Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Could flash memory replace DVD/Hard Drives if this pans out?

Reply
Thread Tools

Could flash memory replace DVD/Hard Drives if this pans out?

 
 
David Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
On 06/12/2012 23:14, Eric Stevens wrote:
[]
> I have been leaving my computer on all the time ever since nospam
> argued that modern power management meant that turning a computer off
> saved little power. Yet I still get two or three reboots a week. It's
> all these damned automatic updates which require the computer be
> rebooted.


Security updates once a month is enough for most people. Personally, I
have my PC set to "Notify only" rather than automatically install.
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
On 07/12/2012 09:02, Eric Stevens wrote:
[]
> I would still want to install them, in which case I would still have
> to reboot.


Yes, but you don't have to install the security updates the instant they
arrive, and it's once a month not "two or three [times] a week" as you
wrote. Reboot takes what? A couple of minutes per month? 0.005% of
the time?

Here, when I have accidentally left a new PC on automatic reboot, the
installation and reboot appear to have happened around three o'clock in
the morning, so zero lost time for me. Perhaps a point in favour of
automatic installation? On the other hand, I prefer to wait until I see
reports from a couple of Web sites I trust about the possible unintended
side-effects of the updates before blindly applying all of them! It's
been a while since that was an issue, though.
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
In article <k9s6no$7qf$(E-Mail Removed)>, David Taylor
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > it's more than ten milliseconds. the difference is huge.
> >
> > the point is that the overall user experience is much nicer. it's like
> > driving a sports car versus a family sedan, even if you're driving on a
> > city street at 30 mph.
> >
> > also, having ssd means the cpu & gpu doesn't need to be as fast for
> > similar performance, which means the product can be cheaper, run cooler
> > and have longer battery life.

>
> It depends on what you are doing. If you are encoding videos, for
> example, CPU/GPU power is by far the most important factor.


most people don't encode video, especially on a lightweight laptop.

those that do encode video more than on occasion will have the video
assets on a hard drive because of their size and a high end machine
suitable for encoding.

> There is no
> single "correct" answer - each use needs to be evaluated on its own.


true but ssd is replacing hard drives for most use cases, particularly
laptops, but there are always going to be edge cases where it's not the
best choice.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
In article <k9s71p$93k$(E-Mail Removed)>, David Taylor
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > the number of cycles for ssd is *very* high.
> >
> > some ssds come with *ten* year warranties, which is far more than any
> > hard drive. in fact, hard drive makers *reduced* their warranty period,
> > and 1 year is now typical.
> >
> > in other words, ssd is a much better choice for disk intensive
> > operations. you'll see a significant benefit since seek time is zero
> > and longetivity is a non-issue. you'll probably replace the computer
> > before the ssd wears out.

>
> For disk operations where the majority of operations are /read/, yes.
> But the number of write cycles (including erase etc.) is limited, so
> SSDs may not be the best choice where a high write throughput is
> required. Choose your device carefully.


hard drives are also limited, and for them, you don't even need to read
or write. the motor and bearings wear out (or just fail). nothing lasts
forever.

as i said, some ssds have a ten year warranty. that's *well* beyond the
expected lifetime of a typical hard drive.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
In article <k9s79r$ab2$(E-Mail Removed)>, David Taylor
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > I had no choice. If I wanted a MacBook Pro with a Retina display, the
> > choice was between a 128 GB SSD or a 256 GB SSD.
> >
> > I chose the former. Actually, I chose it twice because I picked up my
> > second yesterday. I now have a 15" and a 13". If I can manage with
> > the 13" I will be selling the larger one.
> >
> > It will be interesting to see how the 128 GB SSD lasts. I am backing
> > up all documents every evening to cloud storage and two HDDs.

>
> Yes, I have the same issue with the iPad - SSD or nothing.


you wouldn't want a hard drive in an ipad. it would be thicker, noisier
and a lot less reliable.

> On the other
> hand, I'm not editing videos on the iPad, or doing anything else which
> requires a lot of disk write operations, so I'm hoping it will be OK.


it will be fine. flash memory is not as fragile as you think it is.

> I backup to iTunes on one PC from time to time, the applications are
> mostly stored on the stores I bought them from and the settings
> reasonable easily recoverable. There are very few critical documents
> created by me on the iPad which aren't stored elsewhere.


it's important to have backups whether it's flash or a hard drive, and
more than just one.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Whisky-dave
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
On Thursday, December 6, 2012 6:07:31 PM UTC, Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <k9pl0o$13n$(E-Mail Removed)>, David Taylor says...
>
> > Yes, maxing out the memory is usually the best way to improve speed on a

>
> > PC, although /if/ you are doing something which is very disk I/O

>
> > intensive getting a faster disk may be the better choice.

>
>
>
> The problem with SSDs is that they are not so suitable for disk I/O
>
> intensive operations due to the wear on the memory cells. It's better
>
> having lots of RAM, so that page swapping is minimised.


The modern SSDs don;t have quite the sme problem and they are getting better every year, there''s also softtwate that can reduce this 'wear'.

>
> --
>
>
>
> Alfred Molon
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
>
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
>
> http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site


 
Reply With Quote
 
Anthony Polson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
David Taylor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On 06/12/2012 23:36, Anthony Polson wrote:
>[]
>> I had no choice. If I wanted a MacBook Pro with a Retina display, the
>> choice was between a 128 GB SSD or a 256 GB SSD.
>>
>> I chose the former. Actually, I chose it twice because I picked up my
>> second yesterday. I now have a 15" and a 13". If I can manage with
>> the 13" I will be selling the larger one.
>>
>> It will be interesting to see how the 128 GB SSD lasts. I am backing
>> up all documents every evening to cloud storage and two HDDs.

>
>Yes, I have the same issue with the iPad - SSD or nothing. On the other
>hand, I'm not editing videos on the iPad, or doing anything else which
>requires a lot of disk write operations, so I'm hoping it will be OK.



I suppose it is a good reason to avoid video. Not that I need one. I
hate shooting it and am strongly resisting pressure to teach it. I
don't want to give up teaching but I think I would have to if forced
to teach videography.


>I backup to iTunes on one PC from time to time, the applications are
>mostly stored on the stores I bought them from and the settings
>reasonable easily recoverable. There are very few critical documents
>created by me on the iPad which aren't stored elsewhere.



Until we can have more confidence in SSDs' reliability, a cautious
approach is probably wise. I greatly value the advice you gave me in
our previous discussion about SSDs and hope I have taken it fully into
account when establishing my way of working with applications and
documents on my SSD-equipped Macs.

Thank you!

Apple's iCloud makes backing up easy, which is a very good thing;
using SSDs makes systematic backing up not just desirable, but
essential.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Anthony Polson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
David Taylor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Here, when I have accidentally left a new PC on automatic reboot, the
>installation and reboot appear to have happened around three o'clock in
>the morning, so zero lost time for me. Perhaps a point in favour of
>automatic installation? On the other hand, I prefer to wait until I see
>reports from a couple of Web sites I trust about the possible unintended
>side-effects of the updates before blindly applying all of them! It's
>been a while since that was an issue, though.



The one that really annoys me is Adobe Flash. Updates seem to come in
clusters over a few days with a longer gap to the next cluster.

I guess that the second and subsequent updates in each cluster are to
fix bugs in the first. The bugs seem to be many and Flash has to be
the least stable piece of code that I have ever used.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Whisky-dave
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
On Friday, December 7, 2012 1:39:25 PM UTC, Anthony Polson wrote:
> David Taylor <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Here, when I have accidentally left a new PC on automatic reboot, the

>
> >installation and reboot appear to have happened around three o'clock in

>
> >the morning, so zero lost time for me. Perhaps a point in favour of

>
> >automatic installation? On the other hand, I prefer to wait until I see

>
> >reports from a couple of Web sites I trust about the possible unintended

>
> >side-effects of the updates before blindly applying all of them! It's

>
> >been a while since that was an issue, though.

>
>
>
>
>
> The one that really annoys me is Adobe Flash. Updates seem to come in
>
> clusters over a few days with a longer gap to the next cluster.
>
>
>
> I guess that the second and subsequent updates in each cluster are to
>
> fix bugs in the first. The bugs seem to be many and Flash has to be
>
> the least stable piece of code that I have ever used.


Which is why Apple didn't want it on their 'post PC devices'.

 
Reply With Quote
 
DanP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 06:47:58 -0500, nospam wrote:

> In article <k9s79r$ab2$(E-Mail Removed)>, David Taylor
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> > I had no choice. If I wanted a MacBook Pro with a Retina display,
>> > the choice was between a 128 GB SSD or a 256 GB SSD.
>> >
>> > I chose the former. Actually, I chose it twice because I picked up
>> > my second yesterday. I now have a 15" and a 13". If I can manage
>> > with the 13" I will be selling the larger one.
>> >
>> > It will be interesting to see how the 128 GB SSD lasts. I am backing
>> > up all documents every evening to cloud storage and two HDDs.

>>
>> Yes, I have the same issue with the iPad - SSD or nothing.

>
> you wouldn't want a hard drive in an ipad. it would be thicker, noisier
> and a lot less reliable.


And less battery life.

DanP
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Torvalds pans Apple with 'utter crap' putdown Frank Computer Support 2 02-06-2008 06:14 AM
Losing Drives - Finding Drives - Losing Drives mel@no.spam.com Computer Support 2 09-21-2007 10:16 PM
Vista and Flash Drives (Thumb/USB drives) Arawak Computer Support 2 04-25-2007 10:18 PM
Could flash drives replace high def blue ray ? habshi DVD Video 12 01-30-2007 12:16 AM
Any cameras capable of using USB flash drives as extra memory? PeterH Digital Photography 14 09-30-2003 07:03 PM



Advertisments