Re: QLC? It's not the one for me
Each time you add another level, you add complexity to the drive circuitry plus you reduce endurance and so you need more and more complex error correction algorithms to safeguard the data.
And conversely, HDD technology is doing fancy complex stuff like HAMR and shingling, increased track density. So what if the SSD needs advanced software to make it work - we're all pro-technology here, aren't we? And you're reliant on error correction to read this web site and post here, or in almost any form of digital audio operation, from making a phone call to listening to music.
The other thing is that all the studies I've seen (ignoring those from HDD and SSD makers and suppliers) suggests that notwithstanding the known SSD endurance limits, the service life of SSDs is comparable to enterprise HDDs, and the in-service failure rate is considerably lower for SSD than HDD. Whilst it is reasonable to remain sceptical about QLC as with any new technology, I would expect it to do what it says on the tin. I will cheer on the early adopters.