OCZ has gone Bankrupt.

RIP, love or hate them OCZ made SSDs the way they are now. They pushed the envelope and actually created some of the earlier algorithms for useful SSDs. I think that happened around 2010-2011, the CEO was in constant contact a good reviewer (probably with Anandtech) about how to improve SSD performance. This led to the understanding that SSDs aren't regular spinning drives and that burst speed isn't as important as a sustained write/read speed, which used to fall off pretty fast.

Hope they do well under Samsung.
 
They were bought by Toshiba, not Samsung. Should do well though, or at least be more competitive.
 
Happy with my 2 OCZ drives (agility 2 and vertex 3 120gb's) The latter isn't in a mission critical situation, but the agility 2 was my OS drive for 2+ years and was very solid for me. I understand a lot of people have had bad experiences with them, but they were an innovative company that pushed consumer SSD costs way down and introduced them to the masses. I don't think adoption would have been anywhere near as quick without them.

So yea, they got what they ultimately deserved, but I'm not going to say "good riddance" to such a disruptive player in the storage market.
 
Fortunately the $35 million dollar check from Toshiba should keep the people you know there employed for at least a little while.

Until the purchase/bankruptcy is final, Toshiba is essentially going to float them the cash to continue operating and complete the acquisition.
 
Activate: AMD said:
I don't think adoption would have been anywhere near as quick without them.
Click to expand...

It may have been even quicker. OCZ single-handedly brought the return rate of the SSD industry up from a percent or two to five percent or worse.

If it were not for OCZ ruining the reputation of SSDs, perhaps more people would have been comfortable buying SSDs sooner.
 
^ Yeah, those Agility/Vertex 2 SSDs were total crap.
The fact that OCZ lied and mixed up what was actually in the packages was just ridiculous.
 
lucky me! i had a 30gb vertex 2 die on me after 3 years of use, and it was out of warranty by 10 days, i sweet talked the RMA manager to approve a replacement :p thankfully it arrived :D
 
JoeComp said:
It may have been even quicker. OCZ single-handedly brought the return rate of the SSD industry up from a percent or two to five percent or worse.

If it were not for OCZ ruining the reputation of SSDs, perhaps more people would have been comfortable buying SSDs sooner.
Click to expand...

They were also the ones that pushed SSD prices down to the 50 cents/GB level, making it much more affordable and attractive to potential buyers, regardless of return rates.
 
Good riddance.

Tsumi said:
They were also the ones that pushed SSD prices down to the 50 cents/GB level, making it much more affordable and attractive to potential buyers, regardless of return rates.
Click to expand...

I literally wouldn't use any OCZ SSD, even for free. My data is worth far more than the discount OCZ would have offered me for a POS SSD. I had an original Vertex die and followed as they released several generations of SSDs with little firmware validation and with very low reliability. No thanks.

Perhaps you're right in that those who were unfortunate enough to continue to trust OCZ SSDs helped in allowing OCZ to take part in driving market prices down for those of us who actually want a good, reliable SSD. But in that case, they have served their purpose, and again, good riddance. But if anything, OCZ probably cut prices the way they did because they needed to do so to convince people to buy their awful products.
 
I had a ocz drive fail on me 4 times in 6 months - I never went back.

They did however lower the cost of ssd's.
 
JoeComp said:
False.
Click to expand...

How is it false then? They drove prices down, and other companies followed suit to remain competitive with the uninformed consumer. The people who bought an OCZ SSD, had it crashed, would have already felt the quickness of SSDs and would be much more likely to purchase a more reliable alternative rather than going back to a slow mechanical drive.

dandragonrage said:
I literally wouldn't use any OCZ SSD, even for free. My data is worth far more than the discount OCZ would have offered me for a POS SSD. I had an original Vertex die and followed as they released several generations of SSDs with little firmware validation and with very low reliability. No thanks.

Perhaps you're right in that those who were unfortunate enough to continue to trust OCZ SSDs helped in allowing OCZ to take part in driving market prices down for those of us who actually want a good, reliable SSD. But in that case, they have served their purpose, and again, good riddance. But if anything, OCZ probably cut prices the way they did because they needed to do so to convince people to buy their awful products.
Click to expand...

The problem was inherent across all Sandforce-based SSDs at the time, it was not unique to OCZ. OCZ got the bad rep because most of their lineup was Sandforce-based (with a few Indilinx here and there, which actually were reliable), and they tried to deny the problems. Intel Sandforce-based SSDs also had problems, but most of Intel's lineup at the time was not Sandforce if I recall correctly. Same with other SSD manufacturers.

Edit: Also, OCZ had no control over the Sandforce firmware. That is provided by Sandforce.
 
Maybe I have been lucky but I own 4 OCZ drives. 2x Vertex 3 120GB Max IOPs and 2x Vertex 4 256GB drives and they've all been running fine in RAID-0 without issues from day one and I purchased each of these at launch.
 
I hate to see any company failing. I never bought any OCZ product ever. It's always better to have more, then one less. Too bad.
 
They drove prices down, and other companies followed suit to remain competitive with the uninformed consumer.
Click to expand...

Uninformed is the key word here and some never learn that ya get what ya pay for.

OCZ continually misrepresented their products thru specs and in some cases used questionable NAND.

OCZ's president was one of the biggest "snake oil" salesman of the time and it wasn't unusual for posts to disappear from OCZ's forum.

I actually purchased two for my RAID 0 setup, used them for a week to see for myself how they performed....and a week was 7 days too many. I reinstalled my G2s and sold the OCZ units to an uninformed Craigs list buyer.

Although I hate to see competition fall by the wayside they have nobody to blame but themselves.
 
Tsumi said:
OCZ got the bad rep because most of their lineup was Sandforce-based (with a few Indilinx here and there, which actually were reliable), and they tried to deny the problems. Intel Sandforce-based SSDs also had problems, but most of Intel's lineup at the time was not Sandforce if I recall correctly. Same with other SSD manufacturers
Click to expand...

Their Indilinx products were extremely unreliable too, such as the original Vertex, the Octane, etc.
 
I still have a couple agility 2's going nicely, but damn those agility 3's had a high failure rate, not a SINGLE one of those are still working in my computers, all died within 6 months.
 
OCZ was huge back in the day with their slick RAM modules. Then G.Skill came out with the worlds fastest RAM with no heat spreader... hmm.

Fast forward.. I had a vertex 2 that died, they sent a replacement and that one died. I've since switched to Crucial and now using Samsung as well. Awesome SSDs. OCZ had a lot of bad SSDs over the years, which really gave them a bad name.
 
dandragonrage said:
Their Indilinx products were extremely unreliable too, such as the original Vertex, the Octane, etc.
Click to expand...

Disagree - I've got over 20 original Vertexes in various systems of mine / family / customers that are still running strong. Never had an OCZ drive fail and I've had probably 40+ go through my hands....

That said, I know there were tons of issues with the SF drives, but on the internet forums, the failures were greatly exaggerated. Fact.

Not a blind fanboi - I love my Samsung Pros, but I will also vouch for pretty stellar reliability of the original Vertex drives.
 
Brahmzy said:
Disagree - I've got over 20 original Vertexes in various systems of mine / family / customers that are still running strong. Never had an OCZ drive fail and I've had probably 40+ go through my hands....

That said, I know there were tons of issues with the SF drives, but on the internet forums, the failures were greatly exaggerated. Fact.

Not a blind fanboi - I love my Samsung Pros, but I will also vouch for pretty stellar reliability of the original Vertex drives.
Click to expand...

I still run two Indilinx OCZ drives (the Solid 2 120GB in my HTPC and a 60GB Vertex Plus R2 in a little 11.6 inch laptop) and both work fine. At the same time I bought my 120GB Solid 2 I put a 60GB of the same model in my brother's computer and it works to this day as well.

I purchased a refurbished 240GB Agility 3 and it lives on to this day as well in my roommates desktop.

Only reason I bought any of them is because they were significantly cheaper than any other drive on the market at the time. I think I paid something like $40 total for two of the 60GB Vertex Plus R2 drives.

Anyways, it's just more anecdotal evidence, but not everything they made failed in a few weeks.
 
I bought a OCZ Vertex II few years ago. It ran flawlessly until few days ago. I was fortunate enough that warranty wasn't expired. Their RMA process is really painfull.

Coincidently I bought a Toshiba SSD last Black Friday
 
Their role in current prices is debatable, but go back to 2008 when they launched their (crappy) Core drives, and those were the only "affordable" SSDs back then, when the competition was Mtron SLC drives ! We're talking more than 300€/$ for a 32GB Mtron, with questionable controller (advanced wear leveling and all were not thought necessary on SLC).
 
Crappy or not, OCZ was instrumental in getting the consumer SSD market rolling.
 
I've got over 20 original Vertexes in various systems of mine / family / customers that are still running strong.
Click to expand...

Any and all companies can produce a troublesome product but OCZ made MANY bad products and lied, denied, and deceived the public about them.

I wouldn't wish product failure on any end user but nether would I support any company with proven extremely deceptive tactics especially with a customer.

I'm glad it turned out well for you but I wouldn't have had the "cojones" to put those things in a customer's machine simply because of the possibilities of return/replacement time and loss of confidence in my reputation.
 
Aesma said:
Their role in current prices is debatable, but go back to 2008 when they launched their (crappy) Core drives, and those were the only "affordable" SSDs back then, when the competition was Mtron SLC drives ! We're talking more than 300€/$ for a 32GB Mtron, with questionable controller (advanced wear leveling and all were not thought necessary on SLC).
Click to expand...

They sold SSDs at a loss for nearly a year. Not sure how much more instrumental in bringing down prices they can be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top