That happened to one model, when it was IBM.
I got bitten by one, and came back to Deskstar since 2012.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Western Digital Announces Redesigned My Passport Portable Hard Drives
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I got bitten by one, and came back to Deskstar since 2012.
I have a couple of the older Passports, and the first thing I did was wipe them and repartition MBR/exFAT, so I can use them cross-platform. I never used the WD software. I'm sure you can do the same and partition for Time Machine use.
Just get a USB-C to Micro B cable... Then it will have USB-C. What do you even mean by saying don't "have" USB-C. Do you mean... don't have a USB-C cable? They are USB 2.0/3.0. So yes you can get that cable, only downside, maybe the color won't match.
[doublepost=1476293944][/doublepost]I'm personally glad I have the generation right before these, I find them to be pretty ugly.
I guess. Like Kajje above, I've been using WD Passports for at least 10 years and haven't had any go bad yet. The on WD drive I did have die on me was a desktop model. Maybe you're just unlucky, I don't know.
Look, every hard drive, portable or otherwise, is a disaster waiting to happen if you have data ONLY on that drive. If it's only in one place, you're playing with fire.
[doublepost=1476294273][/doublepost]
This interests me only because it means the "old" ones will go on sale.
Make the drives faster, color doesn't matter as much to me! 
Same here, why colors?
Black or silver = done!
BTW: Some of these had mounting issues for me related to the cables that came with it.
Have the mac version with FW800 and USB and could only mount via USB.
On second thought would prefer all ssd, but these prices are very enticing.
The Thunderbolt 3 > 2 > USB argument is only really valid for 5K displays at the moment. And any sort of storage you would get from a portable hard drive is well under Thunderbolt 1 speeds.
But I do agree that if they give these USB-C ports they could be more convenient than having to use an adapter. (Just leave me my MagSafe! Grrrr!)
To the ones complaining about things like lack of TB3, etc: You do realize that max transfer rate of a portable spinning drive isn't going to be high enough to even come close to needing TB3, right?
Also, I've had internal and external drives from Seagate, Western Digital, Hitachi, and Toshiba over the last several years, and in my experience, the Seagate drives were the worst. They are the only ones that have failed so far, or have had read/write errors pop up from time-to-time (knock on wood.) Total number of drives I'm talking about is about 18-20, and 4 of them were Seagate (they are the cheapest drives I can get where I am ... I guess for a reason.) 3 of those died. One within warranty period (rest died less than a month past warranty). The replacement unit died shortly after warranty expired. The last one gave disconnect and read-write errors, so I got rid of it as a precaution, and replaced it with a WD Black unit. Out of the drives I run right now (16 total at the moment), 10 are WD Blacks and Reds, with remainder being a mix of Toshiba and Hitachi.
Also, I've had internal and external drives from Seagate, Western Digital, Hitachi, and Toshiba over the last several years, and in my experience, the Seagate drives were the worst. They are the only ones that have failed so far, or have had read/write errors pop up from time-to-time (knock on wood.) Total number of drives I'm talking about is about 18-20, and 4 of them were Seagate (they are the cheapest drives I can get where I am ... I guess for a reason.) 3 of those died. One within warranty period (rest died less than a month past warranty). The replacement unit died shortly after warranty expired. The last one gave disconnect and read-write errors, so I got rid of it as a precaution, and replaced it with a WD Black unit. Out of the drives I run right now (16 total at the moment), 10 are WD Blacks and Reds, with remainder being a mix of Toshiba and Hitachi.
Last edited:
To those who do not trust WDs, what other brand do you trust?
WD and Seagate are about the only 2 main options, and we all know seagate is the more likely to break.
Never in a million years have I thought the port might break
WD and Seagate are about the only 2 main options, and we all know seagate is the more likely to break.
Never in a million years have I thought the port might break
I don't have any major gripes, but I think HGST is the best, which WD bought.
And the 3.5" Toshibas derive from HGST, so I already chose it once.
Micro-USB has always been a week point in external drives. Move your drive but 1 mm on the table and it gets disconnected. At least that's my experience.
So why does WD feel the need to solder on the usb controller? That's the main criticism here. Other than that, WD hard drivers are very reliable and I don't use anything else.
Right, that's why companies like WD need to innovate and not just change the colors of old drives. They have been stuck at the same drive speeds for many years now.
That's true and that is how they're able to get their 1800 MB crazy speeds, however...(below)
I don't know the percent, but I doubt it is 100%+ more. And charging $700 to go from a 2TB fusion that already has a SSD component to a 1TB SSD in a machine that already costs $2300 is insane even for Apple. I really don't think the current iMacs are a great value. I mean 8GB of RAM in a $2300 machine?
I remember them but that whole issue was from roughly the last 90s or early 2000s back when I think IBM made them.
Early 2000s. I bought one for my Cube and it died quickly.
That's why SSDs exist. There's your speed (at a cost.)
None of these drives will give you speed over an SSD. What they will do, for now, is give you cost effective option for capacity. Eventually, the cost to produce will be greater than SSDs, as drive density increases, until eventually it won't be any cheaper than an SSD, since SSDs continue to drop in cost per GB.
BTW, the increased capacity of these drives available in a 2.5" form factor is the innovation here, and centripetal force is the underlying factor that affects the speed limits on spinning drives.
Would it be cost effective for manufacturers to attempt to bend the laws of physics for these devices, or is it simply more appropriate for them to target a specific market segment with them, and let SSDs roam the other segment? Western Digital's recent acquisition of SanDisk would seem to suggest that they firmly believe in the latter. In fact, they just released a line of SSDs with the WD "Blue" branding attached to them.
It's the only hard drive I have not had to replace due to failure (scrape-scrape, tic-tic).
I do agree about storing all one's eggs in one basket.
[doublepost=1476391213][/doublepost]
Try one - you will not be disappointed. Buy the ULTRA. Just remember to format the drive before you start copying data to it. $59 for 1TB, $89 for 2TB at Amazon. My Passport for Mac is overpriced.
[doublepost=1476391474][/doublepost]
In 2012 I bought 3 HGST Deskstar HDDs, 1 TB, 7200 RPMs. I don't use any of them today. They were failing when I replaced them.
I started buying the 7K4000 in 2012 and now I have 8, in 2 RAID0. None have failed.