Hacker News Reader

Comment by loeg | Hacker News Reader

Hard to argue with those WDC/Toshiba numbers. Seagate's are just embarrassing in contrast.

(HGST drives -- now WDC -- were great, but those are legacy drives. It's been part of WD for some time. The new models are WDC branded.)

View on HN

...and many used Seagate drives have been resold as new in the last 3 years. They were used for crypto mining and then had their SMART parameters wiped back to "new" 0 hours usage.

https://www.heise.de/en/news/Hard-disk-fraud-Increasing-evid...

Sure, but it's hard to blame that on Seagate. The AFR is their fault.

It's not Seagate's fault, but it would behove them to clamp down on such activity by authorised resellers.

After all, it's not just the buyer getting ripped off; it's also Seagate. A customer paid for a brand new Seagate drive and Seagate didn't see a penny of it.

Yes. Nothing would lead me to believe Seagate isn't fervently working to shut down fraudulent resellers behind the scenes.

Seagate has always been the "you get what you pay for" && high replacement availability option, at least since the Thai flood and ST3000DM001 days - they kept shipping drives. It was always HGST > Toshiba > Seagate in both price and MTBF, with WD somewhere in between.

Is crypto mining a high storage IO operation? I always thought it was hard on CPU and RAM, but not on disk IO.

There are coins like Chia that were built around "wasting disk space" proof-of-work rather than the "wasting {C/GPU|ASIC} cycles" PoW that Bitcoin uses (and Ethereum used to use.)

Seagate seems to be very much hit-or-miss.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com