[Yokolos]

Probably no different than current drives? Who would pay more for worse drives? Particularly in enterprise, where defect rates and error rates make a much bigger difference and quickly add up across such a large number of drives.

[cookiengineer]

> Probably no different than current drives? Who would pay more for worse drives? Particularly in enterprise, where defect rates and error rates make a much bigger difference and quickly add up across such a large number of drives.

Western Digital would like to have a word about shingled magnetic recording drives.

[anonymars]

Ha, the ones they mixed in with conventional drives, while still giving them the same model names and numbers? That was a good time, thanks WD

[gruez]

SMR drives aren't worse in any of those metrics except random writes. Yes, people running NAS with them got screwed over, but for your typical use case of storing movies they're fine.

[anonymars]

Maybe, maybe not?

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/hdds/wd-launches-...

[cookiengineer]

The WD case highlights how manufacturers will cheat as much as they can get away with in regards to profits. That's why I mentioned it.

Doesn't matter if your use case is only stashing porn, mine is stashing archived web pages and wikis, for example. So integrity of both the HDD sectors and filesystem sectors really matters to me.

I also wanted to make a point about regulation requirements. If you cannot guarantee integrity of your backups, all compliance gets thrown out of the window, and your company will be closed if that info gets out.

This requirement is also the case for private citizens when it comes to preservations of filed bills and taxes, for the last 10 years, in all EU countries.