Advice Request Is it true that WD really is lighter and faster than most other AVs?

[brigantes]

It is nonsense here, because it is off-topic.

But I did not start the "off topic" discussion. A bunch of other people did. I was only participating in an already existing discussion of HDD versus SSD in this thread.

The performance of WD is dependent upon what type of drive that it runs.

What's Storage type got to do with Antivirus Software?

Isn't it that badly coded & non-optimised software will run like crap regardless of the storage type or speed??

All software runs faster on SSD. WD isn't well optimized for HDD but it is fast on SSD due to the drive technology. So whatever shortcomings it had on HDD are no longer relevant on SSD.

Somebody, actually multiple people, made the claim here that WD is terrible on HDD because Microsoft didn't put any effort into making WD I\O more efficient. The argument is that Microsoft is a trillion dollar company and therefore it somehow owes something to the world - namely making WD uber fast for security geeks that actually care about WD speed on HDD.

Then they talk about WD being so slow when opening huge size files (whether it be on HDD or SSD). When you tell them they can exclude those files (and do on-demand manual scans instead of real-time) to eliminate all the problems, those very same people deliberately remain silent.

Microsoft always focuses on current hardware technology. It makes only a "best effort" to be compatible with older software and hardware technology.

It amazes me that these facts are such massive emotional triggers here at MalwareTips. I just don't get it.

 

[blackice]

It amazes me that these facts are such massive emotional triggers here at MalwareTips. I just don't get it.

What exactly is your argument here? Microsoft programs WD poorly? Or, WD is great just get an SSD you poor? Honestly you have been arguing with some of the most dispassionate people here. People who call others triggered tend to be the ones who can’t let go. Seems you just want to argue.

 

[Andy Ful]

What's Storage type got to do with Antivirus Software?

Isn't it that badly coded & non-optimised software will run like crap regardless of the storage type or speed??

Ha, ha. The non-optimized software does not have to be badly coded.

 

[Andy Ful]

But I did not start the "off topic" discussion.

But, you can easily end it.

Somebody, actually multiple people, made the claim here that WD is terrible on HDD because Microsoft didn't put any effort into making WD I\O more efficient.

That is not proven hypothesis (maybe true and maybe not). I tested WD several times and the main performance issue is not related to WD I/O and remains the same on SSD devices. As you correctly noticed, it is simply not especially visible when using SSD.

It amazes me that these facts are such massive emotional triggers here at MalwareTips. I just don't get it.

I do not see massive emotions here. Some emotions are welcome to keep the thread alive. Simply, the off-topic long discussions bloat the thread.

 

[Cortex]

After working outside pressure washing all yesterday I'm pretty certain I'm defiantly legacy & past my sell by date (and WD runs much faster than I this morning)

 

[brigantes]

What exactly is your argument here? Microsoft programs WD poorly? Or, WD is great just get an SSD you poor? Honestly you have been arguing with some of the most dispassionate people here. People who call others triggered tend to be the ones who can’t let go. Seems you just want to argue.

My argument, and the argument of others, is all in this thread. You just have to read all the posts from the initial OP post. All of it is self-explanatory. Despite what you say, there are a lot of people who get upset about the topic of HDD being legacy. You obviously did not read all the posts.

There is an ongoing debate. And this is where the problem comes in at MalwareTips. As soon as you people get upset, then you all do your utmost to shut down the discussion. That is why there are literally thousands of threads here that have been locked. Not to mention so many members banned. This place just isn't a very credible place to discuss much of anything unless a poster is part of the hive agenda and mob rule.

Simply, the off-topic long discussions bloat the thread.

HDD discussion is not off-topic. It is relevant to WD performance because WD performs differently on legacy HDD versus current tech SSD. The whole point of the thread is to answer "
Is it true that WD really is lighter and faster than most other AVs?
"
That cannot be answered without first identifying whether WD is running on a HDD or SSD. Any discussion not identifying the drive type is highly mis-leading.

 

[Cortex]

For me & for my final answer: There is a equal place in my life for SSD & HDD, all my external storages devices are HDD, the 5 TB drive in this PC is HDD - I would never be able to afford a 5TB drive for storage & the speed of it isn't that important, it will be some time before SSD drives of that size are affordable (paid just over $100 USD) SSD are perfect for C:\ & data that's needed for quick retrieval - They are of equal standing - I really am not a fan of WD & much prefer a third party solution such as KIS on this PC - I feel that the only way to discern if a AV is for you to try alternatives

@ brigantes - It's just a forum & not to be taken to seriously, my opinions change on a daily basis, they are just my opinion, though yours is as valid as are others, the day everyone agrees with me is never going to happen - It's just fun on here really - Take care.

 

[blackice]

My argument, and the argument of others, is all in this thread. You just have to read all the posts from the initial OP post. All of it is self-explanatory. Despite what you say, there are a lot of people who get upset about the topic of HDD being legacy. You obviously did not read all the posts.

There is an ongoing debate. And this is where the problem comes in at MalwareTips. As soon as you people get upset, then you all do your utmost to shut down the discussion. That is why there are literally thousands of threads here that have been locked. Not to mention so many members banned. This place just isn't a very credible place to discuss much of anything unless a poster is part of the hive agenda and mob rule.




HDD discussion is not off-topic. It is relevant to WD performance because WD performs differently on legacy HDD versus current tech SSD. The whole point of the thread is to answer "
Is it true that WD really is lighter and faster than most other AVs?
"
That cannot be answered without first identifying whether WD is running on a HDD or SSD. Any discussion not identifying the drive type is highly mis-leading.

What was off topic was the intense hand wringing over the definition of words and how they apply to HDD. If HDDs are truly considered obsolete then the rest of the industry has the same problem and the issue is moot. The same hardware is in the pool for all vendors. For someone with few posts you sure do know a lot about the BIG problems with MT. Broad generalizations are being made about people getting mad. I don’t know about you, but I’m a runner and my blood pressure is low.

 

[Andy Ful]

brigantes,
The WD performance will be the same on the standard HDD and on the standard HDD renamed to "legacy HDD". Furthermore, some users can think that you have in mind 20 years old legacy HDD.
If I correctly understood, you do not see any difference between HDD and "legacy HDD". So, why do you bother to use twice more words to describe the same thing?

 

[Chuck57]

I don't get the problem between "legacy" HDD and SSD. If the computer works, 99% of the people who own and use them don't care what holds their data, or OS, or anything else.

 

[Andy Ful]

I don't get the problem between "legacy" HDD and SSD. If the computer works, 99% of the people who own and use them don't care what holds their data, or OS, or anything else.

Most people will prefer the SSD as a system disk and HDD (or external USB drive) as a secondary disk. When using SSD as a system disk we have a much quicker system start and system maintenance. The WD Quick scan and folder opening (displaying icons) are also faster on SSD.

 

[plat]

Hard drives are still in production. Western Digital just got sued and shamed for mis-representing the capabilities of some of its Red disks--it's the first brand that comes to mind when you say "HDD.". So, I think HDDs are by no means "legacy" or in other words: in use until the host mechanism dies of natural causes. As long as something is currently in production, mass rpoduction even!, it cannot be considered "legacy."

Windows Defender slows down on an HDD? Maybe then, esp. if it needs defragmenting. On an NVM-e, I don't know it's there unless it ding-dongs in Action Center. It's a matter of read/write speeds. It's like saying a bicycle is legacy because it's slower than a gas-powered engine, at least in my mind.

 

[mlnevese]

Every time I see this discussion about legacy hard disks this is what comes to my mind:

 

[brigantes]

brigantes,
The WD performance will be the same on the standard HDD and on the standard HDD renamed to "legacy HDD". Furthermore, some users can think that you have in mind 20 years old legacy HDD.
If I correctly understood, you do not see any difference between HDD and "legacy HDD". So, why do you bother to use twice more words to describe the same thing?

WD runs OK on hybrid HDD with a enough dedicated flash memory. WD does not run OK on HDD - which everyone knows what I'm talking about. HDD today is still the same technology as HDD from decades ago. They are a spinning platter. So todays HDD is legacy all the same as 20 year old HDD.

Once again, wide spread current use does not make something NOT obsolete or legacy. There is a single advantage to HDDs and that is low cost. That's why HDDs are still around. Primarily for data backup where speed is not a requirement.

Hard drives are still in production. Western Digital just got sued and shamed for mis-representing the capabilities of some of its Red disks--it's the first brand that comes to mind when you say "HDD.". So, I think HDDs are by no means "legacy" or in other words: in use until the host mechanism dies of natural causes. As long as something is currently in production, mass rpoduction even!, it cannot be considered "legacy."

Windows Defender slows down on an HDD? Maybe then, esp. if it needs defragmenting. On an NVM-e, I don't know it's there unless it ding-dongs in Action Center. It's a matter of read/write speeds. It's like saying a bicycle is legacy because it's slower than a gas-powered engine, at least in my mind.

Production status has nothing to do with the definition of legacy or obsolete. Legacy equates to obsolete in one way or more.

HDDs are still in production only because of their low cost. Otherwise there is no advantage to using an HDD and the drive OEMs can only make tiny improvements to the HDD technology year over year. That is why HDD is rated as legacy.

Every time I see this discussion about legacy hard disks this is what comes to my mind:

View attachment 243907

Any HDD you buy today is legacy. It is obsolete technology. Spinning platters of any kind are ancient technology.

 

[Andy Ful]

HDD today is still the same technology as HDD from decades ago. They are a spinning platter. So todays HDD is legacy all the same as 20 year old HDD.

Once again, wide spread current use does not make something NOT obsolete or legacy. There is a single advantage to HDDs and that is low cost. That's why HDDs are still around. Primarily for data backup where speed is not a requirement.

Production status has nothing to do with the definition of legacy or obsolete. Legacy equates to obsolete in one way or more.

HDDs are still in production only because of their low cost. Otherwise there is no advantage to using an HDD and the drive OEMs can only make tiny improvements to the HDD technology year over year. That is why HDD is rated as legacy.

Any HDD you buy today is legacy. It is obsolete technology. Spinning platters of any kind are ancient technology.

Mostly nonsense.
Your posts are much better if you avoid the term legacy and use sometimes the term WD.

 

[brigantes]

Mostly nonsense.
Your posts are much better if you avoid the term legacy and use sometimes the term WD.

Two year old article. Industry leader calls HDD "spinning rust." There's a ton of other experts out there saying or have said the same thing. So, nope. Not nonsense. Everything I've been saying all along is technically correct to industry standards.

Say bye-bye to spinning rust: Soon most PCs won't have hard drives

By 2018, more than half of computers will store data on memory chips instead, analyst firm TrendForce expects.

www.cnet.com

Nice to see you keep trying to discredit me. I see the ad hominem and polemics here have not changed.

 

[ChoiceVoice]

you seem to be trying to make a point veiled as a question: and yet your question undermines your point. you ask:
"Is it true that WD really is lighter and faster than most other AVs?" (a point is made) -- yet you then say:
"This discussion is irrelevant if people do not list if they are running Windows on HDD." and your rationale is:
" HDD is legacy hardware that is the reason for slow performance." (you just admitted WD is slower in this regard)
--if some OTHER AVs don't have "slow performance" with HDD, that indicates they are faster. and they will still be faster with SDD, but it won't be as pronounced, so you might not notice it. but faster is still faster in the metric you chose to focus on.

i don't know whether WD is slower or not in disk activity, but i do know you just said it was slower while simultaneously telling us to ignore that.

 

[ChoiceVoice]

Two year old article. Industry leader calls HDD "spinning rust." There's a ton of other experts out there saying or have said the same thing. So, nope. Not nonsense. Everything I've been saying all along is technically correct to industry standards.

Say bye-bye to spinning rust: Soon most PCs won't have hard drives

By 2018, more than half of computers will store data on memory chips instead, analyst firm TrendForce expects.

www.cnet.com

Nice to see you keep trying to discredit me. I see the ad hominem and polemics here have not changed.

he disagreed with you, he did not insult you or make a personal attack. it is you, that by accusing him of an ad hominem attack (instead of addressing his argument), who actually made an ad hominem inference against him. you did what you accused him of.

 

[Andy Ful]

Two year old article. Industry leader calls HDD "spinning rust."

It was not an industry leader, but analyst working for TrendForce (global market consulting firm from Taiwan):
"TrendForce has long been a leader in semiconductor research and offers critical intelligence on subjects such as IC production (i.e., design, fabrication, and assembly/testing) and memory technologies (i.e., DRAM and NAND Flash). "

It is obvious why they would like to throw away the HDD technology. There is also misunderstanding about the term "spinning rust". It is not a pejorative term, but simply means the traditional HDD technology which is known for decades. See for example:

Network Dictionary – Spinning Rust — EtherealMind

etherealmind.com

There's a ton of other experts out there saying or have said the same thing.

Yes, there are. But, these experts do not say what you say. They say that it is time to replace the HD technology and that this may happen soon (just the same as what I say).
Even the TrendForce expertise you refer on, does not say that HDD will be a legacy technology in 2018, but only that 56% of notebooks will adopt SSD.

So, nope. Not nonsense. Everything I've been saying all along is technically correct to industry standards.

Nothing that you wrote about legacy technology does confirm this statement.

Nice to see you keep trying to discredit me. I see the ad hominem and polemics here have not changed.

It would not be nice to you, if I really tried to do so. All my critic is related to misusing the term "legacy HDD" and the critic is not related to anything else in your posts. I am not saying that it is not possible to find some people (including experts) that understand this term as you do (although you did not find them yet). I am only saying that the term legacy is used often in a different meaning (see the sources in my posts), but you insist to use only one meaning, which can be misguiding for many people. You can easily avoid this by simply using the term HDD which by accident means just the same to you as "legacy HDD".

 

[Andy Ful]

Here are some statistics.
In the second quarter of 2019 about 64 mln. SSD and 78 mln. HDD were shipped worldwide. In the third quarter, the number of HDD devices increased to 83 mln. But there is a clear increasing tendency for SSD and decreasing tendency for HDD.

This graph shows solid-state disk (SSD) shipments in million units worldwide, from the fourth quarter of 2013 to the second quarter of 2019. In the second quarter of 2019, some 64.38 million solid-state drives were shipped worldwide.
Solid-state disk drive (SSD) shipments worldwide from 2013 to 2019, by quarter :

SSD unit shipments worldwide by quarter 2013-2022 | Statista

In the third quarter of 2022, some 74.89 million solid-state drives (SSDs) were shipped worldwide.

www.statista.com

The below statistic shows global shipment figures for hard disk drives since the fourth quarter of 2010. In the third quarter of 2019, around 83 million hard disk drives were shipped worldwide.
Global shipments of hard disk drives (HDD) from 4th quarter 2010 to 3rd quarter 2019:
HDD shipments 2019 | Statista