External ones die asap.

>>51647645

Most external ones are garbage tier drives.

>>51647645
They are not? You're looking at different models.

>>51647712

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seagate-Expansion-Desktop-inch-External-Drive/dp/B00UNA1O0W

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seagate-ST5000DM002-Internal-Hard-Drive/dp/B013JPL0KG

>>51647645
They use the cheapest slowest shit for externals.

>>51647678
>>51647753
Sounds like BS to me. I think you are just making that up. Externals die quicker because of the cases not having adequate cooling or the case controller dies.

>>51647751
Do you feel I have to explain what random sellers offering partly older hardware on the UK Amazon do with their pricing?

Buy a current 6TB or 8TB drive and/or look at the whole market.

>>51647784

Actually this is probably true.

I usually bust open dead external drives and stick the drives in a box and they continue to love on.

>>51647796
I have. I cannot buy a 4/5/6TB internal drive for the same price as external. Usually the internal drives are a good £30-50 more expensive. I have tried Amazon, Ebuyer, Scan and Ebay.

>>51647814
That's one way of doing it but some drives are now coming with non-standard SATA connectors that only work in the cases. Also they are making them harder to open with all glued and plastic snap shit. You risk damaging the drive getting it out and invalidating your warranty in the process.

>>51647645
Because they use the cheapest drives that aren't rated for 24/7 operation.

External drives are meant for low performance situations where the USB bus isn't going to impact your workflow.

Generally they are 5400RPM and meant for sporadic use (such as back ups).

Though it does have to do with cooling and such as well, generally they also just start off with a cheaper quality drive that has undergone less stringent quality assurances testing.

>>51647837
source?

>>51647796
Well, maybe that is some UK thing then?

It's not the same in Switzerland, Germany, the USA, ... so I still see a chance that you did not look at enough stores or even brands.

>>51647751
http://www.amazon.com/Seagate-Barracuda-ST5000DM000-3-5-Inch-Internal/dp/B00KIVMRWU
This in the external. Just a normal 5900rpm.

File: 152766-7[1].jpg (173 KB, 1920x788) Image search: [Google]

173 KB, 1920x788

>>51647868

>>51647837

If the case is dead I don't care about the warranty.

That other part is pretty douchey. I mean what's the real point? Its not like these things are pushing some sort of bull shit ads or something, what would some company care how you use the drive?

>>51647879
Believe me bud I have looked far and wide.
>>51647880
>USA

>>51647816
This was actually for you: >>51647879

>>51647891
Yeah only WD does that and only with their 2.5" passports.

>>51647784
Backblaze ripped a whole bunch of externals out and put them into their servers, and they died.

>>51647907
> Believe me bud I have looked far and wide.
Okay. Well, if you want a crappy low-end drive, I guess you'll get it cheapest in the UK with an external enclosure, then.

I do still not think you can get the slightly better drives like that.

>>51647863
>drives that aren't rated for 24/7 operation.

How is this even a thing?

>>51647907
>USA
what does that matter, they just don't have that model on amazon uk. Its whats inside the 5tb external usb case you linked.

>>51647947
There is a thing called cold storage archival drives.
The Seagate 8TB archive drive being one of them.

They are meant to be booted up, back things on to it, and then taken offline for archival storage.

>>51647796
>8TB
They're at 8TB already? Sweet Jesus, I still use a 160GB hard drive.

>>51647956
Yeah I can't see that for sale over here.

>>51647992

> TFW having a 4 TB NAS and 4TB in your main PC
> TFW is all probably 75% filled and I am not even a movie pirate.

>>51647992
I think they're at 10TB for 3.5" drives.

> Sweet Jesus, I still use a 160GB hard drive.
You surely can.

But even for hobbyist digital photography it's kinda too little now, these RAW files from a 24MP (or even 40MP) Sony camera or such add up quickly.

Smartphone photos won't be much different for long either, they're also getting into that range...

And many more things, eh. Video games, higher resolution video files, yadda yadda.

>>51647920
>>51647891
Can't have some shit head thinking they can just shuck a drive and get a 2tb laptop hdd.

>we control the market!!

I wish I wasn't traumatized by seagate, sometimes I fucking hate WD.

>Had four seagate drives on me in two years
>Lost 2 TB of data

>>51647992
only seagate archive drives that I've seen, not fast enough for anything over than backup iirc.

>>51648040
Do backups, eh. Maybe do RAID.

Yes, that costs some extra and it *is* either your money or your data, life is shit like that, take your pick.

>>51648045
WD has helium drives in 8TB and soon to be 10TB variants.

Seagate has 8TB full speed enterprise drives too.

>>51648045
They're fast enough for a lot of uses, but maybe you don't want to run Windows bloat software off them.

That said, even with random file access, it's not nearly as large a difference between an archive and regular HDD as the difference that exists between a HDD and a SSD.

>>51648054
I do do raid now but I'm still never buying another seagate product so long as I fucking live.

>reach for seagate
>instant pain of loss and regret for having given them far too many chances

Currently have two 4 TB WD Red's in raid for primary backup. Literally never had a WD drive fail on me and I've got a black with something like 35,000 powered on hours.

I have a 2tb my passport ultra since 2 years, and i use it as secondary drive.

Never had a problem.

My external hd fell off my table and I lodt years of data

external hds are shite

>Black Friday, Cyber Monday over
>One hard disk in my 4TB raid array dies
Fuck everything.

>>51648079
Well, I don't really care if you don't buy Seagate, but I don't think you have particularly rationally made this decision - various data sources suggest there is not really much of a difference between WD and Seagate.

The rates of failure between them will be pretty inconsequential at the number of drives we might run at home.

>>51648148
Yes, and? I am aware I'm being irrational. It's a thing, it exists. People are irrational all the fucking time.

>>51648181
As you prefer.

Obviously, it won't currently be worse in terms of data/drive management to run with WD, either.

Does anyone know what the Seagate equivalent is to the 5/6TB blue drives?

>>51648209
Yeah hopefully.

It'll be neat to see WD branded SSD's too, even if I know they're just sandisk shit in disguise.

Just makes me mad when I see shit like this.

>>51647891


Did think about swapping to HGST, but I got a really good deal on the WD Reds, and desperately needed storage space, so I was kinda stuck.

I've just found a place where I can get that Seagate ST5000DM000 for £103. Is it worth it?

>>51648286
Nevermind. These are pulled drives and Seagate does not warranty them.

I hate spinning disks. Of any brand. I've had each of WD, Seagate, Samsung and HGST fail at inopportune moments.

Since I only do reads 90% of the time, I can't wait for SSD capacity to catch up.

SSDs can live practically forever if I write very little, right? (Genuine question)

>>51648411
Unless something goes wrong with the controller or a chip fries yeah.

Until what extent is it true that leaving your hard drive active all day is better for its lifespan?

>>51648411
> SSDs can live practically forever if I write very little, right? (Genuine question)
No. There are many electrical parts that still can fail.

You avoid some common types of HDD failure related to their ultra lightweight & sensitive reading heads and motor and stuff like that, but that does not mean a SSD is just safe forever.

You'll still want a backup.

>>51648470
>>51648411
I really want a read-only storage medium that can be always-on and never fails.

>>51648549
DVD/Blu-ray discs

>>51648549
Many would want that, and cheap. It does not exist.

You've got HDD and SSD and maybe magnetic tape drives to work with, everything else is not really viable for any normal storage volume. Deal with it.

If you just have 100 bytes of data, of course you can inscribe them on stone tablets, heh.

>>51648616
I want to dream.

Maybe some brilliant engineer will think of a new storage paradigm that allows this to exist.

Reminder to run wdidle3 on your greens

>>51648549
If it's read-only then how are you planning to write on it to do said reading? Or you expect them to come loaded with cp for your convenience?

>>51648832
He obviously means some WORM device.

>>51647645
As a general rule internal drives are cheaper than external drives of the same capacity.

OP you are using the internet incorrectly

File: image.png (289 KB, 1136x640) Image search: [Google]

289 KB, 1136x640

Speaking of storage. Is this a good deal?

>>51649351
RAM isn't storage.

But this is decent enough, sure.

>>51649351
Think i paid like $60 for 16gb of gskill so yea looks about par for the course

My external is a laptop HDD that I bought a case for

Will it break sooner that desired if I plug it in and out a lot? It makes a kind of clicking sound when I unplug the USB and it sounds like it's something bad

>Seagate, Samsung etc...
>implying I use any HDDs not made by Western Digital...

>>51649351
>8 gigs
>115 dollars

What? 8 gigs is 49 eurobucks here

>>51649994
yeah, thats not great

>>51649295
Try searching UK sellers. I think it's a problem with this country.

INTERESTING LINK ABOUT RELEBILTY
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-reliability-q3-2015/
What are best disk for NAS / homeserver for ultra poor fucker. I don't know how to setup
I got 300gb, and ofc i will make backups. Maybe buying a lot of used disks will be solution?

I am scared as fuck becouse of my PSU, will go broke and just fry all that data, even with raid.

>>51650584
INTERESTING LINK ABOUT BLACK BLAZE

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6028/dispelling-backblaze-s-hdd-reliability-myth-the-real-story-covered/index.html

>>51650162
USAfags like seeing how much a thing was when it was first launched so they can feel like they are saving money.

4x2 8GB of ddr3 RAM was about 120 bucks 6 or 7 years ago, which is when that particular brand and model of ram was probably initially put into production.

>>51647712
Why are you asking that to him?

>>51647891
thanks, still looks usable though

>>51647920
It's actually getting more and more common among Ext HDD manufacturers.
I take these things apart as part of my job, attempting Data Retrieval.

I seriously hate non-Sata drives.

My externals have yet to die or show signs of dying.
6 years now.