1) Intel SSD's are not the only SSD's worth buying, though they are the best, and now have become competitive price-wise within the SSD market. Most recent SSD's are also fabulous performers, great value bang-for-buck, and will transform any computer moving up from a HDD, and will blow any HDD away in real use, in multiple ways.
2) It is not just a matter of HDD for storage and SSD for performance. it is a matter of how much storage do you need in your main storage medium. do you need 80GB, 120GB, 320, 500GB, 1000GB, 1500GB? It is an assessment that does not have one answer. e.g. I find 120GB is far more than I really need in my main storage medium so the value sweet point for SSD's @ 128GB is just fine. I don't suffer a storage deficit. I could have paid double for the same SSD @ 250GB if I needed so much more space. I didn't. 500GB HDD's are good value at the moment, but is that better than a 320GB or 250GB or even 120GB HDD if you have no need of that storage? I bought a 500GB HDD recently for external storage and backups. But the argument that 120/250GB storage of a typical SSD is inadequate when a 500GB is adequate can just as well be that 500GB HDD is inadequate, and that only a 1000GB HDD is adequate...
3) the posts that rubbish the value of SSD's seem to be HDD users. Those who actually use SSD's seem to love them to bits, and know how dramatic the difference they make to any computer. It is not just a matter of numbers, however good they are. For me, moving from a 160GB 16MB cache 7200rpm HDD to a OCZ Summit 120GB 120MB cache SSD turned my computer silent and to almost instantaneous computing (with the only real delay being internet-induced). Goodbye storage media-lag, HDD spinning and noise, fans running to cool storage media. Goodbye worrying if the computer is "fast enough" or quiet enough. If it is practically instantaneous and silent, what point is there for more speed or more quiet?
...
2) It is not just a matter of HDD for storage and SSD for performance. it is a matter of how much storage do you need in your main storage medium. do you need 80GB, 120GB, 320, 500GB, 1000GB, 1500GB? It is an assessment that does not have one answer. e.g. I find 120GB is far more than I really need in my main storage medium so the value sweet point for SSD's @ 128GB is just fine. I don't suffer a storage deficit. I could have paid double for the same SSD @ 250GB if I needed so much more space. I didn't. 500GB HDD's are good value at the moment, but is that better than a 320GB or 250GB or even 120GB HDD if you have no need of that storage? I bought a 500GB HDD recently for external storage and backups. But the argument that 120/250GB storage of a typical SSD is inadequate when a 500GB is adequate can just as well be that 500GB HDD is inadequate, and that only a 1000GB HDD is adequate...
3) the posts that rubbish the value of SSD's seem to be HDD users. Those who actually use SSD's seem to love them to bits, and know how dramatic the difference they make to any computer. It is not just a matter of numbers, however good they are. For me, moving from a 160GB 16MB cache 7200rpm HDD to a OCZ Summit 120GB 120MB cache SSD turned my computer silent and to almost instantaneous computing (with the only real delay being internet-induced). Goodbye storage media-lag, HDD spinning and noise, fans running to cool storage media. Goodbye worrying if the computer is "fast enough" or quiet enough. If it is practically instantaneous and silent, what point is there for more speed or more quiet?
...