Juan Martin Balam Peraza

Comentado en México el 7 de marzo de 2025

Se mueve, si tu intención es usar el touch del ipad mientras trabajas, tal vez no sea la mejor idea, se mueve el iPad.He optado por ponerle cinta y kola loka para que sea más resistente, también le puse un plástico para reforzarlo. Y así ya me siento a gusto trabajando.

D

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 8 de enero de 2025

I bought this drive on Saturday, September 14, 2024. Monday, January 6, 2025, a bunch of the files on my server were gone. After investigation I find my newest hard drive isn't showing in bios, and emitting the click of death. Make certain you don't trust your data to these drives, because at least in my case, it had a lifespan of 115 days. According to my monitoring software, it went from zero errors to just not responding. No warning.I'm really upset. I'm never getting my data back. That's the true cost of trusting cheap drives.

D

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 8 de enero de 2025

I bought this drive on Saturday, September 14, 2024. Monday, January 6, 2025, a bunch of the files on my server were gone. After investigation I find my newest hard drive isn't showing in bios, and emitting the click of death. Make certain you don't trust your data to these drives, because at least in my case, it had a lifespan of 115 days. According to my monitoring software, it went from zero errors to just not responding. No warning.I'm really upset. I'm never getting my data back. That's the true cost of trusting cheap drives.

D

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 8 de enero de 2025

I bought this drive on Saturday, September 14, 2024. Monday, January 6, 2025, a bunch of the files on my server were gone. After investigation I find my newest hard drive isn't showing in bios, and emitting the click of death. Make certain you don't trust your data to these drives, because at least in my case, it had a lifespan of 115 days. According to my monitoring software, it went from zero errors to just not responding. No warning.I'm really upset. I'm never getting my data back. That's the true cost of trusting cheap drives.

D

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 8 de enero de 2025

I bought this drive on Saturday, September 14, 2024. Monday, January 6, 2025, a bunch of the files on my server were gone. After investigation I find my newest hard drive isn't showing in bios, and emitting the click of death. Make certain you don't trust your data to these drives, because at least in my case, it had a lifespan of 115 days. According to my monitoring software, it went from zero errors to just not responding. No warning.I'm really upset. I'm never getting my data back. That's the true cost of trusting cheap drives.

D

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 8 de enero de 2025

I bought this drive on Saturday, September 14, 2024. Monday, January 6, 2025, a bunch of the files on my server were gone. After investigation I find my newest hard drive isn't showing in bios, and emitting the click of death. Make certain you don't trust your data to these drives, because at least in my case, it had a lifespan of 115 days. According to my monitoring software, it went from zero errors to just not responding. No warning.I'm really upset. I'm never getting my data back. That's the true cost of trusting cheap drives.

D

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 8 de enero de 2025

I bought this drive on Saturday, September 14, 2024. Monday, January 6, 2025, a bunch of the files on my server were gone. After investigation I find my newest hard drive isn't showing in bios, and emitting the click of death. Make certain you don't trust your data to these drives, because at least in my case, it had a lifespan of 115 days. According to my monitoring software, it went from zero errors to just not responding. No warning.I'm really upset. I'm never getting my data back. That's the true cost of trusting cheap drives.

D

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 8 de enero de 2025

I bought this drive on Saturday, September 14, 2024. Monday, January 6, 2025, a bunch of the files on my server were gone. After investigation I find my newest hard drive isn't showing in bios, and emitting the click of death. Make certain you don't trust your data to these drives, because at least in my case, it had a lifespan of 115 days. According to my monitoring software, it went from zero errors to just not responding. No warning.I'm really upset. I'm never getting my data back. That's the true cost of trusting cheap drives.

D

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 8 de enero de 2025

I bought this drive on Saturday, September 14, 2024. Monday, January 6, 2025, a bunch of the files on my server were gone. After investigation I find my newest hard drive isn't showing in bios, and emitting the click of death. Make certain you don't trust your data to these drives, because at least in my case, it had a lifespan of 115 days. According to my monitoring software, it went from zero errors to just not responding. No warning.I'm really upset. I'm never getting my data back. That's the true cost of trusting cheap drives.

Army Navy Guns

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 2 de agosto de 2024

A very good price for a new internal hard drive.

Army Navy Guns

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 2 de agosto de 2024

A very good price for a new internal hard drive.

Army Navy Guns

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 2 de agosto de 2024

A very good price for a new internal hard drive.

Army Navy Guns

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 2 de agosto de 2024

A very good price for a new internal hard drive.

Army Navy Guns

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 2 de agosto de 2024

A very good price for a new internal hard drive.

Army Navy Guns

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 2 de agosto de 2024

A very good price for a new internal hard drive.

Army Navy Guns

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 2 de agosto de 2024

A very good price for a new internal hard drive.

Army Navy Guns

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 2 de agosto de 2024

A very good price for a new internal hard drive.

buggy

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 10 de julio de 2024

Recognized by the disk manager. Appropriate noise level. No complaints so far after a month of use.

buggy

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 10 de julio de 2024

Recognized by the disk manager. Appropriate noise level. No complaints so far after a month of use.

buggy

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 10 de julio de 2024

Recognized by the disk manager. Appropriate noise level. No complaints so far after a month of use.

buggy

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 10 de julio de 2024

Recognized by the disk manager. Appropriate noise level. No complaints so far after a month of use.

buggy

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 10 de julio de 2024

Recognized by the disk manager. Appropriate noise level. No complaints so far after a month of use.

buggy

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 10 de julio de 2024

Recognized by the disk manager. Appropriate noise level. No complaints so far after a month of use.

buggy

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 10 de julio de 2024

Recognized by the disk manager. Appropriate noise level. No complaints so far after a month of use.

buggy

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 10 de julio de 2024

Recognized by the disk manager. Appropriate noise level. No complaints so far after a month of use.

Shlomo

Comentado en México el 24 de junio de 2024

Te permite ver el celular es de buena calidad durable, lo recomiendo 100%

Susana Tánori

Comentado en México el 6 de diciembre de 2024

Un buen soporte, práctico, liviano y portátil

Oswaldo H.

Comentado en México el 12 de diciembre de 2024

Sirve perfecto para lo que se requiere, sostiene bien el celular pero hubiera preferido que estuviera más macizo/rígido en las bisagras ya que no puedes usar tu cel estando en el soporte porque la presión de tu dedo (al tocar la pantalla) hace que la parte donde se pone el cel se mueva fácilmente

John Smith

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 7 de enero de 2024

I've had a pair of these running in a NAS as backup for about 2 years so far, no significant issues - so I bought another, and then 6 more 40 days after that one.Of the initial 2, only one of them has any reallocated sectors at all. 13 total, over a 2 year lifespan under regular use. Very decent. As of 11AM EST today, all of these drives just completed a full-disk dd with no issues whatsoever (writing 1s) - and the drive with the 13 bad sectors has not found any more. Time will tell.Load_Cycle_Count increment is the only problem I have with these drives, and this is not an MDD problem.For the uninitiated, these are Seagate drives underwater. Seagate implements some proprietary power-saving - they are NOT compatible with APM (IE: via hdparm). So telling these drives to stop parking the heads via normal methods (ie: hdparm -B 255) will not work, which I did not notice for 2 years.As you can see, /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are the drives which were initially purchased. Over a 2 year lifespan, the load cycle count of /dev/sda and /dev/sdf is fairly extreme - and there are 11526 Load_Cycle increments in just 40 days for /dev/sdh:# for i in {a..i}; do echo /dev/sd$i && smartctl -a /dev/sd$i | grep Load_Cycle; done/dev/sda193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 001 001 000 Old_age Always - 206445/dev/sdb193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdc193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 11/dev/sdd193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 13/dev/sde193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdf193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 013 013 000 Old_age Always - 175988/dev/sdg193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdh193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 095 095 000 Old_age Always - 11526/dev/sdi193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7Power-on hours for /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are 17289.Power-on hours for /dev/sdh is 983.Power-on hours for /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd is 22.Power-on hours for the remaining 4 is 16.So, obviously, this is completely insane. The drive will wear out long before the actual medium degrades at this rate.To stop this nonsense: Explicitly disable idle_b state on the drive via SeaChest (Windows) or openSeaChest (Linux, find it on GitHub) to stop the drives from parking the heads so aggressively: # openSeaChest_PowerControl -d all --idle_b disableArguments in favor of excessive head parking can be made, and I'm sure some people are very convinced by them.These people are wrong.If you're shoving a bunch of these in a rack and not jumping up and down while writing data to them, then there's no reason to park your heads this often.I will be buying more of these.

John Smith

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 7 de enero de 2024

I've had a pair of these running in a NAS as backup for about 2 years so far, no significant issues - so I bought another, and then 6 more 40 days after that one.Of the initial 2, only one of them has any reallocated sectors at all. 13 total, over a 2 year lifespan under regular use. Very decent. As of 11AM EST today, all of these drives just completed a full-disk dd with no issues whatsoever (writing 1s) - and the drive with the 13 bad sectors has not found any more. Time will tell.Load_Cycle_Count increment is the only problem I have with these drives, and this is not an MDD problem.For the uninitiated, these are Seagate drives underwater. Seagate implements some proprietary power-saving - they are NOT compatible with APM (IE: via hdparm). So telling these drives to stop parking the heads via normal methods (ie: hdparm -B 255) will not work, which I did not notice for 2 years.As you can see, /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are the drives which were initially purchased. Over a 2 year lifespan, the load cycle count of /dev/sda and /dev/sdf is fairly extreme - and there are 11526 Load_Cycle increments in just 40 days for /dev/sdh:# for i in {a..i}; do echo /dev/sd$i && smartctl -a /dev/sd$i | grep Load_Cycle; done/dev/sda193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 001 001 000 Old_age Always - 206445/dev/sdb193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdc193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 11/dev/sdd193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 13/dev/sde193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdf193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 013 013 000 Old_age Always - 175988/dev/sdg193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdh193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 095 095 000 Old_age Always - 11526/dev/sdi193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7Power-on hours for /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are 17289.Power-on hours for /dev/sdh is 983.Power-on hours for /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd is 22.Power-on hours for the remaining 4 is 16.So, obviously, this is completely insane. The drive will wear out long before the actual medium degrades at this rate.To stop this nonsense: Explicitly disable idle_b state on the drive via SeaChest (Windows) or openSeaChest (Linux, find it on GitHub) to stop the drives from parking the heads so aggressively: # openSeaChest_PowerControl -d all --idle_b disableArguments in favor of excessive head parking can be made, and I'm sure some people are very convinced by them.These people are wrong.If you're shoving a bunch of these in a rack and not jumping up and down while writing data to them, then there's no reason to park your heads this often.I will be buying more of these.

John Smith

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 7 de enero de 2024

I've had a pair of these running in a NAS as backup for about 2 years so far, no significant issues - so I bought another, and then 6 more 40 days after that one.Of the initial 2, only one of them has any reallocated sectors at all. 13 total, over a 2 year lifespan under regular use. Very decent. As of 11AM EST today, all of these drives just completed a full-disk dd with no issues whatsoever (writing 1s) - and the drive with the 13 bad sectors has not found any more. Time will tell.Load_Cycle_Count increment is the only problem I have with these drives, and this is not an MDD problem.For the uninitiated, these are Seagate drives underwater. Seagate implements some proprietary power-saving - they are NOT compatible with APM (IE: via hdparm). So telling these drives to stop parking the heads via normal methods (ie: hdparm -B 255) will not work, which I did not notice for 2 years.As you can see, /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are the drives which were initially purchased. Over a 2 year lifespan, the load cycle count of /dev/sda and /dev/sdf is fairly extreme - and there are 11526 Load_Cycle increments in just 40 days for /dev/sdh:# for i in {a..i}; do echo /dev/sd$i && smartctl -a /dev/sd$i | grep Load_Cycle; done/dev/sda193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 001 001 000 Old_age Always - 206445/dev/sdb193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdc193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 11/dev/sdd193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 13/dev/sde193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdf193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 013 013 000 Old_age Always - 175988/dev/sdg193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdh193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 095 095 000 Old_age Always - 11526/dev/sdi193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7Power-on hours for /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are 17289.Power-on hours for /dev/sdh is 983.Power-on hours for /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd is 22.Power-on hours for the remaining 4 is 16.So, obviously, this is completely insane. The drive will wear out long before the actual medium degrades at this rate.To stop this nonsense: Explicitly disable idle_b state on the drive via SeaChest (Windows) or openSeaChest (Linux, find it on GitHub) to stop the drives from parking the heads so aggressively: # openSeaChest_PowerControl -d all --idle_b disableArguments in favor of excessive head parking can be made, and I'm sure some people are very convinced by them.These people are wrong.If you're shoving a bunch of these in a rack and not jumping up and down while writing data to them, then there's no reason to park your heads this often.I will be buying more of these.

John Smith

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 7 de enero de 2024

I've had a pair of these running in a NAS as backup for about 2 years so far, no significant issues - so I bought another, and then 6 more 40 days after that one.Of the initial 2, only one of them has any reallocated sectors at all. 13 total, over a 2 year lifespan under regular use. Very decent. As of 11AM EST today, all of these drives just completed a full-disk dd with no issues whatsoever (writing 1s) - and the drive with the 13 bad sectors has not found any more. Time will tell.Load_Cycle_Count increment is the only problem I have with these drives, and this is not an MDD problem.For the uninitiated, these are Seagate drives underwater. Seagate implements some proprietary power-saving - they are NOT compatible with APM (IE: via hdparm). So telling these drives to stop parking the heads via normal methods (ie: hdparm -B 255) will not work, which I did not notice for 2 years.As you can see, /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are the drives which were initially purchased. Over a 2 year lifespan, the load cycle count of /dev/sda and /dev/sdf is fairly extreme - and there are 11526 Load_Cycle increments in just 40 days for /dev/sdh:# for i in {a..i}; do echo /dev/sd$i && smartctl -a /dev/sd$i | grep Load_Cycle; done/dev/sda193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 001 001 000 Old_age Always - 206445/dev/sdb193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdc193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 11/dev/sdd193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 13/dev/sde193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdf193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 013 013 000 Old_age Always - 175988/dev/sdg193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdh193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 095 095 000 Old_age Always - 11526/dev/sdi193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7Power-on hours for /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are 17289.Power-on hours for /dev/sdh is 983.Power-on hours for /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd is 22.Power-on hours for the remaining 4 is 16.So, obviously, this is completely insane. The drive will wear out long before the actual medium degrades at this rate.To stop this nonsense: Explicitly disable idle_b state on the drive via SeaChest (Windows) or openSeaChest (Linux, find it on GitHub) to stop the drives from parking the heads so aggressively: # openSeaChest_PowerControl -d all --idle_b disableArguments in favor of excessive head parking can be made, and I'm sure some people are very convinced by them.These people are wrong.If you're shoving a bunch of these in a rack and not jumping up and down while writing data to them, then there's no reason to park your heads this often.I will be buying more of these.

John Smith

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 7 de enero de 2024

I've had a pair of these running in a NAS as backup for about 2 years so far, no significant issues - so I bought another, and then 6 more 40 days after that one.Of the initial 2, only one of them has any reallocated sectors at all. 13 total, over a 2 year lifespan under regular use. Very decent. As of 11AM EST today, all of these drives just completed a full-disk dd with no issues whatsoever (writing 1s) - and the drive with the 13 bad sectors has not found any more. Time will tell.Load_Cycle_Count increment is the only problem I have with these drives, and this is not an MDD problem.For the uninitiated, these are Seagate drives underwater. Seagate implements some proprietary power-saving - they are NOT compatible with APM (IE: via hdparm). So telling these drives to stop parking the heads via normal methods (ie: hdparm -B 255) will not work, which I did not notice for 2 years.As you can see, /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are the drives which were initially purchased. Over a 2 year lifespan, the load cycle count of /dev/sda and /dev/sdf is fairly extreme - and there are 11526 Load_Cycle increments in just 40 days for /dev/sdh:# for i in {a..i}; do echo /dev/sd$i && smartctl -a /dev/sd$i | grep Load_Cycle; done/dev/sda193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 001 001 000 Old_age Always - 206445/dev/sdb193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdc193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 11/dev/sdd193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 13/dev/sde193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdf193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 013 013 000 Old_age Always - 175988/dev/sdg193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdh193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 095 095 000 Old_age Always - 11526/dev/sdi193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7Power-on hours for /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are 17289.Power-on hours for /dev/sdh is 983.Power-on hours for /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd is 22.Power-on hours for the remaining 4 is 16.So, obviously, this is completely insane. The drive will wear out long before the actual medium degrades at this rate.To stop this nonsense: Explicitly disable idle_b state on the drive via SeaChest (Windows) or openSeaChest (Linux, find it on GitHub) to stop the drives from parking the heads so aggressively: # openSeaChest_PowerControl -d all --idle_b disableArguments in favor of excessive head parking can be made, and I'm sure some people are very convinced by them.These people are wrong.If you're shoving a bunch of these in a rack and not jumping up and down while writing data to them, then there's no reason to park your heads this often.I will be buying more of these.

John Smith

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 7 de enero de 2024

I've had a pair of these running in a NAS as backup for about 2 years so far, no significant issues - so I bought another, and then 6 more 40 days after that one.Of the initial 2, only one of them has any reallocated sectors at all. 13 total, over a 2 year lifespan under regular use. Very decent. As of 11AM EST today, all of these drives just completed a full-disk dd with no issues whatsoever (writing 1s) - and the drive with the 13 bad sectors has not found any more. Time will tell.Load_Cycle_Count increment is the only problem I have with these drives, and this is not an MDD problem.For the uninitiated, these are Seagate drives underwater. Seagate implements some proprietary power-saving - they are NOT compatible with APM (IE: via hdparm). So telling these drives to stop parking the heads via normal methods (ie: hdparm -B 255) will not work, which I did not notice for 2 years.As you can see, /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are the drives which were initially purchased. Over a 2 year lifespan, the load cycle count of /dev/sda and /dev/sdf is fairly extreme - and there are 11526 Load_Cycle increments in just 40 days for /dev/sdh:# for i in {a..i}; do echo /dev/sd$i && smartctl -a /dev/sd$i | grep Load_Cycle; done/dev/sda193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 001 001 000 Old_age Always - 206445/dev/sdb193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdc193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 11/dev/sdd193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 13/dev/sde193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdf193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 013 013 000 Old_age Always - 175988/dev/sdg193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdh193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 095 095 000 Old_age Always - 11526/dev/sdi193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7Power-on hours for /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are 17289.Power-on hours for /dev/sdh is 983.Power-on hours for /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd is 22.Power-on hours for the remaining 4 is 16.So, obviously, this is completely insane. The drive will wear out long before the actual medium degrades at this rate.To stop this nonsense: Explicitly disable idle_b state on the drive via SeaChest (Windows) or openSeaChest (Linux, find it on GitHub) to stop the drives from parking the heads so aggressively: # openSeaChest_PowerControl -d all --idle_b disableArguments in favor of excessive head parking can be made, and I'm sure some people are very convinced by them.These people are wrong.If you're shoving a bunch of these in a rack and not jumping up and down while writing data to them, then there's no reason to park your heads this often.I will be buying more of these.

John Smith

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 7 de enero de 2024

I've had a pair of these running in a NAS as backup for about 2 years so far, no significant issues - so I bought another, and then 6 more 40 days after that one.Of the initial 2, only one of them has any reallocated sectors at all. 13 total, over a 2 year lifespan under regular use. Very decent. As of 11AM EST today, all of these drives just completed a full-disk dd with no issues whatsoever (writing 1s) - and the drive with the 13 bad sectors has not found any more. Time will tell.Load_Cycle_Count increment is the only problem I have with these drives, and this is not an MDD problem.For the uninitiated, these are Seagate drives underwater. Seagate implements some proprietary power-saving - they are NOT compatible with APM (IE: via hdparm). So telling these drives to stop parking the heads via normal methods (ie: hdparm -B 255) will not work, which I did not notice for 2 years.As you can see, /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are the drives which were initially purchased. Over a 2 year lifespan, the load cycle count of /dev/sda and /dev/sdf is fairly extreme - and there are 11526 Load_Cycle increments in just 40 days for /dev/sdh:# for i in {a..i}; do echo /dev/sd$i && smartctl -a /dev/sd$i | grep Load_Cycle; done/dev/sda193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 001 001 000 Old_age Always - 206445/dev/sdb193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdc193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 11/dev/sdd193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 13/dev/sde193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdf193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 013 013 000 Old_age Always - 175988/dev/sdg193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdh193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 095 095 000 Old_age Always - 11526/dev/sdi193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7Power-on hours for /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are 17289.Power-on hours for /dev/sdh is 983.Power-on hours for /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd is 22.Power-on hours for the remaining 4 is 16.So, obviously, this is completely insane. The drive will wear out long before the actual medium degrades at this rate.To stop this nonsense: Explicitly disable idle_b state on the drive via SeaChest (Windows) or openSeaChest (Linux, find it on GitHub) to stop the drives from parking the heads so aggressively: # openSeaChest_PowerControl -d all --idle_b disableArguments in favor of excessive head parking can be made, and I'm sure some people are very convinced by them.These people are wrong.If you're shoving a bunch of these in a rack and not jumping up and down while writing data to them, then there's no reason to park your heads this often.I will be buying more of these.

John Smith

Comentado en los Estados Unidos el 7 de enero de 2024

I've had a pair of these running in a NAS as backup for about 2 years so far, no significant issues - so I bought another, and then 6 more 40 days after that one.Of the initial 2, only one of them has any reallocated sectors at all. 13 total, over a 2 year lifespan under regular use. Very decent. As of 11AM EST today, all of these drives just completed a full-disk dd with no issues whatsoever (writing 1s) - and the drive with the 13 bad sectors has not found any more. Time will tell.Load_Cycle_Count increment is the only problem I have with these drives, and this is not an MDD problem.For the uninitiated, these are Seagate drives underwater. Seagate implements some proprietary power-saving - they are NOT compatible with APM (IE: via hdparm). So telling these drives to stop parking the heads via normal methods (ie: hdparm -B 255) will not work, which I did not notice for 2 years.As you can see, /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are the drives which were initially purchased. Over a 2 year lifespan, the load cycle count of /dev/sda and /dev/sdf is fairly extreme - and there are 11526 Load_Cycle increments in just 40 days for /dev/sdh:# for i in {a..i}; do echo /dev/sd$i && smartctl -a /dev/sd$i | grep Load_Cycle; done/dev/sda193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 001 001 000 Old_age Always - 206445/dev/sdb193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdc193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 11/dev/sdd193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 13/dev/sde193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdf193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 013 013 000 Old_age Always - 175988/dev/sdg193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7/dev/sdh193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 095 095 000 Old_age Always - 11526/dev/sdi193 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0032 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 7Power-on hours for /dev/sda and /dev/sdf are 17289.Power-on hours for /dev/sdh is 983.Power-on hours for /dev/sdc and /dev/sdd is 22.Power-on hours for the remaining 4 is 16.So, obviously, this is completely insane. The drive will wear out long before the actual medium degrades at this rate.To stop this nonsense: Explicitly disable idle_b state on the drive via SeaChest (Windows) or openSeaChest (Linux, find it on GitHub) to stop the drives from parking the heads so aggressively: # openSeaChest_PowerControl -d all --idle_b disableArguments in favor of excessive head parking can be made, and I'm sure some people are very convinced by them.These people are wrong.If you're shoving a bunch of these in a rack and not jumping up and down while writing data to them, then there's no reason to park your heads this often.I will be buying more of these.

Margarita Morales Cervantes

Comentado en México el 21 de junio de 2023

Accesorio perfecto en estos tiempos

Mario Noh

Comentado en México el 3 de mayo de 2023

Me agrado el diseño Y materiales con los que está hecho

jorge v.

Comentado en México el 28 de febrero de 2023

Cumple con lo ofrecido por el vendedor

Mike A.