Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > Seagate SeaTools for Windows. utter Rubish

Reply
Thread Tools

Seagate SeaTools for Windows. utter Rubish

 
 
Arno
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2009
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage impossible <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:gqpblr$tlk$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> impossible wrote:
>>
>>>>> SeaTools reads SMART data, which can only be interpreted accurately for
>>>>> a
>>>>> given drive by the drive's manufacturer. The same would apply for any
>>>>> manufacturer's diagnostic tools. Third-party tools that pretend to know
>>>>> better are complete and utter frauds.
>>>>
>>>> A drive manufacturer's diagnostic will pass a drive that has, say, 500
>>>> reallocated sectors, but a tool such as HD Sentinel may fail it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Reallocated sectors are commonplace, and they do not necessarily signal a
>>> failing frive. In any case, you cannot RMA a drive based on an HD
>>> Sentinel report. Either the drives passes a manufacturer diagnostic or it
>>> doesn't.

>>
>> No, but you can RMA it if it is haveing issues that get logged by windows
>> liek delayed write failures, getting kicked out of a raid all the time,
>> read errors etc. Done it before.
>>


> Only if the manufacturer approves, and iun the end they're going to use
> their own diagnostic tools to make that decision.


Typically they will just replace the drive, testing drives that
come in is far too expensive.

> Maybe you got a vendor to
> take back a poorly performing drive, but if the vendfor then RMA's the drive
> to the manufacturer under warranty, you can be sure that the manufacturer
> ran their own tests before shipping a free replacement.


No. And I have sucessfully RMAed drives that started to look like
they had a problem, but were still far from reaching the SMART
thresholds. You just need to find out how to coax a RMA
number from the webpage. On the last drive I just stated that
it had become inaccessible (which it had not).

>>>> However, I agree that the raw SMART data don't
>>>> always make much sense, unless you know how the manufacturer has
>>>> encoded them.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's why you're wasting your time with tools like HD Sentinel.

>>
>> They never work when I have tried them anyway. The only controller I can
>> use smart on here is an onboard that pretends its pata - everything else
>> will not do smart.


> I don't know of any drive manufactured in the last 8-10 years that doesn't
> do SMART.


Finally one good pice of information from you. The only one so far.

Arno
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rod Speed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2009
impossible wrote:
> "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:gqpblr$tlk$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> impossible wrote:
>>
>>>>> SeaTools reads SMART data, which can only be interpreted
>>>>> accurately for a
>>>>> given drive by the drive's manufacturer. The same would apply for
>>>>> any manufacturer's diagnostic tools. Third-party tools that
>>>>> pretend to know better are complete and utter frauds.
>>>>
>>>> A drive manufacturer's diagnostic will pass a drive that has, say,
>>>> 500 reallocated sectors, but a tool such as HD Sentinel may fail
>>>> it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Reallocated sectors are commonplace, and they do not necessarily
>>> signal a failing frive. In any case, you cannot RMA a drive based
>>> on an HD Sentinel report. Either the drives passes a manufacturer
>>> diagnostic or it doesn't.

>>
>> No, but you can RMA it if it is haveing issues that get logged by
>> windows liek delayed write failures, getting kicked out of a raid
>> all the time, read errors etc. Done it before.
>>

>
> Only if the manufacturer approves, and iun the end they're going to
> use their own diagnostic tools to make that decision. Maybe you got a
> vendor to take back a poorly performing drive, but if the vendfor
> then RMA's the drive to the manufacturer under warranty, you can be
> sure that the manufacturer ran their own tests before shipping a free
> replacement.
>>>> However, I agree that the raw SMART data don't
>>>> always make much sense, unless you know how the manufacturer has
>>>> encoded them.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's why you're wasting your time with tools like HD Sentinel.

>>
>> They never work when I have tried them anyway. The only controller I
>> can use smart on here is an onboard that pretends its pata -
>> everything else will not do smart.

>
> I don't know of any drive manufactured in the last 8-10 years that
> doesn't do SMART.


Pity about what gets thru the USB bridge.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2009
In message <gqp7mg$q8m$(E-Mail Removed)>, Richard wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> In message <gqnl3t$da9$(E-Mail Removed)>, Richard wrote:
>>
>>> Considering that a drive need not be partitioned or have a drive letter
>>> assigned to it to be able to be tested in seatools I fail to see the not
>>> displaying in my computer as being anything to be concerned about.

>>
>> You mean, you can't see or use a drive if it hasn't been partitioned?

>
> Correct.


I certainly can.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Rod Speed
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2009
impossible wrote:
> "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:gqpblr$tlk$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> impossible wrote:
>>
>>>>> SeaTools reads SMART data, which can only be interpreted
>>>>> accurately for a
>>>>> given drive by the drive's manufacturer. The same would apply for
>>>>> any manufacturer's diagnostic tools. Third-party tools that
>>>>> pretend to know better are complete and utter frauds.
>>>>
>>>> A drive manufacturer's diagnostic will pass a drive that has, say,
>>>> 500 reallocated sectors, but a tool such as HD Sentinel may fail
>>>> it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Reallocated sectors are commonplace, and they do not necessarily
>>> signal a failing frive. In any case, you cannot RMA a drive based
>>> on an HD Sentinel report. Either the drives passes a manufacturer
>>> diagnostic or it doesn't.

>>
>> No, but you can RMA it if it is haveing issues that get logged by
>> windows liek delayed write failures, getting kicked out of a raid
>> all the time, read errors etc. Done it before.


> Only if the manufacturer approves, and iun the end they're going to use their own diagnostic tools to make that
> decision.


They cant if you say the diag cant see the drive.

> Maybe you got a vendor to take back a poorly performing drive, but if the vendfor then RMA's the drive to the
> manufacturer under warranty, you can be sure that the manufacturer ran their own tests before shipping a free
> replacement.


And you can always just RMA it direct to Seagate.

>>>> However, I agree that the raw SMART data don't
>>>> always make much sense, unless you know how the manufacturer has
>>>> encoded them.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's why you're wasting your time with tools like HD Sentinel.

>>
>> They never work when I have tried them anyway. The only controller I
>> can use smart on here is an onboard that pretends its pata -
>> everything else will not do smart.

>
> I don't know of any drive manufactured in the last 8-10 years that
> doesn't do SMART.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike Ruskai
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2009
On or about Sun, 29 Mar 2009 19:45:26 +1300 did Woger <(E-Mail Removed)>
dribble thusly:

>So how can you trust SeaTools..?


As the others say, you can't. It was unable to run any tests on a drive
attached via eSATA on both my laptop and desktop. I had to pull my machine
out and jimmy a cable into a spare motherboard connector through a tangle of
cables, while the machine was running (I'm not about to shut down just for
that).

Once connected, I found it was incapable of running SMART tests on any drives.
it just reported a failure each time, even on quite healthy ones. At least it
failed the drive on the short test.

It doesn't seem to matter for getting an RMA, though. Just plug in your model
and serial numbers on the right web page, and you can get one automatically.

I had to do two recently, including the one that had read errors, and one
which shuts down the PSU when the power is plugged in (it killed the original
PSU outright).
 
Reply With Quote
 
Franc Zabkar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2009
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 02:32:25 -0400, Mike Ruskai
<(E-Mail Removed)> put finger to keyboard and
composed:

>I had to do two recently, including the one that had read errors, and one
>which shuts down the PSU when the power is plugged in (it killed the original
>PSU outright).


I'll bet the latter had a shorted TVS diode across either the +12V or
+5V rail. If your PSU is OK, then you can desolder this diode and the
drive should work OK without it. This type of fault is discussed quite
frequently in the HD forums.

- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
 
Reply With Quote
 
impossible
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2009

"Arno" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage impossible <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>> "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:gqpblr$tlk$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> impossible wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> SeaTools reads SMART data, which can only be interpreted accurately
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> given drive by the drive's manufacturer. The same would apply for any
>>>>>> manufacturer's diagnostic tools. Third-party tools that pretend to
>>>>>> know
>>>>>> better are complete and utter frauds.
>>>>>
>>>>> A drive manufacturer's diagnostic will pass a drive that has, say, 500
>>>>> reallocated sectors, but a tool such as HD Sentinel may fail it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Reallocated sectors are commonplace, and they do not necessarily signal
>>>> a
>>>> failing frive. In any case, you cannot RMA a drive based on an HD
>>>> Sentinel report. Either the drives passes a manufacturer diagnostic or
>>>> it
>>>> doesn't.
>>>
>>> No, but you can RMA it if it is haveing issues that get logged by
>>> windows
>>> liek delayed write failures, getting kicked out of a raid all the time,
>>> read errors etc. Done it before.
>>>

>
>> Only if the manufacturer approves, and iun the end they're going to use
>> their own diagnostic tools to make that decision.

>
> Typically they will just replace the drive, testing drives that
> come in is far too expensive.
>


No, it's not. They plug the drive in and run a 20-second pass-fail test,
like SeaTools.

>> Maybe you got a vendor to
>> take back a poorly performing drive, but if the vendfor then RMA's the
>> drive
>> to the manufacturer under warranty, you can be sure that the manufacturer
>> ran their own tests before shipping a free replacement.

>
> No. And I have sucessfully RMAed drives that started to look like
> they had a problem, but were still far from reaching the SMART
> thresholds.


Point is, you have no idea what the SMART thresholds for a particular drive
are. You don't even know whether the raw number that tools like HD Sentinel
blindly read from SMART are actual event colunts or just some normalized
reference value.

> You just need to find out how to coax a RMA
> number from the webpage. On the last drive I just stated that
> it had become inaccessible (which it had not).
>


Being clever gets you a bar-coded label to print and instructions on how to
pack your drive. To "coax" a replacement drive from the manufacturer
requires that the drive actually fail the manufacturer's test.

>>>>> However, I agree that the raw SMART data don't
>>>>> always make much sense, unless you know how the manufacturer has
>>>>> encoded them.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's why you're wasting your time with tools like HD Sentinel.
>>>
>>> They never work when I have tried them anyway. The only controller I can
>>> use smart on here is an onboard that pretends its pata - everything else
>>> will not do smart.

>
>> I don't know of any drive manufactured in the last 8-10 years that
>> doesn't
>> do SMART.

>
> Finally one good pice of information from you. The only one so far.
>


Wasted your money on HD Sentinel, didn't you, chump?

 
Reply With Quote
 
impossible
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2009

"Arno" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage impossible <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>> "Justin Goldberg" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9BDD83A49AAF4j1u2s3t4i5n6forXnews@69.16.18 5.247...
>>> "Ato_Zee" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:CmLzl.237660$Bt3.58818
>>> @newsfe03.ams2:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 29-Mar-2009, Arno <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> > So how can you trust SeaTools..?
>>>>>
>>>>> You cannot?
>>>>
>>>> Found the same thing, SeaTools is rubbish.
>>>> Profitable rubbish if it doesn't find faults with
>>>> drives that should be RMA'd.
>>>
>>> It works with any drive, too, so it would seem that it has no special
>>> knowledge of Seagate drives that other drive utilities don't have, imho.
>>> If I'm incorrect please let me know.

>
>> SeaTools reads SMART data, which can only be interpreted accurately for a
>> given drive by the drive's manufacturer. The same would apply for any
>> manufacturer's diagnostic tools. Third-party tools that pretend to know
>> better are complete and utter frauds.

>
> Not necessarily. First, there are the manufacturer thresholds. Then
> there are experience values that can be better than the thresholds,
> for example for reallocated sectors and poending sectors. Also a
> third party tool can have a database of disk pecularities.
>


You're reading this promo directly off the HD Sentinel website, aren't you?

> Interpretation of SMART data has been done in this group for years.


Badly.

> There is not reason at all to put this into a tool.
>


Those tools belong to the manufacturers.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Stephen Worthington
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2009
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 11:47:31 GMT, "impossible" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>"Arno" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage impossible <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Richard" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:gqpblr$tlk$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> impossible wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> SeaTools reads SMART data, which can only be interpreted accurately
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> given drive by the drive's manufacturer. The same would apply for any
>>>>>>> manufacturer's diagnostic tools. Third-party tools that pretend to
>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>> better are complete and utter frauds.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A drive manufacturer's diagnostic will pass a drive that has, say, 500
>>>>>> reallocated sectors, but a tool such as HD Sentinel may fail it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Reallocated sectors are commonplace, and they do not necessarily signal
>>>>> a
>>>>> failing frive. In any case, you cannot RMA a drive based on an HD
>>>>> Sentinel report. Either the drives passes a manufacturer diagnostic or
>>>>> it
>>>>> doesn't.
>>>>
>>>> No, but you can RMA it if it is haveing issues that get logged by
>>>> windows
>>>> liek delayed write failures, getting kicked out of a raid all the time,
>>>> read errors etc. Done it before.
>>>>

>>
>>> Only if the manufacturer approves, and iun the end they're going to use
>>> their own diagnostic tools to make that decision.

>>
>> Typically they will just replace the drive, testing drives that
>> come in is far too expensive.
>>

>
>No, it's not. They plug the drive in and run a 20-second pass-fail test,
>like SeaTools.
>
>>> Maybe you got a vendor to
>>> take back a poorly performing drive, but if the vendfor then RMA's the
>>> drive
>>> to the manufacturer under warranty, you can be sure that the manufacturer
>>> ran their own tests before shipping a free replacement.

>>
>> No. And I have sucessfully RMAed drives that started to look like
>> they had a problem, but were still far from reaching the SMART
>> thresholds.

>
>Point is, you have no idea what the SMART thresholds for a particular drive
>are. You don't even know whether the raw number that tools like HD Sentinel
>blindly read from SMART are actual event colunts or just some normalized
>reference value.
>
>> You just need to find out how to coax a RMA
>> number from the webpage. On the last drive I just stated that
>> it had become inaccessible (which it had not).
>>

>
>Being clever gets you a bar-coded label to print and instructions on how to
>pack your drive. To "coax" a replacement drive from the manufacturer
>requires that the drive actually fail the manufacturer's test.


Actually, if you are dealing with a reputable retailer, you will get a
forward replacement for your drive so that you can copy all the data
onto the new one.

I would guess that you buy from the wrong shops since you do not seem
to have ever experienced this.

>>>>>> However, I agree that the raw SMART data don't
>>>>>> always make much sense, unless you know how the manufacturer has
>>>>>> encoded them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's why you're wasting your time with tools like HD Sentinel.
>>>>
>>>> They never work when I have tried them anyway. The only controller I can
>>>> use smart on here is an onboard that pretends its pata - everything else
>>>> will not do smart.

>>
>>> I don't know of any drive manufactured in the last 8-10 years that
>>> doesn't
>>> do SMART.

>>
>> Finally one good pice of information from you. The only one so far.
>>

>
>Wasted your money on HD Sentinel, didn't you, chump?


You can use the trial version.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Justin Goldberg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-30-2009
On Mar 30, 12:30*am, Arno <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage impossible <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > "Franc Zabkar" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
> >> On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 20:36:02 GMT, "impossible" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> >> put finger to keyboard and composed:

>
> >>>SeaTools reads SMART data, which can only be interpreted accurately for a
> >>>given drive by the drive's manufacturer. The same would apply for any
> >>>manufacturer's diagnostic tools. Third-party tools that pretend to know
> >>>better are complete and utter frauds.

>
> >> A drive manufacturer's diagnostic will pass a drive that has, say, 500
> >> reallocated sectors, but a tool such as HD Sentinel may fail it.

> > Reallocated sectors are commonplace, and they do not necessarily signal a
> > failing frive. In any case, you cannot RMA a drive based on an HD Sentinel
> > report. Either the drives passes a manufacturer diagnostic or it doesn't.

>
> In practice, you can RMA any drive, even one that is perfectly fine.
>
> Also certain numbers of reallocated sectod do signal a failing drive,
> and a steady increase over a certain rate does to. Not with maximum
> reliability, but SMART also is about early warning, so a bit of
> paranoia is a good idea.
>
> >> In this particular case I'd fail it, too. I certainly wouldn't trust such
> >> a drive with my data.

> > That's why you run daily backups.
> >> However, I agree that the raw SMART data don't
> >> always make much sense, unless you know how the manufacturer has
> >> encoded them.

>
> > That's why you're wasting your time with tools like HD Sentinel.

>
> Not at all. Seem to me you have limited experience with SMART.
>
> Arno


Google's paper, Failure Trends in a Large Disk Drive Population:
http://labs.google.com/papers/disk_failures.pdf states:

Our results confirm the findings of previous smaller population studies
that suggest that some of the SMART parameters are well-correlated
with higher failure probabilities. We find, for example, that after
their first scan error, drives are 39 times more likely to fail within
60 days than drives with no such errors. First errors in
reallocations, offline reallocations, and probational counts are also
strongly correlated to higher failure probabilities. Despite those
strong correlations, we find that failure prediction models based on
SMART parameters alone are likely to be severely limited in their
prediction accuracy, given that a large fraction of our failed drives
have shown no SMART error signals whatsoever. This result suggests
that SMART models are more useful in predicting trends for large
aggregate populations than for individual components. It also suggests
that powerful predictive models need to make use of signals beyond
those provided by SMART.

So S.M.A.R.T. is really not proven technology, like IBM's glass
platter drives. [1] Anyone else concur?


[1] http://www.datacent.com/datarecovery/hdd/ibm
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to stop Idiots that keep posting Rubish. William Brown NZ Computing 2 10-06-2010 11:08 AM
nested lists - utter newbie rahoool@gmail.com Python 2 07-01-2005 07:03 PM
Re: ABC Early Voting Poll: Why this is utter propaganda. Jasmine DVD Video 0 10-28-2004 06:55 AM
Rubish Way of extracting elements Daniel Vlkerts Ruby 12 08-18-2004 03:24 PM
Re: SeaTools FREE disk utility from Seagate - go get it! Jack A+ Certification 2 06-29-2004 09:41 AM



Advertisments