Websites that Track PC Hardware Failure Rates? 13
scarolinus asks: "Working in the computer field, I find myself asking, "Which component to specify for my customers?" It used to be I would specify the most expensive component the customer could afford. The more established and reputable the brand, the better. Now, with no change in volume, it seems that failure rates are at least double what they used to be in the last few years. And it doesn't matter if the system is a $999 special or a $9999 multiprocessor server. So, is there a website out there that cataloges the failure rates of individual PC hardware components? Is there a website that helps us hold the hardware manufacturers accountable for the quality of product they produce?"
Service (Score:4, Insightful)
I think a better measure would be service and how the returns are handled. You could ocmpile that data from customers. To me, it isn't a big deal if a piece of equipment dies as long as it is replaced/fixed quickly. I know for my servers I keep spares around just in case... If I can't keep a spare for it I'm sure to have a 4 hour response time service agreement.
Storagereview (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Storagereview (Score:2)
The SR community will thank you for your contribution.
Speak Danish? (Score:2, Informative)
Large amounts of the page is, however, in Danish, but look for soemthing like this: "Info: Vores reparations afdeling kan konstatere at Net-hub af mærket D-LINK har haft en reparations frekvens på 0,82%. Tryk på det lille i ved produktet for at se om lige det produkt du ønsker måske har stor reparations frekvens. " ie. 0.86% of D-Link's net-hubs has been returned for fixing.
Re:Speak Danish? (Score:1)
Damn, Danish is complicated. Not only do you need to translate the words, but the numbers need to be translated too!
MTBF is what you're looking for (Score:1)
Re:MTBF is what you're looking for (Score:4, Informative)
The other problem is that modern designs tend to push the components very hard, especially regarding heat dissipation and electrical currents. Even if the design is good, the components are still pushed into a regime where the historical data isn't as valid. And all too often the design turns out to be not good enough. (How many laptop batteries have been recalled over the last year?)
Usage of components. (Score:3, Interesting)
Is it a heat thing? An OS thing? Damned if I know. But if you polled these two communities, you'd probably get vastly different results.
--saint
Re:Usage of components. (Score:2)
Sad, because traditionally, IBM drives have been head and shoulders above their competition in reliability. (This is *especially* true of laptop drives.) I switched to Maxtors a few months ago, partly because of the IBM 75GB problems, partly because I wanted 100 GB drives anyway, and so far, the've performed beautifully in non-trivial quantities in arrays - not one failure so far. I'm looking at the new 7500 RPM WD drives, but am reluctant to consider giving up the reliability of the Maxtors...