Originally Posted by 45nm
Samples based off the 7200.11. It was well acknowledged that those drives had certain problems with firmware which is what that article specifically states. However the 7200.12 do not exhibit the same issues with their firmware as their predecessor. The article itself is outdated and irrelevant as such because they compare a previous series rather than the current Seagate 7200.12. Also consider the article date of publication.
However the way I see it is that Toms Hardware simply published a controversial report to generate site traffic than to expose a pattern of hardware failure on a brand basis.
What evidence do you have to show that the 7200.12 are more reliable than 7200.11? While the article is slightly outdated, it's still the best info we can find on hard drive reliablity by brand.
Another point of data is Newegg user reviews. While the reviews can't be considered scientific evidence, it's still an indication of the initial failure rate of hard drive. Now I know people will blame Newegg's packaging, but all the bare drives are packed equally poorly, so they took an equal amount of abuse during shipping.
Samsung F3 1TB bare drive, 14% of reviews rated it 1 or 2 stars.
Seagate 7200.12 1TB bare drive, 27% of reviews rated it 1 or 2 stars.