[filmscanners] RE: HD failure [was RE: keeping the 16bit scans}

["LAURIE SOLOMON" <laurie@advancenet.net>]

Bob,

Not to be argumentative; but those are for drives in aggregate UNDER
CONTROLLED CONDITIONS and not real life practical world conditions, right?
And if that is right, then those  average figures themselves could be
different give or take a year or a few percentage points under real
practical life situations.  Thus, they are useful for practical purposes as
guidelines as opposed to predictions.

-----Original Message-----
From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Bob Frost
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 9:42 AM
To: laurie@advancenet.net
Subject: [filmscanners] Re: HD failure [was RE: keeping the 16bit scans}


Frank et al,

Interesting that Western Digital no longer use MTBF's. They now say that
their Caviars have a Component Design Life of 5 years and an Annualized
Failure Rate of < 0.8%.

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Paris" <frankparis@comcast.net>

We've had this discussion and I don't think anyone else believes it
follows a normal distribution. Who would want one that lasted even 10
years, let alone 100? Ten years ago, drives were 200 Mbytes. Who would
be using such hard disks today, even if they were immortal? Some
software installations are bigger than that.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title
or body

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body