@Trevor Pott o_O
I take your point that MLC drives need improvement, but if wear levelling works even half reasonably then 300,000 write endurance is vastly more than anybody is likely to use in 10 years. Consider a bit of mathematics and assume you have a 1TB drive and imagine you have it for 10 years.
That means that a 300,000 write endurance cycle would average out at the following (using one TB = 1,000,000MB)
300,000 x 1,000,000 / (10 x 365.25 x 24 x 3600) = 950MBps
So, in principle, such a 1TB drive could manage to write almost 1GB per second, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year for 10 years without wearing out. Now, of course, it's highly unlikely that the wear levelling is 100% effective, but even if it was just one tenth of that, that still allows for a 10 years lifespan at almost 100MBps. That may be an issue for some very large enterprises (but in my experience it won't be provided that write intensive loads can be spread over a wider estate), but no personal user is going to come remotely close to that write access density over a period of 10 years. Of course MLC gives nothing like 300,000 write endurance cycles, but Crucial are confident enough that their 256GB drive is good enough to offer a 5 year guarantee (I have one of those drives, and it transforms the usability of the machine).
That's not to say it's sensible for a medium sized enterprise to put a highly volatile transactional database on an MLC SSD, but the likelyhood is that for almost all personal users a properly engineered MLC drive will outlast the PC it is installed into. After all, hard drives don't last for ever, and I have personal experience of those failing (and I don't get a 5 year guarantee).
