At the forum, Intel mobility chief Sean Maloney conducted a demonstration in which he booted two PCs, one with 256MB of flash memory, and the other without. The PC with flash booted in about half the time.
Because they can only be used for X erase/write cycles.Don't panic said:good news. i had wondered for a while why they don't start using flash memory. with the sizes they have now it should be doable, at least in parallel to regular hard drives, which can act as a internal back up/storage system.
storage said:Because they can only be used for X read/write cycles.
They will probably use a "flash filesystem" on the flash memory, which minimizes the amount of erase/write cycles.joshysquashy said:so why are they being considered now? what has changed?
timmillwood said:I dont mind waiting a bit longer for my MBP if it has this in..
but will it only make booting quicker?
becuase i bet i will leave the computer on all the time, just letting it sleep.
The NAND flash is not for HDD. It is just to augment the existing RAM.appleguru1 said:Very interesting.. but unless we're getting 100+GB flash drives... I'll still want an hdd![]()
64GB Flash memory drives are avaliable now albeit at a high price.appleguru1 said:Very interesting.. but unless we're getting 100+GB flash drives... I'll still want an hdd
though.. it'd be cool to have some non-volitile flash memory to store the OS and other critical components on.
I agree, without wanting to sound too argumentative, shouldn't this really be a page 2?PlaceofDis said:interesting implementation, but this is just rumor and the title of this thread treats it as a bit more than that.....