icefloe01

They are somewhat hand-in-hand problems. First the drive will lock up in a "BSY" state and will not be detected by the BIOS. Some have successfully unlocked their drive from the "BSY" state and it gets recognized by the BIOS but it is detected as LBA 0B in size.

I thnk we would have a really solid case there if they all occurred on the exact same day at the exact same time coinciding with Zune failure because of the whole leap second thing. LOL

Heh, I was about post asking about the link, refreshed the page instead and you had already fixed it. LOL Very interesting article. Now if only it were worthy of 20/20 picking up on it and blasting Seagate publically WORLDWIDE.

I found another forum where someone is having the same issue: HDD Guru forum I posted a link to here with some extra information. So hopefully we'll have another drive to add to the list. In fact, I think I'll go PM the guy with the problem...

Just did a search for "beware 7200.11". avsforums was 1st and this thread was 2nd!

There may be a language barrier happening here, but no one was actually insulting you for not buying into a conspiracy theory. Yes, if you had read the thread or searched it, PCB swap has been tried. It does not work because the firmware is not encoded in the PCB, it is written on the disk platter itself. As for shorting pins on the connector, there really isn't much of a possibility of that doing anything. That works for a computer BIOS chip because there is A: a battery powering it all the time, and B: when you do the jumper you still have to turn on the computer for it to go into effect. There is no battery on the PCB of the drives, and shorting data pins and powering it on will more than likely damage the controller chips on the PCB of the drive. And, there is no "dumping ground for madcap garbage and idiocy", just frustrated users posting jabs at a seemingly indifferent hardware manufacturer. You came into this topic about 20 or 21 pages into the discussions. The questions you posed showed a lack of thread research on your part, and then you started attacking other posters and trying to tell us how to run this discussion. This has the potential to put in the category of a troll because of your impolite actions.

12 January, 2009, 10:15AM this thread has 24,232 views. Granted, there are a lot of the key posters refreshing the page for updated information, but I doubt that would be even half of that page count though!!!

The only two things I can think of are free personal webspace sites (e.g. Geocities) that let you upload a few megabytes worth of stuff, or, and this is probably the least favorable of the two, most ISP's provide subscribers with 10MB worth of webspace. The dataset could be uploaded there with a direct link provided to it. Since it would basically be a text document of sorts, it would at most be a few hundred KB in size and would not be a concern towards data limits imposed by the ISP. But then some person or maybe an "organization" may develop a personal vendetta against you and hit the list several thousand times a day/hour thereby killing your account... So, not all that good an idea. Just call me "Mr. Conspiracy Theory". LOL

The relevance of these statements is to think in terms of how survey results are calculated. No one ever surveys the entire populace (except at census time). They only survey a sample of people, therefore each person represents the opinions/views/experiences of thousands. The only real caveat here would be that the technically savvy/computer enthusiast subset of the world population would be a smaller sample of the population as a whole, but each person "surveyed" would still represent a whole heckuva lot of people. I think the representation would be MUCH greater than this example, but say each drive failure posted here represents an equivalent of only 100 drives per drive posted. At 40 drives that's 4,000 failures right there. And I dare say that's NOT statistically insignificant. So I would say we need to keep the database going and growing, but we might need to toss around some ideas of how to keep the thread cleaned up a bit. Like not posting the entire list each time a drive is added, but possibly having a spreadsheet or database maintained offline with a link posted to it so each person could see it/analyze it/download it at any given time. The main problem with this idea is that it saddles one individual with the task of update/upkeep of the list and that's not exactly fair to them...

Yeah, this was discussed back on page 15...

Yes, I can tell you! Seagate actually acknowledged a firmware problem on the drives with an 8 in place of the 3. See here: http://www.seagate.com/www/en-us/support/d...wnloads/cuda-fw Take Luck!

no, I think in the list is at least one with a SD81, too Tokuro himself was the other one with SD81...

If you have a gmail account, sign in and do your search again. There will be a link next to the result so you can promote ite to the top. The more people do that, the higher this forum will show in results for everyone else too. I also did a search for "seagate 7200.11 falling down" and "seagate 7200.11 problems" went to the bottom of the page and clicked the link so I could actually add this forum as a result. I did this with five (yep five) accounts I use on a daily basis.

What state do you live in?

I just PM'd him on those forums asking if he would be willing to share his experience and drive information with us. That would make the list of drives even more impressive!

Something else we can do; if you have a google account, sign in and try various searches for seagate problems. At the bottom of the page is a link to add a result. There you can add a link to the first page of this forum topic. The more people add similar results, the higher this forum will appear for others to find their way here.

No, I don't think it's become an afterthought, it just requires some "behind the scenes" work that would cause the thread to become a bit obscure, especially to search engines. So the more updates we have on failed drives, the better this thread it will appear in Google and other search engines. So maybe what would be better thing to do, since this thread has a pretty good view count and listing in Google, is to start a thread dedicated towards writing the code for fixing it as both fatlip and pichi seem to be making strides in that area, and then relevant updates and links could be posted here. What does everyone think of that?

In all seriousness this "data" is irrelevant to finding a solution... *snip* While it would not be relevent towards finding a solution, it would be relevant towards building a stronger case against Seagate for denying that there is a problem and trying to sweep it under the rug. I'm trying to find if there are any consumer protection groups that work with sort of thing and what steps would need to be done to build a solid case. Afterall, it's clear that SG knows about this and are refusing to acknowledging it.

Anyone here from India? I did not do any in-depth looking on this site, so I do not know the legitimacy of it... http://www.consumergrievance.com/

LOL I was about to say the same...

Hmm, I'm starting to consider using Carbonite. US$50 a year for online backup and they don't care how much data you have. I might have to email them and make sure they're not using Seagate drives though... heh In fact, I DID ask the IT department where I work (40,000+ employees worldwide) what they use and I was informed that our data is entrusted to Western Digital drives. For the longest time I despised WD drives simply because of the confusing way the jumper worked on IDE drives. No jumper was for a single drive. Jumper in one place for Master with non-compliant slave, jumper in another for slave, or a third position for cable select. What I always hated about that was the fact that there was no jumper position for master with slave present, only master with non-compliant slave present. They seem to have fixed that within recent years though. So, considering the nature of the business where I work, and the sensitivity of that data, and the fact that WD is chosen to protect it, I will now have to revise my view of WD and invest in some of their storage.

And then once you learn how to use it completely, you start a side business of data recovery and hard drive rejuvenation!! Depreciate it on business expense and your almost 100% profit from there on out!!

How about at least the first four characters so we continue to see the trend of affected drives...?

Hmm, from the list of drives so far, this seems to be affecting only 500GB drives. I wonder if there is a particular amount of capacity that gets hit before the drive "flips it's wig"?

In another thread from somewhere else in the cloud (maybe this forum maybe Seagate, I can't remember) ANxx series firmware is for SAS (Serial Attached SCSI) drives and SNxx is for SATA drives. Both series of firmware are only for the ES.2 drives. These are the drives that end with NS instead of AS. Because of the advanced features of these drives for enterprise use, your drive will be bricked if you use their firmware on the AS series.