Re: [MLUG] solid state drives

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008, Jonathan King wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Mike Miller wrote:
>>
>>> I can't wait until those 64GB SLC drives cost $100.  I'll be loving 
>>> that.
>>
>> Jon King and others -- when will the first 64GB SLC SSD drive become 
>> available for $100 or less (ignoring S/H)?
>>
>> My guess:  2 years.
>
> I'm not sure. 3 years would be closer to the historical projection, I 
> think.

I can live with that.  We'll just have to wait and see.


> Also, I think pretty soon we will really be seeing the Great Network 
> Shift for storage on more portable devices, which is where SSD drives 
> make the most sense.

Do you mean that data will be stored on servers that are accessed over the 
internet instead of stored on the device itself?  I've been thinking 
that's the way to go.  Over the years we've shifted away from the 
mainframe with diskless terminals to using large numbers of small 
computers.  That is no longer a good system because people want to get 
their data from anywhere and their incessant use of the internet makes 
that an obvious potential option.

I think a VNC-like system would be the best approach because then the 
current state of processes could be available from any terminal or device 
that supports that VNC-like viewing/controlling program.  I use VNC on 
Linux all the time now, running Gnome.  It's pretty amazing.  I can access 
it from my cell phone, but the cell phone interface isn't very good.


> (Note that the speed comparisons at the beginning of this thread are for 
> very slow notebook drives, and not the 10,000+ RPM super-SATA monsters 
> we will likely have by then. So even right now, you've got things like 
> the iPod Touch which are really just super-portable keyboardless 
> computers (running Unix, in the case of the iPod Touch), and they don't 
> really need drives anywhere near that big if they can get stuff off the 
> network.

Very true.  But those 10,000+ RPM drives must use a lot more energy than 
an SSD drive and you have to wait for them to spin up.  Energy usage is a 
very important consideration.  I think the SSD drives are probably more 
reliable too and better at withstanding impact, but I'm not sure. 
Because, as you point out, we don't need giant drives if we are accessing 
data via a network, we don't need the moster drives.

We will always want to have some storage for off line uses (on planes, for 
example, but maybe someday we'll have access from anywhere) and for quick 
transfers from other people's devices (at least until everyone is using 
some kind of simple shared network storage system).


> So in other words, I think most people will be more interested in really 
> portable subnotebook-y things that may not need SSDs per se. I used to 
> think differently, but I have been very impressed with how fast I and 
> most other people can type on what should have been really suboptimal 
> keyboards, and also by how little typing you can get away with in many 
> situations (namely, when you aren't at a desk).

I have a nice little folding keyboard for my Treo and it works great.  I 
learned very quickly to type almost as fast on the little keyboard as on 
the big keyboard.  I didn't have to think about it much.  The fingers just 
kinda fell into place.


> Basically, when you have a device you hold in your hands to use, the 
> screen size can go down a lot because you are holding it much closer, 
> the keyboard doesn't have to be as big as I would have thought (by a 
> long shot), and if you can already get 64 GB on these things today 
> anyway...the real constraints seem to be things like wireless 
> connectivity (getting better every year) and battery weight/life 
> (definitely the biggest issue in the near future).

The screen size is an issue.  I'd really like to see a good folding screen 
-- something that can give me more space.  A little screen is actually OK 
for watching TV/movies because holding it close does the trick, but if you 
want to fit 100 characters on a line of text you have a problem.  Maybe 
with really tiny pixels and really good glasses I can pull it off.

The real problem is that it would be awesome to have a pocket-sized device 
that can do what I want, but it probably won't happen.  So I have to 
decide how to trade off between size and functionality.  Do I want to 
accept the limitations of the pocket device because it is conveniently 
carriable?  Do I want to accept the burden of carrying around a little 
laptop computer in order to get the added functionality of the big screen 
and other features?

Mike

_______________________________________________
members mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/members