...using 4 x 365 and 1 x 366 days/year...
So what planet does your journo live on I wonder?
Seagate has fired a new Barracuda SSD at the home server, PC and notebook disk replacement markets. It's a 6Gbit/s SATA SSD in a 2.5-inch form factor, with capacities ranging from 250GB, through 500GB and 1TB, up to 2TB. The performance claims up to 90,000 random read IOPS, 540MB/sec sequential read and 520MB/sec sequential …
5 year warranty = 4 regular years + 1 leap year, much more often than not.
If you really want to be picky (an ElReg commentard? surely not!!), the calculation should be based on:
0.75 x ( (4 x 365) + (1 x 366) ) + 0.25 x ( (3 x 365) + (2 x 366) )
(no doubt someone will chime in about leap seconds next... :) )
Agreed. Whilst I like the idea of SSD, the fact that you can get a decent hard drive of the same capacity for around £60 makes it REALLY hard to justify... I mean..even double the price would be worth pause for thought, but this is more than 7x the price.
"get back when they come close to the price of spinning rust."
They don't need to be close. Even double would result in a stampede of uptake.
On the other hand, like "Vauxhall" or "Leyland", this is a brand which would probably have to sell its SSDs for less than the spinning version before people would think about buying them.
Very few people can tell a real world difference between a SATA SSD and NVMe, this is especially true in a single user (Not server or shared storage) workload.
Unless you are editing 4K video in real time or similar then a 6Gbps SATA SSD is more than fast enough 99% of the time.
Surely the UK pricing is way out.
'SATA flash drives to put low-cap disk on endangered list'
At 80 quid for 250GB SSD, vs 35 quid for 1TB spinning rust, this is hardly competitive.
A quick look shows that 250GB SSD can be bought for approaching 50 quid, with 120GB at around the thirty quid mark.
If you're looking for a single drive of moderate capacity it's now economic to buy an SSD. For multiple large storage devices, spinning rust is still much, much cheaper.
Depends on your take on low capacity...
For many corporates, 80GB is plenty big enough for a local disk, and 250GB is a waste - real storage occurs in the enterprise apps or "Cloud" in some form or another.
As such, the availability of low(er) cost SSD enables a truely useful and noticeable performance boost without excessive cost.
A fair enough take I felt...
After quoting total write life and warranty, is the actually any reason for a human to bother with MTBF "having a useful increase" up to 205years ...? If it was ten or even fifteen years I'd think about it as I'd possibly get a fail in five but this is more or less stating that it won't fail in the life of this tech ... or the next one!
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019