SSDs have a 'bleak' future, researchers say

[Night Hawk]

I think you just pointed out the main vulnerability anyone could end up seeing with an SSD of "not being able to recover data" to some extent that is. There are data recovery services that are able to salvage some ? of what you may lose when and if and SSD goes south on you.

The other option of course can be used with any drive namely the option to create a full system image of the drive or create one with 3rd party ware to recover later in the event a drive needs to be replaced. Of course thats a reality for any drive type.

Here when planning out this build I said capacity was the concept when deciding on just what drives would go in. SSDs were just coming out at the time and like any brand new hardware it takes time to work out all the bugs once something new is in mass production and to see who would be making them as for quality concerns.

As of late the capacity on your typical sata drive with mechanical platters will likely be seeing a sudden increase over the next several years. Seagate is working on changing the costing used on drive platters from the platinum to a more conductive/magnetic surface where they estimate a 20tb for laptop, 60tb capacity for desktop 3.5" drives.With tech breakthrough, Seagate promises 60TB drives this decade - Computerworld

 

[ICIT2LOL]

Hum NH well for this puppy the idea of anything over a terabyte is wandering of into the abyss as I cannot conceive of how much info would be stored on drives of 20, 40, 60TB excepting companies or large gov departments.

 

[jorpe]

I think you just pointed out the main vulnerability anyone could end up seeing with an SSD of "not being able to recover data" to some extent that is. There are data recovery services that are able to salvage some ? of what you may lose when and if and SSD goes south on you.

The other option of course can be used with any drive namely the option to create a full system image of the drive or create one with 3rd party ware to recover later in the event a drive needs to be replaced. Of course thats a reality for any drive type.

Here when planning out this build I said capacity was the concept when deciding on just what drives would go in. SSDs were just coming out at the time and like any brand new hardware it takes time to work out all the bugs once something new is in mass production and to see who would be making them as for quality concerns.

As of late the capacity on your typical sata drive with mechanical platters will likely be seeing a sudden increase over the next several years. Seagate is working on changing the costing used on drive platters from the platinum to a more conductive/magnetic surface where they estimate a 20tb for laptop, 60tb capacity for desktop 3.5" drives.With tech breakthrough, Seagate promises 60TB drives this decade - Computerworld

with my 3 SSD striped RAID setup I have Acronis do an image a day to a platter drive and once a week to a second system so in case something does happen ive got multiple backups... well worth it right now for how blazing fast the SSD setup is

 

[Night Hawk]

Here I don't need anything "blazing fast" since 7 is already a fast OS to begin with! That allows me to load on just about anything I would need or want and still see a smooth running OS without looking at just boot times only.

 

[Katanyavich]

At THIS stage of the game, I'm not really interested in SSDs.

I don't have a speed or boot-time issue, I can do without the excessive
cost, I don't need the bragging rights, and I believe reliability is an issue.

My twin 750GB Toshiba SATA spinners will do me for the moment.

There's also another 3.3TB of external storage, all spinners.

I've never had an HDD die in over 20 years, and still have a couple
of 10+ year-old HDDs in semi-regular service.

What the future brings, however......we shall see.....

 

[jorpe]

Here I don't need anything "blazing fast" since 7 is already a fast OS to begin with! That allows me to load on just about anything I would need or want and still see a smooth running OS without looking at just boot times only.

My desktop boot time sucks because of all the different BIOSes that need to post. I like the fast windows search, icons to always appear instantly, virus scans to go very quickly, and applications to load instantly... which my SSD stripe setup seems to accomplish.

 

[T I M B O]

Option 1, 2 or 3

As i have used SSD's i would choose Opt 3. I can appreciate that SSD's are faster, but reliability is upmost for me.

 

[BomberAF]

I don't really mind having conventional drives in my system as I believe that SSD's are no more than expensive toys that offer very little compared to the price you pay for them. Some people may find them useful but for me and my use a normal drive is perfect.

On another point though, does anyone think that maybe the reasons why manufacturers will opt for developing traditional drives over SSD's is for reasons of security? What I mean is with traditional drives law enforcement can find all kinds of evidence on your hard drives that dates back years, and with SSD's once the data has been deleted you are very limited in what you can find. Think about how many convictions have been secured as a result of old files found on hard drives, and do you think those convictions would still be got with SSD's.

I think for this reason manufacturers will not be permitted to develop large SSD's for office use, and as such if you wish to have an SSD it will only be small and you will also have to have some sort of HDD as back up.

 

[ICIT2LOL]

As i have used SSD's i would choose Opt 3. I can appreciate that SSD's are faster, but reliability is upmost for me.

Welcome Timbo

I can see where you are coming from but I have a small SSD for the boot and the larger HDD for data - I used to have two 1TB drives back to back and clone regularly from one to the other in case one died.

Now I enjoy the speed only at the risk of just losing the OS and a bit, and in any case the SSD's carry a substantial warranty. It's then just a matter of reinstalling the OS onto the replacement drive.

 

[jimbo45]

Hum NH well for this puppy the idea of anything over a terabyte is wandering of into the abyss as I cannot conceive of how much info would be stored on drives of 20, 40, 60TB excepting companies or large gov departments.

Hi there

Didn't somebody at IBM say once that they couldn't ever consider a computer needing more than 64 KB (yes KB - KILOBYTES) of memory

I think also somebody said that it was inconceivable ever to conceive of a disk holding as much as 1TB. !!!

Data has a hideous capacity to expand into all available storage -- rather like Money which has an amazing propensity to get spent however much you have.

Prophecies of like you'll never need xxxGB / TB or even PB od data just never pan out.

BTW data loss on an SSD is no worse than any other disk --if you do regular backups --no problem.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[Night Hawk]

Here's one to ponder on! "PCIe SSD task force to tackle interoperability issues" PCIe SSD task force to tackle interoperability issues - Computerworld

The latest form of SSD is apparently running into several problems showing they still haven't perfected the PCIe format quite yet. That's the format seen for the latest large capacity drives.

 

[mickey megabyte]

...

BTW data loss on an SSD is no worse than any other disk --if you do regular backups --no problem.

...

today is world backup day, boys and girls! do it now!

 

[Azearoth]

SSD are going to become the HDD in the future...they're going to come out with something that will be faster than SSD therefor SSD's will be our new "HDD" as long as the pricing will be right.

 

[cyclic]

Didn't somebody at IBM say once that they couldn't ever consider a computer needing more than 64 KB (yes KB - KILOBYTES) of memory

The honourable Mr. Gates espoused for quite a while that anyone considering they would ever need more than 128K memory, clearly did not understand how computers worked.

Who knew ?

 

[Influx]

I vote for #1.

 

[Influx]

Didn't somebody at IBM say once that they couldn't ever consider a computer needing more than 64 KB (yes KB - KILOBYTES) of memory

The honourable Mr. Gates espoused for quite a while that anyone considering they would ever need more than 128K memory, clearly did not understand how computers worked.

Who knew ?

Exactly, applications get bigger as new hardwares are created.

 

[jimbo45]

Hi there

I DID once think that SSD's might not be the answer - but having dropped both a standard external HDD and an SSD on the stone floor at St Pancras station rushing for a Eurostar train (Serves me right "More Haste Less Speed -- and I normally NEVER rush like that - I just say I'll get the next one - meanwhile I'll drink in the Lounge etc) the SSD showed NO SIGNS whatsoever of any damage / malfunction / etc.

The HDD worked but gave the odd "funny noise" -- So I backed up both.

The SSD was an older one (only 80GB) so it was going to be retired anyway but for robustness my vote goes to SSD.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[Night Hawk]

Didn't somebody at IBM say once that they couldn't ever consider a computer needing more than 64 KB (yes KB - KILOBYTES) of memory

The honourable Mr. Gates espoused for quite a while that anyone considering they would ever need more than 128K memory, clearly did not understand how computers worked.

Who knew ?

Exactly, applications get bigger as new hardwares are created.

As applications grow so does the need for drive capacity. Twelve years ago who would think you could be adding 2-3tb drives into any case?

The first notebook being an Epson HX-20 saw a 512kb display(calculator sized led display) and a 60min. microcassette tape drive or ram module you plugged in on one side of the unit. Now that same size plastic case would easily see a laptop with 6gb of memory, 200gb drive with a 13-15 display.

 

[whs]

Just for the record - there are quite a few reputable SSDs that are close to $1/GB. Just look for the sales.

Example: Newegg.com - Mushkin Enhanced Chronos MKNSSDCR120GB 2.5" 120GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

 

[ICIT2LOL]

Just for the record - there are quite a few reputable SSDs that are close to $1/GB. Just look for the sales.

Example: Newegg.com - Mushkin Enhanced Chronos MKNSSDCR120GB 2.5" 120GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)

Hum pity they don't ship out here whs with out dollar as it is it would probably break even or even less than $/GB.

As for the future the way thins are going as I mentioned before re circuits and trannies based at atomic sizings SSD's could end up smaller than postage stamp if not the whole machine!

Graphene - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and some refs I saw on a site last night re some German research into n/p switchable transistors - exciting stuff.
Scientists Build a Quantum Computer Inside a Diamond & Universal Transistor Could Enable Much Smaller Circuits