Haven't looked at Tigerdirect for a while. Thanks for the reminder. Unfortunately this rebate expired on Friday (2/6). :-( -----Original Message----- From: John Ferrell Sent: Feb 8, 2004 8:39 AM To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU Subject: Re: [EE:] What are acceptable Hard Disk shipping packaging standards? I ordered & received a Seagate 200GB drive from TigerDirect for $149+$11.32+tax-$50 rebate. It was packed in two plastic shells suspended in a pair of foam shock absorbers. Installation was well documented but required a large down load from the Seagate site. It had to make a registry change in XP Pro to get by the 137 GB boundry. John Ferrell 6241 Phillippi Rd Julian NC 27283 Phone: (336)685-9606 johnferrell@earthlink.net http://DixieNC.US NSRCA 479 AMA 4190 W8CCW "My Competition is Not My Enemy" ----- Original Message ----- From: "Russell McMahon" To: Sent: Friday, February 06, 2004 4:50 PM Subject: [EE:] What are acceptable Hard Disk shipping packaging standards? > PICLIST (2000 international members) > > CC: RJ (whose ID & address is unshown to all other recipients) > > Summary: > > Is sending Seagate hard drives by courier with only the > "Seashell" for protection adequate? > > If Seagate won't accept drives back that are packed this way, > why shouldn't I be concerned when I receive a new one > in this state? > > What level; of physical impact protection would YOU expect > for (Seagate) drives sent to YOU by courier. > > __________________ > > Detail: Just received a single Seagate 120 GB drive from a local supplier > (who shall > remain nameless), sent across the city by local courier. The drive is packed > in Seagate's "seashell" anti impact protection packaging. > Whereas they have previously packaged these in additional foam, on this > occasion it was only in the seashell within a small tight fitting cardboard > box > with no extra packing of any sort. > > I considered this an inadequate level of packaging. > "Sammy" - the appropriate expert at one of the local master distributors > agreed that this level of packaging was inadequate when I rang him. He was > surprised and said I should send it back to the supplier. ). > > Seagate's promo material suggests (and the supplier pointed out) that disk > damage in shipping dropped by 70% with the introduction of the Seashell. Put > another way, that's an improvement of less than 2.5 times over shipping a > bare drive. Better than no protection at all, but if someone couriered me a > drive in a skinny cardboard box with no protection at all I would be > extremely dissatisfied. Less than 2.5 times better is hardly worth having. > > Seagate's official on-web return advice agrees. They clearly say that if the > drive > experiences excess g's in shipping the warranty is void, and stipulate 2 > inches of foam rubber as well as the seashell. (They specifically say NOT to > use bubble wrap, foam pellets or newspaper. > > http://www.seagate.com/support/service/shipping.html > > The supplier disagrees. > They apparently now send all drives out this way. > The manager concerned states he discussed this issue with Seagate Singapore > and they advised that for local deliveries this level of packing is adequate > but for eg international shipment extra external protection should be used. > I consider that logic highly questionable as I consider that the g forces > from a courier throwing, dropping or knocking a package is liable to be far > in excess of anything experienced in a shipping container or Jumbo hold. > > The supplier said that the drive would be just as damaged by dropping in > foam rubber packing plus seashell as if in seashell alone. This argument > gently ignores the laws of physics - g forces are proportional to > deceleration distance. The manager also noted that far more failures are due > to ESD, power surges and other sources. I was strangely uncomforted. He said > the drive > was under warranty (3 years in this case) and would be replaced if it > failed. I was still strangely uncomforted. (The concept that loss of data is > far more important than having a drive replaced under warranty seemed a > little foreign to him). > > I will certainly not be buying any more drives packed this way from this > supplier. The manager noted that they would provide extra packing on > request. > The manager said I could return the drive for exchange if I wished. > He said I should run the Seagate tools program first to check it to see if > there was any damage evident. We didn't complete that line of thought but I > think he may have meant that if no damage showed then return was pointless > and perhaps meant that in that case return would not be accepted. > > I asked Seagate via their online help facility what they thought. They > basically said it was none of their business how dealers in other countries > did business. I thought this a little bit dismissive until I read their > final comment. > > You ask "Would I be justified in returning this drive > and asking for a replacement?" > > Sure, but if the drive works, why bother? I just wouldn't > give them any future business. > > SO - they seem to think it's a bad idea, as does the local master > distributor. I'm puzzled as to why the local seller doesn't. > > > > > Russell McMahon > > -- > http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: > [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads > -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details. -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different ways. See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.