16/20 disks in RMA Receiving inferior model (Seagate)

H

houkouonchi

RIP
Joined
Sep 14, 2008
Messages
1,622
Very annoyed with seagate right now. I did two RMA's with them one for 20 disks and another for 11. I have not seen the results for the 11 batch yet.

I sent them 31 drives that were ST31000333AS drives that are 3 platter 1TB drives. I got an email to see that 16 of the 20 drives they are sending me back are an older/inferior model (ST31000340AS).

The ST31000340AS has raid compatability issues and has generally been a really crappy/unreliable drive. Very annoyed to see them do this especially since its a 4 platter 1TB drive vs the 3 platter drives I sent them which means they will be less reliable... I would have preferred just to get the exact model I sent them (333AS) so they would all be the same type/performance of drive. The other 4 drives are ST31000528AS drives which I am fine with as a replacement but again 16 of them they are replacing with the dreaded/crappy 340AS model (seagates worse 1TB model of drive) =(

I will report back if they can resolve this matter. Shipping is pretty expensive on 20 drives so I would hope they would at least eat the shipping bill if I have to send the 20 drives they sent me back to them.
 
Standard Seagate policy is that they will match at least the same size drive (physically (2.5, 3.5) and logically (1TB, 2TB etc)) in replacement of normal drives. Any other attributes that we might care about (ECC, # of platters etc is luck of the draw) are not guaranteed. In Enterprise drives (the real ones, not including the Constellation CS) they guarantee a return of the same exact model.
 
Yep, I have sent back quite a few 7200.10 series drives and received rebuilt/recertified 7200.12 series drives. I've yet to send in a recertified 7200.12 series drive that cacked recently. Not impressed with Seagate as of late either.
 
Second RMA came through only 1 of the 11 drives are not the 340AS so now its 26/31 drives being replaced with the really crappy 340AS model.. sigh.
 
That is unfortunate. In addition to the potential compatibility (and unreliability [seems like they have lots of 340s:(]) issues, the 340 is ~15% slower (xfer rate) than the 333. That is going to drag down the performance of any array they "pollute".

I understand Seagate's perspective--it's a consumer drive, and most consumers don't know/care. But, if the customer explicitly expresses (and justifies) a need for a direct replacement, I would hope Seagate would try to accomodate. After all, it's bad enough their drive(s) failed; talk about "adding insult to injury".

[Reminds me of another great Sopranos line:
"It's bad enough that Junior shits on our head--but we're supposed to say `Thanks for the hat.'" ]
 
The 340AS is really a crappy model. Most of the failed disks that i grabed from work were 340AS's I had to dig for 333AS's even though probably only 15% of the drives at work are 340AS's (just tons of failed ones).

I emailed them about the model being different after openeing a ticket that I never got a response to last week =(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top