When will spinning disks become uncommon?

[RealJimmyJames]

I'm specifically thinking of small-form factor desktop machines and laptops. Why are "old school" spinning disk hard drives still the default option when SSD's are faster, quieter and use less energy?

Given that most users have some kind of cloud storage as well, what's the need for terrabytes of storage in an entry level computer? for my use a 250GB SSD would be more than enough. And running the OS from an SSD would speed things up so much more than all the money spent on higher end processors.

I truly don't get it.

[killramos]

Well 4-6 times the price per gb probabaly has nothing to do with it.

Honestly I had a 500gb laptop hard drive in 2008, pretty standard. Now to get a 500gb ssd? That's premium shit and you will pay through the nose for it.

Especially because modern laptops are trending away from even 2.5" form factors to tiny highly dense ssd's.

HDD's will have a place for a long time in terms of mass data.

You say how nice it is to have things load faster from an ssd. Try using a cloud and see how long it takes to even open a ppt file. Cloud is overrated, and besides everyone on the cloud is running on spinning disks anyways.

[BigMass]

I will only backup to spinners. Also use one for a home media server (movies/music). Laptop is M.2 for noise/heat and weight savings.

[benyl]

An SSD has a finite life and will eventually die.

Spinning disks won't go away anytime soon.

[D'z Nutz]

While SSDs are faster, quieter, and uses less energy, the trade off is the more you write to it the more you're wearing it down and you're shortening the life of it. That is why I will not ever buy a laptop with an SSD integrated into the mainboard.

So until they come up with the storage technology that has all the benefits of SSD without the finite life, the spinning disks won't be phased out.

[ZenOps]

Primary storage for my laptop is a Sandisk Ultra Fit 128GB that sticks out 8 mm. Heat is pretty much the only limitation on how small and fast these devices can get.

[Xtrema]

SSD with proper OS support should last the life of machine for most consumers.

In enterprise raid configuration, they are doing all kinds of tricks to prolong the life and reduce write wear.

Here's the some scary stats:

We have been stuck with 8TB spinning disk for quite a few years now and 10TB just arrived. In the SSD realm, we just jumped for 960GB to 3.8TB to 16TB in 2 years with 32TB and 64TB being tested in R&D and should roll out in 2-3 years. There is nothing in the spinning disk side on the horizon that can compare.

So pricing of SSD will drop really fast compared to spinning counterpart unless they artificially keep price up. They predict SSD price will drop 50% by 2018.

Originally posted by RealJimmyJames
Given that most users have some kind of cloud storage as well, what's the need for terrabytes of storage in an entry level computer? for my use a 250GB SSD would be more than enough. And running the OS from an SSD would speed things up so much more than all the money spent on higher end processors.

I truly don't get it.

Content creators and gamers will still need large amount of space as cloud is too slow for workflow.

But if you are talking about normal users, while 250GB is good enough, you may still want to invest in a NAS for photos. Cloud services is great until they change pricing or goes under on you.

[revelations]

What really bothers me is that most laptops, with a single drive, dont come with a 250-500gb SSD as standard.

They are much faster, use about 10-15% less battery, far tougher, lighter and produce less heat. In the real world of the average PC user, the lifespan of an SSD read/write - is trivial to talk about.

It would cost the manufacturers about 50-100$ extra per laptop to do this. I have a stack of 2.5" drives that I have swapped out for clients who bought brand new laptops and all asked the same question.

[suntan]

MemX has 53 laptops that have at least a 256GB SSD, out of 137 models.

[BigMass]

Originally posted by revelations
What really bothers me is that most laptops, with a single drive, dont come with a 250-500gb SSD as standard.

They are much faster, use about 10-15% less battery, far tougher, lighter and produce less heat. In the real world of the average PC user, the lifespan of an SSD read/write - is trivial to talk about.

It would cost the manufacturers about 50-100$ extra per laptop to do this. I have a stack of 2.5" drives that I have swapped out for clients who bought brand new laptops and all asked the same question.

I don't mind swapping out spinners from new laptops. They make a good backup that has all the original drivers and settings ready to go. If the SSD dies, I can be back in business in minutes just swapping the original drive back in. It makes it good for warranty purposes as well where I can just pull my SSD with personal data and put the original drive back in to where it's basically bone stock.

[jacky4566]

You guys know that HDD have finite lives too right? Ignoring enterprise drives. After 3 years on the high end you have 96% Survival Rate (WD & Hitachi) and 75% (Seagate) on the low end.
Just keep a backup of some kind and your doing better than most people.

OP its all about cost. SSD haven't got to the same $/GB as regular hard drive.

[revelations]

Originally posted by suntan
MemX has 53 laptops that have at least a 256GB SSD, out of 137 models.

And these are not tablets? Im talking about lappers in the 14-17" range.

edit:

>=14" laptops
excluding dual drive units
any size SSD

12 units shown and only 3 of those are <1000$.

I have clients bringing me 300$ Acer/Walmart laptops and I turn them into machines that can perform basic web-surfing and emails just as good as a 1000$ unit.

[revelations]

Originally posted by jacky4566
You guys know that HDD have finite lives too right? Ignoring enterprise drives. After 3 years on the high end you have 96% Survival Rate (WD &amp; Hitachi) and 75% (Seagate) on the low end.
Just keep a backup of some kind and your doing better than most people.

OP its all about cost. SSD haven't got to the same $/GB as regular hard drive.

I believe HDDs are generally measured with MTBF as opposed to SSDs which have a limited number of write operations.

[ZenOps]

Side note: I wonder when it will be possible to transfer my brain into a few hundred thousand SSDs.

Live forever electronically?

[01RedDX]

.

[RealJimmyJames]

Yeah, I'm not talking about enterprise situations or anything for backup purposes. I get that consumer SSD's have a shorter lifespan, but compared to the lifespan of most consumer laptops, it's a non-issue.

While we are on the subject, since I can buy an SD card with 128 GB storage space for sixty bucks at full retail markup, why not just run the OS off an integrated one of those? Speed isn't an issue, and as far as I know, they have an acceptable life expectancy.

[killramos]

Umm I don't think you realize quite the magnitude in speed difference between an SD card and a solid state drive. There is a VERY good reason for the price difference. You might as well compare the engine in a car to one in a lawnmower.

If an SD card is 1X, a HDD is 10X, SSD is 50X (obviously there is a bit more to it than that I'm just giving magnitude type examples).

So yea, speed is definitely an issue.

[thetransporter]

I do not think spinning discs are that bad.

I have left a spinning disc computer in the garage acting as a file server, its been online since 2005, on and off. -30 here and there and still works. if it does die it doesn't matter nothing important is on there.

i did convert my car (DC-DC) computer to a SSD drive, running on deep cycle battery. didnt notice a difference in battery life.

also note
i did find a old hard drive from 1992 from the previous owners, still runs, it was stored on top the electric panel, 22 years of cold and heat and electromagnetism didnt destroy it.

[revelations]

Originally posted by thetransporter
I do not think spinning discs are that bad.

I have left a spinning disc computer in the garage acting as a file server, its been online since 2005, on and off. -30 here and there and still works. if it does die it doesn't matter nothing important is on there.

i did convert my car (DC-DC) computer to a SSD drive, running on deep cycle battery. didnt notice a difference in battery life.

also note
i did find a old hard drive from 1992 from the previous owners, still runs, it was stored on top the electric panel, 22 years of cold and heat and electromagnetism didnt destroy it.

My laptop battery showed an immediate 10-15% boost in expected run time on battery - and it was correct.

But as far as that old HDD, did you manage to access the contents?

[ExtraSlow]

Originally posted by killramos
Umm I don't think you realize quite the magnitude in speed difference between an SD card and a solid state drive. There is a VERY good reason for the price difference. You might as well compare the engine in a car to one in a lawnmower.

If an SD card is 1X, a HDD is 10X, SSD is 50X (obviously there is a bit more to it than that I'm just giving magnitude type examples).

So yea, speed is definitely an issue.

it seems like you are exaggerating quite a bit.

A really fast SD card is 150 Mb/s and that appears to be close to that of spinning platter hdd, if I'm reading those specs right.
Sample SD card: http://www.memoryexpress.com/Products/MX60160