Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?

On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 13:56:12 -0000, Paul wrote:

Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 29/12/2018 02.35, nospam wrote:
In article , William Gothberg
wrote:

figure 4:
http://www.storagemojo.com/wp-conten..._temp_age_dist.
png
That would be
http://www.storagemojo.com/wp-conten...p_age_dist.png
nope. it would be as i posted, properly delimited with .

your version will break when quoted. that's bad.

Otherwise I get "This page isn¹t working, storagemojo.com redirected you too
many times."
then your newsreader doesn't properly handle urls. it's broken.

Don't wrap links please.
i didn't wrap anything. whatever wrapping you saw or problems you
encountered were entirely at your end, by your software.

No, the line was wrapped before we got it, so either by your software or
in transit. We can see it by looking at the raw message code.


get a better newsreader, one which complies with the relevant rfcs and
doesn't wrap or break links.

I'm not certain that there is a an RFC regarding the brackets on URLS..
It is a standard accepted by some some software and not by other.

Somebody has their wrap set to 72 characters...

http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi...pam.invalid%3E

People still do that?!

Looking at your link, I'm using 40% of the width of my monitor, bloody annoying. Leave lines in one piece please, I can easily wrap to window at my end, depending on the width of my screen. Everyone will then see it as wide as they wish.

In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote:


Don't wrap links please.

i didn't wrap anything. whatever wrapping you saw or problems you
encountered were entirely at your end, by your software.

No, the line was wrapped before we got it, so either by your software or
in transit. We can see it by looking at the raw message code.

the point of delimiters is so that there won't be a problem when a
url has embedded whitespace, including line breaks, which can happen
for any number of reasons.

get a better newsreader, one which complies with the relevant rfcs and
doesn't wrap or break links.

I'm not certain that there is a an RFC regarding the brackets on URLS.
It is a standard accepted by some some software and not by other.

there is.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#appendix-C

URIs are often transmitted through formats that do not provide a
clear context for their interpretation. For example, there are many
occasions when a URI is included in plain text; examples include text
sent in email, USENET news, and on printed paper. In such cases, it
is important to be able to delimit the URI from the rest of the text,
and in particular from punctuation marks that might be mistaken for
part of the URI.

n practice, URIs are delimited in a variety of ways, but usually
within double-quotes "http://example.com/", angle brackets
http://example.com/, or just by using whitespace:

These wrappers do not form part of the URI.

In some cases, extra whitespace (spaces, line-breaks, tabs, etc.) may
have to be added to break a long URI across lines. The whitespace
should be ignored when the URI is extracted.

No whitespace should be introduced after a hyphen ("-") character.
Because some typesetters and printers may (erroneously) introduce a
hyphen at the end of line when breaking it, the interpreter of a URI
containing a line break immediately after a hyphen should ignore all
whitespace around the line break and should be aware that the hyphen
may or may not actually be part of the URI.

Using angle brackets around each URI is especially recommended as
a delimiting style for a reference that contains embedded whitespace.

The prefix "URL:" (with or without a trailing space) was formerly
recommended as a way to help distinguish a URI from other bracketed
designators, though it is not commonly used in practice and is no
longer recommended.

For robustness, software that accepts user-typed URI should attempt
to recognize and strip both delimiters and embedded whitespace.

tl;dr - anything that doesn't handle delimiters is broken.

In article , William Gothberg
wrote:

I read that, in a TLC drive, the difference between
stored value might be as little as 15 electrons.
That ain't much margin.

yet they're are very reliable, and there is now qlc.

I've found they're equally as unreliable as mechanical drives.

then you had duds. nothing is perfect.

They're as unreliable as LED lighting. New technology, not ironed out the
problems yet.

nonsense.

led lighting is *extremely* reliable and works exceptionally well and
is far more flexible than tungsten lighting.

ssds are *significantly* more reliable and faster than mechanical
drives.

Yeah right. Most mechanical drives I've had have lasted for 10 years plus -
long enough that I just give them away as they're too small.

bull****. drive failures start to increase after about 3-4 years:
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wp-co.../blog-drivesta
ts-3-lifecycles.jpg

the manufacturers know this, which is why hard drives typically come
with 1-3 year warranties, sometimes 5 for enterprise drives, which are
more expensive to cover the longer warranty, while ssds typically come
with as long as 10 year warranties.

And some of them are absolute ****e, like OCZ SSDs. They fail in
under a year! I'm surprised the company isn't bankrupt yet.

some older ocz ssds had issues, but these days they're fine.

Some?! I bought 10 and all 10 failed, 3 of them had the replacements fail
too! That's more than enough reason to never use that piece of **** company
again. Bad reviews of them all over the net aswell.

like i said, some ocz ssds had issues. that is no longer the case.

or just stick with crucial or samsung.

I do now. Although I've had quite a few Crucial ones require a
flash update as they just disappeared from the BIOS!

nonsense.

On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 14:55:23 -0000, nospam wrote:

In article , William Gothberg
wrote:

I read that, in a TLC drive, the difference between
stored value might be as little as 15 electrons.
That ain't much margin.

yet they're are very reliable, and there is now qlc.

I've found they're equally as unreliable as mechanical drives.

then you had duds. nothing is perfect.

They're as unreliable as LED lighting. New technology, not ironed out the
problems yet.

nonsense.

led lighting is *extremely* reliable and works exceptionally well and
is far more flexible than tungsten lighting.

You've clearly had very little experience with them. I've used LEDs from many many different makes since the technology first came out. Most of them overheat (even used in a room no more than 20C) (you should be able to keep your finger on it indefinitely without pain) and last 3 months to 1 year. The only ones I've had last over a year are tube type ones (as in they're shaped like a fluorescent tube, not a CFL), where I've removed the diffuser to allow the LEDs to run cooler.

ssds are *significantly* more reliable and faster than mechanical
drives.

Yeah right. Most mechanical drives I've had have lasted for 10 years plus -
long enough that I just give them away as they're too small.

bull****. drive failures start to increase after about 3-4 years:
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wp-co.../blog-drivesta
ts-3-lifecycles.jpg

the manufacturers know this, which is why hard drives typically come
with 1-3 year warranties, sometimes 5 for enterprise drives, which are
more expensive to cover the longer warranty, while ssds typically come
with as long as 10 year warranties.

A 3 year warranty doesn't mean they last 3 years, it means almost all of them will last 3 years even when used heavily. The average desktop does not need a new hard disk in its whole 6 year life.

And some of them are absolute ****e, like OCZ SSDs. They fail in
under a year! I'm surprised the company isn't bankrupt yet.

some older ocz ssds had issues, but these days they're fine.

Some?! I bought 10 and all 10 failed, 3 of them had the replacements fail
too! That's more than enough reason to never use that piece of **** company
again. Bad reviews of them all over the net aswell.

like i said, some ocz ssds had issues. that is no longer the case.

Because they were bought over. I still won't touch them. Like Skoda, if VW want to sell me one, they need to put a VW badge on it.

or just stick with crucial or samsung.

I do now. Although I've had quite a few Crucial ones require a
flash update as they just disappeared from the BIOS!

nonsense.

FFS look it up on Google, the M4 series, famous for it.

In article , William Gothberg
wrote:

They're as unreliable as LED lighting. New technology, not ironed out the
problems yet.

nonsense.

led lighting is *extremely* reliable and works exceptionally well and
is far more flexible than tungsten lighting.

You've clearly had very little experience with them. I've used LEDs from
many many different makes since the technology first came out. Most of them
overheat (even used in a room no more than 20C) (you should be able to keep
your finger on it indefinitely without pain) and last 3 months to 1 year.
The only ones I've had last over a year are tube type ones (as in they're
shaped like a fluorescent tube, not a CFL), where I've removed the diffuser
to allow the LEDs to run cooler.

bull****.

led bulbs do not overheat, are cool to the touch and they last longer
than tungsten bulbs do.

you're buying ****ty bulbs if they fail in 3 months. don't blame the
industry because you bought crap.

ssds are *significantly* more reliable and faster than mechanical
drives.

Yeah right. Most mechanical drives I've had have lasted for 10 years plus
-
long enough that I just give them away as they're too small.

bull****. drive failures start to increase after about 3-4 years:
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wp-co.../blog-drivesta
ts-3-lifecycles.jpg

the manufacturers know this, which is why hard drives typically come
with 1-3 year warranties, sometimes 5 for enterprise drives, which are
more expensive to cover the longer warranty, while ssds typically come
with as long as 10 year warranties.

A 3 year warranty doesn't mean they last 3 years, it means almost all of them
will last 3 years even when used heavily. The average desktop does not need
a new hard disk in its whole 6 year life.

the length of the warranty represents the confidence the manufacturer
has in the product. longer warranties means a more reliable product.

ssds have longer warranties because they're more reliable than a
spinning drive which has moving parts. there's less to break.

and the average desktop will very likely need a new hard drive before 6
years unless it's off for most of the time, which makes it decidedly
not average.

or just stick with crucial or samsung.

I do now. Although I've had quite a few Crucial ones require a
flash update as they just disappeared from the BIOS!

nonsense.

FFS look it up on Google, the M4 series, famous for it.

nonsense, and the m4 is nearly a decade old anyway.

you're trolling.

On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 19:45:24 -0000, nospam wrote:

In article , William Gothberg
wrote:

They're as unreliable as LED lighting. New technology, not ironed out the
problems yet.

nonsense.

led lighting is *extremely* reliable and works exceptionally well and
is far more flexible than tungsten lighting.

You've clearly had very little experience with them. I've used LEDs from
many many different makes since the technology first came out. Most of them
overheat (even used in a room no more than 20C) (you should be able to keep
your finger on it indefinitely without pain) and last 3 months to 1 year.
The only ones I've had last over a year are tube type ones (as in they're
shaped like a fluorescent tube, not a CFL), where I've removed the diffuser
to allow the LEDs to run cooler.

bull****.

led bulbs do not overheat, are cool to the touch and they last longer
than tungsten bulbs do.

Then your experience is much smaller than mine. Try buying a 50W equivalent GU10 spot, they're the worst.

you're buying ****ty bulbs if they fail in 3 months. don't blame the
industry because you bought crap.

As I already said, I've bought many different makes.

ssds are *significantly* more reliable and faster than mechanical
drives.

Yeah right. Most mechanical drives I've had have lasted for 10 years plus
-
long enough that I just give them away as they're too small.

bull****. drive failures start to increase after about 3-4 years:
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wp-co.../blog-drivesta
ts-3-lifecycles.jpg

the manufacturers know this, which is why hard drives typically come
with 1-3 year warranties, sometimes 5 for enterprise drives, which are
more expensive to cover the longer warranty, while ssds typically come
with as long as 10 year warranties.

A 3 year warranty doesn't mean they last 3 years, it means almost all of them
will last 3 years even when used heavily. The average desktop does not need
a new hard disk in its whole 6 year life.

the length of the warranty represents the confidence the manufacturer
has in the product. longer warranties means a more reliable product.

It means they THINK it's more reliable. A new technology might not have enough data for them to make an accurate judgement.

ssds have longer warranties because they're more reliable than a
spinning drive which has moving parts. there's less to break.

Not only moving parts break.

and the average desktop will very likely need a new hard drive before 6
years unless it's off for most of the time, which makes it decidedly
not average.

Almost every hard drive change is due to the drive becoming too small as time progresses and people store more data. It's very rare for a mechanical hard drive to fail - they're a proven technology.

or just stick with crucial or samsung.

I do now. Although I've had quite a few Crucial ones require a
flash update as they just disappeared from the BIOS!

nonsense.

FFS look it up on Google, the M4 series, famous for it.

nonsense,

So I have to google it for you do I?
https://forums.crucial.com/t5/SSD-Ar...ot/td-p/114830
"After reading posts here on these forums I can see that this is appears to be a common problem."

and the m4 is nearly a decade old anyway.

I bought them more recently than that.

you're trolling.

No, just making you out to be an ignorant fool.

the length of the warranty represents the confidence the manufacturer
has in the product. longer warranties means a more reliable product.

Warranty is a marketing concept. You set the warranty terms to optimize
the ratio of warranty cost to increased sales you get by making the
buyer think your product is better.

Light bulbs are a prime example. If the lamp costs 99-cents
and the cost to mail it back to the factory for replacement
is $2, a longer warranty costs the vendor zero...and is unrelated
to the quality of the device.

The opposite end of the spectrum was the Lifetime Craftsman Tool warranty.
You paid more for an expensive product, but if it broke, you
could easily go to a local store and get a replacement, no questions
asked. That was a WARRANTY. I surely paid more than if I'd bought
Harbor Freight tools, but I almost never broke a Craftsman tool.
That was QUALITY.



It means they THINK it's more reliable. A new technology might not have
enough data for them to make an accurate judgement.

In article , William Gothberg
wrote:

You've clearly had very little experience with them. I've used LEDs from
many many different makes since the technology first came out. Most of
them
overheat (even used in a room no more than 20C) (you should be able to keep
your finger on it indefinitely without pain) and last 3 months to 1 year.
The only ones I've had last over a year are tube type ones (as in they're
shaped like a fluorescent tube, not a CFL), where I've removed the diffuser
to allow the LEDs to run cooler.

bull****.

led bulbs do not overheat, are cool to the touch and they last longer
than tungsten bulbs do.

Then your experience is much smaller than mine. Try buying a 50W equivalent
GU10 spot, they're the worst.

i own and use many led bulbs and have not had a single problem with any
of them. i can change their colour on a whim, something not possible
with old school bulbs.

everyone i know who has led bulbs has a similar experience.

traffic lights and cars have used leds for *years*, with a significant
increase in reliability.

you're buying ****ty bulbs if they fail in 3 months. don't blame the
industry because you bought crap.

As I already said, I've bought many different makes.

apparently all of them were crap.

or you're lying.

ssds are *significantly* more reliable and faster than mechanical
drives.

Yeah right. Most mechanical drives I've had have lasted for 10 years
plus
-
long enough that I just give them away as they're too small.

bull****. drive failures start to increase after about 3-4 years:
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wp-co.../blog-drivesta
ts-3-lifecycles.jpg

the manufacturers know this, which is why hard drives typically come
with 1-3 year warranties, sometimes 5 for enterprise drives, which are
more expensive to cover the longer warranty, while ssds typically come
with as long as 10 year warranties.

A 3 year warranty doesn't mean they last 3 years, it means almost all of
them
will last 3 years even when used heavily. The average desktop does not
need
a new hard disk in its whole 6 year life.

the length of the warranty represents the confidence the manufacturer
has in the product. longer warranties means a more reliable product.

It means they THINK it's more reliable. A new technology might not have
enough data for them to make an accurate judgement.

ssds have been around long enough to know that they are *far* more
reliable than mechanical hard drives.

ssds have longer warranties because they're more reliable than a
spinning drive which has moving parts. there's less to break.

Not only moving parts break.

they're the ones that break first, especially due to shock. controllers
rarely break.

and the average desktop will very likely need a new hard drive before 6
years unless it's off for most of the time, which makes it decidedly
not average.

Almost every hard drive change is due to the drive becoming too small as time
progresses and people store more data. It's very rare for a mechanical hard
drive to fail - they're a proven technology.

nonsense. drive failures are very common. there are many companies that
will recover data from a failed drive.

just ask anyone with a 1.5 or 3tb seagate drive.

or just stick with crucial or samsung.

I do now. Although I've had quite a few Crucial ones require a
flash update as they just disappeared from the BIOS!

nonsense.

FFS look it up on Google, the M4 series, famous for it.

nonsense,

So I have to google it for you do I?

https://forums.crucial.com/t5/SSD-Ar...ead-Suddenly-n
ot-detected-in-BIOS-PC-won-t-boot/td-p/114830
"After reading posts here on these forums I can see that this is appears to
be a common problem."

anecdote is not data, and the problem was likely the bios, not the ssd.

one of my systems has an m4 in it, without issue. crucial is extremely
reliable.

and the m4 is nearly a decade old anyway.

I bought them more recently than that.

then you bought obsolete products.

m4 was released in 2011, almost 8 years ago:
https://www.engadget.com/2011/04/27/...sds-prices-the
m-between-130-and-1-000/

you're trolling.

No, just making you out to be an ignorant fool.

you're doing that to yourself.

On 12/29/18 3:21 AM, Paul wrote:
T wrote:


Thank you.Â* I had them mixed up.

I have not heard the term "martensite" in about 40 years.

How are these memory cells annealed?

I didn't know this.

It looks like someone has built some.

Presumably just for bar bets and such.

https://www.extremetech.com/computin...million-cycles


Â*Â* "Macronix’s new memory cells contains a heating element
Â*Â*Â* that can deliver a jolt of 800C (1472F) heat to the cell,
Â*Â*Â* healing it and preventing wear-out"

Now that's hot!

Hotter than a self-cleaning oven.

Â*Â* Paul

Yikes!

On Sat, 29 Dec 2018 22:03:19 -0000, nospam wrote:

In article , William Gothberg
wrote:

You've clearly had very little experience with them. I've used LEDs from
many many different makes since the technology first came out. Most of
them
overheat (even used in a room no more than 20C) (you should be able to keep
your finger on it indefinitely without pain) and last 3 months to 1 year.
The only ones I've had last over a year are tube type ones (as in they're
shaped like a fluorescent tube, not a CFL), where I've removed the diffuser
to allow the LEDs to run cooler.

bull****.

led bulbs do not overheat, are cool to the touch and they last longer
than tungsten bulbs do.

Then your experience is much smaller than mine. Try buying a 50W equivalent
GU10 spot, they're the worst.

i own and use many led bulbs and have not had a single problem with any
of them. i can change their colour on a whim, something not possible
with old school bulbs.

Sounds like you bought the expensive type, like Philips Hue. Try buying normal ones.

everyone i know who has led bulbs has a similar experience.

traffic lights and cars have used leds for *years*, with a significant
increase in reliability.

They most likely put in better designed ones than you buy for domestic lightbulbs, where they assume most folk won't care if they break too soon.. Who's going to keep a receipt for a £4 bulb?

you're buying ****ty bulbs if they fail in 3 months. don't blame the
industry because you bought crap.

As I already said, I've bought many different makes.

apparently all of them were crap.

or you're lying.

Yes, they were all crap. Your problem is you won't admit that there are things that happen outside your own experience. I accept there are probably some decent ones, but I'm just saying it's easy to make a **** bulb. And when you buy one in a shop, you have no way of knowing if it'll be **** or not.

ssds are *significantly* more reliable and faster than mechanical
drives.

Yeah right. Most mechanical drives I've had have lasted for 10 years
plus
-
long enough that I just give them away as they're too small.

bull****. drive failures start to increase after about 3-4 years:
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/wp-co.../blog-drivesta
ts-3-lifecycles.jpg

the manufacturers know this, which is why hard drives typically come
with 1-3 year warranties, sometimes 5 for enterprise drives, which are
more expensive to cover the longer warranty, while ssds typically come
with as long as 10 year warranties.

A 3 year warranty doesn't mean they last 3 years, it means almost all of
them
will last 3 years even when used heavily. The average desktop does not
need
a new hard disk in its whole 6 year life.

the length of the warranty represents the confidence the manufacturer
has in the product. longer warranties means a more reliable product..

It means they THINK it's more reliable. A new technology might not have
enough data for them to make an accurate judgement.

ssds have been around long enough to know that they are *far* more
reliable than mechanical hard drives.

Funny how that's not true. Hard drives became more and more reliable, then SSDs came out, a new untested technology, which was **** to begin with. It will eventually get more reliable, but until then I just won't trust them.

ssds have longer warranties because they're more reliable than a
spinning drive which has moving parts. there's less to break.

Not only moving parts break.

they're the ones that break first, especially due to shock. controllers
rarely break.

Bull****. Everything breaks. Controllers contain electronic components that fail. For example, capacitors on motherboards or in power supplies can burst.

and the average desktop will very likely need a new hard drive before 6
years unless it's off for most of the time, which makes it decidedly
not average.

Almost every hard drive change is due to the drive becoming too small as time
progresses and people store more data. It's very rare for a mechanical hard
drive to fail - they're a proven technology.

nonsense. drive failures are very common. there are many companies that
will recover data from a failed drive.

just ask anyone with a 1.5 or 3tb seagate drive.

But at least you hear them making noises first. An SSD just decides one day to **** off and not communicate with the computer anymore.

or just stick with crucial or samsung.

I do now. Although I've had quite a few Crucial ones require a
flash update as they just disappeared from the BIOS!

nonsense.

FFS look it up on Google, the M4 series, famous for it.

nonsense,

So I have to google it for you do I?

https://forums.crucial.com/t5/SSD-Ar...ead-Suddenly-n
ot-detected-in-BIOS-PC-won-t-boot/td-p/114830
"After reading posts here on these forums I can see that this is appears to
be a common problem."

anecdote is not data, and the problem was likely the bios, not the ssd..

No, it was the SSD, if you read properly, you'll realise that the firmware needed fixing ON THE SSD. I've done it myself to several Crucial SSDs.

one of my systems has an m4 in it, without issue. crucial is extremely
reliable.

Depends on the revision of the M4.

and the m4 is nearly a decade old anyway.

I bought them more recently than that.

then you bought obsolete products.

m4 was released in 2011, almost 8 years ago:
https://www.engadget.com/2011/04/27/...sds-prices-the
m-between-130-and-1-000/

So 7 years, not 10. And that was the RELEASE date. Do you really think they were made for zero years?

you're trolling.

No, just making you out to be an ignorant fool.

you're doing that to yourself.

6 year olds say "I know you are". You're better than that. Maybe.

In article , William Gothberg
wrote:

Almost every hard drive change is due to the drive becoming too small as
time
progresses and people store more data. It's very rare for a mechanical
hard
drive to fail - they're a proven technology.

nonsense. drive failures are very common. there are many companies that
will recover data from a failed drive.

just ask anyone with a 1.5 or 3tb seagate drive.

But at least you hear them making noises first.

but you just said it's rare for them to fail...

An SSD just decides one day
to **** off and not communicate with the computer anymore.

nope.

ssds usually indicate that they're approaching end of life (but have
not yet reached it) via smart data. you do check smart data, right?

and when ssds do fail, they usually fail to read-only so there's no
data loss.

that end of life is after multi-petabytes of data being written, which
is going to be long after the lifetime of the device in which the ssd
is installed.

in other words, something *else* will fail first.

when a hard drive fails, the chances of recovery are slim to none,
other than hiring a recovery company, such as drive savers, and they
ain't cheap. the fact that there are many such companies speaks volumes
of the unreliability of hard drives.

and hard drives do not necessarily make noises prior to failure. they
can suddenly fail. drop one and game over.




https://forums.crucial.com/t5/SSD-Ar...4-dead-Suddenl
y-n
ot-detected-in-BIOS-PC-won-t-boot/td-p/114830
"After reading posts here on these forums I can see that this is appears to
be a common problem."

anecdote is not data, and the problem was likely the bios, not the ssd.

No, it was the SSD, if you read properly, you'll realise that the firmware
needed fixing ON THE SSD. I've done it myself to several Crucial SSDs.

if it was the ssd, it would have issues in devices that don't have
bios, such as macs, linux boxes, rapsberry pis, arduinos and other
custom systems.

they didn't.

the firmware fix was to deal with buggy bios.

On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 05:10:42 -0000, nospam wrote:

In article , William Gothberg
wrote:

Almost every hard drive change is due to the drive becoming too small as
time
progresses and people store more data. It's very rare for a mechanical
hard
drive to fail - they're a proven technology.

nonsense. drive failures are very common. there are many companies that
will recover data from a failed drive.

just ask anyone with a 1.5 or 3tb seagate drive.

But at least you hear them making noises first.

but you just said it's rare for them to fail...

It is, but when they do you get a warning.

An SSD just decides one day
to **** off and not communicate with the computer anymore.

nope.

Yip.

ssds usually indicate that they're approaching end of life (but have
not yet reached it) via smart data. you do check smart data, right?

Yeah, I've got OCD and check that regularly (note that was sarcasm). What's the point in smart data if the OS doesn't use it? I should get a proper warning, some kind of dialog box stating a problem.

Oh and that only works if the drive knows it's failing, which it usually doesn't.

and when ssds do fail, they usually fail to read-only so there's no
data loss.

Bull****, every one I've seen fails by not communicating with the BIOS in any way whatsoever. It's as though it's not connected at all.

that end of life is after multi-petabytes of data being written, which
is going to be long after the lifetime of the device in which the ssd
is installed.

in other words, something *else* will fail first.

On paper, not in reality. Bad design causes problems.

when a hard drive fails, the chances of recovery are slim to none,
other than hiring a recovery company, such as drive savers, and they
ain't cheap. the fact that there are many such companies speaks volumes
of the unreliability of hard drives.

and hard drives do not necessarily make noises prior to failure. they
can suddenly fail. drop one and game over.

They can do, but usually there are mechanical noises as things struggle. Usually you just lose a few sectors here and there.

https://forums.crucial.com/t5/SSD-Ar...4-dead-Suddenl
y-n
ot-detected-in-BIOS-PC-won-t-boot/td-p/114830
"After reading posts here on these forums I can see that this is appears to
be a common problem."

anecdote is not data, and the problem was likely the bios, not the ssd.

No, it was the SSD, if you read properly, you'll realise that the firmware
needed fixing ON THE SSD. I've done it myself to several Crucial SSDs.

if it was the ssd, it would have issues in devices that don't have
bios, such as macs, linux boxes, rapsberry pis, arduinos and other
custom systems.

they didn't.

the firmware fix was to deal with buggy bios.

Those SSDs were on all sorts of different motherboards. None of them received any changes to the motherboard BIOS etc, the SSDs just decided to give up. Repeated booting got them to go occasionally, just long enough to do a firmware update on the SSD.