Sounds like you got very-unlucky with WD then just regular-lucky with Seagate :P
A good way to think of “quality” in terms of how the manufacturing industry uses the term: Even if Seagate has a 2-4% failure rate (which they do, see my other comment) that still means 96-98% of their drives are just fine (and you probably fall in this group, which is great). But in terms of modern manufacturing, your failure/return rate should be ~1% or less. Otherwise you’re just throwing money away, not only on the RMAs, but also all the wasted time/money on manufacturing/disposing of all of those failed drives. So it’s a potential 2-3 fold loss (so 4-12% in their case) in revenue. That’s not a very good business strategy.
Not to mention you’re dealing with millions of drives and customers. Which leads to hundreds/thousands of people voicing their frustrations publicly and you developing a bad reputation. Again, they’ve done it to themselves.
Sounds like you got very-unlucky with WD then just regular-lucky with Seagate :P
A good way to think of “quality” in terms of how the manufacturing industry uses the term: Even if Seagate has a 2-4% failure rate (which they do, see my other comment) that still means 96-98% of their drives are just fine (and you probably fall in this group, which is great). But in terms of modern manufacturing, your failure/return rate should be ~1% or less. Otherwise you’re just throwing money away, not only on the RMAs, but also all the wasted time/money on manufacturing/disposing of all of those failed drives. So it’s a potential 2-3 fold loss (so 4-12% in their case) in revenue. That’s not a very good business strategy.
Not to mention you’re dealing with millions of drives and customers. Which leads to hundreds/thousands of people voicing their frustrations publicly and you developing a bad reputation. Again, they’ve done it to themselves.