Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well it's presumably WD140EMFZ, but does knowing that help any? What's the real question?
The thing is that they aren't the same drives because they would be sold for the full price as regular reds if they were such drives. And the 14TB reds are stupid expensive for what they are as the true enterprise grade 14TB drives I got earlier this year were actually cheaper.Most are interested because these have the possibility of being Red Drives or relabeled Red Drives. Red drives are stupid expensive. I can't even find 14TB Red drives in stock right now, but I believe they are over $400 a piece. The cost of building large arrays gets multiplied many times over when you're buying 10-20 drives. Even a $50 savings per drive can be significant. Saving $200 per drive, in excess of 50%, is insane.
So the question asked is the question that needs to be answered: What drive and can I take it out?
(Obviously we already have a response).
The thing is that they aren't the same drives because they would be sold for the full price as regular reds if they were such drives. And the 14TB reds are stupid expensive for what they are as the true enterprise grade 14TB drives I got earlier this year were actually cheaper.
I've noticed that the WD external deals seem to be in line with drives being as cheap as they can even though they share the same parts with more expensive brothers. But knowing what I know about pricing, there's no way a $200 drive has the same thing going for it as a $400 drive--it just won't. And in arrays where simultaneous drive failures at the wrong time can destroy large amounts of data, the cost of the drives is just a part of the total cost of a storage system. I mean if drives never failed at all, I don't think people would really care what the cost per TB would be because every drive you'd ever buy would still run indefinitely so you're only buying at an incremental cost.
The thing is that they aren't the same drives because they would be sold for the full price as regular reds if they were such drives. And the 14TB reds are stupid expensive for what they are as the true enterprise grade 14TB drives I got earlier this year were actually cheaper.
I've noticed that the WD external deals seem to be in line with drives being as cheap as they can even though they share the same parts with more expensive brothers. But knowing what I know about pricing, there's no way a $200 drive has the same thing going for it as a $400 drive--it just won't. And in arrays where simultaneous drive failures at the wrong time can destroy large amounts of data, the cost of the drives is just a part of the total cost of a storage system. I mean if drives never failed at all, I don't think people would really care what the cost per TB would be because every drive you'd ever buy would still run indefinitely so you're only buying at an incremental cost.
I think you pay a lot for "warranty" too on boxed red drives, which you lose shucking I believe.
That's purely dependent on what it takes to shuck the drive. You can simply put the drive back in the enclosure to handle warranty. But it's doubtful these are supported more than a year. 3, tops.
I don't know why you say that. For years, these had 8TB Red drives in them at a price that was, as I recall, roughly 1/2 buying the bare drive. My guess is the only reason they went to white label drives was becasue people were buying these externals, shucking them and selliing the bare drive on ebay.The thing is that they aren't the same drives because they would be sold for the full price as regular reds if they were such drives. And the 14TB reds are stupid expensive for what they are as the true enterprise grade 14TB drives I got earlier this year were actually cheaper.
I've noticed that the WD external deals seem to be in line with drives being as cheap as they can even though they share the same parts with more expensive brothers. But knowing what I know about pricing, there's no way a $200 drive has the same thing going for it as a $400 drive--it just won't. And in arrays where simultaneous drive failures at the wrong time can destroy large amounts of data, the cost of the drives is just a part of the total cost of a storage system. I mean if drives never failed at all, I don't think people would really care what the cost per TB would be because every drive you'd ever buy would still run indefinitely so you're only buying at an incremental cost.
Well that's why you use some sort of RAID system with a secondary backup.That is a lot of data to lose. Good price though
I thought the warranty was an issue on these for a long time, but it seems that the reddit folks have figured out that the serial number on the drive inside and the casing is the same, so even when shucked, the warranty is still 100% intact, which is pretty damn awesome.I think you pay a lot for "warranty" too on boxed red drives, which you lose shucking I believe.
Being an automotive parts distributor as a previous profession taught me a lot about the 'oem' and 'equivalent' market. There is a significant difference on non-branded items. Sometimes it is really large, like the quality between 'Great Value' brand and the branded items they're copying, and sometimes less like you mention about costco and kirklands. But there is a difference. Why? Because generally any product is marked up 50% (100% from cost). So your branded items sell for 1/2 that price in wholesale from distributors. But the unbranded items can be marked up as high as 70%. Why? Because if they were only marked up to 50%, people would know they were inferior and instead the higher price implies that they are higher quality when they definitely are not.The thing is, this has been happening for a long time. The 8TB Easystores originally had 8TB Red drives in them. Saying "should" doesn't matter. In a business that involves manufacturing most of the cost differences associated with selling a product is just about artificial differentiation. You can have two identical products and sell them at two different prices with just a different label.
Need an example? That's how every Costco brand essentially operates. There is a premium brand that charges their premium price, and then there is Kirkland brand that is relabeled for Costco at a cheaper price. This is done on things like Olive Oil to Alcohol, cleaning products to toiletries. And the companies do this relabeling because it targets two different sectors. One is a group that cares about labels, the other cares about deals, and you can't get people to change their buying behavior. So you sell more product by simply relabeling the product and pricing them differently. Hell, this is how they make money regardless of if you choose store brand or brand label sitting side by side, which is genius.
This is much the case here for harddrives. WD has a product they label for NAS use and another for consumer level and as long as you don't know whats on the inside they can get away with it. Smarter people who figure out what the drives are regardless of the labels can get better deals.
The argument can be whatever "against". But if the cost is too high then you might not be able to afford building arrays any other way. This is versus the cost of buying "true" RED's. I could buy twice as many of these drives and run an entire redundant array to support my already redundant array.
Still, all drives are a crap shoot whether enterprise level or consumer (and you can read Backblaze reports all day if that's your thing). But arguing that people should spend twice as much money to build their arrays for themselves when that additional cost isn't viable is a pointless argument. Considering as an example that on 10 drives that's a cost difference of $2000. Which may not matter for a small business, but it is a significant investment for an individual user.
So the question is the question because people have budgets. If you don't care and you don't want it and it doesn't make sense for you: then fine. But most folks on here are educated enough to at least know the risks they're taking with these drives and it's ridiculous to say they shouldn't when it's not even your money.
That's purely dependent on what it takes to shuck the drive. You can simply put the drive back in the enclosure to handle warranty. But it's doubtful these are supported more than a year. 3, tops.
You need more than just that if you want your data to last decades.Well that's why you use some sort of RAID system with a secondary backup.
I think that initially might have been the reason, but today the drive is different than a red as the sth article flushes out.I am pretty sure WD went the White label route to curb people trying to pass off shucked Red Label drives as retail Red Label drives.
My 8TB Easystore I bought 3 years ago was a Red Label and my 10TB and 3 other 8TB I shucked for others were all white label.
I know too much about business and manufacturing to think otherwise. I linked to the article previously, but here it is again as it is a good read:Look, you're reasonably sure on your understanding. I am on mine. I wouldn't mind you linking the article on servethehome.
So is almost any review of an item--what's your point? WD isn't going to release their internal test data.STH sample size is insufficient to determine standard deviation and prove the difference is more than just that.
So is almost any review of an item--what's your point? WD isn't going to release their internal test data.
The other issue in that case is you got copies early on and as I recall, backblaze found that new drive models tend to have higher rates of failure than the same model does later in the process (assuming the model isn't a lemon, eg the ibm deathstar)My point being that it's interesting but proves nothing.
Back in the day I worked at a place that was among the first to receive Seagate's brand new 4GB drives. We experienced an over 60% failure rate inside 2 weeks across 40 drives. While our numbers significantly impacted the overall rate, it was far lower than our experience might lead someone to believe.
If you can't understand the points in the article, there isn't much I can do about that.My point being that it's interesting but proves nothing.
Back in the day I worked at a place that was among the first to receive Seagate's brand new 4GB drives. We experienced an over 60% failure rate inside 2 weeks across 40 drives. While our numbers significantly impacted the overall rate, it was far lower than our experience might lead someone to believe.
This is true of almost any new model. My father was an engineer at Ford and he would tell me that newer models always tended to have more issues or recalls. It's just the nature of mass manufacturing something new.The other issue in that case is you got copies early on and as I recall, backblaze found that new drive models tend to have higher rates of failure than the same model does later in the process (assuming the model isn't a lemon, eg the ibm deathstar)
But I agree you need to have a fairly large sample size. I'd think that if individuals on reddit posted data for their drives on that forum, you'd get a reasonable idea of what to expect from the various drive models.
... But with what I know about business, there's no way the afr is going to be the same as their enterprise product or they would be selling these as such.
If you believe that quantity is better than profit, then there's a couple of franchises I could sell you, lol.That same research and experience is going to tell them the sweet spot of price for intended market where they make the most for the smallest quantity and lowering prices boosts quantity but not profit. For certain classes of hardware it's cheaper to differentiate models post-manufacturing than to have actually different product lines. This may or may not be the case here since we don't have the hard data to make that determination.
Either way the argument is moot as it's based on personal experience and belief of what can be gleaned from the minimal data available rather than pure fact. You have your opinion and I have mine and imho they're both valid. I'm not trying to say you're wrong just pointing out that yours is not the only possible explanation and people get to make their own judgement call.
If you believe that quantity is better than profit, then there's a couple of franchises I could sell you, lol. ...