Hi all gurus,

I'm looking to purchase a new external HDD now and wish to ask a few questions.

These are general questions and some have no absolute answer but I just want to have some view from experienced users like you.

So here goes,

1) 2.5" or 3.5" HDD?
It is not so much of the size because reliability is what I'm looking for.
I've read somewhere (or heard) that data recovery tend to be easier (or with higher possibility) with 3.5" as compared to 2.5". Is this true?
At the same time, I've heard that if you intend to use the HDD constantly and it is connected to desktop 24/7 (for example, saving downloaded files from torrent), it is better to get 3.5" as 2.5" can easily heat up due to limited space for ventilation. Some even said that 2.5" is not recommended for long-term usage (for example, using it to watch movies for long hours). Any truth to all these claims?

2) Seagate or WD?
Some of you might know that recently my WD HDD died and this is my 2nd WD that died on me. So, I'm a little septical about getting a WD again.
However, I've read about Seagate Barracuda BSY problem as well, which is intimidating as well.
For WD, I'm aware there are 4 colours, blue, green, black and red.
This is what I found, quoted by other members:

Blues: Solid general use hdd. It's either this or the Seagate Barracuda for budget builds.
Greens: Low power slower storage
Blacks: High performance
Reds: Slightly faster than Greens storage. Awesome for their nearly silent 3TB drives.

And many have said if I were to get a WD, get the Black version. It is better in term of realibility but not fail-proof, of course.


3) Enclosed casing or raw HDD?
I'm pretty sure I won't buy WD with enclosed casing because I will not know which color of HDD within (I was told most of the time it is either green or blue inside) and secondly, I do not want to get anymore HDD with hardware encryption like MyBook.
My question is more to if I were to get raw HDD (just like internal HDD), will I have any problem after long use because it is 'exposed' (at least the PCB board are exposed, maybe more prone to oxidisation?) to outside as I'm not going to install it inside my desktop?
In addition, if I were to get a raw HDD, I might buy a SATA-to-USB docking station as well but most of the docking station requires the HDD to be plug in vertically.
Isn't there a saying that because of the HDD read / write mechanism spinning, it is better for the HDD to lay down horizontally when it is being used?


4) 1TB or 2TB?
Some of you might agree that the bigger the size, the better it is because you can store more things and also in term of price, it is cheaper to get a 2TB compared to two 1TB HDD. However, I have friends who would rather get two 1TB HDD than one 2TB HDD due to some bad experiences.
I've also read that HDD with bigger storage tend to shorter lifespan due to the complexity and also the amount of data it handled and stored.
If that's true, I would rather pay more to have 2 1TB HDD, at least I will have 2 backup and not a single point of failure.


In conclusion, I know HDD do failed and I'm not looking for something that last forever but at least in term of reliability, I would appreciates if the HDD do show some symptoms of dying rather than just sudden death on me.

So, since I have 2 HDD which died on me without warning, I'm looking for something more reliable now.

Appreciates your opinions and experience sharing!

Hello unhappy_wd_user,

first of all, you need to regulary perform backups.
There is no magic word this is reliable and buy it. It is so many facts, that could cause damages on the drive. Regular backup is only solution. Rest is matter of luck.

I would say not. WD at least test all their drives (2.5" and 3.5") at 100% duty cycle (writing). So, for purposes of their reliability testing and MTBF calculations, the drives are used constanstly and are subjected to a duty cycle that is likely way more than the average consumer will put it through. I assume this is the same for other manufacturers.


None of us here can really answer that question as none of us run a large enough population of drives for the failure statistics to be meaningful. In addition, those here who are in data recovery by nature only work with failed drives, so their opinion is understandably skewed.

Those who do run enough drives, such as Backblaze, found Seagate to be the least reliable of all the drives they run (https://www.backblaze.com/blog/what-har ... uld-i-buy/).

Personally I've never had a WD drive fail on me, but have had a few Seagates fail (including an RMA'ed Seagate which also failed within a few weeks).


I would be hesitant to run a drive that is not either in an enclosed metal case or installed in a PC. They are too susceptible to shock while running, especially 2.5" drives. One light press on the top case while the drive is running (such as if something falls on it), and the drive will be killed.

You also have to consider that a metal enclosure allows heat dissipation away from the drive, which a plastic dock or vertical dock might not.

Drives are generally tested in all planes/axes so mounting them vertically will not be an issue. They should stay in one orientation while running though, and not be moved.


In your case, having been bitten with failed drives and presumably losing data, I would really think about getting 2 drives and keeping one as a backup of the other -- if the data is important to you.

Hi again jerovsek,

I clearly understood what you said and agreed with that and that is what I stressed again in my conclusion part that I understood HDD will eventually failed, no matter who the maker is. What I was looking for was some opinions from several different users who are willing to share what works for them and what's not.

And I do agreed with you on the "luck" matter. It does plays an important part.

Thanks for sharing that great piece of information from backblaze. It is interesting to read.

Now that makes me very interested to get my hand on Hitachi HDD but since it was bought over by WD, I dont think I can find any lying around now, can I?




I'm thinking to get an internal HDD now and connect using SATA-to-USB cables for now.



Yes, that's exactly what I thought!

Anything that is branded HGST (Hitachi Global Storage Technologies) in theory "should" still be a Hitachi design. It was more of a business acquisition rather than an acquisition to wipe out Hitachi's technology. Perhaps WD recognised Hitachi's reliability, even if their reputation was damaged by "Deathstar" name, although that was seriously over-hyped.

Hi there,

I would like to let you know that I am a WD representative and I am not going to discuss if our brand is better than the competitive.

Generally speaking, it is always a good decision to get an external drive to backup your data. I wouldn't say that the drive size matters in case of heating, noise and performance. It is more a HDD type matter.
If I were you, I wouldn't use internal as an external. I will tell you why. The concept of doing a backup is to secure your data and using an internal drive in an unusual environment is not the best decision. If you put the drive inside the desktop, it is not a secure backup anymore. I would recommend you to think about external drive that comes with its own enclosure, but, of course, if you insist, USB to SATA connection may do the job for you. Have in mind that using and internal HDD as an external with a third party enclosure may not be fully supported. Check the link below.

I see that you need to know the drives inside the device and not to be dependent of the encryption. You can always get an external without the encryption, like the WD Elements or WD Elements portable. As for the drives inside, check the link below for the official WD position.

The truth is that, like other mechanical devices, you can never be sure when the drive is going to fail. You can only make sure to handle the drive properly and protect your data. Using two externals is not unusual decision and I would say that, if you have the option, go for it. Do scheduled backups and store your devices separately. If anything goes wrong, do a RMA and rebuild.

Talking about WD drives, the WD Black is a great drive, when talking about performance and warranty. The truth is that no drive can be fail proofed. I can give you an advice: if you want to benefit the better warranty, go for the Black drive, but you will not experience the better performance when talking about a backup drive. I would use a Green or a Blue drive for this purpose. That is why you may find one of those in a desktop external.

And finally: You can never know when a Data Recovery will be easier. If you do not have backup and the drive fails, the best scenario is not to try to save the data yourself, but to contact a Data Recovery Company, because your actions may make recovery harder. In other words, do backups and don't be dependent of such companies

http://wdc.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/296 – Some information about installing SATA Drive in an external enclosure
http://wdc.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1704 - What drive is inside a portable device

Hope this helped

Hello R2D2_WD,

I have a question for you or other forum members: Why does WD use a data encryption chip in some of their external drives? What possible security value does it have, when a thief who steals the enclosure also steals the decryption capability in the enclosure? Or if a hacker accesses the data, the data is not at all protected by the encryption/decryption chip. The only "security" this type of encryption provides is that if the enclosure fails, you are secure in the knowledge that you have almost no hope of retrieving data on the disc. So why does WD do it?

A few years ago I purchased my first WD drive, a MyBook Studio Edition external drive. I used the drive to store video footage during a documentary shoot. The fooage that was irreplacable. I was travelling and intended to back up the footage when I returned to my base, but unfortunately the drive failed after less than a week of light use.

I accept that some drives will fail, and I know that seperate back ups are the only protection. What was interesting in this case was that a professional data recovery company could access the data on the bare drive, but it was completely scrambled. It turned out that the WD enclosure had encrypted the data, yet nowhere on the WD website or on the packaging did WD explain that the product featured automatic encryption. That is, the encryption was not a choice for the user, it was mandatory and data was encrypted without the user even knowing.

Following the discovery that the data was encrypted, I began a long correspondence with WD by phone and email. The WD staff I spoke too did not seem to be aware that the Studio drives were encrypted. They said that WD did not offer a decryption service and could not offer any technical support to my data recovery provider. Eventually a WD staff mentioned that a company in California had worked out how to decrypt the drives, but it would cost about US$1000 so it was not an option for me.

Ultimately WD offered to refund the purchase price of the Studio drive, which was welcome but no consolation for having my data still encrypted and unusable. I suspect that WD was legally skating on very thin ice when they sold external drives that featured mandatory encryption that the buyers were not aware of. I certainly would not have purchased the drive had I known it dangerously encrypted all data.

A year went by, and out of the blue the date recovery technician called to say that he had retrieved the data. Apparently the enclosure had a damaged Firewire port but the USB port still worked. So the encryption chip in the enclosure was still functioning, and the data was decrypted as it was backed up to a new drive.

It was a happy ending, but no thanks to WD who had created the problem by selling drives that unknowingly encrypted all data, and not providing any solutions or insights into how that encryption process worked.

I was probably one of the first people to experience this problem as the encrypted Studio Edition drives were new and few of them would have failed so early. I hope that someone with more resources has taken WD to court for recklessly pushing encryption onto unknowing consumers.

I don't know if WD are still not disclosing encryption in some of their products. Personally, I now avoid WD branded products.

And the question I still can't answer, is why on earth did WD think it was beneficial, or even reasonable, to put an encryption chip in a cheap-as-they-come plastic enclosure that looks like it was almost designed to fail? The WD product manager I was dealing with could not answer that question. Does anyone have a logical explanation?

Thank you!

I know you're not asking me, but here's my 2 cents.

I think the reason is so that the data is already encrypted if a password is set on the drive later. Otherwise it would have to go back and encrypt all existing data on the drive if you later decide to set a password.

So basically the password you enter in the WD smartware just allows access to the encryption key (stored in the hidden sectors at the end of the drive) which was always being used to encrypt the data.

Though it provides no protection if the thief has access to a PC-3000

_________________
Data Medics - Hard Drive, SSD, and RAID Data Recovery Service Company

Nice to have a company representative on the forum. If you have any technical expertise prepare to be bombarded with questions on here.

_________________
Data Medics - Hard Drive, SSD, and RAID Data Recovery Service Company

We all know who that WD guy is, and he's not a genuine rep. In fact several of his "WD partners" are hitting Tom's Hardware, claiming to be "Official Western Digital Representatives". No doubt Western Digital will correct me if I'm wrong.

_________________
A backup a day keeps DR away.

I believe I have read that what Data-Medics has said is one reason, if you choose to secure wipe, then just destroy the key. Also, there has been talk about bad sectors that hold your data. If the drive is not encrypted, then any sector that is fine will hold data, but after it is marked bad, it still holds your data, but not often will any format utility or other encryption utility touch that sector.. so theoretically you could have data, wipe it, then start storing files again, even using file encryption, then possibly you could recover data from the bad sectors that you didn't want or know could be recovered. It takes out a lot of uncertainty if the only thing left in a bad sector is 512k of encrypted bytes.. and possibly encrypted bytes with no key anymore.

That and other operations are easier if you only have to play with a key, and a bunch of bytes, not all the data on the drive. Easier == cheaper firmware dev == cheaper drives

You buy a drive and the purpose is to hold data and let you retrieve data. If the drive is working properly, this works fine, and inside, really is it our job to know what is going on, or to dictate how it should work?

Look at a regular car. Do we tell the manufacturer that yes the car works fine, but why the hell does it swerve into a pole and destroy the car if a wheel falls off?

I get the seemingly bone-headed way this is done makes it hard to retrieve files from a DR perspective, I really do... but these are the "features" that MAKES them cheap.

It all comes down to the 1 common word "Backups" even the best most revered drive that everyone says is the bees knees can fail in a way that cant be recovered.. so the best idea is to plan for the worst. That way you just have the same methodology that you can hone to your preferred solution regardless of what drive you use. BTW this is the idea of RAID Redundant Array of Inexpensive disks.... a system designed(essentially) to just grab a heap of "whatevers" and bundle them up and when a failure happens make it "easier" to get back up and running. Obviously this is over simplistic view.

I am personally in 2 minds about the veiled encryption.

That's my opinion at the moment.

cheers

Hello, Russ

Some WD products have encryption as a security measure. Usually security is stabled in different layers. One of them is physical security. The encryption chip provides encryption to the drive but the user will still use a password to de-crypt the data (if the user password protected the drive). This is where the complexity of your password helps preventing decryption. Also, the drive uses 256-bit AES which is still classified as unbreakable. If users wish the drive to be accessible only by them, the should put a password. The hardware encryption provides additional security making the drive unusable if someone tries to physically open the drive and read the data, bypassing the software encryption.
The cases of the external WD drives have nothing to do with the encryption. The purpose of the plastic material is protecting the drive, absorbing some shocks that may appear in everyday usage and keeping the price down, compared to metal enclosures.
You should keep in mind that not all WD product use encryption and if some do, that information should be provided in our web page.
I believe that fzabkar has mistaken me for someone else. I am an official WD representative and I don’t know what makes you think that I’m not. How would lying about this give me any benefits? As for Tom’s Hardware – the Official WD Representative “badge” was given to us by the forum administration after identity verification, we cannot simply put it there.

Hope this helps