[HN Gopher] SanDisk Portable SSDs Are Failing So Frequently, We ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       SanDisk Portable SSDs Are Failing So Frequently, We Can No Longer
       Recommend Them
        
       Author : mikece
       Score  : 47 points
       Date   : 2023-08-09 18:06 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (petapixel.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (petapixel.com)
        
       | 58x14 wrote:
       | Damn, I have a few of these. I keep them backed up to a RAID
       | setup but still disappointing to hear.
        
       | rjh29 wrote:
       | I use them and have had no issues, but it is worrying how hot
       | they get, even when idle. They are warm when not being used at
       | all which seems wrong.
       | 
       | Of course I back them up to a 8tb portable hdd weekly using borg.
       | You should do that no matter what brand of ssd you use!
        
       | wtallis wrote:
       | Portable storage devices should only be treated as temporary
       | storage. Use them for sneakernet, not as a working drive or a
       | place to park important backups. Even in high-end portable drives
       | like this that are just a M.2 NVMe SSD in an enclosure, you still
       | have to worry about bugs in the NVMe to USB bridge chip and
       | unreliable connectivity and power delivery over USB.
       | 
       | There was a time period where it almost made sense to use 2.5"
       | SATA SSDs in hot-swap bays as if they were floppy disks.
       | Unfortunately, the form factor proved unnecessarily bulky for the
       | PC form factors that are popular today, and SATA was a dead-end
       | for performance. But a typical consumer SATA SSD is durable
       | enough for portable usage and more reliable than anything
       | involving USB.
        
         | isr wrote:
         | That's a huge, and rather meaningless, overreaction.
         | 
         | I'm sure others have their own personal anecdotes. Here's mine:
         | I've run a number of Linux installs directly off Samsung
         | external ssd's. Heck, I've used multiple Samsung miniature USB
         | flash drives (so, not their fastest USB flash drives) as
         | permanent installs (mainly for chromebooks with limited
         | internal, non-replaceable drives) - they just extrude a tiny
         | amount, so one can just leave them in, and treat them as
         | permanent storage.
         | 
         | It just ... works. For ... years.
         | 
         | SanDisk sticks and ssds (especially their mini USB sticks) on
         | the other hand, always seem to run too hot. Try a different
         | manufacturer.
        
           | wtallis wrote:
           | For what it's worth, I have both a SATA-based Samsung
           | portable SSD and a NVMe-based SanDisk portable SSD, and
           | they've both been almost completely trouble-free for me--
           | though I am careful in how I use them. I'm definitely not the
           | disgruntled customer you seem to think I am (especially
           | because both of those drives were review samples).
           | 
           | For the smaller USB-native flash drives, I have not noticed
           | any particular pattern to their unreliability, but I trust
           | them even less because that product segment is a dumping
           | grounds for low-grade flash memory.
           | 
           | For NVMe-based portable SSDs in particular, I am wary in part
           | because of the long-running thread on the AnandTech forums
           | documenting how all three suppliers of NVMe to USB bridge
           | chips (JMicron, Realtek, ASMedia) have had extensive problems
           | with both reliability and compatibility. Companies like
           | Samsung and SanDisk can certainly be expected to do more QA
           | on their products incorporating those chips than smaller
           | brands, but that's not a guarantee that they'll avoid the
           | problems from their upstream supplier.
        
         | mikece wrote:
         | Temporary storage, yes, but they are marketed as rugged and
         | reliable external SSD for photographers and film makers to use
         | for storing their images/video on rather than filling up their
         | MacBook Pro out in the field. Very disappointing.
        
           | wtallis wrote:
           | Taking storage marketing at face value is _also_ a serious
           | mistake that you 'll eventually regret.
        
             | macintux wrote:
             | How, pray tell, are people supposed to determine that
             | certain categories/manufacturers of drives are inherently
             | unreliable? It's not as though most of us run dozens of
             | them for long periods of time to evaluate their
             | reliability.
             | 
             | Most of us wait for someone who does do so to spread the
             | news. Which is what is now happening.
        
               | wtallis wrote:
               | > How, pray tell, are people supposed to determine that
               | certain categories/manufacturers of drives are inherently
               | unreliable?
               | 
               | Certainly not by thinking the marketing department is
               | giving you the full story. I don't have a problem with
               | news like this being reported. What I have a problem with
               | is acting like it's a surprise, or acting like a user who
               | loses 3TB of data because of the failure of a single
               | portable drive is a blameless victim (especially when the
               | failed drive in question was a warranty replacement for a
               | previous drive failure).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-08-09 23:03 UTC)