10-10-2009, 03:35 AM
1 3.5", 1 2.5"; both less than 100GB. Each developed different hardware failures. Each have seen only sporatic use in the last 2 years. One had very low mileage.
What's surprised me this past year was how many of my older IDE hard drives have failed - and most are not ones in regular use. I was thinking the new hard drives are poorer in quality than older models, but now I'm not so sure.
I used to think hard drives stored on the shelf was a good way to secure data. I've certainly had my share of poor shelf-life optical discs despite being stored properly.
But now I'm wondering how many duplicates of critical archival data I need to keep to be sure to have one functional copy!
What's surprised me this past year was how many of my older IDE hard drives have failed - and most are not ones in regular use. I was thinking the new hard drives are poorer in quality than older models, but now I'm not so sure.
I used to think hard drives stored on the shelf was a good way to secure data. I've certainly had my share of poor shelf-life optical discs despite being stored properly.
But now I'm wondering how many duplicates of critical archival data I need to keep to be sure to have one functional copy!