Seagate Hit with Class Action Lawsuit for High Failure Rates

[WYP]

Seagate has been hit with a Class Action Lawsuit for the High Failure Rates of their 3TB hard drives.

Read more on Seagate getting hit with a class action lawsuit.

 

[dwatterworth]

Had 4 out of 5 of these (and 2 of the replacement drives) fail in a Synology NAS at the office. Definitely junk. Seagate wouldn't replace the replacement drives.

 

[kirk1000]

have one with all my photos from the past 10 years die a couple of months ago

 

[Kushiro]

I had a lot of these drives and none failed. By a lot I mean like over a hundred after taking into account how many I have put into others builds.

Even got 8 of them in my NAS and has been flawless for 2 years so far.

So I wouldnt call it definite junk....

 

[jimma47]

I don't want to jinx myself...

I had two seagates fail but I put that down to a dodgy PSU. Replacements were supplied with no issue under warranty (they were older 1TB models)
My current one (3TB.) has been going for about 2 years with no signs of trouble so far.

Hitachi looks the goods according to that graph. I wonder how failure rates versus cost versus usage scenarios go. I'm thinking maybe the enterprise class drives are built to higher spec or are subject to less abuse. (taking your rig to LANS, portable back up drives, cheaper PSUs etc)

Seems we want to sue everyone for everything these days. No wonder things are so expensive.

 

[WYP]

Have been using a 3TB Seagate HDD for multiple years now, I should really make a home server or buy a NAS.

Had a Seagate 500GB USB hard drive fail a few years back the day I bought it, but thankfully I got that replaced. They gave me the 750GB model as a replacement, so I was well happy.

 

[notcool]

Seagate still not learnt their lesson I see.... my brother had a good way of fixing his Seagate, he bought a WD Black.

 

[Kushiro]

And pay the premium too. Not like WD has a zero failure rate either.

There is nothing wrong with Seagate drives.

 

[notcool]

And pay the premium too. Not like WD has a zero failure rate either.

There is nothing wrong with Seagate drives.

You obviously weren't around when they had their firmware scandal back in 2009 or so with chronic levels of drive failures. I'm not saying WD is perfect but Seagate are known for their high failure rates.

 

[Kushiro]

So basically you want to boycott Seagate and praie WD knowing that both have their issue. Go for it, whatever makes you happy.

People make mistakes.

FYI I was around for it. I was happy with their response I did not get a single angry email from my clients about the issue as they always had a backup as advised by me. They were well aware that these things happen from time to time.

Seagate replaced the drives and offered to recover the data on the problem drives free of charge. So that is as good as it gets.

 

[jimma47]

Just had a look at the fb post on this and the hate is strong with this one.

As far as I can see there's no real reason that Seagate would knowingly send out drives that have a 13% failure rate. If more than one in ten fail it's going to cost them a fortune in returns and warranty processing.

Think about how many drives they manufacture. Millions? At least hundreds of thousands in a year I would think. If someone has the figures that would be great.

Every manufacturer of every hardware would expect some failures.

Side note - and the reason some people seem to be so angry - Users are the only people who can be blamed for lack of backups and permanent loss of data.

Edit @Kushiro yes spot on.

 

[barnsley]

If you use the cheapest consumer spec hdds in a way that they aren't designed for then of course you'll get a higher failure rate.

For the record, BackBlaze have stated that their preferred HDDs are Seagate's 4TB drives. They've got a great price/failure rate (a whole lot lower than the 3TB). They don't like WD because they consistently end up the most expensive for an OK failure rate.

 

[Excalabur50]

I've had good Seagates and bad Seagates and I've also had bad WD'S and good WD'S just the luck of the draw although for awhile now I've stuck with WD and so far they've been great

 

[H3M4NZ]

I've got 5 3TB seagates on my desk atm - all dead.

 

[jimma47]

I've had good Seagates and bad Seagates and I've also had bad WD'S and good WD'S just the luck of the draw although for awhile now I've stuck with WD and so far they've been great

Same.

If you use the cheapest consumer spec hdds in a way that they aren't designed for then of course you'll get a higher failure rate.

For the record, BackBlaze have stated that their preferred HDDs are Seagate's 4TB drives. They've got a great price/failure rate (a whole lot lower than the 3TB). They don't like WD because they consistently end up the most expensive for an OK failure rate.

I think this is on the money. There's a reason they have several tiers of drive class. You get what you pay for. It's like comparing that the OEM no-name 30 dollar PSU's to your Silverstone Platinum.

 

[Bartacus]

Damn, I have 2 of these in RAID1! Now I fear my pr0n is unprotected, just like the sex in those movies!!

 

[jimma47]

Damn, I have 2 of these in RAID1! Now I fear my pr0n is unprotected, just like the sex in those movies!!

Pron in RAID? Viking PRON? =00=

 

[Kushiro]

Someone must rly love their pron.

 

[Bartacus]

That might have been a joke. But I do have a RAID1 array with 2 of these drives that has a LOT of stuff I'd hate to lose on it. Sad to see this though, as I've preferred Seagates for years. I had far fewer issues with Seagate than Western Digital.

 

[Kushiro]

Dont worry about it too much mate. The chances of yhem both failing at once is slim to none.

I have never had any Seagets fail on me thus far. Its more a bunch of people looking to get some chump change than anything.

Your viking pron is safe in the hands of the sea.