But in my opinion, a very interesting report about those today pretty odd products doesn't say that much about the longetivity of the complete HGST brand today. The Backblaze report is great news to all of you that happen to have a 5700 rpm HGST disks. The fourth and only 7200 rpm model is an expensive enterprise helium model but they only have 45 samples of it so it's not a relevant population to draw any realiability conclusions from. Yes HGST look good in the Backblaze reports but they're still just some select HGST models and notable is that none of the four HGST models mentioned are the 7200 rpm Deskstar NAS models that are popular with many users in this forum! Three of the HGST models in the Backblaze report are slower spinning 5700 rpm models. They happen to be the absolute cheapest and by the looks of it, they're not very reliable either. Seagate of course look particularly bad in there because Backblaze bought very large numbers of DM desktop disks. It should be noted though that the Backblaze data happen to be for specific models but many people still refer to it as some kind of definitive guide to brand reliability, when it isn't. Backblaze and similar organziations have large enough product populations to present usable failure statistics and as it's numbers, it's not as affected by personal preference and opinions. Even if we've used hundreds of disks it's only based on the few models we happen to have experience with, not the complete brand lineup.
#2018.5 avid media composer crack professional
Human beings (me included) tend to develop a brand preference that's based on our previous experience but for almost all of us (even for professional users exposed to hundreds of disks) it's not completely rational. I believe that the original poster - RJR at Tilt Media knows me from "the old AVID days", and knows that I am not trying to steer him in the wrong direction. I am also hearing rumor that WD (who owns HGST) will soon drop the brand name HGST, and there will only be WD drives in this product line (I guess WD RED as it applies to "us"). I started doing this because people did not want to spend the extra money for the Enterprise drives, and to my surprise, the reliability has been quite amazing. Personally, I have been using the cheaper HGST "NAS" drives (which used to be called Deskstar drives). I am just gun shy about them, but I am sure that the Seagate IronWolf drives perform as well, and reliably as WD and HGST drives. Very recently, Seagate has come out with the new IronWolf series, and this is the exact model that both QNAP and Synology are endorsing as the "preferred drive" for these NAS systems. This unfortunately included the Constellation line. In 2009, something bad happened to Seagate, and their products starts to become unreliable, and I had high failure rates (which has been documented by many users on user forums all over the net).
I have a long AVID Media Composer background, and historically, only used Seagate drives for decades, including SCSI drives.
0 kommentar(er)
