back to article Seagate hauls out fat form factor throwback hard drive

It's back to the future for the latest Seagate large form factor disk with a low capacity. The company has introduced a 3.5-inch 1TB and 2TB disk drive spinning at 7,200rpm with a slow 6Gbps SATA interface, and called it an Enterprise Capacity drive. Remarkably, other 3.5-inch Enterprise Capacity drives of Seagate's go up to …

  1. CAPS LOCK Silver badge

    Gah - I thought that meant a return of the...

    ...Bigfoot!

    1. Jeffrey Nonken Silver badge

      Re: Gah - I thought that meant a return of the...

      Kinda what I was thinking too... I still have a couple Bigfoot drives in a box in my garage somewhere.

      1. Alistair Silver badge
        Windows

        Re: Gah - I thought that meant a return of the...

        I know of at least one Bigfoot drive that lives in the back of a rowboat. On a long rope.

    2. Purple-Stater

      Re: Gah - I thought that meant a return of the...

      Same here. I was seriously hoping to see something about a 5.25" form factor with a 20TB+ capacity, running slow and cool.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    In which application is a 3.25" 2TB more desirable than a 4TB or 6TB or... ? Even the examples given in the article don't meet justification, especially considering Seagate has 8TB models for each scenario for a reason. A 2.5" would of made this all make sense (smallish, but cheaper and better cap than SSD).

    Unless these are 50usd or less, it appears Seagate is trying to create a market for its old stock before SSDs catch up.

    Off to the side, who decided 55TB to be personal usage yet magically 10 * 55TB = enterprise? I missedthe case study on this, but somehow this is presented as factual by many manufacturers.

    1. Cynic_999 Silver badge

      Read the specifications the article links to ...

      ISTM that the biggest difference from what you would buy for you home PC is:

      "Engineered for 24x7 workloads of 550 TB/yr" In many cases that would be far more important than having extra capacity or faster speeds.

      I note the article wonders why it is using a 6Gbps interface rather than a 12Gbps interface. I wonder the opposite - why fit any mechanical HDD with a 12GB/s interface? The drive itself has a maximum sustained transfer rate of barely 1Gbps, and no mechanical HDD I have come across can get anywhere close to 6Gbps read or write speeds (except for short bursts to & from its RAM cache). Increasing the interface speed increases the probability of data corruption in transit and needs more expensive cables but AFAICS gives almost no advantage whatsoever.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Read the specifications the article links to ...

        6gbs because they're trying to make a cheap drive, SAS wouldn't be available in typical applications for this. As far as 1gbs, you might be thinking of ATA133. Which yes, 1gb was the rough limit. SCSI on the other hand...

        Reliable 24x7 means what when there is also a reliable 24x7 4TB? This product seems to make sense when I read about it, but when I think about the given applications and actually implementing them, why 2TB at 3.5? Again, I think it is marketing jazz.

        As far as more expensive cables, actually the opposite. A SATA cable today still costs me less than a ATA133 ribbon did 15 years ago, and SCSI cables are significantly cheaper and managable with SAS.

        As far as the actual mechanical limit of a platter, I don't know. It'd be interesting to see a video of this taken solely for this determination. I have heard a 12,000rpm drive give its all, so it would be VERY interesting to hear someone force a drive to something like 24,000. Again, this would need a video to hear it as it does its best.

        "RAID rebuild?" - OK, but that can be said about form factor or capacity.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Read the specifications the article links to ...

          > 6gbs because they're trying to make a cheap drive, SAS wouldn't be available in typical applications for this. As far as 1gbs, you might be thinking of ATA133.

          No, he's thinking of the raw sustained data rate from the platter as the disk spins under the head.

          If the drive has a sustained data throughput of 120MB/sec (which it might do when the head is at the outer edge, not the inner) that's about 1Gbps.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Hmmm....

      "In which application is a 3.25" 2TB more desirable than a 4TB or 6TB or..."

      RAID rebuild?

    3. InfiniteApathy

      In the SMB space it's common to require cheap space & IOPS. One way to achieve this is to setup one big RAID 10 array with as many disks as you can. I run several of these setups and they work a treat.

      Classic example: Dell R510, dual CPU, 64GB RAM, 12x2TB OBR10. Cheap, reliable & very capable of hosting a great many small VM's plus one large file system VM.

    4. Blank Reg

      There is a draw back to these massive drives that are available today. When used in a raid system, and you lose an 8tb drive, it can take an extremely long time to fully recover after replacing the dead drive. And if you're running a less redundant flavour of raid then you're vulnerable until the system finishes repopulating the new drive.

  3. jtaylor

    Ahaha. I remember the Bigfoots. Cheap and cheerful.

    Nothing can replace my old full height ST423451W. I keep it around to scare kids and win arguments.

    I've had a few experiences getting Seagate to RMA a drive that failed in hardware RAID but passed their SeaTools diagnostics. This new drive would have to be pretty cheap for me to consider it.

  4. Peter X

    I was hoping for something a bit larger. (Fujistu Eagle spinning up)

    1. Brian Miller

      I remember those Fujitsu Eagles! I worked on them. However, they weren't as loud as the old Maxtor 5-1/4" drives. Remember those spinning up and initializing? weeeeEEEEEP! ... weeEEP! ... weEP!weEP!weEP!weEP!weEP!weEP!weEP! You could hear that initialization from across the room with all of the HVAC blowing, it was so loud.

    2. Cem Ayin

      A bit larger?

      That Eagle thingy looks rather dainty to me.

      Have a look at this beauty:

      http://www.cpushack.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/3000-33_1978-PromoPhoto-32.jpg

      I mean the cabinet on the far left. No, that is not a washing machine (although the amount of energy being converted while spinning is probably comparable, at least it feels that way).

  5. redpawn Silver badge

    Do they

    come with a pair of 30-pin SIMMs to complete the retro-server package?

  6. Oh Homer
    Gimp

    Worth it just for the high MTBF

    I'm sick of modern HDDs dying just after the (usually one year) warranty.

    Meanwhile I have HDDs from the late 80s that still work perfectly.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Worth it just for the high MTBF

      "I'm sick of modern HDDs dying just after the (usually one year) warranty."

      Wish some of mine had lasted more than a few hours.

  7. MasterofDisaster

    It never made sense to flog very high capacity into markets like video surveillance - the drive rebuild times are too long! This offering seems to make a lot more sense in a market like surveillance where lowest price and shortest recovery time is needed.

  8. gordon123

    Makes Sense

    As others have stated towards, this makes sense in a large commodity play, scaled out environment, where you are looking for a capacity that can be rebuilt in RAID in reasonable timeframes, gives reasonable performance, and is priced at a replace-and-bin level.

    Large cloud vendors would eat these things up at a sufficient pace to make it worthwhile for Seagate.

  9. tr1ck5t3r

    How about firmware that can not be hacked by the suite of malware that's been evolving over the years that spreads over Windows, Linux & BSD and has had aspects of it identified by experts that have called their observations, BadBios, BadUSB, Stuxnet, Duqu, Flame & most recently Shamoon?

    Its only a simple ask for hardware than needs a physical intervention to short some pins or jumpers of graphics cards, CMOS chips, usb connected devices, hard drives, printers and more, to flash the firmware whilst employing bug free code.

    If we cant have that, then enjoy your repression if you are even clever enough to spot it, as you go about deferring your judgement in all aspects of your life to so called experts.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019