Being that 10 TB externals are regularly on sale for as low as $160...

being that 10 TB externals are regularly on sale for as low as $160, why doesn't (((WD))) just lower the fucking price of their internal drives to that? it probably costs them more to produce those plastic pieces of shit they're wrapped in

Attached: Easystore-WD-10TB-USB-Desktop-Backup[1].jpg (800x585, 112K)

Because the internals are white. Not blue,green,purple,black,red, or gold.
And white labor is almost always cheaper

market segmentation is the only reason.

The target audience for external drives is completely different from the one who buys bare drives, it's PC gamer markup, basically.
They also clamped down on gamers breaking apart external drives to get bare drives for cheaper, now they solder on a nonstandard connector instead of sata.

Because internals come with longer warranties. Also the externals are competing with online cloud services so they price them lower.

look at this shit

Attached: Screenshot_2019-09-20 Western Digital Red 10 TB 3 5 5400RPM Internal Hard Drive.png (1046x357, 21K)

Part of it is artificial market segmentation but that's not the whole thing. The drives that get put in these external enclosures are utter dogshit and have fuckall warranty coverage both in terms of length and what modes of failure are actually covered. It's basically a way for these companies to dump equipment that failed validation for any serious use. In some cases they also do glacially slow and unreliable bullshit like shingled recording to fit 10TB on a platter stack meant to hold 6TB.
You can still shuck these things with mods or adapters and use them as internals but they will never be as reliable.

>complaining about double jew dee drives being expensive
Let me guess, next you'll be surprised Apple is overpriced as well.

External drives are bottom of the barrel quality. Only smoothbrains use them.

I have red, blue, green and black drives, all internal.

there's zero proof of external drives being worse
stop making shit up
it's the same fucking model number, even

This is absolutely right. DO NOT BUY EXTERNAL DRIVES FOR YOUR NAS. Especially since shucking voids the warranty.

>t. W. D. Samshiba, Esq.

Buy Seagate.

well your NAS should have some kind of redundancy so that you don't really care if a drive fails.

LACIE = the best action!!

Attached: LACIE 168TB.jpg (2500x2500, 256K)

>still using the 120gb SSD from 2012
>still using my old 2010 laptop 500gb 2.5" drive
Feels good to reuse parts from older tech.

RAID is not a backup.
The odds of 2 drives failing at the same time is much higher than you think. Especially if they are all the same type of drive with the same production date and same amount of usage.

>>RAID is not a backup.
this meme again.

Yes, that's true in the general case because RAID, unlike a "real" backup, doesn't protect you against human error, your house burning down, and so forth. But we're specifically taking here about drive death. Which is something that RAID does, in fact, protect you from.

open one up and you'll realize you CAN'T use it as internal. WD does some jewish tricks and uses a proprietary port.

That's why my NAS is backed up to a cheap bigass external drive. The unreliable one gets used less that way.

you have to block one of the pins on one of the connectors but it works. you still shouldn't do it though

just open it up and put drive in to PC

Attached: Silly_9101b8_6224539.jpg (900x900, 248K)

Internal hdd doesn't have that much of a demand because of SSD.

>buying shingled HDDs for anything but anime storage

Most new big consumer HDDs are shingled

I only use SSDs over an USB2.0 connection

Hardly. The garbage write performance puts them right out of competition in every segment outside of specialized archival drives (or as a means to offer trash externals at low prices). Hell even in good condition SMR drives throw so many CRC errors and retries during re-shingling writes that I'd never trust them for data integrity.