Seagate expansion 2TB STBV200200

[krs77]

Hi

I am currently updating all m files both on my desktop computer and laptops. I am aiming at a 2 TB external drive - doesn't need to be small or light it has to be reliable. So my pick was the Seagate Expansion 2TB STBV200200. I got this HDD and it works quite fine, however when I started reading the reviews there is quite a few negative feedback about this drive. So I am considering returning it and getting a WD. However those have also a few negative reviews although not as many as the Seagate? Does it mean, that no matter what you choose in terms of HDD it's all crap now? I have discs in my old Desktop or laptops that are over 15 years old and are still operational. Now I am reading that a HDD lasts 2 - 3 years. Are any companies better than others?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Krs

 

[phil22]

External hard drives of all brands have one weak-spot which internal drives don't have, and that's the SATA-to-USB bridge chip (a small PCB) which is attached to the actual drive inside the enclosure.

This PCB is prone to failure, causing detection errors when the actual hard drive is healthy, so whatever make it is, it's not the drive that's unreliable, it's the PCB attached to it.

having said that, I found Seagate external drives to be appallingly unreliable and WD ones to be the complete opposite. I have two identical WD Elements Desktop 1TB drives and they are working perfectly after 4 years. Highly recommended: http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=260

All three Seagate externals I once owned, failed inside two years.

 

[anmolsharma]

External hard drives of all brands have one weak-spot which internal drives don't have, and that's the SATA-to-USB bridge chip (a small PCB) which is attached to the actual drive inside the enclosure.

This PCB is prone to failure, causing detection errors when the actual hard drive is healthy, so whatever make it is, it's not the drive that's unreliable, it's the PCB attached to it.

having said that, I found Seagate external drives to be appallingly unreliable and WD ones to be the complete opposite. I have two identical WD Elements Desktop 1TB drives and they are working perfectly after 4 years. Highly recommended: http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.aspx?id=260

All three Seagate externals I once owned, failed inside two years.

well I have just purchased seagate expansion 3.0 500gb external and have used it for only 1-2 hours twice to tranfer 100 gb. I will use it for 6-7 hours more to transfer 300gb data and then keep it safe so in case my hard drive fails I can retrieve it . but I have read bad reviews about them now. I don't have budget to buy a wd now. so you said your seagate failed within 2 years . but how often you used them. I would be happy if they work fine for total usage just 30-40 hours in 4 years. just for backup , so in case my internal fails and to delete some not so very important files to free space on internal but in case i need them in future. I won't use it to play videos or anything else but just transfer data for 2-3 hours after 2-3 months which will amount to total usage of 20 hours in one year. I guess those who report external failure use it extensively in one year. so my question is if usage frequency is very low then can they survive for 3-4 years.