[QUOTE=JimPBish;2708685]I’m more interested in [I]how[/I] the drives fail…[/QUOTE]
Yes. But I believe this is a worthless search.
Because there are many plants assembling these devices, and in each plant, there are probably many robotic assembly lines AND there are so many parts-suppliers. No two can be exactly alike, as much as it displeases their owners AND consumers. When a product line starts having failures of some repeated nature, those lines are adjusted. (Oh please - let that be true!)
Of course, “hearing about failings from the field” takes months, probably, before there are significant statistics. And those will also be eroded by questions of “how was it used”. By that time, there’s a likely chance that those assembly lines have undergone changes anyway, perhaps because of different suppliers, different parts, OR in response to in-house lab test results (failures).
Thus, the quantity of assembly lines, the quantity of parts suppliers, and the relative rapidity of model changes (due to?? assembly line modifications??) castrate our research into “How do they fail”.
I end up with the “everything’s a crap shoot” argument.
The so-called Enterprise Line of hard-drives survives for extended periods of time not so much because they are ‘better’ products, but because the manufacturers (parts assemblers), parts suppliers AND the warehousing middle-men agree to maintain supply-levels for that extended time. I think they are AS likely to have assembly-line differences in performances and longevity - but the supply of dust-collecting replacements is ‘guaranteed’ by this host of middle-men parts distributors. “Double your per-unit suggested retail price, and we’ll keep twice as many on our shelves, paying inventory taxes on all of them for years to come.”