Well, it's a good question, and to a large extent I suppose it depends on what you're doing with it and how full the drive is. Bear in mind hard drives will slow down as they fill up while an SSD drive speed basically remains constant. I have seen a test where the current 64 GB SSD drive smoked a Hitachi 7K in small random read tests (by about 2X), and this new drive appears to be even faster overall.But what's the real world performance? A 500GB 2.5 inch drive would have very tightly packed sectors. And at 1TB we're talking super density.
May not be within 5 years, but I do agree with you in concept.At the rate that the capacity of SSDs is increasing, HDs could go the way of the floppy within 5 years...
The iPhone and iPod Touch use Flash memory. The iPhone has one slot and the iPod Touch has two slots. So if the maximum Flash memory chip is 16GB, the iPhone would max out at 16GB and the iPod Touch at 32GB, as they currently do.iPod, Touch and iPhone are just dying for this technology to reach the 1 inch storage drive form factor that they use! (iirc)
Yep, memory prices definitely decrease over time. Around 1993, a 32MB (that's Megabyte) SIMM cost around $3,200. Today, that same memory goes for $5 if you can find it, or need it.This year... $3000 next year, and will be a notebook standard within 5 years.
Density is only one measurement. You still have to take into account rotation and head positioning, plus latency. There is also the data transfer limitation from the disk to the head and through the HD circuity.But what's the real world performance? A 500GB 2.5 inch drive would have very tightly packed sectors. And at 1TB we're talking super density.
True but I can't see HDD being dumped. It's more probable there will always be a caste system of Fast SSD at the top with less capacity but more performance and HDD below that with more capacity but less performance.
What makes you think that? 64 GB SSD in the MBA costs $1000, and 64 * 4 = 256, and $1000 * 4 = $4000. Even if you add on an extra premium for it being a new technology making it cost more per megabyte (which is not the direction cost per megabyte usually goes) then it still doesn't sound like there's any reason fo it to cost over $5000.
Hmm. Even if it is too thick, there might be a 128 GB version that would fit in the Air. Assuming that they make a PATA version of it, too, or that Apple switches the Air to SATA. Anyone know what Apple's particular reason for using PATA was? If it was just to match the drives they wanted (rather than being lighter or less power-intensive or something), then I could see them switching for better drives.
I just hope a 128 GB SSD is cheap enough for me to afford one by the time I want to buy an Air (probably sometime in 2009).
IBM have a technology in development which is apparently much better, faster and cheaper with unlimited read/write capabilities. I'm holding out for that.
me too!! i dont remember what its called, but it has much better densities and all that (puts the data on the walls aswell as the holes). sounds like an awsome product for the same price (basically)
What about as a Photoshop scratch disk? We currently have dual 10K Raptors in a RAID 0 stripe connected via eSATA. Could the current SSDs compete with that?
Holographic Memory?
no lol..Holographic Memory?
I think that's something different, though I never heard of that. IBM calles its own "Racetrack memory" http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article3728060.ece
I just found the link above, and I remember that I've read about that some time ago in the newspaper.
In the Wikipedia article for Holographic Memory there isn't even one word about IBM. So maybe something similar, but from other companies.
Anyway, the future will bring nice technology!
What makes you think that? 64 GB SSD in the MBA costs $1000, and 64 * 4 = 256, and $1000 * 4 = $4000. Even if you add on an extra premium for it being a new technology making it cost more per megabyte (which is not the direction cost per megabyte usually goes) then it still doesn't sound like there's any reason fo it to cost over $5000.
At the rate that the capacity of SSDs is increasing, HDs could go the way of the floppy within 5 years...
Apple Insider said:The 256GB drive changes this by switching to a new approach to multi-level cell storage that allegedly solves the problems of the format. The technology allows data to be much more densely packed, but has traditionally been slow and short-lived. However, a new drive controller not only gives it the same speed as single-level storage but gives it the same kind of longevity, at roughly one million hours before a failure occurs.
As it's more efficient in storing data, the multi-level cell technology is also "considerably" less expensive to make, though Samsung has stopped short of revealing the exact difference.
At the rate that the capacity of SSDs is increasing, HDs could go the way of the floppy within 5 years...
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/4A102 Safari/419.3)
Things are definitely improving with SSDs but it is going to take some time before the price makes them practical enough to be a standard.