SHARE
Facebook X Pinterest WhatsApp

Backblaze: Is the Earth Flat?

Exactly one year ago today I published an article titled Selecting a Disk Drive: How Not to Do Research. This article took Backblaze to task for a lack of intellectual rigor in their disk drive studies. Their latest study raised my ire enough to write today’s blog  – even though I said I was retired […]

Written By
thumbnail
Henry Newman
Henry Newman
Jan 27, 2015
Enterprise Storage Forum content and product recommendations are editorially independent. We may make money when you click on links to our partners. Learn More

Exactly one year ago today I published an article titled Selecting a Disk Drive: How Not to Do Research. This article took Backblaze to task for a lack of intellectual rigor in their disk drive studies. Their latest study raised my ire enough to write today’s blog  – even though I said I was retired from writing. Let me take you through a few points I made in last year’s article.

Here’s my first point from a year ago:

“Let’s talk about the release data first. The oldest drive in the list is the Seagate Barracuda 1.5 TB drive from 2006. A drive that is almost 8 years old! Since it is well known in study after study that disk drives last about 5 years and no other drive is that old, I find it pretty disingenuous to leave out that information. Add to this that the Seagate 1.5 TB has a well-known problem that Seagate publicly admitted to, and it is no surprise that these old drives are failing.”

Well these drives are still being used and still being reported on by Backblaze. One has to wonder why, if the drives are so bad, they are still being used and reported on year after year.

And another main point from a year ago:

“One of the definitions of consumer drives as compared to enterprise drives is that hard error rate is 1 bit in 10E14 bits for consumer drives and 1 bit in 10E15 bits for enterprise drives. The following table shows how many bits are moved before the storage vendors say there will be an error on the drive. So move about 11.3 TiB of data on a consumer drive and expect a failure.”

backblaze, hard drives

With a known lower hard error rate, why would Backblaze use consumer drives for an enterprise application? Maybe they do not think their users’ backup data is that important and believe that all that is needed is consumer drives. Nothing has changed from last year; there is no comparison of consumer and enterprise drives. There seems to be a belief, with no supporting evidence, that enterprise drives are more expensive with no benefit.

The Backblaze approach seems to be that they don’t want real research to get in the way of their opinions. Maybe they should join the Flat Earth Society while they’re at it.

Photo courtesy of Shutterstock.

Recommended for you...

15 Software Defined Storage Best Practices
Drew Robb
Dec 18, 2023
What is Fibre Channel over Ethernet (FCoE)?
Drew Robb
Dec 8, 2023
9 Types of Computer Memory Defined (With Use Cases)
Anina Ot
Dec 1, 2023
Comparing SSD vs HDD Speed: Which Is Faster?
Don Hall
Nov 22, 2023
Enterprise Storage Forum Logo

Enterprise Storage Forum offers practical information on data storage and protection from several different perspectives: hardware, software, on-premises services and cloud services. It also includes storage security and deep looks into various storage technologies, including object storage and modern parallel file systems. ESF is an ideal website for enterprise storage admins, CTOs and storage architects to reference in order to stay informed about the latest products, services and trends in the storage industry.

Property of TechnologyAdvice. © 2025 TechnologyAdvice. All Rights Reserved

Advertiser Disclosure: Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which TechnologyAdvice receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. TechnologyAdvice does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.