Seagate recall: Just got my iMac back today


Recommended Posts

Hi,

This is a follow up to the Seagate recall and I was wondering whether they would replace it with another Seagate or an entirely new brand. Here is the information prior to taking it in:

ST31000528AS:

Capacity: 1 TB (1,000,204,886,016 bytes)

Model: ST31000528AS

Revision: AP4C

Serial Number: XXXXXXX

Native Command Queuing: Yes

Queue Depth: 32

Removable Media: No

Detachable Drive: No

BSD Name: disk0

Rotational Rate: 7200

Medium Type: Rotational

Partition Map Type: GPT (GUID Partition Table)

S.M.A.R.T. status: Verified

I ran the 'System Profiler' and found that they replaced the Seagate with a Western Digital:

WDC WD1001FALS-403AA0:

Capacity: 1 TB (1,000,204,886,016 bytes)

Model: WDC WD1001FALS-403AA0

Revision: 06.01D02

Serial Number: WD-XXXXXXXXXX

Native Command Queuing: Yes

Queue Depth: 32

Removable Media: No

Detachable Drive: No

BSD Name: disk0

Rotational Rate: 7200

Medium Type: Rotational

Partition Map Type: GPT (GUID Partition Table)

S.M.A.R.T. status: Verified

Has anyone else noticed that they have switched brands? Not that I'm complaining but I wonder if Seagate is being pushed to one side given that there has been several years of bad batches coming out of Seagate.

Interesting, ive found WD's to be much more reliable anyhow but cost a bit more. Not surprised that Apple went with Seagate as they love charging premium for the cheapest parts imaginable.

It's a bit up and down because Atheros IMHO are a lot better than Broadcom and yet we see a mixture of both being used same goes when it comes to hard disks - sometimes they just change things around to keep the various suppliers on their toes. If it were me (personally) I'd establish a good long term relationship with Western Digital if it meant a secure supply of quality drives because the cost of replacing these drives in terms of labour wouldn't be small change given how labourious it is to open up an iMac to begin with.

I personally refuse to buy any hard drive from Seagate any more because of this exact reason. Of the past 10 drives I've bought, I've had 3 drives fail in the first year all coming from Seagate. And their external hard drives are complete jokes. I only buy Western Digital now.

Hrmm thought it was just my bad luck for a while. Used to have decent results with Seagate drives (older models that lasted forever, a few almost 10 years), but the past few I've put into various servers seemed to crap out relatively quickly. Pity, used to like them.. been using a lot of WD's lately, so far no problems with the past dozen or so, knock on wood.

Hrmm thought it was just my bad luck for a while. Used to have decent results with Seagate drives (older models that lasted forever, a few almost 10 years), but the past few I've put into various servers seemed to crap out relatively quickly. Pity, used to like them.. been using a lot of WD's lately, so far no problems with the past dozen or so, knock on wood.

Everything after the 7200.8 series has been crap. This was about the time they merged with Maxtor, so there's the problem. I've never had good luck with Maxtor drives and ever since the two merged, Seagate has been driving themselves into the ground. I tend to stick with WD, Hitachi and Samsung drives these days.

  • Like 1

I'm a pretty big Samsung fan atm. I used to be a WD fan, but the Samsungs seem to outperform them a lot of the time..

Either way, I have all Samsung disks in my server, desktop and laptop. The only issue I have found is with one particular drive family, if a smart status call is made while writing data, it writes the sector off as bad and write speeds go to hell until the queue is emptied.

Other then that, they've been superb >.<

  • 1 year later...
Model: ST31000528AS

Revision: AP4C

Sorry for reviving an old thread, but I don't suppose you have an Apple support case number for this replacement I could reference, do you?

This is exactly the same model *and* firmware revision of a hard drive I have in my 21.5" iMac bought in July 2011, and it has failed (not to worry, I have Time Machine backups), and I'm getting very sick of Apple telling me my hard drive doesn't qualify for this replacement program. The last Sr. Advisor I just talked with told me it didn't because only the AP24, and AP25 firmware revision models qualified, but obviously here you are with the AP4C revision just like mine, and yours qualified.

Hard drives aren't supposed to fail with only 1 and a half years of use. I've owned close to 20 different drives over the course of the last ten years (most of them Seagate drives), and I've only ever had one other drive die within the first 3 years. I've re-sold 6 of them recently that lasted me about 5 years, and every last one still worked. I still have a couple ~100GB drives from 2003/2004 that work perfectly fine, and pretty much every single drive I buy (outside of Apple) comes with at least a 2-year warranty (although most of mine are 3-year to 5-year).

This iMac drive obviously had something wrong with it, and Apple is replacing the exact same model with a recall, and I'm just getting shafted here because I'm no longer under the Apple Care warranty (but this recall is supposed to still cover me).

Capacity: 1 TB (1,000,204,886,016 bytes)

Model: ST31000528AS

Revision: AP4C

Serial Number: XXXXXXXX

Native Command Queuing: Yes

Queue Depth: 32

Removable Media: No

Detachable Drive: No

BSD Name: disk0

Rotational Rate: 7200

Medium Type: Rotational

Partition Map Type: GPT (GUID Partition Table)

S.M.A.R.T. status: Failing

I feel like I'm the only person in the world that likes Seagate. I've had better luck with them than WD.

Same here lol. Pretty much all my computers but one have had Seagate drives (the one that didn't had a Samsung one) and they've all worked flawlessly.

Sorry for reviving an old thread, but I don't suppose you have an Apple support case number for this replacement I could reference, do you?

This is exactly the same model *and* firmware revision of a hard drive I have in my 21.5" iMac bought in July 2011, and it has failed (not to worry, I have Time Machine backups), and I'm getting very sick of Apple telling me my hard drive doesn't qualify for this replacement program. The last Sr. Advisor I just talked with told me it didn't because only the AP24, and AP25 firmware revision models qualified, but obviously here you are with the AP4C revision just like mine, and yours qualified.

Hard drives aren't supposed to fail with only 1 and a half years of use. I've owned close to 20 different drives over the course of the last ten years (most of them Seagate drives), and I've only ever had one other drive die within the first 3 years. I've re-sold 6 of them recently that lasted me about 5 years, and every last one still worked. I still have a couple ~100GB drives from 2003/2004 that work perfectly fine, and pretty much every single drive I buy (outside of Apple) comes with at least a 2-year warranty (although most of mine are 3-year to 5-year).

This iMac drive obviously had something wrong with it, and Apple is replacing the exact same model with a recall, and I'm just getting shafted here because I'm no longer under the Apple Care warranty (but this recall is supposed to still cover me).

AP4C is not covered by the recall. However, due to the way they log parts, it's possible to have a machine with an AP4C drive flagged up as under the recall. Also, if you have previously had the drive swapped for a AP4C they may still detect it as the old model.

Hard drives fail. Your AP4C drive hasn't failed due to the problem the recall was issued for - it has failed due to another problem, and thus you will need to pay for the repair. Every hard drive you buy has a longer warranty, but you don't get that privilege as an OEM.

Sorry for reviving an old thread, but I don't suppose you have an Apple support case number for this replacement I could reference, do you?

This is exactly the same model *and* firmware revision of a hard drive I have in my 21.5" iMac bought in July 2011, and it has failed (not to worry, I have Time Machine backups), and I'm getting very sick of Apple telling me my hard drive doesn't qualify for this replacement program. The last Sr. Advisor I just talked with told me it didn't because only the AP24, and AP25 firmware revision models qualified, but obviously here you are with the AP4C revision just like mine, and yours qualified.

Hard drives aren't supposed to fail with only 1 and a half years of use. I've owned close to 20 different drives over the course of the last ten years (most of them Seagate drives), and I've only ever had one other drive die within the first 3 years. I've re-sold 6 of them recently that lasted me about 5 years, and every last one still worked. I still have a couple ~100GB drives from 2003/2004 that work perfectly fine, and pretty much every single drive I buy (outside of Apple) comes with at least a 2-year warranty (although most of mine are 3-year to 5-year).

This iMac drive obviously had something wrong with it, and Apple is replacing the exact same model with a recall, and I'm just getting shafted here because I'm no longer under the Apple Care warranty (but this recall is supposed to still cover me).

Hi,

Sorry I don't have my iMac any more - I made a HUGE mistake and moved to the PC world - basically for the next 6 months I'll be going 'hell for leather' to earn money and wait till the Hallswell is released and buy an iMac and MacBook Air.

As for the hard disk - end of the day every vendor has gone through a bad experience, Seagate, Quantum, Western Digital, Samsung, Fujitsu and so on thus there really isn't a 'safe harbour' where you can point to and say, "ah, if I get this brand then everything will be sweet" because unfortunately that isn't going to be the case.

  • 2 weeks later...
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Simple answer is yes, you will still get the Windows updates and as long as browser is up to date, you will be good. Only thing secure boot does is protect you against boot level threats and make it harder to install other OS's. I've been looking into this pretty thoroughly lately myself as wifes computer has secure boot disabled plus my other, older computers that run Linux, don't have secure boot enabled. Have seen all kinds of questions about this on the Linux Mint and MX Linux forums. Just don't suddenly enable secure boot now.
    • How many other companies will follow Ford's lead? Or, have they already gotten lazy and become enslaved to AI--and now can't figure out how to get out of that mess.
    • Why would any self-respecting intelligent person follow any recommendation by Donald's GOP administration? With almost two years of fabrications, deceit, and blatantly illegal behavior, why believe them now? They had best be gone after the November 2026 election, so we'll wait and see.
    • AltSendme 0.4.1 by Razvan Serea AltSendme is a minimal, cross-platform application designed for fast, secure, and private peer-to-peer file transfers. It allows users to send files or entire directories directly between devices without relying on cloud servers, accounts, or any personal information. Everything is encrypted end-to-end using modern protocols like QUIC and TLS 1.3, ensuring both strong security and low-latency performance. Transfers are verified with BLAKE3 for data integrity, and interrupted downloads automatically resume, making the experience reliable even on unstable connections. You can transfer anything—images, videos, documents, and more. Integrity checks are performed on both ends, so your files are automatically verified for correctness during both sending and receiving. AltSendme works seamlessly across local networks or long-distance links, capable of saturating multi-gigabit connections for extremely fast delivery. With built-in NAT traversal and encrypted relay fallback, it connects devices almost anywhere. The app integrates with the Sendme CLI and will soon support mobile and web platforms. Fully free and open-source, AltSendme offers a lightweight, privacy-first alternative to traditional cloud-based services, removing size limits, upload costs, and unnecessary data exposure. AltSendme 0.4.1 changelog: Release Highlights Self-hosted relays: Run your own iroh relay so transfers don't rely on public infrastructure. Includes a full deployment template in deploy/relay/ with Docker Compose for a VPS and configuration examples for production use. Fly.io support: One-click deploy template for Fly.io, including a quick-start config (fly.dev.toml) for testing without a custom domain, plus production setup with Let's Encrypt and your own hostname. Relay settings UI: New Settings → Network panel to choose how AltSendme connects: automatic public relays, custom self-hosted URLs (with optional auth token), or disabled. Test connections, verify latency, and see live relay status in the footer. Disable relays: Turn off relay servers entirely when you only need same-network transfers (e.g. LAN). Direct connections only. No relay hop required when devices can reach each other. Android graduates from beta: Android is now part of the regular release cycle alongside desktop. APKs ship with each version (universal, arm64, and armv7). Other improvements Private relay access control via shared auth token Relay fallback notifications when a custom relay is unreachable Broadcast mode toggle in sharing settings Android release build fixes (split-per-ABI APKs, universal APK preservation) UI polish: mobile safe-area insets, dropzone layout, transfer progress animation Bug fixes for minification-related serialization issues and system tray icon loading What's Changed feat(relay): add relay status functionality and settings UI (a120cdf) feat(relay): implement custom relay server configuration and verification (51276c7) feat(relay): add configuration for private relay access and enhance observability features (48fbabf) feat(relay): enhance relay URL validation, display connection status (d4fffa0) feat(relay): add RelayChangeGuard component and enhance relay-related translations (16ba514) feat(broadcast): add toggle setting for broadcast mode in sharing UI (ca6d977) fix(relay): correct QUIC discovery port, pin image, templatize fly.dev (52a2ba5) fix: More broken serialization due to minification (67491a9) fix(android): preserve true universal APK across per-ABI builds (e9f256f) fix(ui): conditional safe-area insets padding on mobile (1182f0e) refactor(transfer): CircularRing component animation fix (944572b) chore(android): drop x86 and x86_64 release APKs, keep universal+arm64+armv7 (34ada0b) Download: AltSendme 0.4.1 | ARM64 | ~9.0 MB (Open Source) Download: AltSendme for MacOS | Android Links: AltSendme Home Page | GitHub | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • You are mostly right about the ephemeral nature of it. As I mention in the article, if you dont add a second device or take a backup of your account before uninstalling it, then yes you will lose access to your account. That said, in terms of actual user experience when you sync multiple devices your message history carries across and there's also a Saved Messages chat like there is on Telegram to send messages and attachments between your installs. But yh, what you point out are correct and its not trying to emulate Messenger or Telegram.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      495
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      225
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      149
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!