Comments

Chienworks wrote on 1/26/2011, 6:17 PM
All that, and the reliability and lifespan are quite awful. Definitely a product who's time has not yet come.
JJKizak wrote on 1/27/2011, 4:36 AM
Yet there are some people who swear by them.
JJK
baysidebas wrote on 1/27/2011, 5:36 AM
Probably outnumbered by those who swear at them.
Dreamline wrote on 1/27/2011, 7:48 AM
Mine is fine and fast as hell so... and to mention great on energy and battery life. You do the math.
Bill Ravens wrote on 1/27/2011, 7:59 AM
If you had taken the time to actually read this article, you'd realize the issue is the unavailability of NAND chips(due to the rarity of manufacturing infrastructure) for adequate production(thereby lowering the cost). The issue is NOT lifetime or MTBF.
Chienworks wrote on 1/27/2011, 12:51 PM
Bill, for me the issue is lifetime and MTBF. Cost is immaterial if i can't trust the darned thing to keep my data safe for a reasonable period of time.
rmack350 wrote on 1/27/2011, 2:42 PM
Seems to me that the message here is demand will outstrip supply for quite a while. Probably a good business to be in.

Rob
LReavis wrote on 1/27/2011, 5:00 PM
I've been a happy SSD user for how long? About a year, as I recall. It was perhaps the best upgrade I've ever made - programs open almost instantly (I recently counted about 150 programs on my Drive C, which I'm constantly opening for editing one of our books or editing a photo for an ad, editing videos, creating animations, opening VMware / Linux to get on the web, etc. etc.).

Reliable? Not especially. A nearby lightning hit killed my first one - even though I use a huge 1200-wall UPS that supplies power 100% of the time through the battery; must have been the electric field that did it in - not a power-line surge.

So I booted into WinXP and restored the Win7-64 OS onto a spinning disk from a recent image that I had at the ready. Within a couple of weeks or so Intel had a new one in my hand - no charge, except about $3 for postage.

Gotta luv it . . . I could hardly bear to use my retard of a computer while a spinning disk was holding the OS
darg wrote on 1/27/2011, 6:48 PM
I think with SSDs it is not only the question of demand and supply. SSDs require some other specialties which are not needed for HDD. As long as the chips are soldered to a substrate they require something that is rare on this planet which we call earth, low alpha solder material which can not be manufactured. Low alphas are metal alloys where the metals are coming from sources which are low in alpha particle radiation. The source for these alloys are only 2 or 3 mines in the world and all sunken pirate ships or wrecks which are sunken before the first nuclear bomb was ever started. When we are running out of that stuff, goodbye data....
Even an AFC process has these requirements, just to bring here a different manufacturing process to the table. It is just, that NANDS are too fragile and small.....
MyCat wrote on 1/27/2011, 7:25 PM
A year ago I replaced my aging Core 2 Duo's 120GB drive with a 160GB SSD. It was like getting a new computer, but a lot cheaper and with a 16x10 screen instead of 16x9.

Every night I back it up with WHS.