Only even THINK of using these size drives as DATA drives --then you don't really have a problem with backups if the HDD fails -- take regular backups by DIRECTORY - don't even THINK of imaging the whole HDD. By taking Directory backups (folder backups) you can backup in stages and also use incremental backups for a period so you don't have to backup enormous volumes of data.
Usually User data doesn't change very much such as audio files etc.
Of course there's NO POINT in purchasing large HDD's unless you have enough space to backup all your data on different devices. Realistically though I'd rather set 2 X 5TB up as a 10 TB data space rather than have a 1 X 10TB drive even if the reliability of the drive was OK.
By setting up 2 X 5 TB as a data space you'd have decent recovery area too if one of the drives failed. The chance of TWO HDD's failing at the same time is so rare as to be negligible -- barring accidents such as spilled liquids etc.
Using Data spaces also means you can aggregate a lot of smaller (and they don't have to be the same size) HDD's into larger data pools.
Single drives take up less space and weigh less than multiple drives (weighing less is huge at my age). You also need to have room for the backup drives for each drive you have (I have a total of 12 HDDs for backing up the three HDDs in my desktop machine).
Full recovery from a large drive isn't all that difficult as long as you have a good backup scheme in place; it just takes longer. I keep two backup HDDs at home per HDD installed in my computer (and two more in my safe deposit box at my credit union; I also use Carbonite to backup data online). I could recover data from a full 8GB drive in roughly 24 hours. If I became impatient waiting for a data recovery from one of my backup drives (I have a built in hot swap bay for that), I could just plug the second backup drive into an external dock and work from that while the restoration takes place.
Once the initial backup has been made, it doesn't take any longer (and very well may take less time) to backup a large data drive than several smaller ones as long as one uses the correct backup scheme. Example: a folder/file syncing program (I like FreeFileSync but there are others available) is much faster and far more efficient than using imaging for backing up data only. It wouldn't be necessary to backup individual folders separately since the folder/file syncing program is capable of restoring partially missing data. Imaging is more suitable for backing up the OS and programs.
Intel has predicted 10TB SSDs within two years. While I'm not holding breath waiting for that, I find the prospect of much larger SSDs than what we have now to be extremely exciting for a data junkie like me. Imagine a single 2.5" 8TB SSD being able to replace the two 2TB and one 4 TB 3.5" spinners I have in my case now. Not only would the SSD be way lighter than the spinners, I could move into a smaller and lighter case.
This isn't anything new, Seagates have been a problematic hard drive for me personally and for several others I know. I ALWAYS hate seeing Newegg ads for hard drives and they're ALWAYS Seagates....
Hitachis and Western Digital drives are pretty good.
Last edited by Lady Fitzgerald; 24 Jan 2015 at 12:17.
I've found that both Seagate and WD are very good HDD's. Each company will build a bad drive but that's to be expected in any mfg process. I just avoid any other drive maker.
EDIT: though I can tell you (I just checked it) to restore 370GB from tape last time took just over 18 minutes. To back it up (every day) takes slightly under 5 minutes.
Restoring 10TB would take a while I guess.