🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 21 May 1998 07:23:40 GMT, E.R.J...@ET.TUDelft.NL (Edwin Rots)
wrote:
>On Wed, 20 May 1998 19:46:05 GMT, bah...@mail.telepac.pt (Nuno Neves)
>wrote:
>>On Sun, 17 May 1998 05:35:02 -0700, Steve <st...@rcs.com> wrote:
>>>gnha...@usenet.com wrote:
 
>>>> Lots of rumors on the premature failure of these drives and of the poor after-sales service. Anyone with an experience to share ?
>>>> Please Post
>>>
>>>Spam!  Don't you people see how many newsgroups this
>>>  . . .
>>
>> I have some doubts that it's just spam. 
>>  . . .
>
>Well, OK but the odd harddisk failing is something every manufacturer
>has to deal with.  This is _definitely_ not limited to Quantum.
>
>> And I'm still waiting for a replacement drive. It sure is taking a
>>long time. This was probably the last Quantum I bought and probably 
>>the last drive I bought from this importer.

Don't know Edwin, but it does appear to me that Quantum is currently having
more problems with reliability than the other manufacturers.  Additionally,
they are having so many returns that their support is slow.  At least, to
their credit, they do work to correct problems.  My experience (besides
Quantum) has been with:  Seagate (OK), Maxtor (mixed - failures but
corrected by in-warrantee exchange), Hewlett-Packard (poor - but they no
longer manufacture HD's), Western Digital (OK), Digital (OK), Conner (poor
- but they don't market under that name any more, at least that I have
seen), and Fujitsu (OK).  The sampling of drives I have been exposed to in
the last few years is admittedly too few to define a trend, however it is
sufficient to hint at one.  It definitely guides me when I decide to
purchase a new one.  Therefore for my personal use, I rank them as follows:
(1)  Western Digital
(2)  Seagate
(3)  Quantum
(4)  Maxtor
(5)  Digital
(6)  Fujitsu
(7)  Conner
(8)  H-P
Digital would be ranked much higher if they were not so expensive.  Fujitsu
is ranked low because I don't have enough experience with their hardware to
have great confidence yet.  Quantum and Maxtor are where they are because
despite very good customer support, I did lose time and data due to their
premature failures.

Several of my systems run 24 hours hosting a multi-node BBS.  I have six
systems in all with 20 hard drives, using a mix of IDE and SCSI over a 100
Base-T net.  My parts bin contains 10 older HD's which have been retired
because they are too small and slow by today's standards.  They include a
Quantum, two Seagates, four Maxtors and four WDs - all performed a hard
drive lifetime of flawless service.

Wf