Is it just me or has SanDisk always been kind of sketchy?
I remember hating them when I was using their SD cards on my Nintendo Wii... I had a lot of those little things fail on me.
They were always the cheapest available USB drives, and it always made me go "why? quality?"
I've used so many of their memory cards, flash drives, not much in the way of SSDs. I've had only one fail on me, that I can remember. I don't want to say it's not happening. But I also wonder how many fakes ppl received, damaging SD's name. Either way, aside from this latest spat, they've made pretty good products. There was another period years ago I felt they dropped the ball, can't remember why, but otherwise generally good.
Same here. I've only stopped using their stuff when it was already too small for me. Their CruzerBlade flash drives are my favorite flash drives thanks to their fast random access. I installed Linux Mint on 1 of them and it runs fairly well. Much faster than HDD unless you're doing large file transfers. Obviously this greatly limits their lifespan, flash drives can't handle so many writes.
I just replaced a SanDisk MicroSD card in my phone for Samsung one, and I regret it. Moving many small files is noticeably slower.
On the other hand there's Philips. Sequential I/O gave me better results than the SanDisk drive, but that thing isn't even useful as installation disk. That thing is just awfully slow. How they managed to make a flash drive slower than DVD, I don't understand. But hopefully it's just faulty unit that I have.
I have used SanDisk cards for years, without issue. They are a huge manufacturer of flash memory, which is why their prices were always good. It is certainly possible and even probable that the quality has gone down. All kinds of companies lower their product's quality and reliability to make them cheaper to increase profits.
Yup, they've been the reliable, fast brand for me for SD cards for years. I'm not going to buy their SSDs, but I'll buy their SD cards any day of the week.
I had many USB drives and SD cards from them, one actually died after 5 years in my phone and it's not actually fully dead. My Pi runs from them, no problems there.
The complaint is seeking class-action certification on behalf of people who bought a 500GB, 1TB, 2TB, or 4TB SanDisk Extreme Pro, SanDisk Extreme, or Western Digital My Passport SSD that was "designed, manufactured, distributed, promoted and/or sold" since January 2023.
Looks like this is for people who've purchased the drives since January 2023. So does it not affect people from before?
Found a PDF of the complaint from another article, which says "since at least January 2023" on page 15, so, take that as you will.
I wonder if that suggests that hardware made prior to that data doesn't suffer from the same flaws? Or if it's just an arbitrary cut off they decided on for the affected customers they would include in the lawsuit.
Here’s the original article from Ars Technica last May. IIRC this has the details on which drives are suspect.
This is the important question.
Damn, WD's been my go-to brand for drives for years.
Brand is mostly irrelevant with storage devices in my experience... It's usually just a matter of luck.
Unless we're discussing the Quantum Bigfoot...
We abandoned using SanDisk after WD merged the G-DRIVE into them. This particular model we've seen like half a dozen fail over 6 months as well as 3 failures from their 22TB HDD Pro series which is what replaced G-DRIVE. Their quality has really plummeted.
Someone should get one of these and dd copy all 0xdeadbeefs to the disk
Then dd it all off and confirm no corruption and it truly is the size it says.
Seen firmwares of shitty sd cards and drives lie about their storage capacity
Here is a 15GB card, btw it only has 9GB.
The issue with this is the difference between GB (1,000,000,000 bytes) and GiB (1,073,741,824 bytes) https://massive.io/file-transfer/gb-vs-gib-whats-the-difference/
HDD manufacturers use GB, which is a metric measurement, because its better for marketing while computers use GiB, which is a binary measurement. So people think they're buying 15GiB but in reality they're buying 13.5GiB marketed as 15GB
That's not the only issue. Some flash drives have been found to completely misrepresent their sizes. There was something of an epidemic of them a few years ago, so much so that people started testing their drives after purchase (with tools eg Fight Flash Fraud). You could fill up the drive, then it would just completely fail as it did not actually have the storage capacity advertised.
Suffice it to say, the data storage industry isn't without its own brand of shady practices.
Just as a side note for any reader that doesn't already know it, the computer ones are 2 to the power of a multiple of 10.
So 1 kilobyte is 2^10^ (which is 1024) bytes, 1 MiB is 2^20^ (1048576) btes and so on.
So there is actually some logic behind the wierd looking numbers.
True, and adding the filesystem also takes off somewhat. That, however, doesn't explain 15 vs 9 gb
The next level is that some flash drives reserve some of the space as a hot failover as memory cells die. Some have this separate from the advertised memory capacity, whereas others may report the total memory on the device even if it's not available for direct use by the user.
So a double whammy of GB vs GiB and reserve flash memory to keep the drive going as cells die.
And then you have to put a filesystem on it, which has its own metadata – file attributes and folder/file names and so on. If you use NTFS you lose at least 12.5% to the metadata so now you're down to 11.8 GiB. 😛
As an amusing side note, I once came across a joke compression program that could compress any data down to zero bytes. It did this by creating directories filled with zero-sized files whose filenames contained the actual data of the file in question.
If you right-clicked on the folder and asked the OS how big it was, it'd report 0 bytes. But of course all that data still had to be stored somewhere, in the metadata of the filesystem.
That's part of why I use du on Linux instead of df/ls -l to figure out file/directory/partition usage. The former figures out actual size on disk, whereas the latter ignores metadata like the list of files in the directory.
Damn that sucks, I have one of those extreme 4tb drives. I've had it for more than a year with no problems tho. It's such an awesome form factor for such a large drive. I have three partitions on it. One FAT32 for music that I can play on my phone and the other two are ext4 with movies and TV for the Raspberry Pi. On a related note, why the fuck can't android recognize an external ext4 drive. Like the entire internal file structure is ext4.
Ikr, still boggles my mind, it's like Linux without the Linux
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Amid ongoing pressure to address claims that its SanDisk Extreme SSDs are still erasing data and becoming unmountable despite a firmware fix, Western Digital is facing a lawsuit over its storage drives.
Complaints about the drives littered SanDisk's forums and Reddit (examples here, here, here, and here) for at least four months before Western Digital released a firmware fix in late May.
Nathan Krum filed a lawsuit [PDF] against Western Digital in a federal court in San Jose, California, on Wednesday, as spotted by The Register.
The complaint says Western Digital "engaged in a scheme to mislead consumers" about Extreme and My Passport SSDs and that both series of drives are still defective after the firmware update, "according to reports from individuals who installed this fix."
Western Digital's current product page advertises Extreme drives as fit for photographers, and it's pushed My Passport as suitable for creators and businesses.
The SMR and drive size scandals resulted in class-action lawsuits, with the former reportedly ending in a $2.7 million settlement and the latter with Western Digital compensating affected parties with free backup and recovery software worth $30.
I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Damn, I have one of these that I use a lot for work, it's been pretty reliable so far, but this makes me think I should get something else to replace it...
Same here -- had one at a previous job and thought it was great. Got another one for my current job, and just bought another one for my Dad. I think the takeaway here is what we've always known though, which is to never trust your storage solutions. As long as there's multiple copies, I think it's okay to continue using them.
I have one as well. Did the firmware update a few months ago when it would periodically just start skipping or stop responding (I have my music collection on it). Haven't had an issue since.
Now what the hell did they think was gonna happen when they shipped defective drives? Did they really think people wouldn't notice their bytes vanishing into the ether and their drives dropping off the bus?
This is unfortunate. I just bought one a couple months ago but haven’t even opened it yet.
I just bought ones of these on discount at Costco in July… Are they fixed? Can they even be trusted? Ugh.
Just like any other drive, assume they could fail at any moment, and have backups.
I’m not worried about losing data, I’m worried the drive won’t work when I need it to copy new data.
Check the model number. We bought ours from Costco as well, so I checked ours based off the article Ars Technica published last week. Our SDDs were older.
I guess mine is old too; SDSSDE50-1T00. The Support page for the disconnect issue lists it as unaffected and no firmware updates available.
It's getting difficult to trust these companies though. The entire line of Samsung Evo 870 500GB drives I bought at work are failing early, I just passed 11/20 Dead or Dying. Then I bought some Western Digital Blue drives as a replacement that had 65K reviews on Amazon only to find out they might also be lemons. Quality Control has gone to shit.
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed