this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2025
463 points (96.4% liked)

Technology

71163 readers
3072 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
463
This new 40TB hard drive from Seagate is just the beginning—50TB is coming fast! (www.techradar.com)
submitted 1 week ago by TheImpressiveX@lemm.ee to c/technology@lemmy.world
228 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] zod000@lemmy.ml 22 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I know people love to dunk on Seagate drives, but it was really just the one gen that was the cause of that bad rep. Before that the most hated drives were the "deathstars" (Deskstars). I have a 1TB Seagate drive that is 10 years old and still in use daily. Just do some research on which drive to buy, no OEM is sacrosanct. I'd personally wait 6 months to a year before buying one of these drives though, so enough people have time to find out if this generation is trouble or not.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

Many people can't accept that one drive model isn't going to kill a company or make everything from them bad.

The exception being the palladium drive. Although its not directly attributed to the fall of JTS, who at the time owned Atari. Its was clear from the frontline techs these things were absolute shit. The irony is that 1 out of say 10,000 was perfect. So much so I still have one of the 1.2 gig's that still spins up and reads and writes fine. Its nearly a unicorn though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ok5JTwpv5go

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] MangioneDontMiss@lemm.ee 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (7 children)

i dunno man, i have about 20 years worth of bad experiences with seagate. none of their drives have ever been reliable for me. WD drives have always been rock solid and overall just better drives in my experience. I have two WD externals sitting on my desk right now that are almost 15 years old. Still going strong.

[–] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 5 points 6 days ago

Seagate have never once secretly changed the underlying disk technology on a NAS grade drive to one utterly unsuited for use in a NAS drive and then sold it as a NAS grade drive at a premium price because it's a NAS grade drive. So there's that.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I have killed every single type of magnetic platter drive from every brand they are all bad

[–] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago

Not "bad", consumable.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] zod000@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

The only drives I have ever had die on me were actually both WD, but it's all anecdotal, and I've had tons of WD drives that were great (my favorites were the raptors and velociratpers). I've owned way too many HDDs over the many years, and I can say that I haven't had issues with any, but again I do my research and only order from what I believe to be good runs of drives. In case you have never done so, take a look at the reports that Backblaze puts out on their drive reliability. I found it pretty eye opening. Before Backblaze start sharing their data, there used to be a site that crowd sourced HDD lifetimes and failure causes that I used to use when buying drives and I always entered my drive data there. I can't recall the name of it now nor do I know if it still exists, but you could definitely spot the "bad" gens on there and WD and Seagate were both pretty even as far as I recall. I remember Hitachi being statistically worse, but it made sense as they bought IBM's derided Deskstar business from them. Ironically, WD ended up buying Hitachi's HDD business years later, but I think it was considered OK by then.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Vinstaal0@feddit.nl 3 points 5 days ago

There are loads of people who think a company is bad because of one product, one service etc. A friend of mine hates Seagate, but he bought 10 drives of the same model. Pretty sure he even bought some after the first one failed ... or people (like me) put desktop drives in a NAS or service with other drives. While mine are still good I expect them to fail any time since well they are not desinged for the use case I am using them for.

[–] Pnut@lemm.ee 13 points 6 days ago

If EA or Ubisoft don't get their shit together this won't be enough.

[–] nthavoc@lemmy.today 24 points 6 days ago (6 children)

If you aren't running a home server with tons of storage, this product is not for you. If the price is right, 40TB to 50TB is a great upgrade path for massive storage capacity without having to either buy a whole new backplane to support more drives or build an entirely new server. I see a lot of comments comparing 4TB SSDS to 40TB HDD's so had to chime in. Yes, they make massive SSD storage arrays too, but a lot of us don't have those really deep pockets.

[–] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

Thank you! I lol'd at the guy with one in his main PC lol. Like why?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 17 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Imagine how long it’ll take to rebuild your raid array after one fails lol

[–] MangioneDontMiss@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (4 children)

underrated comment. i'd much rather clone a 16 tb drive than 50 tb one. Also better speeds considering the use of more drives. That said, if I can save on electricity, noise, enclosure space, and very importantly, money, it could be pretty cool. Just need to wait and see how reliable these things are and if they are going to carry a price point that makes them make sense.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] UltraBlack@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Wow great. From seagate. The company that produces drives with the by far lowest life expectancy compared to the competiton

[–] crozilla@lemmy.world 7 points 6 days ago (3 children)

And IIRC moved their headquarters to some Caribbean island to avoid paying US corporate taxes.

[–] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 11 points 6 days ago

They're called Seagate, not Landgate.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Is this true? I remember them being very reliable in the past.

[–] ernest314@lemm.ee 11 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I think people say this because there was one specific 6TB model that does really poorly in BackBlaze reports, combined with a generally poor understanding of statistics ("I bought a Seagate and it failed but I've never had a WD fail").

I will also point out that BackBlaze themselves consistently say that Seagate and WD are pretty much the same (apart from the one model), in those exact same reports

[–] UltraBlack@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Repair technicians see by far the most of seagate drives

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Imagine losing a 50tb drive because you choose to use Seagate.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

Seagate Exos is usually ok. Their generic stuff, is sometimes crap, but that's true of all manufacturers, really.

That being said, I'd be nervous with a single huge drive, no matter where it's from. And even as part of a redundant structure, the rebuild times would be through the roof.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Hey! You! Get offa the Cloud (and grab yourself one of those drives). You can keep your thoughts to yourself, now you can keep your data to yourself, like in the recent old times.

[–] Infernal_pizza@lemm.ee 7 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Best to get at least 2 so you have a backup

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Gonzako@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

I can't wait to upgrade my NAS to a 200Tb Setup

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 5 points 5 days ago

You thought 50TB was it? LOL! Hold on to your butts because 53.713TB SSDs are coming! These will cost you all your vital organs at 35years of age. Brains included.

[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 7 points 6 days ago

Great, can't wait for it to be affordable in 2050.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

I can't wait to lose even more data when this thing bricks

[–] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

Hope you have a database for file management at that point.

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 3 points 6 days ago (6 children)

…And it’s bound to be stupidly expensive.

Wish I could afford 20 of them, but not without winning the Powerball.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

i don't mind that, if it means that lower capacity drives will get cheaper

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›