Nope :)Quote:
Originally posted by ewitte
You mean the "Deathstars" :)
Out of what 300-400 IBM 60/75GXP I had 1 failure... Not a deathstar to me :)
Plus the 120GXP have a higher reliability rating then WD :)
Printable View
Nope :)Quote:
Originally posted by ewitte
You mean the "Deathstars" :)
Out of what 300-400 IBM 60/75GXP I had 1 failure... Not a deathstar to me :)
Plus the 120GXP have a higher reliability rating then WD :)
I've just been unlucky with IBM. We had a batch where 8 out of 10 SCSI drives were bad. I've seen thier laptop drives die a lot. On top of that the model I had at home was the one that was famous for dying. I got an RMA for it and the new one died within 2 months. Generally I do not even use a drive very long anymore before upgrading.Quote:
Originally posted by Colossus
Nope :)
Out of what 300-400 IBM 60/75GXP I had 1 failure... Not a deathstar to me :)
Plus the 120GXP have a higher reliability rating then WD :)
Eric
no, it is bad luck that you decided to buy those poses. it is bad engineering that made them fail on you, ibm is truly the last disk I would ever consider purchasing.Quote:
Originally posted by ewitte
I've just been unlucky with IBM. We had a batch where 8 out of 10 SCSI drives were bad. I've seen thier laptop drives die a lot. On top of that the model I had at home was the one that was famous for dying. I got an RMA for it and the new one died within 2 months. Generally I do not even use a drive very long anymore before upgrading.
Eric
You know it was considered a good drive when it came out. It had great reviews. Then about a year later everyone started complaining how unrealiable the were. Sure enough it died on me. I still have the RMA drive. It *may* work but I gave up on it when I got my WD SE drive.Quote:
Originally posted by pudad
no, it is bad luck that you decided to buy those poses. it is bad engineering that made them fail on you, ibm is truly the last disk I would ever consider purchasing.
Eric
I read somewhere that ibm has some exclusive stuff that make it perform nicely in benchmarks, but it's actual performance isn't as good as what benchmarks can tell. all I have to say is, any ibm I have owned (and I have been through 4 some 60 and 120 gxps) has seemed much slower in actual use than my barracuda 4. could be anything, but I juat lost my trust in ibm drive after my first 2 died on me. wd and Seagate are good in my book. never ran a maxtor, for the most part I am loyal to seagate, until their products start failing on me left and right (which I doubt).