Yeah, the only way it would "make sense", across the entire MG0* series and capacity spectrum, from a reliability perspective, is if the primary failure point was the head(s)-actuator assembly/mechanism (one per drive). But that would be ludicrous because ...Okay, so after reading that, I went looking to see what Toshiba said ...
Makes no sense to me.
(On a 512e drive,) if you performed continuous/non-stop 512-byte random reads, 24/7, for one year, you would have read 1.3 TB !!
[The only reason I even looked at the spec page in the first place was because I was curious to see what the seek-time for the drive was. Shame on Toshiba for not including that info! Hence, the above scenario assumed (best-case) avg seek of 8ms, plus avg latency of