Western Digital promises new model numbers with internal SSD overhaul – Computer – News

Without delving into all the details of all cases at different manufacturers, I would like to state that this in itself is not a difficult story.

During the life cycle of a product, as a rule, due to all kinds of circumstances, components often have to be replaced/swapped. The point is not that this happened, but how it happened. You must replace it with an equivalent performing part. That >seems< has not always been the case here.

What is difficult, of course, do you as a buyer of a product assume what the reviewer tells you about the product or what specifications are actually supplied by the manufacturer!? It certainly happens that a first revision of a product is a bit ‘heavier’ than the original specification for that particular product. That can then be toned down in later revisions, but still within the described spec. fall.

That of course does not apply to the CMR/SMR joke where people simply sell a product while it does not meet the intended application (hence the lawsuit, no doubt).

Doesn’t take away of course that a WD and competitors of course really know what they are doing and it is ultimately just manipulation left or right in the negative sense.
Such ‘tactics’ are often carried out at the marketing level. They can often (partly) invoke ‘ignorance’ towards the outside world. In my experience that is, because the internal company technicians usually don’t want to know anything about this (motto: change part = change revision and/or article number)

–