If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Warranty Length Not Related To Drive Life?
Has anyone ever heard anyone claim that the length of a HD's warranty was
simply a marketing and price point decision by the mfg and the warranty length has nothing to do with expected drive life? Somewhere I think I remember someone making such a claim and a bunch of trolls tried unsuccessfully to shoot him down? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Reaugh" wrote in message ... Has anyone ever heard anyone claim that the length of a HD's warranty was simply a marketing and price point decision by the mfg and the warranty length has nothing to do with expected drive life? Somewhere I think I remember someone making such a claim and a bunch of trolls tried unsuccessfully to shoot him down? Well, AFAIK nothing physical changed in ATA drives when manufacturers a while ago decided to drop the warranty period from 3 years to 1. And I just read that Seagate is now going to *raise* that period to *5* years as an inducement to prospective buyers (something I'd certainly take into consideration: I deliberately chose a 3-year-warrantied drive last time I bought one). Even if manufacturers over time might be able to cut corners such that a drive would often fail in its second year without too much risk of first-year failures, it seems unlikely that the cost savings could make up for the resulting bad publicity. So I'd guess that drives should be in the bottom of their 'bathtub' curve for several years regardless of what the nominal warranty period is: unless they fail (even during that nominal period) at a fairly significant rate the savings that the manufacturer can realize by shortening it would seem unlikely to be large (though in such a cut-throat pricing environment the resulting price difference might noticeably affect sales, so if one does it, the rest may have to follow, and the same may be true for lengthening the period as Seagate is doing, since it would otherwise give them a unique selling point for very little price difference). Whether similar considerations apply to the terms of service (e.g., duty cycle) specified for the drive is less clear: there may be fairly noticeable savings in manufacturing a drive for light-desktop rather than server-style use, even leaving aside more obscure characteristics such as resistance to the need for re-seeking in environments subject to vibration. - bill |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill Todd" wrote in message ... "Ron Reaugh" wrote in message ... Has anyone ever heard anyone claim that the length of a HD's warranty was simply a marketing and price point decision by the mfg and the warranty length has nothing to do with expected drive life? Somewhere I think I remember someone making such a claim and a bunch of trolls tried unsuccessfully to shoot him down? As usual your pompous jibber below says little. The deal is that HD warranties were ALWAYS a marketing and price point decision and had little to do with expected HD life. Since the 1 year and 3 year warranty HDs ALREADY had an expected life of over 5 years. So in a pen stroke a company could change its HD warranty length and even retroactively without great exposure SINCE the drives were ALREADY going to last for 5 years anyway as I've always said. Seagate simply announced a modest cost change internally and externally effectively a modest price decrease, nothing more. Well, AFAIK nothing physical changed in ATA drives when manufacturers a while ago decided to drop the warranty period from 3 years to 1. And I just read that Seagate is now going to *raise* that period to *5* years as an inducement to prospective buyers (something I'd certainly take into consideration: I deliberately chose a 3-year-warrantied drive last time I bought one). Even if manufacturers over time might be able to cut corners such that a drive would often fail in its second year without too much risk of first-year failures, it seems unlikely that the cost savings could make up for the resulting bad publicity. So I'd guess that drives should be in the bottom of their 'bathtub' curve for several years regardless of what the nominal warranty period is: unless they fail (even during that nominal period) at a fairly significant rate the savings that the manufacturer can realize by shortening it would seem unlikely to be large (though in such a cut-throat pricing environment the resulting price difference might noticeably affect sales, so if one does it, the rest may have to follow, and the same may be true for lengthening the period as Seagate is doing, since it would otherwise give them a unique selling point for very little price difference). Whether similar considerations apply to the terms of service (e.g., duty cycle) specified for the drive is less clear: there may be fairly noticeable savings in manufacturing a drive for light-desktop rather than server-style use, even leaving aside more obscure characteristics such as resistance to the need for re-seeking in environments subject to vibration. - bill |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 19:11:02 GMT, "Ron Reaugh"
wrote: Has anyone ever heard anyone claim that the length of a HD's warranty was simply a marketing and price point decision by the mfg and the warranty length has nothing to do with expected drive life? Somewhere I think I remember someone making such a claim and a bunch of trolls tried unsuccessfully to shoot him down? What I do understand are that hard drive warranties are often at the time they are manufactured and not the date of purchase so if you bought a new hard drive today, has a manufactor date of July 20, 2003 and it breaks down, the manufactor may not take it even though you just bought it. Most current warranties are for one year and in my experience, properly manufactured hard drive should last at least a few years. Unfortunately they tended to build them as cheaply as possible so it's not unusual for hard drive to die horribly in just months or even weeks. I still have an old Seagate 20MB drive somewhere that is almost 20 years old and still works but Maxtor 120GB hard drive that I got new last year went south after only 3 months. A 200 GB Western Digital hard drive that refused to work properly even though I have 2 more of the same models working just fine in the same PC. -- To reply, replace digi.mon with tds.net |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
You've got issues. I thought the information was well laid out and
fairly intuitive. Everything is about price, but there's unquantifiable costs as well; like bad publicity when your drives barf in year 1. Even with a warranty I wouldn't buy that mfg again simply because it's a pain in my butt to restore all the data and get it back the way I had it. I will pay more money for a drive that doesn't barf even with a shorter warranty. So my guess is a mfg would make the drive as robust as possible without losing money. But like I said, some costs are not quantifiable. I would agree that warranty length isn't *all* about drive life but I'm sure it has something to do with it. An example is a Mecerdes Benz. The warranty has little to do with why people purchase the car, it's because of the reputation. However, if they made the warranty 1 year some people would likely consider another mfg. ~F On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 20:29:21 GMT, "Ron Reaugh" wrote: "Bill Todd" wrote in message ... "Ron Reaugh" wrote in message ... Has anyone ever heard anyone claim that the length of a HD's warranty was simply a marketing and price point decision by the mfg and the warranty length has nothing to do with expected drive life? Somewhere I think I remember someone making such a claim and a bunch of trolls tried unsuccessfully to shoot him down? As usual your pompous jibber below says little. The deal is that HD warranties were ALWAYS a marketing and price point decision and had little to do with expected HD life. Since the 1 year and 3 year warranty HDs ALREADY had an expected life of over 5 years. So in a pen stroke a company could change its HD warranty length and even retroactively without great exposure SINCE the drives were ALREADY going to last for 5 years anyway as I've always said. Seagate simply announced a modest cost change internally and externally effectively a modest price decrease, nothing more. Well, AFAIK nothing physical changed in ATA drives when manufacturers a while ago decided to drop the warranty period from 3 years to 1. And I just read that Seagate is now going to *raise* that period to *5* years as an inducement to prospective buyers (something I'd certainly take into consideration: I deliberately chose a 3-year-warrantied drive last time I bought one). Even if manufacturers over time might be able to cut corners such that a drive would often fail in its second year without too much risk of first-year failures, it seems unlikely that the cost savings could make up for the resulting bad publicity. So I'd guess that drives should be in the bottom of their 'bathtub' curve for several years regardless of what the nominal warranty period is: unless they fail (even during that nominal period) at a fairly significant rate the savings that the manufacturer can realize by shortening it would seem unlikely to be large (though in such a cut-throat pricing environment the resulting price difference might noticeably affect sales, so if one does it, the rest may have to follow, and the same may be true for lengthening the period as Seagate is doing, since it would otherwise give them a unique selling point for very little price difference). Whether similar considerations apply to the terms of service (e.g., duty cycle) specified for the drive is less clear: there may be fairly noticeable savings in manufacturing a drive for light-desktop rather than server-style use, even leaving aside more obscure characteristics such as resistance to the need for re-seeking in environments subject to vibration. - bill |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Heheh, the wacko troll has stepped up a tree on the psychopathic ladder.
Now he is Super Wacko. "Bill Todd" wrote in message ... "Ron Reaugh" wrote in message ... Has anyone ever heard anyone claim that the length of a HD's warranty was simply a marketing and price point decision by the mfg and the warranty length has nothing to do with expected drive life? Somewhere I think I remember someone making such a claim And now you know who that someone was. When it looks like a trap and sounds like a trap and smells like a trap, THEN IT USUALLY IS A TRAP. and a bunch of trolls tried unsuccessfully to shoot him down? And now you are part of that select group. Well, AFAIK nothing physical changed in ATA drives when manufacturers a while ago decided to drop the warranty period from 3 years to 1. And I just read that Seagate is now going to *raise* that period to *5* years as an inducement to prospective buyers (something I'd certainly take into consideration: I deliberately chose a 3-year-warrantied drive last time I bought one). Even if manufacturers over time might be able to cut corners such that a drive would often fail in its second year without too much risk of first-year failures, it seems unlikely that the cost savings could make up for the resulting bad publicity. So I'd guess that drives should be in the bottom of their 'bathtub' curve for several years regardless of what the nominal warranty period is: unless they fail (even during that nominal period) at a fairly significant rate the savings that the manufacturer can realize by shortening it would seem unlikely to be large (though in such a cut-throat pricing environment the resulting price difference might noticeably affect sales, so if one does it, the rest may have to follow, and the same may be true for lengthening the period as Seagate is doing, since it would otherwise give them a unique selling point for very little price difference). Whether similar considerations apply to the terms of service (e.g., duty cycle) specified for the drive is less clear: there may be fairly noticeable savings in manufacturing a drive for light-desktop rather than server-style use, even leaving aside more obscure characteristics such as resistance to the need for re-seeking in environments subject to vibration. - bill |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 19:11:02 GMT, "Ron Reaugh"
wrote: Has anyone ever heard anyone claim that the length of a HD's warranty was simply a marketing and price point decision by the mfg and the warranty length has nothing to do with expected drive life? Somewhere I think I remember someone making such a claim and a bunch of trolls tried unsuccessfully to shoot him down? I also think this has always been a marketing exercise. Manufacturers offset the cost of warranty claims against the increased sales that a long warranty generates. You also have to consider how many purchasers actually bother to claim under warranty when a drive is 2 or 3 years old. By then, larger, cheaper, smaller, cooler drives will be available, and most people just buy a replacement. The vast majority of drives will last for more than 5 years whatever the warranty arrangements. Here in the UK, many stores offer extended warranties on consumer electronics items for a one off payment. Some offer to refund your payment if you don't make a claim. Of course, you have to actually *ask* for the refund after 3 or 5 years. Last time I heard, the proportion of purchasers that remembered / could be bothered to do this was under 10%. Best regards, Paul -- Paul Sherwin Consulting http://paulsherwin.co.uk |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 23:13:09 GMT, "Ron Reaugh"
wrote: http://www.seagate.com/cda/newsinfo/...1,2285,00.html Not arguing they did it, but for me I don't care if the warranty is 10 years. If it fails in year 1 I'm going to replace it with someone else. The warranty does not take into account my time and effort to put things back. Like I said, I agree a warranty is alot of marketing. But so are statistics and benchmarks. ~F |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
OC settings advice from the experts | baj2k | Overclocking | 4 | February 10th 05 02:43 AM |
how to test psu and reset to cmos to default | Tanya | General | 23 | February 7th 05 10:56 AM |
Win XP doesn't like a second hard drive! | N9WOS | General | 9 | January 6th 05 02:10 AM |
first build.. problem | Christo | Abit Motherboards | 21 | September 10th 04 02:45 PM |
How Move OS XP from Old to New HD? | Nehmo Sergheyev | Homebuilt PC's | 80 | January 12th 04 06:10 PM |