Resultados 1 a 5 de 5
  1. #1
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000

    [EN] Seagate faces class-action lawsuit over 3TB hard drive failure rates

    Backblaze’s test isn’t actually an accurate indicator, since they put consumer-grade drives into their Storage Pods and ran them in an enterprise setting 24-7.



    Backblaze’s failure data as of April 2015


    Joel Hruska on February 2, 2016

    Almost a year ago, we covered Backblaze’s decision to phase out Seagate 3TB drives after seeing unacceptably high failure rates from one drive in particular, the ST3000DM001. Now, Seagate is facing a class action lawsuits brought on behalf of its customers who bought that particular model — and Blackblaze’s data is mentioned prominently in the suit.

    Seagate failure rates on the ST3000DM001 weren’t just far higher than other drives, they were also distributed differently. Normally, products follow what’s called a “bathtub curve” failure rate. That means an initial high period of failure as defective units die, followed by low overall failure rates until end-of-life, when hardware begins burning out. The Seagate drives in Backblaze’s storage pods did not exhibit this type of curve.


    Backblaze 3TB failure data as of 2015

    As of April 2015, just 6% of the original 3TB drives Backblaze purchased were still in service. This kind of data could be evidence of a significant problem with the drive family.

    The complaint

    The complaint notes that Seagate’s ST3000DM001 was the first 3TB drive to use three platters at 1TB each. This is in contrast to other 3TB drives then on the market, which used 4-5 platters to hit their 3TB densities.

    The company made a number of marketing claims that emphasized the reliability of the ST3000DM001, including the claim that the annualized failure rate of the drive is less than 1% and non-recoverable read failure rate is extremely small. These figures are both highly suspect when used to calculate overall drive reliability, but they’re the only information that a hard drive manufacturer will typically release.

    The class action suit leans heavily on the Backblaze report — and that’s where problems may arise.

    Does Backblaze’s data accurately capture the failure rate?

    The class action suit does offer the example of a plaintiff who purchased a drive, experienced an early failure, and then replaced it again with a warrantied drive that also failed. It also leans on the Backblaze information on the ST3000DM001 to support allegations that the drive family was broken.

    This argument will hinge on whether Backblaze’s use of the drives in a commercial storage pod constitutes a proper environment for representative testing. I suspect Seagate will argue it does not. Seagate manufactures enterprise-class drives that are specifically designed for reliable operations in challenging environments, and the company will likely claim that the reason Backblaze saw such high failure rates on the ST3000DM001 is because they operated the drive incorrectly.

    The fact that the Seagate drives failed in huge numbers while competitor drives did not could be evidence of a defect across the entire product line, or it could simply mean that the other consumer drives are over-engineered.
    http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/2...-failure-rates
    Última edição por 5ms; 03-02-2016 às 05:39.

  2. #2
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000

    Seagate sued over alleged `defective' drives

    Edward C. Baig | USA TODAY | February 2, 2016

    Hard drive maker Seagate Technologies is facing a class action law suit surrounding drives that plaintiffs allege “were defective and failed prematurely at spectacularly – and in many respects unprecedentedly – high rates.” The case was filed Monday at the U.S. District Court in Northern California.

    The suit specifically calls out the Seagate Barracuda 3TB Hard Disk Drive and the Seagate Backup Plus 3TB External Hard Disk Drive models. The former was marketed “as an engineering triumph and a `major milestone for the hard drive industry’ and `as having a `host of refined technologies to further boost performance’” which the plaintiffs allege wasn’t so.

    To bolster their claims, the complainents point to data from the online backup provider Backblaze, which reported that in “terms of raw percentages, approximately 32% of the (drives in question) deployed in 2012 failed by early 2015,” and that “only 68%... that were deployed in 2012 were operational after three years, well below Backblaze’s overall drive survival rate of 80% after four years."

    The suit also mentions more than 700 negative reviews for Barracuda on the Newegg.com website.

    On its own website, the Hagens Berman and Sheller law firm handling the suit is inviting consumers who purchased one of the drives in question to fill out forms to see if they, “may be entitled to damages including replacement costs and damages from loss of data and data recovery expenses.”

    In a statement mailed to USA TODAY, Seagate said it “has received a copy of the complaint but has not yet been served. Seagate is reviewing the complaint and will respond to it in due course.”
    http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/c...ives/79714384/

  3. #3
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000

    Lawsuit cites high failure rates and negative consumer reviews

    Jared Newman | PCWorld | Feb 2, 2016
    ...

    The story behind the story: As we’ve noted in the past, Backblaze’s data may not represent the average consumer experience. The company puts its drives through rigorous use, which may in turn put greater wear on drives that are designed to spin down and save power when they’re not needed. That’s not to say Seagate isn’t at fault, but the case isn’t so cut-and-dry given the many variables that can factor into hard drive failure.

    ...

    http://www.pcworld.com/article/30289...ure-rates.html

  4. #4
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000

    PR


    Consumers File National Class-Action Lawsuit Against Seagate for Defective Hard Drives

    02/01/2016

    Law firm representing purchasers of certain Seagate 3TB Hard Disk Drives

    Consumers today filed a national class-action lawsuit against Seagate Technologies (NASDAQ: STX), claiming the data storage company sold hard drives that routinely failed at exceptionally high rates, leaving consumers with broken hardware and significant loss of data, according to Hagens Berman and Sheller P.C., two firms representing the affected consumers. The lawsuit, filed on Feb. 2, 2016 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, states that consumers have lost massive amounts of data unexpectedly, as Seagate’s hard drives failed to live up to the advertised promises, violating federal consumer laws and Seagate’s own warranties after delivering faulty replacement hard drives.

    “Seagate promised purchasers reliable hard drives that would safeguard their important documents and cherished photos, but consumers report that these Seagate hard drives fail sometimes just days after their first use,” said Steve Berman, managing partner of Hagens Berman. “These hard drives failed to deliver on Seagate’s promises, and replacements from Seagate were just as defective, amounting to loss of data and wasted money for thousands of purchasers – something we believe to be direct violation of federal consumer-rights laws.”

    If you purchased Seagate’s Barracuda 3TB Hard Disk Drive or Backup Plus 3TB External Hard Disk Drive, you may be entitled to damages including replacement costs and damages from loss of data and data recovery expenses. Contact Hagens Berman’s legal team about the class-action lawsuit against Seagate.

    Berman added, “Plain and simple, consumers paid for a product that they did not receive, and we intend to fight for their rights to receive payback from Seagate.”

    The complaint states that these particular hard drives were marketed as innovative, fast, powerful, reliable, dependable, and having extremely low failure rates, when in reality, the failure rate of the drives was substantially higher than advertised. Consumers report them failing at an unprecedented rate – sometimes even days after their first use, according to the suit and reports published by Backblaze, a data backup company.

    According to the firm’s investigation, Seagate promised purchasers that it would replace the failed hard drives, but replacements were also defective and failed at extremely high rates, leaving Seagate’s warranty promise unfulfilled, and consumers without working hard drives.

    The suit’s named plaintiff suffered a complete unexpected failure and loss of data when his Backup Plus hard drive unexpectedly crashed, causing him to lose irreplaceable photos and documents. Less than a year after the plaintiff received the replacement drive from Seagate, it too failed, rendering it useless.

    Find out more about the Seagate lawsuit.
    # # #
    About Hagens Berman
    Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP is a consumer-rights class-action law firm with offices in 10 cities. The firm has been named to the National Law Journal’s Plaintiffs’ Hot List eight times. More about the law firm and its successes can be found at www.hbsslaw.com. Follow the firm for updates and news at @ClassActionLaw.
    https://www.hbsslaw.com/cases/seagat...ve-hard-drives

  5. #5
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    15,000
    Dave

    I have 4 of the Seagate 3tb drives. Two were returned under warranty after dying in less than a year. Right now, 3 of the 4 are dead (including the replacements). No longer under warranty. The 4th is on it's last leg.

    The warranty return process was really easy, but now they're out of warranty.
    https://vpsboard.com/topic/8480-seag...failure-rates/

Permissões de Postagem

  • Você não pode iniciar novos tópicos
  • Você não pode enviar respostas
  • Você não pode enviar anexos
  • Você não pode editar suas mensagens
  •