Seagate Announces 16TB HDD • Hacker News Board

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#41

Post by djsumdog » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 7:29 PM UTC

eatbitseveryday wrote: post #32

dlevine wrote: post #22

I know that big disks are useful for a lot of people/applications. However, I topped out at 500GB about 10 years ago. That gives me plenty of headroom. Since then, I have gone from a 500GB HDD to a SSD, but my space usage hasn't really gone up. The largest disk I own is a 1TB disk in my Time Capsule (which I could probably stand to upgrade, but I don't feel like taking it apart). I think this is probably because I st…

Just from a camera perspective, RAW capture from digital cameras can eat up space over time. At ~60MiB per image on 24MP cameras and a usage rate of 2000 images each year, you consume ~120GiB of storage each year. Video and post-processing storage adds further. Cameras increase in resolution, better sensors, ...

Yea when I started shooting in RAW I became very thankful for these high capacity drives. It's still cheaper and easier just to deal with buying a pair of drives than using any type of online backup when talking about files at that size.

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#42

Post by sixothree » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 7:30 PM UTC

mkirklions wrote: post #20

Anyone have an opinion about Seagate? I had one of their HDD and it died on me within a year. Not sure if this was a 'one-off' or other people had issues with their quality. Similar issue with samsung on SSD.

Backblaze reports always have Seagate with significantly higher failure rates. I suspect they just RMA them all since failures don't actually affect them too badly.

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#43

Post by djsumdog » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 7:32 PM UTC

mkirklions wrote: post #20

Anyone have an opinion about Seagate? I had one of their HDD and it died on me within a year. Not sure if this was a 'one-off' or other people had issues with their quality. Similar issue with samsung on SSD.

I've had a drive from every major manufacturer fail at some point. Brands don't matter, backups do. Buy hard drives in pairs and put an item on your calendar to pop the other one in once a month, sync it, and put it back in a fire-resistant safe.

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#44

Post by unexpected » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 7:33 PM UTC

mkirklions wrote: post #20

Anyone have an opinion about Seagate? I had one of their HDD and it died on me within a year. Not sure if this was a 'one-off' or other people had issues with their quality. Similar issue with samsung on SSD.

In 2013, I ordered 6 x Seagate Barracuda drives (3 TB). By 2017, 5 of the 6 had failed. There was a famed "bad batch" that I think my drives were a part of, but I will never buy Seagate again.

I think Backblaze has the best public hard drive statistics available.

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#45

Post by pixl97 » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 7:34 PM UTC

projectramo wrote: post #14

pixl97 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NAND demand is insanely high. You aren't just building computer SSDs, you have phones, in particular, and hundreds of other devices that use it competing for the manufacturing capacity. Another issue with demand is IOPS. Enterprise is rarely limited by storage capacity, but instead by reliable operations per second. Pretty much every enterprise wants every SSD it can get at the right price point, which is much higher…

By that logic things should get more expensive, not cheaper, as the demand increases. To put it another way, why wouldn't someone undercut the current suppliers and sell at just above their marginal cost and take over the whole market.

Things do get more expensive as demand increases.

Have you not bought enterprise SSDs up until 6 months ago?

https://cdn.pcpartpicker.com/static/forever/images/trends/tr...

This is the average price of a 256GB SSD. In May 2017 they were just above $100. Soon after that demand pushed that near $175. Just recently that price has dropped as new processes have increased inventories.

> why wouldn't someone undercut the current suppliers

Why would you when all your production is sold out for the next six months?

You don't understand supply and demand curves at all, do you?

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#46

Post by eBombzor » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 7:38 PM UTC

mkirklions wrote: post #20

Anyone have an opinion about Seagate? I had one of their HDD and it died on me within a year. Not sure if this was a 'one-off' or other people had issues with their quality. Similar issue with samsung on SSD.

Same but the one I got from the RMA has been running for 5-6 years without any issues.

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#47

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 7:40 PM UTC

thrusong wrote: post #27

mkirklions wrote: post #20

Anyone have an opinion about Seagate? I had one of their HDD and it died on me within a year. Not sure if this was a 'one-off' or other people had issues with their quality. Similar issue with samsung on SSD.

I've used them exclusively for the past 10 years in my web servers and I couldn't be happier. I've had the occasional drive fail on me here and there, of course, but some of those 10-year-old drives are still humming along nicely.

[deleted]

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#48

Post by Thetawaves » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 7:43 PM UTC

combatentropy wrote: post #2

From the article: "In a world where SSDs have become more and more common, one might ask what the point of even developing newer and bigger HDDs is." Solid state drives still cost about 10 times more per gigabyte. I'm just a web developer, but a spinning-disk drive looks 100 times more complicated to me to manufacture. I know at the beginning that hard drives would be cheaper, simply because SSDs were newer, and ther…

An added complication is that pure silicon in the required quantities is not cheap.

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#49

Post by pezdeath » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 7:48 PM UTC

izzydata wrote: post #12

For general file storage spinning disk HDD are still better cost, but there is a decreasing need for general file storage for the average person. For most people one terabyte is more than enough and it may as well be an SSD that is also their boot drive. Personally I'd love to replace my multiple 2TB drives with 8TB drives if the price comes down a bit.

Games are the only reason most people will need more.

Most new AAA games are approaching 100GB each. And on the extreme end Gears of War 4 for example takes up over 250 GB.

Re: Seagate Announces 16TB HDD

#50

Post by penagwin » Wed, Dec 05, 2018, 7:49 PM UTC

izzydata wrote: post #12

For general file storage spinning disk HDD are still better cost, but there is a decreasing need for general file storage for the average person. For most people one terabyte is more than enough and it may as well be an SSD that is also their boot drive. Personally I'd love to replace my multiple 2TB drives with 8TB drives if the price comes down a bit.

I work at a computer resell/repair place and I beleive 9/10 customers would be fine with a 128GB SSD which can be had on amazon for 20$ ! Most people just watch youtube, netflix, some bills, maybe a few documents, etc.