Hard Disk Monitoring

Hi again
It would be welcome if registered HDS users could get access to the "smart values" online database in general,
not only concerning the specific drives that are already present in are computer/HDS.
So we can consult if a preferred drive, we like to buy, is reliable and to what degree.
You know, the information you gather via HDS of all the connected drives is quite valuable for registered users who like to buy a new hard drive!
It can help us to choose the most reliable drives, because any brand does have good and bad drives.

Ideas ?
I'm already satisfied with the current database of smart values and total health %.
My favourites are "current pending sector count", "raw read error rate and "write error rate"
If possible to add to that database? The Counted bad sectors of the surface scan would be greatly.
But that's not a smart value, thus not automatic generated, this information is only reliable if everybody scans the surface of a drive regularly, as soon as they encounter decreasing total health% of a drive, especially if the "current pending sector count" smart value is rising.
If not yet present in the overview green box: you could provide a warning message that suggest to carry out a surface scan, a soon as the "current pending sector count" value is rising.

Btw, thx for this great tool, if you want my opinion: I suppose the best HDD monitoring tool of the world. The best ever running on my pc's. And I can ensure you, HDS is not my first monitoring tool!

Thanks for the ideas and thoughts!

Yes, I agree that such information may help to find "best buy" hard disk drives.
It is already planned to make different lists about "best" and "worst" devices, based on S.M.A.R.T. statistics (just like http://www.hdsentinel.com/storagestats.php?lang=en which now shows lists based on user ratings/votes).
However, I agree that this may be extended about other (non-S.M.A.R.T.) related reliability parameters, like the surface scan errors as this informaiton may be useful also.

Yes I know, but sorry that list based on votes is not relevant, is quite subjectively.
That is my opinion since I have evaluated the vote rating of two drives I own.
Samsung HD103SJ and Western Digital WD10EALX (both 1TB).

The HD103SJ is better rated than the WD10EALX?!?
But actually the WD10EALX is the best drive!! He is almost as fast as the already very fast HD103SJ (read/write!), but the access time in HD Tune seems slightly better of the WD drive (so in practice you will not notice a speed difference), also the noise level is not irritating, and he seems much more reliable according to the online SMART database of HDS, based on the "current pending sector count" average value: WD10EALX about 0,50 facing an average of about 13 for the HD103SJ!! Power consumption is about the same for both drives.
So the WD10EALX is "objectively" a much better drive and secondly my HD103SJ is already crashed

So, you can imagine, why I prefer objective ratings based on SMART data and eg Surface scan results

Yes I agree: the votes are very subjective, the users can rate their hard disks based on their actual experiences.

Yes, it is planned to offer full SMART details for any drives (for registered users).
Exactly what you may see for your own drive when you click on the "Verify online" button, just you will be able to browse the statistics of other drives.
That may help.

Also I'm thinking lots about including other kind of information, exactly as suggested, for example the surface scan results (amount of problems), the seek times and so. That may be also used as indicators and may help selecting hard disks.
But this would require to use the functions of Hard Disk Sentinel, I wonder if you want to test the access times, why don't you use Hard Disk Sentinel also for that? (Disk -> Random seek test)

"Planned" Great You are very clever , actually I'm not surprised, there must be a reason why HDS is such a good/best monitoring tool

Why I use HD Tune instead of HDS to test access time
That's a smart note, but not easy to answer it.
First I know an use HD Tune already years, you know people and habits
Secondly, maybe I did not yet realize that HDS is more than only a monitoring tool?!
Thirdly, actually HDS is even better and more detailed than HDT (I still use free version) to test access time. But maybe I use HDT because It not only test the access time, it also test the read speed at the same time.
In HDS, testing of read speed and access time are separated tools, I suppose?!
Actually, beside the surface test I do not see an ability in HDS to test the read speed with a nice graphic summary?!
And as you know, a surface test can take a while on the large drives of today.

I hope my poor English is clear to understand?

Thanks
Yes, there are different options/functions available in Hard Disk Sentinel, which may be not well known, this is why I asked

Yes, I agree that in Hard Disk Sentinel, the disk surface testing which provides nice graph about transfer speed and working temperature, like on this image:



and the access time test



are different functions. These offer much higher precision and better results. I agree - they may require more time as the most important was to offer detailed testing (for both reliability, stability and performance) than a quick benchmark. Anyway, such quick benchmark is also planned in a later version.

Ps. no problems, I'm also not an English person