How can they get that if they stuff enough fake reviews, plus the legion of consumers who would have no idea that the drive was the issue and not "viruses".
No one is going to be selling a million laptops with a drive from RandoDriveManuGoodBrand off Amazon with no track record and no validation.
Anyone buying the non-name brand types of drives knows they're getting (at best) something that might only work a little while before exploding.
The name brands like Samsung, et. al. work hard to make their firmware not grenade something (and the drives overall to be AT LEAST as reliable as their competitors) BECAUSE they want the name to mean something. It is what drives customers their way, most of the time.
If they get a reputation as a company selling junk (cough Deskstar/Deathstar) that costs them billions over many years.
I remember an adjacent team to mine that had to store several gigs of data which changed often, but only a small percent changed at any one time. They needed to recover quickly from a crash so they wrote it to disk. But they wrote the entire data set out to disk after every update, instead of keeping it in e.g. rocksdb or even sqlite. Their entire fleet burnt through their SSDs at about the same rate, so machines were dying in rapid succession, ouch. Write amplification is a real problem, but SSDs great performance often masks it being an issue until down the road.
You can burn out a modern consumer drive in 2 days if you want to. Write perf ~6 gb/s, mtbf 700 tb written on a 1 tb drive. The tlc/qlc cells have very poor endurance imo.
[1]: https://du.nkel.dev/blog/2021-05-05_proxmox_influxdb/#config...
https://www.pcgamer.com/storage-study-finds-ssds-might-not-b...
"Are SSDs Really More Reliable Than Hard Drives?"
https://www.backblaze.com/blog/are-ssds-really-more-reliable...