Skip to comments.
Samsung breakthrough packs 128 GB on one flash memory card
SciFi.com ^
| 10/23/07
| Charlie White - Gizmodo
Posted on 10/23/2007 4:28:47 PM PDT by gridlock
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
Cool stuff. My next computer will not have spinning drives.
1
posted on
10/23/2007 4:28:48 PM PDT
by
gridlock
To: gridlock
Have they ever solved the problem that after you had written to the same spot on the drive a number of times that spot was now no longer viable?
I remember that being an issue early on; it’s why I don’t own any of these devices.
2
posted on
10/23/2007 4:33:20 PM PDT
by
TheZMan
(Texas is no place for pansy-ass liberals. Ya'll move back to California er Mexico er somethin')
To: TheZMan
To: TheZMan
Have they ever solved the problem that after you had written to the same spot on the drive a number of times that spot was now no longer viable? Supposedly NAND flash, the type used for these HD replacements, is not subject to the wearing-out problem.
To: TheZMan
That same problem would certainly apply to a mechanical device like a hard drive.
5
posted on
10/23/2007 4:40:56 PM PDT
by
Pontiac
(Your message here.)
To: gridlock
Sorry, but phallic jokes entered my mind with the photo. Could be a good photo to caption.
6
posted on
10/23/2007 4:43:14 PM PDT
by
BGHater
(Bread and Circuses)
To: TheZMan
Have they ever solved the problem that after you had written to the same spot on the drive a number of times that spot was now no longer viable? I have several 1G and 2G SD chips in various devices, and have never seen any decreases in capacity. And I over-write a lot.
Are you sure you're not thinking of re-writable CDs?
7
posted on
10/23/2007 4:44:43 PM PDT
by
gridlock
(ELIMINATE PERVERSE INCENTIVES)
To: Pontiac
One gets many more write-read-erase-write cycles with spinning media than with the current flash devices.
To: BGHater
Sorry, but phallic jokes entered my mind with the photo. Could be a good photo to caption. What, something about how 30 cm diameter highly powerful magnifying glasses are the latest hot sexual aid in Japan?
9
posted on
10/23/2007 4:46:54 PM PDT
by
gridlock
(ELIMINATE PERVERSE INCENTIVES)
To: gridlock
There was a show on one of the cable channels more than a year ago about futuristic computer technology. One technology used magnets as storage devices. The capacity for storage was virtually limitless.
10
posted on
10/23/2007 4:48:19 PM PDT
by
Man50D
(Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it!)
To: gridlock
How soon will they show up at Wal-Mart? And for how much?
11
posted on
10/23/2007 4:56:00 PM PDT
by
SkyDancer
("There is no distinctly Native American criminal class...save Congress - Mark Twain")
To: gridlock
To put that in more down to Earth terms, that would be about 28 single layer DVD quality movies on one of those chips.
At that point, it would seem that having a faster bus becomes much more important. For this reason it is probably going to be USB3 4.8Gbit/s instead of USB2 480Mbit/s.
To: TheZMan
I had a whole flash drive just go totally dead on me a few months back. Nice surprise. Did have a backup, though.
13
posted on
10/23/2007 5:03:30 PM PDT
by
Right Wing Assault
("..this administration is planning a 'Right Wing Assault' on values and ideals.." - John Kerry)
To: gridlock
This really isn't a substitute for spinning drives. I use FLASH memory as a disk drive in my embedded Linux applications. It is imperative to avoid creating a swap area on a FLASH disk. There is a limited number of write operations in the lifetime of a FLASH memory. The support ASICs try to level the wear on the memory cells. A swap area on a FLASH disk will wipe it out in fairly short order. It should be a write rarely, read often type device. System RAM is used for repeated re-writing tasks. It is designed to be used that way.
A good application for this kind of device would be to hold a navigation database that normally resides on a CD ROM or DVD ROM. Access times are faster. The operation is mostly read. Updates might only be necessary annually as new databases are offered by the supplier.
14
posted on
10/23/2007 5:16:46 PM PDT
by
Myrddin
To: TheZMan
It’s still a problem, but it’s 100,000 write cycles, and various techniques can increase the life of a chip to longer than you’ll probably be using it.
To: Popocatapetl
Write cycles are MUCH slower on FLASH devices compared to a read cycle. USB 1.1 is plenty fast for the rate at which these devices operate. USB 2.0 is going to be mostly idle.
16
posted on
10/23/2007 5:19:35 PM PDT
by
Myrddin
To: gridlock
Wow. That’s something. I still remember buying my 100MB hard drive in college in ‘93 and thinking it would be impossible to fill that up. lol
17
posted on
10/23/2007 5:23:30 PM PDT
by
mysterio
To: gridlock
I’ll have the one on the right with a side of shrimp fried rice :)
18
posted on
10/23/2007 5:24:00 PM PDT
by
upchuck
(Hildabeaste as Prez... unimaginable, devastating misery! She will redefine "How bad can it get?")
To: gridlock
Dang, and I just forked over 40 bucks for a 4 gig Cruzer. I coulda had a vee-eight!
19
posted on
10/23/2007 5:30:39 PM PDT
by
MarineBrat
(My wife and I took an AIDS vaccination that the Church offers.)
To: Myrddin
It should be a write rarely, read often type device. System RAM is used for repeated re-writing tasks. Seems like having a Computers OS located on Flash memory would be an ideal application.
The OS is rarely over written and having it on Flash would mean quicker boot up.
20
posted on
10/23/2007 5:32:42 PM PDT
by
Pontiac
(Your message here.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson