from storagereview.com
I wanted to find out more about the 120GXP in regards to the 333 recommended power on hours so I spoke with IBM today. I didn't record the conversation, but below is the gist of the conversation. The sentences are not identical direct quotes, but they should be identical in meaning. Things might also things might be slightly out of order for the sake of continuity.
--------------------------
Q: Would you recommend this drive in a server role?
A: No, the drive is intended to be on for no more than about 8 hours a day. If it were only used during that period and then shut down for the day, then it would be fine, but it definitely should NOT be used in a 24/7 role for those customers concerned with reliability.
Q: This spec is new with the 120GXP series, not other manufactures have used this specification. Was this spec introduced as a marketing strategy or a technical issue?
A: It's definitely a technical issue.
Q: Does the recommended power on hours have anything to do with "pixie dust" drives?
A: Well, we are certainly working to improve the pixie dust technology. Each drive generation has gotten better than the previous.
Q: Is this in response to the 75GXP reliability problems?
A: We aren't allowed to comment on that, but if you know what's going on with that, you will understand why.
Q: You mean the lawsuit on the reliability of 75GXP drives?
A: Yes.
Q: So have there been as many failures with the 120GXP as the 75GXP?
A: Not at all, In fact, I haven't heard of any 120GXP failures yet.
Q: Back to this recommendation of power on hours, why did IBM introduce it?
A: We want our customers to know that IBM drives are reliable and we are working to make our drives more reliable. One way to show this is to inform the customers of what usage is appropriate for the drive. Limiting the power on hours should significantly reduce failures.
Q: Will this power on hours spec become involved with the warranty in future drives?
A: Probably not. Right now, this spec is a response specific to the GXP series. We may not even specify this spec in the future
I wanted to find out more about the 120GXP in regards to the 333 recommended power on hours so I spoke with IBM today. I didn't record the conversation, but below is the gist of the conversation. The sentences are not identical direct quotes, but they should be identical in meaning. Things might also things might be slightly out of order for the sake of continuity.
--------------------------
Q: Would you recommend this drive in a server role?
A: No, the drive is intended to be on for no more than about 8 hours a day. If it were only used during that period and then shut down for the day, then it would be fine, but it definitely should NOT be used in a 24/7 role for those customers concerned with reliability.
Q: This spec is new with the 120GXP series, not other manufactures have used this specification. Was this spec introduced as a marketing strategy or a technical issue?
A: It's definitely a technical issue.
Q: Does the recommended power on hours have anything to do with "pixie dust" drives?
A: Well, we are certainly working to improve the pixie dust technology. Each drive generation has gotten better than the previous.
Q: Is this in response to the 75GXP reliability problems?
A: We aren't allowed to comment on that, but if you know what's going on with that, you will understand why.
Q: You mean the lawsuit on the reliability of 75GXP drives?
A: Yes.
Q: So have there been as many failures with the 120GXP as the 75GXP?
A: Not at all, In fact, I haven't heard of any 120GXP failures yet.
Q: Back to this recommendation of power on hours, why did IBM introduce it?
A: We want our customers to know that IBM drives are reliable and we are working to make our drives more reliable. One way to show this is to inform the customers of what usage is appropriate for the drive. Limiting the power on hours should significantly reduce failures.
Q: Will this power on hours spec become involved with the warranty in future drives?
A: Probably not. Right now, this spec is a response specific to the GXP series. We may not even specify this spec in the future
Facebook
Twitter