Expired Hot Deals

[Amazon.ca] WD 8TB My Book Desktop External Hard Drive, USB 3.0 $199.99

[OP]
Newbie
Mar 9, 2014
87 posts
53 upvotes
Ottawa

[Amazon.ca] WD 8TB My Book Desktop External Hard Drive, USB 3.0 $199.99

A person can possibly shuck it.

Costco deal was the cheapest.
Last edited by viktor89 on Jul 6th, 2020 2:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
58 replies
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Oct 8, 2006
5432 posts
507 upvotes
Toronto
I usually wait until $180 or below.
Deal Addict
Apr 13, 2006
4133 posts
205 upvotes
viktor89 wrote: A person can possibly shuck it.

Costco deal was the cheapest.
To save people time from searching here is the Costco thread: costco-western-digital-mybook-8tb-199-99-2364467/
Good resource with videos/comments etc. on how to shuck, encryption, what happens if drive dies, which cables to use if you need to bypass the power, etc. as well as being aware that it has been cheaper before
Public Mobile | Tangerine | Questrade
Sr. Member
Dec 25, 2010
909 posts
302 upvotes
Vancouver
Costco still has this drive for $189 in the warehouse or $199 online.
Deal Addict
Sep 12, 2007
2383 posts
704 upvotes
Are these WD better than the 8TB Seagate (which I bought from Staples for $150 in Dec 18 - thread on here).
Looking to add a 2nd for backups, and rotate monthly between the 2, store the other in the safe.

-on another note (please point be to the right thread if exists, looking to do a 3rd backup copy offsite, at my family's place- is there anything in place to facilitate this easily?

cheers
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Oct 8, 2006
5432 posts
507 upvotes
Toronto
vodka wrote: Are these WD better than the 8TB Seagate (which I bought from Staples for $150 in Dec 18 - thread on here).
Looking to add a 2nd for backups, and rotate monthly between the 2, store the other in the safe.

-on another note (please point be to the right thread if exists, looking to do a 3rd backup copy offsite, at my family's place- is there anything in place to facilitate this easily?

cheers
Difference is the type of drive. the WD are CMR/PMR not SMR like seagate. You can look up the details, but CMR/PMR is better, especially if your going to shuck them for a NAS.

There was a 'scandal' with WD though a while back, in which they had SMR in their NAS line 2TB-6TB I believe.
Member
Sep 29, 2010
330 posts
383 upvotes
vodka wrote: Are these WD better than the 8TB Seagate (which I bought from Staples for $150 in Dec 18 - thread on here).
Looking to add a 2nd for backups, and rotate monthly between the 2, store the other in the safe.

-on another note (please point be to the right thread if exists, looking to do a 3rd backup copy offsite, at my family's place- is there anything in place to facilitate this easily?

cheers
WD is always better than seagate.
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 5, 2010
1290 posts
612 upvotes
pdipps wrote: WD is always better than seagate.
Thanks to people thinking this way who insist on buying WD only, it pushes Seagate drives with more sales and I'm grateful to get my drives cheaper. I have plenty of WD and Seagate drives and all my important datas are copied on 2. No matter the brands, consumer or entreprise grade, drives will eventually die and betting on the brand instead of the number is a risky move.

As long as it's not SMR when I don't intend to use it as an archive drive, any brands are fine for me.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Mar 21, 2010
4495 posts
2927 upvotes
Edmonton
Gin Martini wrote: Thanks to people thinking this way who insist on buying WD only, it pushes Seagate drives with more sales and I'm grateful to get my drives cheaper. I have plenty of WD and Seagate drives and all my important datas are copied on 2. No matter the brands, consumer or entreprise grade, drives will eventually die and betting on the brand instead of the number is a risky move.

As long as it's not SMR when I don't intend to use it as an archive drive, any brands are fine for me.
This. I've owned plenty of Seagate, WD and other brands. Redundancy is the only real solution. Brand name is irrelevant. Some models of some brands in some generations may exhibit specific issues but to write of an entire brand is silly. Average consumer should buy the cheapest drive that fits their needs. Then buy one or two more for redundant backup and sleep easy. I've lost drives but never data because I keep 3 copies.

It's a simple concept that has proven difficult to educate people on. My own family members think that the one copy of data they have on their external hard drive is a "backup". I eventually gave up and just decided to backup their entire computers everytime I visit for holidays and setup free cloud backup for smaller sized critical data.
Be a nice person and enjoy life

My feedback: Heatware Redflagdeals
Jr. Member
Jun 14, 2017
114 posts
111 upvotes
My first hard disk was a 20 MB model in the early 1980s and I have worked in the IT industry since the 1990s. I have handled thousands of hard disks over the years and have purchased over 100 for myself.
I do not understand the brand loyalty directing some people's decisions. It is sort of like saying that you can only trust Ford vehicles and that all GM models will die prematurely. Imagine saying such things when there is only one other minor car manufacturer and nearly half the world is driving GMs already.
These arguments are especially difficult to understand in the modern times when companies like BackBlaze report meaningful statistics on the subject. A Western Digital model was the failure-rate leader for both 2018 and 2019, but that doesn't change the stance of people like pdipps.
I don't hear that argument very often from people that have decades of experience in the IT field. It is usually people that have suffered one or two drives and have a total sample size of < 10. I am shocked how many people will propagate this false information.
Edit: I completely agree with the 2 comments before me....very good advice.
Member
Sep 29, 2010
330 posts
383 upvotes
Gin Martini wrote: Thanks to people thinking this way who insist on buying WD only, it pushes Seagate drives with more sales and I'm grateful to get my drives cheaper. I have plenty of WD and Seagate drives and all my important datas are copied on 2. No matter the brands, consumer or entreprise grade, drives will eventually die and betting on the brand instead of the number is a risky move.

As long as it's not SMR when I don't intend to use it as an archive drive, any brands are fine for me.
I mean, There was a server company that did tests on a huge sample size - i think it's this https://www.backblaze.com/b2/hard-drive-test-data.html (I think, link is blocked from my current connection) - Seagate had a noticable higher fail rate.

That and the only drives I've ever had die across all of my PC's, NAS's, and even the PC's of friends and family I end up fixing have ALWAYS* been Seagates (*and a few Toshiba drives)

I have WD drives in NAS's that have been running for 10+ years. No issues.

I'd rather pay the extra $10-15 and keep my data, thanks.

(That said, I don't mind using greens and blues in NAS's - they work fine if you're not an enterprise. My NAS has a feature to trick the drive to not spinning into eco mode)
Member
Sep 29, 2010
330 posts
383 upvotes
pbtech wrote: My first hard disk was a 20 MB model in the early 1980s and I have worked in the IT industry since the 1990s. I have handled thousands of hard disks over the years and have purchased over 100 for myself.
I do not understand the brand loyalty directing some people's decisions. It is sort of like saying that you can only trust Ford vehicles and that all GM models will die prematurely. Imagine saying such things when there is only one other minor car manufacturer and nearly half the world is driving GMs already.
These arguments are especially difficult to understand in the modern times when companies like BackBlaze report meaningful statistics on the subject. A Western Digital model was the failure-rate leader for both 2018 and 2019, but that doesn't change the stance of people like pdipps.
I don't hear that argument very often from people that have decades of experience in the IT field. It is usually people that have suffered one or two drives and have a total sample size of < 10. I am shocked how many people will propagate this false information.
Edit: I completely agree with the 2 comments before me....very good advice.
It's less brand loyalty, than it is avoiding poor quality. I'd consider brands other than WD, there's just not much else out there that isn't Seagate

- Hitachi (Pre WD purchase) drives are great too (they were eventually bought by WD). Hitachi had a poor rep for a while, but out of nowhere started producing stellar drives.
- Most of my SSDs are Kingston or Crucial. also great, reliable.
Jr. Member
Jun 14, 2017
114 posts
111 upvotes
Backblaze goes through over 100,000 drives and publishes failure rate data. I am not sure how you define poor quality, but Blackblaze doesn't seem to agree with you. Don't you think THEY would know to avoid Seagate? Do you really think you have more insight on the topic than they do?
Edit: Backblaze is a special sort of company that offers storage based on CONSUMER hard disks; the ones we are talking about (and not the high end SAS options for servers). They actually specialize in leveraging the products we are talking about as their business model. I am not aware of a single major purchaser of consumer drives (Dell, HP, Lenovo, Backblaze, Asus, Acer, etc) that avoids Seagate. There is a reason they are a market leader, despite bad advice from people like pdipps.
pdipps wrote: It's less brand loyalty, than it is avoiding poor quality. I'd consider brands other than WD, there's just not much else out there that isn't Seagate

- Hitachi (Pre WD purchase) drives are great too (they were eventually bought by WD). Hitachi had a poor rep for a while, but out of nowhere started producing stellar drives.
- Most of my SSDs are Kingston or Crucial. also great, reliable.
Member
Sep 29, 2010
330 posts
383 upvotes
pbtech wrote: Backblaze goes through over 100,000 drives and publishes failure rate data. I am not sure how you define poor quality, but Blackblaze doesn't seem to agree with you. Don't you think THEY would know to avoid Seagate? Do you really think you have more insight on the topic than they do?
Edit: Backblaze is a special sort of company that offers storage based on CONSUMER hard disks; the ones we are talking about (and not the high end SAS options for servers). They actually specialize in leveraging the products we are talking about as their business model. I am not aware of a single major purchaser of consumer drives (Dell, HP, Lenovo, Backblaze, Asus, Acer, etc) that avoids Seagate. There is a reason they are a market leader, despite bad advice from people like pdipps.
tbh, haven't checked the most recent report, but the have, in the past, pretty consistently pointed out Seagate as having a higher failure rate than WD/HGST. Has that changed in the last 1-2 reports?

I'm fully willing to correct my stance if the numbers say otherwise and Seagate has made quality improvements. Smiling Face With Open Mouth

EDIT: looks like 2019 doesn't have any WD, but Seagates failure rate is 0.96%-3.32%. HGST failure rates are 0.4%-0.79%. HGST worst failures are better than Seagate's best. Seagate's worst drives are 8.3x more likely to fail than HGST's best

And RE: no major purchaser avoiding Seagate: Many (especially Dell, for instance) use whatever parts the can get that are the cheapest. Even the same model of laptop can have 3-4 different NICs, RAM, HDs.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Mar 20, 2009
3755 posts
1924 upvotes
Toronto
Can't help by laugh at the ridiculous brand loyalty.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/15878/we ... s-hdd-mess
Towards the middle of 2019, WD silently introduced WD Red hard drives (2-6TB capacities) based on drive-managed SMR. There was no fanfare or press-release, and the appearance of the drives in the market was not noticed by the tech press. Almost a year after the drives appeared on the shelves, the voice of customers dissatisfied with the performance of the SMR drives in their NAS units reached levels that WD could no longer ignore. In fact, as soon as we heard about the widespread usage of SMR in certain WD Red capacities, we took those drives off our recommended HDDs list.

Finally, after starting to make amends towards the end of April 2020, Western Digital has gone one step further at last, and cleaned up their NAS drive branding to make it clear which drives are SMR-based. Re-organizing their Red portfolio, the vanilla WD Red family has become a pure SMR lineup. Meanwhile a new brand, the Red Plus, will encompass the 5400 RPM CMR hard drives that the WD Red brand was previously known for. Finally, the Red Pro lineup remains unchanged, with 7200 RPM CMR drives for high performance configurations.

Top