Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!quimby From: quimby@madoka.its.rpi.edu (Quimby Pipple) Subject: Re: TURN COMPUTER OFF OR LEAVE ON Message-ID: Nntp-Posting-Host: madoka.its.rpi.edu Reply-To: quimby@mts.rpi.edu References: <1991May24.160414.3552@rodan.acs.syr.edu> <1991May25.150948.542@monu0.cc.monash.edu.au> <1991Jun9.195502.18858@hq.demos.su> <1991Jun10.082014.8583@omen.COM> Date: 11 Jun 91 05:05:10 GMT Lines: 33 caf@omen.COM (Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX) writes: >It's also a not so subtle warning to get another drive (not >Seagate!!) and transfer your data to it. On my 4051 the >stiction got worse and worse until one fine day... Replacing the drive is only required in a situation where the users aren't flexible enough to just leave the machines on. Typical ST-251's last about three years with daily cycling, then they begin to stick. They seem to last for a very long time afterword when used in near continous operation -- a total life of ten years certainly wouldn't surprise me. (One plus for the Seagates is that the autopark versions very rarely crash, unlike some other drives.) >P.S.: If Seagate doesn't like to read this sort of thing, they >can send me an drive to replace the dead 4051. Frankly I don't >expect Seagate to stand behind 4051's any more than IBM stood >behind that infernal 20 MB disk drive on the PC/AT. At least from what I understand, IBM replaced some of those drives when the users started screaming. They also probably didn't order too many more drives from that manufacturer (can't remember the name). Seagate, on the other hand, hasn't even admitted the possibility that there was/is a tremendous reliability problem with their drives. Why should anyone believe that their newer drives are any better, even if they are? Quimby -- quimby@mts.rpi.edu, quimby@rpitsmts.bitnet