[General] Samsung develops 256GB solid state drive

[Burhan Khalid]

bashar abdullah wrote:
> Good point majed. I was planning to wait a bit before getting a NAS 
> solution. But if it's 25 writes only, it's not worth the wait I guess.

Uh, it bears mentioning here that not all devices are created the same, 
just like all disk drives don't have the same MTBF.

There are devices available with more than 100,000 write cycles. Also, 
these disks have tech in them that makes sure you are not burning out 
one sector all the time -- a process called "wear leveling".

Finally in case you have this notion that slapping a SSD in your laptop 
will somehow inject it with turbo powers to make Vista actually run fast 
-- then it bears keeping in mind that not all devices have the same 
read/write speeds.


> Speaking of which, anyone know a good, quite NAS product?

What capacity?

> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 4:53 AM, Majed B. <majedb at gmail.com 
> <mailto:majedb at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     I read the news summary over /. and I found the last part funny:
>     "A 256GB capacity is getting large enough to replace hard-drives for
>     good — now just the prices just need to come down further for large
>     capacity SSDs."
> 
>     They forgot something more important than price: Reliability!
>     SSDs are like USB memory sticks, suffer from a major reliability issue
>     which is the limited number of writes on a block. The article mentions
>     no improvement on that side, so I'm assuming the recent figures still
>     stand: 25 writes per block, and after that, *poof* the block is no
>     longer usable.
> 
>     Even with smart controllers that distribute data randomly or
>     selectively over blocks, people would want fast disks for fast
>     operations, and most likely to read & write a lot, not just to "store
>     fast," which means that the wear factor is very high.
> 
>     Unless they get another technology to replace the existing one causing
>     such reliability issues, it's not worth the money, in my opinion.
> 
>     On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 1:51 AM, Bashar Al-Abdulhadi
>     <bashar at kuwaitnet.net <mailto:bashar at kuwaitnet.net>> wrote:
>      > i wonder how much it will cost if 64GB is 600ish-800ish
>      >
>      > http://crave.cnet.com/8301-1_105-9952007-1.html
>      >
>      > _______________________________________________
>      > General mailing list
>      > General at oskw.org <mailto:General at oskw.org>
>      > http://mail.oskw.org/mailman/listinfo/general_oskw.org
>      >
>      >
> 
> 
> 
>     --
>      Majed B.
>     _______________________________________________
>     General mailing list
>     General at oskw.org <mailto:General at oskw.org>
>     http://mail.oskw.org/mailman/listinfo/general_oskw.org
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> General mailing list
> General at oskw.org
> http://mail.oskw.org/mailman/listinfo/general_oskw.org


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3262 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://oskw.org/pipermail/general_oskw.org/attachments/20080527/2abf8272/attachment.bin>