From: STeve Andre' (andres_at_msu.edu)
Date: Fri Jan 07 2000 - 15:38:42 EST
I know there are people who will wildly and flamingly disagree with me on
this, but I still think that overall, Seagate drives (and quantum, now
that they're owned by Seagate) are of less well built than other drives.
Over time I have seen more seagate drives go than others. This is not to
say that the others haven't had problems, because they have. But overall,
Seagates for me at least have proven themselves to be less reliable than
IBM, Fujitsu, and Western Digital. I can however point out that IBM's 800M
SCSI disks of 1992 were a disaster, Fujitsu had a ~ 1G disk that was bad and
WD had a 1.6G disk that wasn't any good, so anyone can produce bad stuff.
In talking with friends who deal with lots of computers, I've made a few of
them queasy about them, too, after going over various disasters they've
encountered.
I will say that the "Seagate factor" has gotten better. I don't think
their drives are as likely to die now as they once did, say in the last
couple of years or so. But that still doesn't make me feel good about them.
--STeve Andre'
andres_at_msu.edu
At 11:24 AM 1/7/2000 -0500, Stan Jacobs wrote:
>What is the deal with Seagate drives. I thought they were real good drives.
>
>Stan Jacobs
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 09:55:42 EST