Google white paper on predictive value of S.M.A.R.T. status - melgross

I disagree. I had two instances where I was warned of incipient failure. The program was right both times. I had cloned the info to other drives each time, and left these drives continue. each one failed later. One three days later, and the second about five days later, after warnings of increasingly dire statements.

These programs are surely worthwhile.

Reply to This

Saturday, September 19 2009 @ 12:01 AM PDT

Google white paper on predictive value of S.M.A.R.T. status - Felix01

You're not disagreeing with me; rather, the research Ph.D. at Google who wrote the white paper after studying over 100,000 of their failed drives. That's a pretty statistically valid study! And if you would have read it, you would have seen there are some failure categories for which smartmontools is reasonably predictive.

Any chance you fell into one of those categories?

Or maybe you just beat the odds. With luck like yours, put some money in the next lottery. :-)

Reply to This

Wednesday, September 23 2009 @ 04:42 PM PDT

Google white paper on predictive value of S.M.A.R.T. status - getittowork

Two people in VersionTracker have specific information that this program worked for a PC. The Google study you are talking about has firmware and hardware. Their "data of experience" can be more valuable in its predictive ability then yes, Google. You say that is Google that say it was not valuable. Well, I don't think Google disagreed about what the two enlightened posters said about personal computer hard drives. The absence of data is also data. Especially in this case, such a disaster, if it did not work there would be at least one saying that it did not work who was irate. I know I am careful to rely on any large company, without specific knowledge, telling me about backup. And that includes Microsoft/Danger. I had a Sidekick 3 and sold it before that huge company destroyed all that information. Big can mean nothing. I am downloading the software immediately because it has had specific success from two users and no negative comments. ONly some study on a very different system and not with this same software was negative. I tend to go with actual results. I do not know the application of the program, how it was administered, the statistical methods used, or the length of the study, let alone the relevance to my hard drive and drivers which have to be different. Can't hurt me to use the software, can it?

Reply to This

Sunday, October 18 2009 @ 03:05 PM PDT