Many thanks, Hilbert. That's a valuable info, indeed.

"A series of their storage units will drop into complete failure after precisely 32,768 hours of usage." - Does this smell like planned obsolescence? NOO......

Hilbert Hagedoorn:

This news item is not totally new as a warning was issued back in December, however recently HP updated the SSD list, and the more I think about what is written there, the more my eyebrowses frown.... HP Enterprise SSD users, please check and update firmware (before a kill-switch kicks in)

I'm not sure why you're finding this confusing. This isn't a kill switch or whatever thing you're confused by. It's simply a bug in the firmware that disables certain models after a precise number of hours of operation. They could not have been more clear: https://mspoweruser.com/hp-enterprise-ssd-failure/ HPE was notified by a Solid State Drive (SSD) manufacturer of a firmware defect affecting certain SAS SSD models (reference the table below) used in a number of HPE server and storage products (i.e., HPE ProLiant, Synergy, Apollo, Synergy D3940 Storage Module, HPE ConvergedSystem, D3000/D6000/D6020 Disk Enclosures, MSA Storage, StoreEasy 1000 Storage, StoreVirtual 4335 Hybrid Storage and StoreVirtual 3000 Storage are affected). NOTE: The following platforms are NOT AFFECTED by this issue: HPE 3PAR StoreServ Storage, D8000 Disk Enclosure, Nimble Storage, Primera Storage, StoreOnce Systems, XP Storage, HPE StoreEasy 5000 Storage, SimpliVity, Cloudline, Moonshot and Edgeline. The issue affects SSDs with an HPE firmware version prior to HPD8 that results in SSD failure at 32,768 hours of operation (i.e., 3 years, 270 days 8 hours). After the SSD failure occurs, neither the SSD nor the data can be recovered. In addition, SSDs which were put into service at the same time will likely fail nearly simultaneously. Here's a working link to the notice https://support.hpe.com/hpesc/public/docDisplay?docId=emr_na-a00092491en_us

DG21:

"A series of their storage units will drop into complete failure after precisely 32,768 hours of usage." - Does this smell like planned obsolescence? NOO......

Right... good idea, firmware bug that the maker outs you with because....'rollseyes'.

SweenJM:

Yikes. Sounds like a major hassle for IT folk in companies that run hp equipment.

For sure, and you'd hope that HP has proactively notified every single customer that could be affected.

HeavyHemi:

I'm not sure why you're finding this confusing.

The confusing part is simple, why do the SSDs die after 32,768 hours of operation. Of course, power on counts are normal, however, why does the SSD have a mechanism in play that allows the SSD to die after precisely that number of hours used? HP doesn't explain, the link you include doesn't either.

Oops I accidentally programmed the firmware to kill the SSDs after 32,768 hours. Bug! Nothing to look at, conspiracy theorists. Intentional code is totally a bug.

Hilbert Hagedoorn:

The confusing part is simple, why do the SSDs die after 32,768 hours of operation. Of course, power on counts are normal, however, why does the SSD have a mechanism in play that allows the SSD to die after precisely that number of hours used? HP doesn't explain, the link you include doesn't either.

Because this is the maximum of the positive value of a 16 bit integer. A 16 bit integer can hold 65,535 which is usually -32,768 to +32,768. Exactly the number of days before it dies. Your scare-mongering is irresponsible. What's more likely? HP has a kill-switch in their code that they've told everyone about, so now everyone knows that they're purposefully killing products to sell more...Or that they incorrectly used an int in the firmware? I just don't get the conspiracy BS. Like to believe in this I have to accept that HP has undermined trust in their storage solutions in order to sell a few thousand SSDs, maybe, once.

Typical HP, just like messing with their printer cartridge firmware.

Neo Cyrus:

Oops I accidentally programmed the firmware to kill the SSDs after 32,768 hours. Bug! Nothing to look at, conspiracy theorists. Intentional code is totally a bug.

Companies not getting caught: "Heh heh, everything's working perfectly: This means more sales as replacements!" HP: "It's a totally accidental bug in the firmware! Here's a fix. We are looking into how this happened (we will finish the investigation before the end of the century). AMD: "We have never heard of this problem before. We will be studying the issue... Wait, what were we talking about, again?" Intel: "We take these problems very seriously. In 2035 we will have a totally new product with a hardware fix. Please look forward to it!" Apple: "It's a feature. If you don't understand why it's there and its purpose, it's due to your lack of intelligence. Not our problem." Gigabyte, Asus, MSI, etc: "There are no problems. No problems. Please don't contact us again. Good bye."

You typically don't replace drives in enterprise environments. Most enterprise SSDs are designed that as soon as they see any type of cell corruption/write/read issue they automatically fail the entire drive.

It would be bizarre indeed (or p.poor programming) to have this operate over a constant alone. Irrespective, disassemble the current firmware and any subsequent 'patch' firmware. Focus on the differences. While it would (should?) be suicidal for a company if it were proven, don't be so naive to always assume something like this doesn't happen - we are dealing with companies seeking profit, or other.

Mesab67:

It would be bizarre indeed (or p.poor programming) to have this operate over a constant alone. Irrespective, disassemble the current firmware and any subsequent 'patch' firmware. Focus on the differences. While it would (should?) be suicidal for a company if it were proven, don't be so naive to always assume something like this doesn't happen - we are dealing with companies seeking profit, or other.

Good luck meddling with the drive firmware on a HP server. HP has a knack for whitelisting drives. I'm sure the server will reject a modified drive. Besides, depending how important and large expansive the mainframe is, the amount of downtime modifying each drive would be too costly.

Reardan:

Your scare-mongering is irresponsible. What's more likely? HP has a kill-switch in their code that they've told everyone about, so now everyone knows that they're purposefully killing products to sell more...Or that they incorrectly used an int in the firmware?

This.

When Planned obsolescence is too obvious... Now it's just a random number, after the warranty expires 🙂

kroks:

When Planned obsolescence is too obvious... Now it's just a random number, after the warranty expires 🙂

Not random - an integer value 32767 in binary is 111111111111111, so, once you go to 32768, that would bring the number to 1000000000000000, but they probably limited the amount of digits to the variable, so once you increment that value one more time, it resets to all zeros, at which point, the SSD is probably programmed to fail. But still.... it is planned obsolescence and that's what really matters.

Imagine making a ssd so good you actually have to artificially put a death date for it...... lol..

schmidtbag:

once you increment that value one more time, it resets to all zeros, at which point, the SSD is probably programmed to fail.

That's some interesting James Bond theory you've got there. Kek. 🙄

Could be a nefarious plot to get new ssd's sold just like with their inkjet printers where the cartridges have expiration dates that cause the printers to stop working on those dates until new cartridges are purchased regardless of how much ink is in them. I love HP printers, but the expiration date thing is crap.

DG21:

"A series of their storage units will drop into complete failure after precisely 32,768 hours of usage." - Does this smell like planned obsolescence? NOO......

No, it doesn't, it sounds like a screw up, hence the firmware to fix it. No need to bring conspiracy theories in to any topic, ever. If you have evidence of a conspiracy, that is the only valid time. This is what people who bring up conspiracy theories sound like: https://cdn0.tnwcdn.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2019/03/flat-earth-paul.png

schmidtbag:

But still.... it is planned obsolescence and that's what really matters.

If it was planned, then why fix it? Why fix it in advance? Why do anything about it? It's not like if they had planned it, they wouldn't have known that at some point people would get upset, so what is planned about it? Nothing. Calling this "Planned obsolescence" is simply throwing conspiracy into the wind. It's an issue that causes a product to brick itself that has been fixed and announced by the manufacturers so that way it doesn't happen, simple as that, to state anything else is nonsense, unneeded conspiracy theory. So either you're using the phrase "Planned Obsolescence" incorrectly, or you're throwing around conspiracy theories for no reason, which doesn't sound like most of what i've seen you write @schmidtbag Planned Obsolescence: a policy of producing consumer goods that rapidly become obsolete and so require replacing, achieved by frequent changes in design, termination of the supply of spare parts, and the use of nondurable materials. You must plan to make something obsolescent, to be accused of planned obsolescence. If there was no planning to do this, and no evidence of it, as well as no logical reasoning behind it, there can be no logical conspiracy behind claiming planned obsolescence.

Margalus:

Could be a nefarious plot to get new ssd's sold just like with their inkjet printers where the cartridges have expiration dates that cause the printers to stop working on those dates until new cartridges are purchased regardless of how much ink is in them. I love HP printers, but the expiration date thing is crap.

HP printers suck, not sure why you like them as they are overly expensive for their ink and in general are just not good quality. However, it's science that printer ink degrades, clogs up and ruins printers by trying to use them after so long. Denying this is denying facts. Seriously though being upset that the manufacturer is trying to ensure that its own products do not damage the main device in operation is just sad really. I can't say i don't wish there was a "Just use it anyway" option, but to expect that a LIQUID product will last forever and never change its composition and etc. is downright living with blinds over your eyes to reality.

Hilbert Hagedoorn:

The confusing part is simple, why do the SSDs die after 32,768 hours of operation. Of course, power on counts are normal, however, why does the SSD have a mechanism in play that allows the SSD to die after precisely that number of hours used? HP doesn't explain, the link you include doesn't either.

How can you say it is not explained. There's a new firmware for THE BUG IN THE FIRMWARE. Oh my gosh... come on.

sounds like a similar thing thath appened to initial wd reds.