Linus Torvalds and Hard Disks..

[billybob linux]

I came across this today:

http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise...ds-hard-disks/

Linus Torvalds compares Hard Disks to Satan !

It’s no surprise, then, that Linus codes on machines equipped with flash drives. But he wants more than speed. He wants peace. “My primary requirement — since CPUs are fast enough — has been that the system be really really quiet, and that it has a good SSD in it. If our cat deigns to jump into my lap while I’m working, the loudest noise in the room should be the purring of the cat, not the computer,” he told his Slashdot audience.

[brianblaze]

I saw it too haha so funny but obviously SSD is the future

[kona0197]

To bad SSDs still cost a bit too much.

[Demz3]

Originally Posted by kona0197

To bad SSDs still cost a bit too much.

there not that much compared to a good Graphic card. i find a reasonable SSD cheaper than a updated Graphics card

for a corsair SSD 120GB about $120

[jpollard]

For that same $120 you could get a 1 TB disk...

[ocratato]

Originally Posted by jpollard

For that same $120 you could get a 1 TB disk...

or even 2TB over here: http://www.jbhifi.com.au/computers/s...ive-sku-65092/

but I tend to agree that for laptop or workstation a nice fast SSD would be nice.

[marriedto51]

Don't SSD wear out faster? Or is that just my unfortunate experience?

[billybob linux]

I was interested in that as I had seen comments about SSD having a shorter read/write lifespan than a conventional hard drive. But, after some searching I did not really find any relaible and up to date data on that.

There is plenty of speculation and guess work and opinion but no hard data (that I could find) ! Others might have better luck. So in my view it would be unfair to say they are any less reliable or have a shorter life than an HD.

I have (after reading several articles) seen that newer SSD has better ECC (increasing life) and possibly enterprise level SSD may be better quality than consumer SSD. Also, there are several differnt factors to consider, such as , storage capacity versus speed and cost. I have seen reports of high failure rates on SSD but those did seem to be somewhat dated

[kona0197]

World will be a better place when isolinear chips are invented.

[ocratato]

Originally Posted by marriedto51

Don't SSD wear out faster? Or is that just my unfortunate experience?

You might find this page useful for setting up a system with an SSD.

[YeOK]

Originally Posted by marriedto51

Don't SSD wear out faster? Or is that just my unfortunate experience?

My current SSD has out lasted two 250gb hard drives that failed recently. They actually failed within a week of each other, strangely. Western Digital drives too.

Though I admit I run with noatime and /var, /home on standard hard drives. /home was on the 250gb (now using my windows 7 drive, which is like new).

[coffee412]

While having a very fast alternative to conventional hard drives, I do not think I will be getting a SSD very soon. Infact, I will not trade off the options of a CDD (conventional disk drive) for just speed. Im sure speed is a technical drug that is hard to resist but I am alot more prudent in my system building.

A simple search on just newegg shows a 500 gig SSD for atleast 450 bucks. Compared to approx. 70 dollars for a seagate CDD. The cost of speed is too high. I am aware that many feel that they can get along with a smaller size for less. However, This quoted article talks about moving log files to ram which for me is a big "no-no".

I am not trying to throw dirt on the new technology. I am just expressing my thought that SSD drives, While very fast, are not ready for the prime time. Should we switch all switch to SSD instead of CDD's then hard drive recovery will become more complicated or darn near impossible.

I run 4 Seagate 600 gig drives in my server raid right now. I also have a 80 gig system disk. These drives have been running for 6 years. Will a SSD last that long?

In summation, I am not willing to hop on the bandwagon of SSD drives as they only offer a speed increase and probably last less than a CDD. In time, Things will hopefully change and I will start to look at them again. However, For now CDD offer more advantages for the price and probably more dependable than SDD's.

Best Regards,

coffee

[Dan]

Hmmm.

For me, the choice was a matter of a durability trade-off, and speed was simply a nifty by-product. From that you can correctly glean that I only use SSDs in my laptops. In one particular case, the near impossibility of data recovery is in fact a good thing. If and when that particular drive needs to get itself D-Ban'ed, I want it as empty as your average lawyer's head in the shortest amount of time possible. On that system, any and all saved files/data/documents are targeted to/at a removable 32gb mini-SD card.

In the case of both laptops, however, shock resistance is/was the determining factor in their installation and usage. Their relatively short lifespan isn't so much of an issue where the actual operating hours/lifespan ratio is so much lower than the desktop machine.