deskthority

I was reading an article about Apple's new laptops when I came across this thing Intel developed called "Thunderbolt Technology". Apple claims Thunderbolt Technology offers a transfer rate of up to 10Gbps, three times that of USB 3. Intel also says that Thunderbolt Technology is useful for audio and video. What do you all think of this? Do you all think it'll overtake USB?

Thunderbolt Technology page on Intel's Web site:
http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thun ... /index.htm

Maybe. Personally I stopped seeing the benefit in even faster and faster physical connections at around firewire. What worth it s a 10gbps if your HD and other hardware can't even handle the speed?

Then again, if you throw in SSD in combination, maybe its worth it. I am (similar to you) always at least one generation behind in technology, so I had almost forgotten about SSD.

SSD's would be pretty viable with my computers, as many of them only have 10GB hard disks. But the main issue with SSD's is that they don't last as long as well-cared-for hard disks do.

I don't really care about using new computers, but it's always neat to read about them.

Apparently they already make SSDs with over 100gb storage now.

microsoft windows wrote:But the main issue with SSD's is that they don't last as long as well-cared-for hard disks do.

Is that even true? Pretty sure that's rumored and has yet to be proven. Also ssds have a much lower rate of failure than hdds.

keyboardlover wrote:

microsoft windows wrote:But the main issue with SSD's is that they don't last as long as well-cared-for hard disks do.

Is that even true? Pretty sure that's rumored and has yet to be proven. Also ssds have a much lower rate of failure than hdds.

Seems to depend on the type. From wiki:

Write longevity Solid state drives that use flash memory have a limited number of writes over the life of the drive. SSDs based on DRAM do not have a limited number of writes.

keyboardlover wrote:

microsoft windows wrote:But the main issue with SSD's is that they don't last as long as well-cared-for hard disks do.

Is that even true? Pretty sure that's rumored and has yet to be proven. Also ssds have a much lower rate of failure than hdds.

I just did some reading about SSD's upon seeing your post. It seems like the main weakness of current SSD's is overwriting data. With a hard disk, data can just be overwritten with no trouble. But with an SSD, the data on it must first be erased and then new data can be written onto it. Each flash cell in a typical SSD can go through 10,000 erases before it may start to go bad.

I'd recommend these articles if you're interested in SSD's. They're pretty good reads.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2347918,00.asp
http://www.notebookcheck.net/SSD-versus ... 750.0.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2738/5

SSDs have by definition been mainstream ever since I bought one.

Tastes great. Less filling.

I read that magnetic hard drives fail with old age or heavy usage.

They all fail, sooner or later. back-up and move on with life.

The future is in the cloud storage anyway. That shit is not for me though. I rather have 10 external hds piling up with my porn.

I dunno if I agree. as feasible as "cloud storage"(I fucking hate the expression) may or may not become, how will that storage still not be faster and cheaper in your own machine? Not to mention, some of us want to keep certain data OFF the cloud.

While I don't feel the need to be uber-private (I'm squeaky-clean legally speaking), I am not a big fan of the idea of cloud storage. I would rather have my backups in a little more "tangible" state even if it's just for speed's sake.

I use MobileMe for syncing between my Apple stuff. Then I also have an Icy Box 2.5/3.5" HDD caddy that I use as a Time Machine to back up. So I have backups on the cloud and backups in my possession. I could do syncing manually with a lot of fucking around with Linux. But I'm bored of doing that sort of crap. And it would involve me having to mess around with dynamic DNS and all the rest of it to have access to my personal box and it's just a bloody hassle. With MobileMe I can just put in my username and password and it does it all for me.

The only problem is that if an error occurs it is an absolute pain in the arse trying to get rid of the sync'd data off the cloud. You have to go through an annoying process that could be made much simpler if Apple simply allowed you to delete the sync data via iDisk.

microsoft windows wrote: But the main issue with SSD's is that they don't last as long as well-cared-for hard disks do.

SAMSUNG electro-mechanical HDD MTBF = 500,000 hours
OCZ Vertex 2 Pro SSD MTBF = 10 million hours

And Samsung are being 'SUPER-optimistic', 500.000 hours is 152 years .
(People in marketing should really just go suck a tail-pipe !)
Motors can die, heads can crash, the surface can become scratched and if you use a note-book
it isn't really built to protect the HDD against the G-force .
Then there is overheating, bearing-wear, wear due to power-cycling etc etc etc .
Don't even get me started on the 50.000 SSD IOPS vs 70-100 Mechanical HDD IOPS ..

Also, the figure '10.000' erase-cycles for NAND-RAM has been around on the Internets for ages.
People just keep repeating it over and over and have done so for nearly 10 years now .
With modern NAND-RAM it's more like 100.000 erase-cycles and that's for MLC-NAND,
SLC-NAND can tolerate 5-10x that, at a 4x price-increase .

I can't believe we still have electrical motors in our computers !

Nice post. And good timing.

Made me glad I pulled the trigger on a new HP DM1z with 128K SSD. Thinkpad X120e looked good but no SSD option and I'm lazy.


Alas, no Flash (the other kind) = no iPad.

128K ought to be enough for anybody.

Damn, I've been had.

or...

Let me see.....TRANSPOSITION ERRORS!!!!

Peter wrote:Also, the figure '10.000' erase-cycles for NAND-RAM has been around on the Internets for ages.
People just keep repeating it over and over and have done so for nearly 10 years now .
With modern NAND-RAM it's more like 100.000 erase-cycles and that's for MLC-NAND,
SLC-NAND can tolerate 5-10x that, at a 4x price-increase .

Interesting. This NAND-RAM thingy must be uber-cool.

The thunderbolt thing seems like it's going to be awesome for HD video editing (which can be done real time on external sources now without transfering). You can also use it to daisy chain up to 10 devices, like monitors.
The adoption of this port will likely be slow, as it's going to take over for firewire on future devices, but I doubt it's going to steal any thunder from USB, which is cheap and plentiful.

Thunderbolt connector can do usb/firewire/video etc out of the same port with adapters (since thunderbolt is based on pci-e express). The goal is to have one connector that does it all.

As far as ssd's go I'm waiting for the intel x25 3rd gen. That is when price/gb should make it affordable and mainstream.

keyboardlover wrote:

microsoft windows wrote:But the main issue with SSD's is that they don't last as long as well-cared-for hard disks do.

Is that even true? Pretty sure that's rumored and has yet to be proven. Also ssds have a much lower rate of failure than hdds.

not rly true.. i have my ssd for.. a year now? no problems.

also there is some site where you have the whole calculation of how many re-write cycles the ssd will last and how many years that will be.

I think if you are re-writing an 80gb ssd the whole day/night with the speed of 100MB/s (or what ever the speed was from the SSD used in the test) you would end up with something like 30 years. Long enough for me

zakazak wrote:I think if you are re-writing an 80gb ssd the whole day/night with the speed of 100MB/s (or what ever the speed was from the SSD used in the test) you would end up with something like 30 years. Long enough for me

I think your math is off. But, most important, your assumption is wrong.

SSDs are far more reliable than hard drives no matter the usage. Even with constant reads & writes they will outlive most mechanical drives, and it's my understanding that once they "die" it is only that they can no longer be written to, whatever data is on there can still be read.

The speed benefit, particularly in notebooks where mechanical drives are far slower, is dramatic. I would not build/buy a system today that did not have a medium to high-end SSD in it as the main drive. (Something like an Intel, Crucial or Corsair drive)

In some scenarios, an SSD can be over 100x faster than WD VelociRaptor—one of the fastest mechanical drives available.

You might want to hold off on the new generation of 25nm drives though, 25nm flash is cheaper, but is not yet proven. It's slower than 34nm flash because they need to increase the amount of error correction, because the smaller the flash gets, the more error-prone it is. I think the lifetime of the flash is also lower.

This is why some companies such as Intel are sticking to 34nm flash with their latest drives for now.

SSDs even with the write limitation will last as long if not longer than a mechanical hard drive.

yes, but at least mechanical HDs dont cost an arm and a leg. Until SSD's cost per gig goes waaay down, im sticking with mechanical Hds. Going back to the original topic, while the concept of thunderbolt is nice, and having only 1 type of plug to worry about would certainly be useful, I still see USB staying around for a good while, everything right now is USB and I dont see that changing anytime soon

If they had stuck to what they were showing off in prototypes with it being pin-compatible with USB and supporting USB3 devices, I think it would have been a much more useful port.

It's all well and good that the Macs finally have a high-speed external connection, but you still can't connect any currently existing USB3 (or eSATA for that matter) devices to them, and nothing currently exists to take advantage of the Thunderbolt port.

I suspect that this is probably going to end up just like Firewire did—or more specifically Firewire 800. It was essentially a port that was only ever used with higher-end Mac users that needed speed, and it was really the only choice that they had. Drives and other devices that supported Firewire 800 were expensive as well, because it was only Mac users buying gear that used it.

Intel only did it because Steve Jobs told them to. Now that he's not around it'll die a quiet death.

I think these Thunderbolt ports are pretty cool. But they seem completely useless to the average consumer and will only be needed by people doing hardcore video editing and stuff like that where they can output multiple 1080p monitors and multiple really large and fast HDD's at the same time without any slowdown all from one port. But the average consumer who just wants an external HDD or thumb drive? This port is useless.
As for SSD's, stick one in a laptop and its very hard to go back! My old laptop had a 30mb/s HDD in it. I stuck an OCZ vertex in there that maxed out the sata speed. Man what a difference haha. I'm on a netbook with a 70mb/s r/w speed and its fast enough but is nothing on the SSD. Boot up was crazy fast, application loading was nearly instant and as an added bonus anti-virus was actually usable! You could run an anti-virus and the SSD was actually fast enough that it would minimally affect performance!

My next NotBook will be a HP DM1z with SSD. Although these guys are trivial to put into HP designs. When the next gen comes out I'll upgrade my main machine and move the old one to a HP 210HD and post pictures/instructions.

Korean KBDthority.net members: Please note that the DM1z is not a joke about your disagreements with your Northern Neighbors. Great movie though.