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 07/12/2012 11:47, nospam wrote:
[]
> 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.


Who said the discussion was restricted to "lightweight laptops"?

Portable devices, but not desktops. The point of the original question
whether larger HDs could be replaced if the write-cycle limit was
raised. At the moment, cost alone would prevent this (on 1 .. 3 TB disks).
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
David Taylor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
On 07/12/2012 13:39, Anthony Polson wrote:
[]
> 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.


You will be pleased that HTML5 is gradually replacing Flash, then!
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
In article <k9ta9o$k6d$(E-Mail Removed)>, David Taylor
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > 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.

>
> Who said the discussion was restricted to "lightweight laptops"?


those are the devices where flash has pretty much replaced hard drives,
namely ultrabooks, plus tablets of course.

for 'normal' laptops, ssd is happening but it's not as widespread.

> Portable devices, but not desktops. The point of the original question
> whether larger HDs could be replaced if the write-cycle limit was
> raised. At the moment, cost alone would prevent this (on 1 .. 3 TB disks).


1-3 tb disks is not suitable for replacing with ssd, yet.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Alfred
Molon <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > You will be pleased that HTML5 is gradually replacing Flash, then!

>
> Still a loooong way to go. Maybe by 2025.


more like 2015, even sooner.

flash on mobile is already dead.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mayayana
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
| > > You will be pleased that HTML5 is gradually replacing Flash, then!
| >
| > Still a loooong way to go. Maybe by 2025.
|
| more like 2015, even sooner.
|
| flash on mobile is already dead.

You shouldn't believe things just because Apple
marketing tells you so. They may say that CDs/DVDs
are dead, that flash storage is the cat's pajamas, and
that Adobe Flash is passe, but that doesn't make it so.
It just means that more Apple devotees, already paying
too much for their hardware, will be paying even more
for USB DVD drives and no choice about storage... all
the while praising the wisdom of Lord Jobs.

HTML 5 is little more than a marketing label for overused
javascript. With improvements in script and in browsers,
script is being used for more things. But so far Flash is
still common. Just look at Anthony Polson's post. He hates
Flash and thinks it's buggy. Indeed, it's one of the riskiest
things to run online. But does he remove it? No. Most people
would never even imagine going without Flash. It's too
much a part of too many things that they do. In fact, it's
still not unusual to find entire websites that are actually
just SWF files.


 
Reply With Quote
 
DanP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
On Fri, 07 Dec 2012 16:30:07 -0500, Mayayana wrote:

> | > > You will be pleased that HTML5 is gradually replacing Flash, then!
> | >
> | > Still a loooong way to go. Maybe by 2025.
> |
> | more like 2015, even sooner.
> |
> | flash on mobile is already dead.
>
> You shouldn't believe things just because Apple
> marketing tells you so. They may say that CDs/DVDs are dead, that flash
> storage is the cat's pajamas, and that Adobe Flash is passe, but that
> doesn't make it so.
> It just means that more Apple devotees, already paying too much for
> their hardware, will be paying even more for USB DVD drives and no
> choice about storage... all the while praising the wisdom of Lord Jobs.
>
> HTML 5 is little more than a marketing label for overused
> javascript. With improvements in script and in browsers,
> script is being used for more things. But so far Flash is still common.
> Just look at Anthony Polson's post. He hates Flash and thinks it's
> buggy. Indeed, it's one of the riskiest things to run online. But does
> he remove it? No. Most people would never even imagine going without
> Flash. It's too much a part of too many things that they do. In fact,
> it's still not unusual to find entire websites that are actually just
> SWF files.


I'm with Apple and Anthony Polson on this, Flash needs to be killed.
It hogs the CPU, poses security risks and the software update rate is
ridiculous.

To support my claim about security risk: http://thenextweb.com/
microsoft/2012/11/02/microsofts-security-team-is-killing-it-not-one-
product-on-kasperskys-top-10-vulnerabilities-list/

Apple and Google are eager to see Flash gone, it will happen soon.


DanP
 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
In article <k9tn3f$6cb$(E-Mail Removed)>, Mayayana
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> | > > You will be pleased that HTML5 is gradually replacing Flash, then!
> | >
> | > Still a loooong way to go. Maybe by 2025.
> |
> | more like 2015, even sooner.
> |
> | flash on mobile is already dead.
>
> You shouldn't believe things just because Apple
> marketing tells you so.


they didn't. apple didn't tell me anything. take a look at what is
happening in the industry, for a change. you are *so* out of touch.

adobe themselves announced mobile flash is dead, and that was nearly a
*year* ago.

flash is gone from android jelly bean and no longer can be installed on
earlier versions unless the user already had it installed. chrome on
android doesn't support flash either.

even on android devices that did support flash (not all of them did),
it pretty much sucked.

performance was usually very poor. frame rates were very choppy and it
was a huge battery hog. not only that but sites built for flash are not
designed for touch and often don't even work properly (or at all) on
mobile. html5 is a big step forward.

flash on the desktop continues for now, but its days are also numbered.

most sites these days offer an html5 version when there is no flash
installed, which means the lack of flash is a non-issue. many sites
have dedicated apps that are far nicer than any flash based web site
could ever be.

<http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-sourc...d-4-1-jelly-be
an-users/11433>
You may not have noticed at the time but Adobe told us back in
February that Flash Player would not not supported on Android 4.1 and
users should uninstall Flash Player prior to upgrading to Android
4.1, Jelly Bean. Adobe was serious. There will be no Flash for
Android 4.1.
....
Looking ahead, Adobe will be blocking Flash runtime downloads.
≥Beginning August 15th we will use the configuration settings in the
Google Play Store to limit continued access to Flash Player updates
to only those devices that have Flash Player already installed.
Devices that do not have Flash Player already installed are
increasingly likely to be incompatible with Flash Player and will no
longer be able to install it from the Google Play Store after August
15th.≤
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mayayana
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
| I'm with Apple and Anthony Polson on this, Flash needs to be killed.

Me too. I would never allow it installed on my PC in
the first place. But Apple only calls the shots in Appleville,
which is not in touch with the rest of the world.

| To support my claim about security risk: http://thenextweb.com/
| microsoft/2012/11/02/microsofts-security-team-is-killing-it-not-one-
| product-on-kasperskys-top-10-vulnerabilities-list/
|

It's always been one of the biggest security risks.
On the other hand, javascript is by far the biggest
problem for both privacy and security. But that doesn't
mean it's going away soon. People just don't care about
security. They want to shop, Facebook and watch
YouTube videos... with zero hassle. If you want interactive
pages you have to accept security risk.


 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-07-2012
In article <k9treo$3dc$(E-Mail Removed)>, Mayayana
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> | I'm with Apple and Anthony Polson on this, Flash needs to be killed.
>
> Me too. I would never allow it installed on my PC in
> the first place.


so why are you arguing for keeping it?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mayayana
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-08-2012
| > You shouldn't believe things just because Apple
| > marketing tells you so.
|
| they didn't. apple didn't tell me anything.

No, you just happen to have adamant opinions
that are always in accord with the Apple view.
Just as you push $300 SSDs over $50 HDDs as
the *only* way to go. Pure Apple fan logic.

| adobe themselves announced mobile flash is dead, and that was nearly a
| *year* ago.
|
| flash is gone from android jelly bean
| ....performance was usually very poor.

Mobile? The discussion was about computers and
the expected life of Flash, not just on mobile. All of
your references are to mobile.

Most video online uses Flash because it provides
a way to obfuscate the file source so that people
can't easily download the actual file. IE 10 (Win
even has it built in. Flash is also used a lot in
advertising animation. Sites won't stop using Flash
to stream video unless they can hide the file path.
On mobile the situation is different. There's not only
limited processing power; there's also limited access
by the person using it, which will make it easier to
prevent people from downloading video directly.

| most sites these days offer an html5 version when
| there is no flash installed

Most sites? I'm running late-model Mozilla with no
Flash. I can't see video unless someone offers the
file download. I can get YouTube videos only because
I have the DownloadHelper extension. I don't see
any HTML5 VIDEO tags on their site.

Maybe Flash will eventually be phased out. But it's
been an insecure problem for many years now and it's
still there. It seems rather glib to flaunt predictions
about how soon it's going to die.


 
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