Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.homedesigned,alt.comp.hardware.overclocking,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (
More info?)
mr potatohead wrote:
> While I’m no expert in statistics, what I do know is that I have read a
> lot more complaints regarding Maxtor’s electronics/firmware/interface
> (and I’ve had my own problems).
This is what's called "anecdotal evidence" and, in this case, is more
personal impression than 'evidence'.
You say you've had 'problems'. I don't doubt you, and sorry to hear it, but
you haven't given any usable description of what the problems might have
been, much less any definitive explanation for what caused them.
You've "read a lot more complaints" about 'A'. This gets back to my
previous post. Perhaps you remember reading 'more' of them because you're
convinced there are more of them, so that is what you remember. Maybe you
remember them because it reminds you of your problem. Maybe you remember
them because it fits with your already decided prejudice. And then, people
have 'problems' even when there's nothing wrong, per see, with the
equipment and maybe there's 'more' of them because more people have those
drives.
The bottom line is, what makes you think your reading is representative of
the real world and what makes you think the people posting a problem knew
what the real cause was?
> I have read reports where an identical,
> RMA’d replacement or off the shelf replacement worked fine. That tells
> you something was screwy with the original.
Yes it does (or that the user 'got it right' the second time), but that is
certainly no evidence of a 'compatibility problem' because the replacement
would be just as 'incompatible'.
> I will not say this is
> typical, perhaps it’s only 1% or .01%. Regardless, I have not read as
> many complaints with other drives as I have with Maxtors. This is enough
> proof for me.
I realize that you think it's enough but what I'm trying to explain to you
is that it's a logic flaw. You're listening to people say "I had a problem,
adding "oh, me too, me too," without the slightest idea of what the cause
was; or at least you've not told us a single definitive cause yet. I.E. All
of the broad generalizations you've presented could just as easily be
caused by something other than the Maxtor and, IMO, probably were. In fact,
I gave you an example of a 'compatibility problem' that was a BIOS issue
and not the fault of Maxtor drives.
> Bare in mind, we’re not talking bad sectors or click of death. Every mfg
> produces junk from time to time. But the original poster said he was
> having issues interfacing his drive, and sure enough, he was using a
> Maxtor. The advice is simple, based on prior experience, try a different
> drive.
"Try a different drive" is not necessarily bad advice, as it might show if
the drive was defective for some reason, but your logic for arriving at the
recommendation is seriously flawed; to which you added the generic claim
that this was a 'built-in problem' of Maxtor drives but have, so far, not
been able to give a single explanation for it.
> One other thing to be wary about Maxtor is they are not always clear as
> to what you get when you purchase a drive. Is it the high-density one
> platter, or last years, lower density two platter? Yet both may be
> identical in size and stamped with the same exact part number. I find
> this unacceptable. None of the other mfg’s screw with you this way. I
> will take the higher density, two platter any day because I know it will
> run cooler and faster. At least, that's normally the case. I was going
> to buy a Maxtor a while back, but decided not to because of this.
That is an entirely different issue (and I wonder how you determined it)
but it does suggest that your judgment is clouded by a personal dislike for
Maxtor.
> David Maynard wrote:
>
>> mr potatohead wrote:
>>
>>> There are no vague generlizations.
>>
>>
>>
>> Except that what you posted below is a beautiful example of one.
>>
>>> Do a search on google groups at alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.abit:
>>>
>>> problem seagate (4,860 hits) problem "western digial"
>>> (5,540 hits) problem "quantum" (5,990 hits) problem maxtor
>>> (21,800 hits)
>>>
>>> Go figure.
>>
>>
>>
>> I gather you think those numbers 'prove' something but they don't.
>> They could, for example, simply indicate that, among those Abit users
>> who have 'problems', maxtor drives are the more popular purchase.
>> Could be they're more popular among all Abit users too. Could be
>> they're more popular in general. COULD mean a LOT of things, or
>> nothing at all.
>>
>> And even if it were the case that those posts were Abit users having
>> problems with maxtor drives it doesn't 'prove' that maxtor drives
>> ARE 'the problem'. For example, some UDMA66 BIOS versions (don't know
>> if they are in Abit motherboards) incorrectly interpret the UDMA100
>> capable response and fail because of it so replacing 'the maxtor'
>> with a UDMA66 drive could cause one to erroneously think that 'the
>> maxtor' was 'the problem'.
>>
>> This is a common logic flaw: finding data that 'appears consistent'
>> with a 'theory' and then leaping to the conclusion that it 'proves',
>> or even 'supports', the theory. Such a conclusion is only valid if
>> there are no other possible outcomes from the data.
>>
>> I.E. If X, Y, and Z are all possible outcomes from 'A' (not to
>> mention the possible outcomes you haven't thought of) then seeing 'A'
>> does not 'prove' that Y is the case.
>>
>> It's also one of the most abused logic fallacies; right up there with
>> drawing a cause-effect conclusion from a statistical correlation
>> (e.g. There is a very strong correlation between people opening
>> umbrellas and the incidence of rain therefor: opening umbrellas
>> causes rain. Furthermore, it can be shown that opening them indoors
>> has a lower correlation; it is opening them outdoors where the
>> correlation is strongest. So, if you want it to rain you should open
>> your umbrella outdoors to maximize the effect.
>>
>> Think of that the next time you hear "X has been 'linked' to A" in
>> the 'science' news.)
>>
>>
>>> kony wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2004 00:41:28 -0700, "mr potatohead" <"mr
>>>> potatohead"> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> So lots of people have installed XP with out problems. And lots
>>>>> have downloaded off the Internet with out catching a single
>>>>> virus. What's your point?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ... and some people have a problem and blame the hardware instead
>>>> of a damaged cable or jumper misconfiguration, bios setting, user
>>>> error, insufficient power supply or (whatever).
>>>>
>>>> If you have a specific instance to cite please do. In general
>>>> there is no compatibility problem. If you know of a pariticular
>>>> combination that won't work that would be so rare that it's
>>>> useful to know exactly what that combination is, not a vague
>>>> overgeneralization that's more false than true.
>>
>>
>>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram