Comments Locked

19 Comments

Back to Article

  • creed3020 - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    "1.75 GB per platter,"

    Should be TB. I don't want to go back to that era of density :)
  • Chaitanya - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    Nice catch.
  • tsk2k - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    What are the benefits of HAMR?
  • saratoga4 - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    It encodes data more densely than is possible without heating.
  • DanNeely - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    Higher data densities mainly. By using a magnetic material that can only change state when heated its possible to use smaller and more densely packed bits on the platter without them fatally interfering with each other. The biggest catch is that needing a laser to zap the platter with every write increases complexity and cost. If prices for these can be made low enough for consumer/prosumer use instead of just data centers (like helium filled drives) is currently unknown.
  • bigboxes - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    '35 million RMA'd HDDs"

    FIFY
  • Samus - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    I see we have a die-hard Seagate fan on the board... ;)
  • Alexvrb - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    They all had lemons in their lineup from time to time (NOT counting drives shipped via DHL!) but Seagate definitely tops my list for "most likely to die violently". Maxtor wasn't great either so when they got absorbed by Seagate I just nodded and said "makes perfect sense". Obviously that's just my opinion.

    My favorite HDDs for reliability probably were Fujitsu and Samsung, back before Seagate absorbed Samsung's HDD business and Toshiba snapped up Fujitsu's. IBM's were good except for one or two series of "Deathstars", the rest of the DeskStar lineup was pretty good (including under Hitachi and perhaps now under WD). WD was always kind of in the middle of the pack, at least back a decade ago.

    WD gradually crept up the list though and I prefer a WD/HGST drive for media storage... as long as it isn't one of the junky Blue/Green entry-level drives. Toshiba is good too when price is competitive - might end up with an N300 for my next storage drive. Nowadays all that we have left as far as manufacturers go is WD, Toshiba, and Seagate.
  • Arbie - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    Another reason sales have gone up is that Seagate no longer mentions the shingled tech in their promotional materials, at least not for external desktop drives. It isn't easy to discover whether they're SMR or PMR, even if you know enough to question that.

    So I think a lot of people are buying these SMR drives unawares, and wouldn't buy them if they knew. Good work, Seagate.
  • Slangefar - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    2 TB on a 7 mm 2.5" with PMR is nice. Why have Seagate not developed higher capacity 2.5" with PMR around 9.5 and 15 mm?
  • takeshi7 - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    They do. They have 3, 4 and 5 TB 2.5" drives...
  • Slangefar - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    No, they SMR and not PMR as mentioned.
  • takeshi7 - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    All modern drives are PMR. Even SMR drives are PMR.
  • Nottheface - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    In case anyone is wondering how long this has been in development, this started at the end of 2001. So 17 years from start to shipped product (and they haven't shipped yet).
  • Samus - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    The real missed opportunities are in the 2.5" nearline segment. Most of the servers I deal with (especially 2U's) are all 2.5" SATA/SAS and there are many data centers that have adopted the density benefits of 2.5" drives. The problem is it seemed to be the flavor of the day a few years ago, until Helium and SMR hit the market and only recently has SMR trickled down to the 2.5" form factor. This has left the 2.5" segment stale, when in reality, these drives only need to be 1/4th the capacity to be competitive on footprint, and they are...mostly. Mostly, because only are consumer 2.5" drives available in 4TB capacity. The largest enterprise SAS 2.5" nearline drive shipping is 1.8TB :\

    The consumer market can obviously benefit from 2.5" drives as well. Obviously I think laptops are a clear winner, although its undesirable to rely on a hard disk as the sole storage device for any laptop (m2 SSD + HDD is more ideal) but for portable storage, 3.5" drives are less reliable\don't travel well, require more power/don't run off bus power, are heavier and bulkier, and generally offer little performance advantage over a comparable 2.5" drive.
  • boozed - Wednesday, May 3, 2017 - link

    I'm not sure two "th"s are necessary.
  • boeush - Thursday, May 4, 2017 - link

    Or conversely, more "th"s would be an improvement, perhaps:

    Seagate Shippeth 35th Millionth SMR HDD, Confirmeth HAMR-Based Drives in Late 2018th
  • helvete - Tuesday, July 18, 2017 - link

    lol
  • Beaver M. - Thursday, May 4, 2017 - link

    So, can we finally see substantial price drops then, after 6 years?
    Even my old 2 TB HDD is still as expensive today as back then...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now