I understand the original post.
While the ops reasoning and possible lack of data to prove such a claim may not be to the level of some folks, I do understand the advice based on the ops experiance.
Case in point, My wires pc had WD drives, simply removing it from the pc was enough to crash it. No, if was a simple unplug and plugin after the fact.
At that point, my opinions of WD drives were formulated. My opinion based on a real life experiance. Since then I have never regretted moving to and staying with Seagate.
Sent from my HTC.
----- Reply message -----
From: "shawn wilson" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Sat, Sep 3, 2011 4:03 pm
Subject: DO NOT BUY Western Digital "Green" Drives (also present in WD "Elements" external USB cases)
So, I can understand your frustration but, 4 discs out of how many thousands they make every day? That's not that conclusive. That said, iirc the reviews about a year ago did say that this was a very consumer drive. I don't remember hearing them break but...
On Sep 3, 2011 4:30 PM, "Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton" <email@example.com> wrote:
> just a word of warning: on absolutely no account, not for any reason,
> should you buy WD "Green" drives.
> i've just spent a hair-raising 6 weeks discovering that these drives,
> when pushed above a mere 40 Centigrade, become so unstable that they
> can actually become completely unresponsive, shut down, and leave the
> linux kernel in a completely unstable state, especially if they are
> part of a RAID1 mirror.
> it merely takes something such as .... ooo, copying the data? *or...
> shock, horror, writing a file, to raise the temperatures enough to
> cause them to become unstable. *and as for actually doing a RAID check
> or a RAID1 re-join - well, you know how normally the mdadm mismatch
> count is supposed to be zero? *well, by the time the re-build is
> complete, the mismatch count is up to 170,000.
> now, you may be thinking "surely, that was just unlucky with two
> drives, right?" wrong - the total number of drives used for this RAID1
> mirror was *four* drives [cf: earlier very helpful discussion
> involving a script which someone published - thanks! - that detected
> partly-complete RAID mirrors]
> so, whilst most people are finding that these drives are "great", the
> reality is that they are only "fantastic" if you don't actually use
> them. *the moment you try to do a backup of them (for example if
> they're failing) then it is too late: you will be absolutely
> guaranteed to have lost all the data.
> according to the mdadm mismatch count as a standard heuristic /
> guideline to determine whether drives should be replaced, strictly
> speaking, these drives are already end-of-life. *but being sold as
> now, apparently, what Western Digital do is they test new drives
> thoroughly, and if they pass with flying colours, they are labelled
> "black" and sold for more money. *if they fail, then they're
> "re-programmed" to run a bit slower, thus making less noise, use less
> power, and can therefore justify being sold with a "green" label.
> unfortunately what that means is that Western Digital are knowingly
> selling faulty drives, *knowingly* trying to pass off
> unfit-for-purpose drives as "new".
BTW, Intel and AMD (and probably every other chip maker) does the same. Why not do it with discs.
> if you have purchased WD "Elements" or any other "Green" Drives, you
> should perform a SLOW backup, ensuring that the temperature never goes
> above 38C in the process, and return them as "unfit for purpose" to
> wherever you bought them from.
> by contrast, hitachi's 1.5tb drives which were £70 each off of ebuyer
> (instead of £55 for the WD Elements including the external USB case)
> run consistently at a full FOUR degrees centigrade lower temperature,
> even when the WD Green Drive was removed from its USB case and placed
> into the exact same server in which the hitachi drive was present.
I'm sure I can find someone saying the exact opposite about WD vs Hitachi if you look. It just depends on how many discs you run into.
> four identical WD Elements drives - all of them completely unfit for
> purpose. *that's not an accident, and i am not the only person who has
> experienced difficulties with these drives (different batch, different
BTW I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying you're not right
If you had 10+ desktops with discs you kept needing to rma, I might see your point. But just 4 of the cheapest discs out there (unknown fs, no bench / profile data, kernel version, etc) and minimal troubleshooting data is very inconclusive to me.
So come again. Do not buy, why?