On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > On Tuesday, 29 October 2002 at 2:03:50 +0000, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > > On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 01:54, Kenneth Culver wrote: > >>> I haven't had any trouble with the WDxxxBB drives - the WDxxxAA drives > >>> are pretty unreliable though. > >>> > >> Hrmm, I havn't tried those, but just about every WD drive I've used has > >> ended up with problems which were of course handled by the warranty, but > >> even then, I still had to reinstall the os and pull a bunch of stuff from > >> my backups which was a pain to do for each failure. Like I said, just my > >> personal experience. I don't think the new 8MB cache drives have been out > >> long enough to actually develop the problems I've seen on WD drives > >> though. > > > > Yes, but my point is that the AA drives are bad, but the BB drives seem > > good. I have been using them for a while (~1 year) without trouble. > > I've had trouble with BB drives. Given that they have (or had) a 3 > year warranty, 1 year of experience isn't very much to go by. > > > Personally I find that no HD manufacturer has a good reputation - > > they have all made trashy drives at one point. Give the general time > > it takes for problems to surface vs product lifetimes makes deciding > > what to buy a PITA :( > > That's a more valid point. > > Note that WD and Seagate have dropped their warranty on IDE drives > from 3 years to 1 year. What does this say to you?
Hmmm, from what I remember, they did that for the 5400RPM drives, not the 7200RPM drives! Regards ----- Richard Sharpe, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.richardsharpe.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
