved.

With Terabytes of data RAID 5 and RAID 6 will take way too long to rebuild and your array will fail during rebuild.

Even with RAID 10, if the behavior occurs in less time than synching the mirror takes you are screwed.

Re:The real problem with these (1)

jargon82 (996613) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728171)

In a raid 10, the other mirrored pair would have to die. In, say, a 12 disk raid 10, this is one disk in 11 that has to fail. In a 12 disk raid 5, any second failed disk will sync you. So yes, it does matter. Raid 10 has a much lower secondary failure rate than raid 5 (or raid 6) especially as the number of disks increases. The rebuild times don't take the same hit that they do on growing raid 5 arrays either. If you are resyncing one failed 1TB disk on a raid 10, you have to resync just that one disk to one new disk no matter how many drives are in the array. If it's raid 5, you have to resync 1 disk using data scattered across every other working disk in the array... this becomes a longer and longer process as you add disks.

Re:The real problem with these (1)

AngelofDeath-02 (550129) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728179)

Is there anything actually limiting raid sync times? Drives are writing faster, processors are MUCH faster - couldn't they sync up faster as well?

I mean really, In a raid 5 you're reading from all the different disks, calculating parody, and writing that information to the drive - aside from all the calculations you've got essentially a disk (probably less) of data to write.

SSD's capturing the 'mindshare' (1)

MaxwellEdison (1368785) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726945)

SSD's are not capturing the mindshare (B.S. buzzword if you ask me). Sure, they're the new, the shiny, but most people have never seen one available in a device they were looking to purchase. I'd be willing to wager that half of all computer users don't even know what SSD stands for. SSD's won't make HDDs obsolete until they are a better choice for all aspects of computer use. There is a reason magnetic storage has had such a long run in an industry that changes as much as computers. HDDs will not be a loss industry until SSDs are faster at reading, faster at writing, cheaper in $/GB, AND more reliable than HDDs.

Re:SSD's capturing the 'mindshare' (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727037)

You're correct, they are intriguing for portable devices, but at this point they're still way too expensive for most people. I'm fine with a disc which is only 120gb or so as long as it's reliable, but I don't think that SSDs are at a reasonable price point.

As for desktops and servers, they need to be a lot less expensive before they're going to be going in any of my computers. For the most part I'm happy with my ZFS mirrored disks. And they're both ATA133.

Besides... (1)

LateArthurDent (1403947) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727049)

This is how Seagate "stays relevant" against SSD's:

"We sell decent storage drives that don't cost thousands of dollars"

Seriously, SSDs just aren't there yet, nor are they going to be in the foreseeable future. They're a niche item for laptops because they should theoretically use a lot less power without having to power a mechanical drive. They should also be a lot more reliable. However, the point is that I can't go out and buy a 1.5 TB SSD.

Re:SSD's capturing the 'mindshare' (1)

Kandenshi (832555) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727061)

I'd be willing to wager that half of all computer users don't even know what SSD stands for.

I don't have access to the proper statistics, but I'd be willing to bet that a substantial number of people walking into Best Buy wouldn't be able to tell you what HDD stands for.
That said, I agree that it'll be a while before SSDs really take the crown away from plain old HDDs. They're simply too expensive per GB for most uses.

Re:SSD's capturing the 'mindshare' (1)

MaxwellEdison (1368785) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727191)

You're probably right...especially the ones drawn like moths to a flame to the TV section.

"Uh...Hyper Digital Definition? DURRRRRRRR" And thats how they know they can sell them $100 HDMI cables and a $150 remote.

Re:SSD's capturing the 'mindshare' (1)

pcolaman (1208838) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727875)

Diss the overpriced HDMI cables, which are ridiculous, but Harmony remotes are actually useful. Granted, they probably could be priced a lot less and still produce a profit, but I actually own a Harmony and find it saves me a lot of hassle.

Yep (1)

copponex (13876) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727187)

I almost lost my coffee on that "mindshare" bit. Apple is pretty much at the forefront of yuppy technology "mindshare," and the SSD isn't standard - even on the Macbook Air. Not much of a chance the unwashed masses are looking at SSD any time soon, unless they're buying a workstation laptop replacement.

The tech is not at all price per gig competitive, and only Intel has an SSD that outperforms traditional hard drives on speed and battery life by any significant margin.

The coolest thing SSD could provide is a RAID-like array (with a REAL controller) in the size of a 2.5" hard drive, splitting up the memory banks for stripe, mirror, or combinations of the two, since the platters seem like they have reached a horizon for getting smaller. Some intelligent file systems could be laid on top of that, and could simply prompt when you first set up your computer for your chosen arrangement, and even switch later on if your storage needs change.

SSD's have a lot of potential (1)

Benfea (1365845) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727235)

Unfortunately, if you read real performance reviews on SSD, you'll find that some of them have better performance and worse power consumption, or better power consumption and worse performance, not to mention all of them are seriously lacking in storage capacity. Someday we'll have SSD drives with better performance, better power consumption, and equivalent capacity, but not any time soon.

Re:SSD's capturing the 'mindshare' (1)

thewesterly (953211) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727309)

Agreed. Hell, I won't consider an SSD until I can get one that competes with a WD Velociraptor in write speeds and $/GB. That'll happen considerably sooner than an SSD that can compete with the 1.5TB 'Cuda for price / capacity, but it will still be years down the road.

Other Seagate 7200.11 drives? (3, Insightful)

crow (16139) | more than 5 years ago | (#25726989)

The 1.5TB drive is part of a family of Seagate drives, the 7200.11 drives. Supposedly the only differences between the different drives in the family are the number of platters and the size of the cache. So if there's a bug, I would expect the same issue with the smaller 7200.11 drives. (If not, the the root cause is probably related to the increase in power draw from spinning the fourth platter.)

Re:Other Seagate 7200.11 drives? (1)

JustinKSU (517405) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727123)

Does anyone know if the 7200.11 1TB has any issues? I was thinking about picking one up. Thanks.

Do not think so (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727175)

I just got some of the 7200.11 1TB seagate drives about a month ago - one I use with an eSata case to hold an Aperture (photo editing) library, the other I use as a drive to store and replay HDTV streams captured OTA from an elGato receiver in a Firewire case. I have yet to see any lockups or freezes like those described, and I'm using them in ways that would seem to be worst case.

So, I'd go ahead with the purchase.

Re:Other Seagate 7200.11 drives? (1)

finalnight (709885) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727853)

Your right, my 640 GB model is having similar issues and there are other reports of this on Seagates forums. The models with the SD13 firmware seem to be most likely to have this issue.

Re:Other Seagate 7200.11 drives? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727993)

I have been using a 500GB 7200.11 for about a year now. Some of these also had issues with the firmware which causes the cache to not be used. Supposedly my drive was in that bad batch but my cache appears to be working.

The raw performance numbers show very good performance equivalent to the two drive RAID-0 array (7200.7) I was using but in actual use I find it rather slow compared to the old RAID array. I don't think I get freezes like described on these 1.5 TB drives but it does seem to hang up at times where it's just hammering the drive. My old RAID array never did that and I'm using it exactly the same way.

Overall I'm not impressed with the 7200.11 series.

I have been looking to set up another two drive RAID-0 but I can't figure out which drives are going to be the most reliable. All drive manufacturers occasionally have bad drive designs. The trick is getting a drive that is reliable, fast and quiet. It always feels like I'm rolling dice... Hard drives are the single most hated component in my computer and SSD is not a viable option yet (SSD on a workstation used for development and VMware will burn out in no time).

Re:Other Seagate 7200.11 drives? (1)

ZerdZerd (1250080) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728183)

I have 6 x 7200.11 1TB-drives, and have yetttttttttttttttttttt to see any hick-upppppppppppppppps.

Only the people who own one? (1)

Eganicus (1374269) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727073)

Small percentage of HD's, 100% of Barracuda 1.5TB buyers? Well, it's a start.... and this time it's really not Vista?

Seagate staying relevant (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727113)

Seagate will stay relevant even after SSDs have hit the mass market.

For storing very large files, the old magnetic HDD will stay relevant for a long time (because it's cheap).

Too bad. This drive has decent performance. (1)

Benfea (1365845) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727217)

From reading the reviews from the usual hardware sites, this looked like a pretty impressive drive. Whatever this is, I hope Seagate clears this mess up.

On a large lot.. (2, Informative)

Fubar420 (701126) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727433)

On a lot of 60, a random subsample of 10:
  - 7 have been nothing but blissful
  - 2 throw random errors enough to stall a raid array
  - 1 just hangs the controller after some amount of time.

Not saying the percentages bear out over the long haul, but people saying "WFM" are probably telling the truth, as are those complaining of errors.

Not every drive (1)

xeno42 (5758) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727453)

Been running a couple in RAID1 for a month or so on a Mac Pro and a third in a DVR with no issues so far (touch wood).. maybe it's only a specific firmware revision that's afflicted.

Early adopter syndrome (2, Informative)

NinthAgendaDotCom (1401899) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727485)

This is a relatively new drive. If you really need stable performance, you probably should buy something more time-tested, like a well-reviewed 1 TB unit.

New Firmware Bugs (2, Interesting)

NeGrusti (912384) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727601)

From 7200.11 series Seagate switched to a completely new firmware, so a new bunch of bugs is not unexpected :)

Re:New Firmware Bugs (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | more than 5 years ago | (#25727703)

Bugs in hard drive firmware are completely unexpected. We aren't talking about a nVidia driver here. Hard drives are expected to perform flawlessly when new.

spend a couple hundred and act like sooo entitled (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727669)

i love how people spend a couple hundred dollars and then act as if they bought a company instead of a product. people think they are so entitled.

not surprised (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25727887)

seagate drives are always wank anyway. get a wd and be done with it

The official statement is slightly misleading... (3, Insightful)

tivojafa (564606) | more than 5 years ago | (#25728041)

"Seagate is investigating an issue where a small number of Barracuda 7200.11 (1.5TB SATA) hard drives randomly pause or hang for up to several seconds during certain write operations. This does not result in data loss nor does it impact the reliability of the drive but is an inconvenience to the user that we are working to resolve with an upgradeable firmware."

"We are therefore asking customers if they feel they are experiencing this issue to give our technical support department a call with any questions."

"Affected part number: 9JU138-300, 336 with firmware revisions SD15, SD17, or SD18."

The official statement is slightly misleading...

1) When the problem occurs all hard drive operations stop until the OS times out the ATA command - typically 30 seconds. This results in the computer freezing for 30 seconds.

2) The problem can result in data loss if using a RAID system. Depending on the OS/RAID configuration the problem may cause a RAID system to think the drive has died. The RAID system automatically removes the drive and continues to run degraded (as designed). 20 minutes later when another drive exhibits the problem the RAID system drops the second drive and dies.

3) The problem may be a systematic problem rather than a small number of drives - all drives have I tested running the SD17 firmware have exhibited the problem.

The only thing that whines more (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#25728181)

than Seagate execs is a cheetah.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...