Yev from Backblaze here -> Most of the comments have it. They tend to be more affordable and the failure rates aren't that much different from their counterparts. Since we account for failure with our software layer a small failure rate delta isn't a big deal and is eclipsed our cost savings which we pass on to our customers!

Yes, by around half.

HGSTs are in short supply states-side right now and in high demand. Toshibas are also in limited supply here (at least the desirable helium-filled ones) and are about 2/3 between the Seagates and HGSTs.

Also in their product, drive failure is okay!

Backblaze's usage pattern is NOT the same as yours with 99+% certainty. Their drive conditions are also unlikely to match yours.

They have a solid system set up for the installation and replacement of large numbers of drives on a regular schedule and the way they segment data would require multiple drive failures to cause data loss (I think it used to be 3 drives out of 20, but don't quote me on that). A slightly higher failure rate on a noticeably cheaper drive still works out in their favor financially without adding significant extra risk.

I am definitely finding Seagates the cheapest option at Microcenter, generally $5-$10 cheaper. Can't say I'm proud of cheaping out on storage, but that's my current price-point and haven't yet made the leap to trying to set up a properly-RAIDed NAS.

If a drive has a 1% higher failure rate, but is 2% cheaper, it's still cheaper to buy it, and just run more of them in redundancy to cover the failure rate.

I think they buy whatever their suppliers can get a hold of. They've said that they would buy HGST only, but they are too expensive.

Thank you for verbalizing a question I have always had haha.

i seem to remember in the past they said price and ease of procurement