times are changing... IBM now LITE-ON (now links sorry)

[Wolfsraider]

first ibm started the ball rolling with their 333 hours a month rating ...

now lite-on has a new one

<< ? MTBF : 70'000 Power On Hours with 25% Duty >>



what is causing this and what if anything can we do about it?

is it a way to get out of tech support/responsibility?

can they get away with producing a hard drive or cdrw and only rate it for 6 hours or 8 hours a day or is this so they can market a professional model?

anyone?

edit:
i know that this is typical but what bothers me is now it gives other companies a min/max lever of compliance and that seems like a very bad thing especially for the companies that have little or no customer support.

i guess i was looking at the big boys setting the standards higher

i know that these numbers in a cdrw are very good actually but it still bothers me as a consumer to have a limited use factor spelled out as if to say if you use this more than "x" amount of hours they you may void your warranty as is spelled out at the time you purchased >edit


links:
hrere

here

 

[LXi]

Can you be more specific? Provide a darn link at least, 'cause I would like know which Lite-On product has this specificiation.

 

[Sunner]

That doesn't sound like the same deal as IBMs 333 hours thing.

Sounds more like "MTBF will be 70k hours assuming 25% duty", sorta like a printer toner saying "5000 pages assuming 5% page coverage.

Of course it will fail sooner if you use it more, sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

 

[ST4RCUTTER]

Not to mention that the average hourly use of a CD-R/RW drive is a fraction of what a HDD would be.

I think this is a non-issue.

 

[usas]

All electronics will fail over time, and when used. All they are doing is pointing out that if it is used this much, it will most likely last this amount of time. They are just letting us know what they recommend. Of course usage is product specific, each 120GXP HDD will last a different amount of time.

 

[Wolfsraider]

here is one

there poppin up at all outlets sorry i got bumped before i finished posting lol

 

[Wolfsraider]

true but what happens next?

another one

i know that this is typical but what bothers me is now it gives other companies a min/max lever of compliance and that seems like a very bad thing especially for the companies that have little or no customer support.

i guess i was looking at the big boys setting the standards higher

i know that these numbers in a cdrw are very good actually but it still bothers me as a consumer to have a limited use factor spelled out as if to say if you use this more than "x" amount of hours they you may void your warranty as is spelled out at the time you purchased.

 

[HappyPuppy]

70,000 houts is about 8 years at 25% constant duty. Geez. My Lite On drives don't get anywhere near 25% usage. I suppose this would be a problem for someone burning CDs 8 hours a day 7 days a week. In this case it would only last about 2 years. If you burn 1 CD every 6 minutes for...err, you figure it out. It's quite a few CDs.

 

[Goosemaster]

seroiusly, stop complaining. YOu should be grateful that the company actually conducted such expensive tests. Seriously, wouldn't it be bad if they hadn't conducted those tests and you were on your own? c'mon.

AS for the IBM rating, I would preferably like their new drives to be 24/7, but get realistic. Those drives are marketed to ALOT OF PEOPLE. Just because it does not meet YOUR needs does not condone an otherwise fine product. Why would IBM make them 24/7...IDE drives..or atleast the majority of desktop pc's are not on 24/7. Most people just turn them on to get E-mail, and from experience, DEll pc's have powermanagement ON by default to turn the HDs off if no one is using them for a while. Basically, stop complaining. IBM is a fine company; I can atest to that. I know their latest batch(s) of HDs haven't been stellar, or downright horrible; case in point, the 75GXPs.

Anyways, if you are adament on keeping your comp on 24/7 for server purpose, get SCSI. Everyone bashes scsi because it is "too expensive," then bashes IDE for not being adaquate. Personally, I paid the premium for SCSI because I know that I get what what I pay for. I have had my machione on for weeks at at time and the HDs have NEVER failed me....EVEN my IBM 60GXP I use for storage.

In additon, I am an Engineering student and am working on a year-long project dealing with automotive engines. Personally, the fact that we do preliminary testing is amust if we want the end-result to be taken seriously in the market place.



<< i know that this is typical but what bothers me is now it gives other companies a min/max lever of compliance and that seems like a very bad thing especially for the companies that have little or no customer support. >>




AS for that staement, you answered your own stament. BECAUSE many companies do not want to invest in costly support services for such small products(IBM , I'm told, offers excellent support on their mainframes😀), they spend the money to do MTBF tests to provide the consumer with the experiation to the product. If the product has not me that deadline and fails(75GXPs), then only those customers might call, saving them a lot of money on tech support.

 

[Wolfsraider]

seroiusly, stop complaining. YOu should be grateful that the company actually conducted such expensive tests. Seriously, wouldn't it be bad if they hadn't conducted those tests and you were on your own? c'mon.

AS for the IBM rating, I would preferably like their new drives to be 24/7, but get realistic. Those drives are marketed to ALOT OF PEOPLE. Just because it does not meet YOUR needs does not condone an otherwise fine product. Why would IBM make them 24/7...IDE drives..or atleast the majority of desktop pc's are not on 24/7. Most people just turn them on to get E-mail, and from experience, DEll pc's have powermanagement ON by default to turn the HDs off if no one is using them for a while. Basically, stop complaining. IBM is a fine company; I can atest to that. I know their latest batch(s) of HDs haven't been stellar, or downright horrible; case in point, the 75GXPs.

Anyways, if you are adament on keeping your comp on 24/7 for server purpose, get SCSI. Everyone bashes scsi because it is "too expensive," then bashes IDE for not being adaquate. Personally, I paid the premium for SCSI because I know that I get what what I pay for. I have had my machione on for weeks at at time and the HDs have NEVER failed me....EVEN my IBM 60GXP I use for storage.

In additon, I am an Engineering student and am working on a year-long project dealing with automotive engines. Personally, the fact that we do preliminary testing is amust if we want the end-result to be taken seriously in the market place.



<< i know that this is typical but what bothers me is now it gives other companies a min/max lever of compliance and that seems like a very bad thing especially for the companies that have little or no customer support. >>




AS for that staement, you answered your own stament. BECAUSE many companies do not want to invest in costly support services for such small products(IBM , I'm told, offers excellent support on their mainframes), they spend the money to do MTBF tests to provide the consumer with the experiation to the product. If the product has not me that deadline and fails(75GXPs), then only those customers might call, saving them a lot of money on tech support





dude i was curious why ibm suddenly went this route.

but was more surprised that liteon followed.

as a buyer i read all the specs in what i'm intrested in including these but i hadn't seen this before and
i was worried that maybe there was just cause for the ibm as their failure rate on their older drives is remarkable.

i was just trying to figure why liteon had gone to the same type system being NOT an engineer i was unaware what hours that equaled out to.

i agree on the scsi standard and that's probably what did me in lol the cheatah drive is rated MTBF: 1,200,000-hour Mean Time Between Failure

i had not seen a mean drive failure rate for ide so please excuse my ignorance of what you already knew.😉

was i complaining nope just trying to word the post so somebody would answer if i needed to worry or move on to bigger and better things -you have and i will please accept my apologies for any offense i caused with my words🙁

thank you again for clearing that up for me i much appreciate that but now i know another reason scsi is priced much higher and to all good day😉