% of my digital storage that is solid-state:
Displaying poll results.23986 total votes.
Most Votes
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on February 28th, 2024 | 8443 votes
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 2606 votes
Most Comments
- What's the highest dollar price will Bitcoin reach in 2024? Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 68 comments
- Will ByteDance be forced to divest TikTok Posted on March 20th, 2024 | 9 comments
Zero Because: (Score:4, Informative)
Price per gigabyte is too high. I don't need to be able to max out my SATA bandwidth.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:3, Insightful)
But surely you have an SD card or other such solid state media for things like a digital camera, no?
About 1% (Score:3)
But surely you have an SD card or other such solid state media for things like a digital camera, no?
This is why I picked the "more than 0 but not more than 25" percentage level. I have a hell of a lot of SD and SDHC and CF cards, along with a bunch of USB sticks. Even so, the solid state stuff probably adds up to less than 300GB worth, whereas we have about 30TB of spinning magnetic disks in service at home, so call it about 1%. If the CD-R and DVD±R archives of photos, home videos, software, and so forth were to be counted also, the ratio would be even worse.
Really, the more than "0 but not more than 25" category should have been divided into two or three. Say up to 3%, 3-10% and 10-25%.
Re:About 1% (Score:2)
So did I. However I noticed that the question was not really well defined: Percentage of storage capacity or of storage devices? In the first case, clearly my non-SSD hard disks completely dwarf my SSD USB sticks and memory cards. However in device count, the percentage is much more favorable to solid state. :-)
Of course, if you add CDs and DVDs as well as old floppy disks collecting dust, that again completely dwarfs all my solid state storage in numbers.
(Of course, strictly speaking, all my digital storage is solid state, because also my magnetic disks are neither liquid nor gas. :-))
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Nope. Don't own a digital camera. If you want to go all nit-picky I do have a car that keeps some things like what radio station I'm tuned to in solid state. Oh, and my graphing calculator from high school could save things. I guess there must be a Dreamcast VMU in my closet somewhere... But I don't really feel like that's the intent of the poll here... And any USB key I own isn't "storage" in my mind -- I've used it for "transfer" of files but I don't keep anything there with the expectation of getting back to it ever again.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:3)
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Not totally true... I use an Ironkey to back up my passwords etc so I can safely carry them around and not worry if they become lost. Backup.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Re:Zero Because: (Score:5, Informative)
I don't consider any of these as "storage". They're like grocery bags, you don't "store" stuff in them. If anything, those are all temporary data devices. To me, "Storage" means "long-term".
Re:Zero Because: (Score:3)
I can beat that, the premise of the poll is how much storage is "solid state", which says in my mind that the proper answer to the question should be around 99 44/100% as the flip side of the coin is how much storage is "vacuum tube".
Maybe it's just me.....
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
My phone and one of my ARM laptops both have microSD cards that are semi-permanently installed. They're where most of the data is stored. 32GB of microSD costs about £10 now, so there's lots of space in these devices. Not, admittedly, in comparison to the 4TB RAID-Z array in my NAS, but still more than the total of my hard drives a decade ago...
By your definition, I don't store stuff on my laptop either, since it's all backed up on the NAS.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
By my definition, it doesn't matter if it's backed up, it matters whether it's intended to sit there quasi-permanently. None of my solid-state storage devices are intended for that purpose.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:5, Insightful)
Dude, it's not an "argument". I'm not "arguing" with anyone. It's just how I see things, my opinion is not official, and frankly I couldn't care less whether you have the same opinion or not.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
if it isn't ZFS, its only temporary.
Larry Ellison would be proud.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:3)
That being said, ZFS is awesome, if you're not using it, try it. It's hungry for resources but having 4 drives drop out of an array at the same time due to a faulty backplane and ZFS not giving a shit was nice.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:3)
But surely you have an SD card or other such solid state media for things like a digital camera, no?
I'm not the guy you asked but I wanted to chime in: I have plenty of SD cards and thumb drives, all are blank. I don't 'store' data, there, I buffer it until I can offload it to my hard drive. The only solid state storage (i.e. longer term than just a day) I have in my house is all on mobile phones or tablets.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:5, Interesting)
I have relatively small drives I use for things like my root filesystem. Those binaries are not constantly updated, so I'm not wearing out my drive by writing to it. This means that most binaries are paged in from the SSD, and if the system ever kicks their pages out of memory, they can be paged in again relatively quickly. So I think I get the biggest bang for the buck by sticking them on an SSD. I keep /var and /home on conventional RAID1 storage.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:3)
See, I might do that if Windows supported that kind of setup. (Yes, I use Windows on my home machine since I play video games on my PC not all of which are Linux compatible.)
Re:Zero Because: (Score:3)
It does, after a fashion.
My xp setup (desktop P4, drives as they come):
System: 32GB SSD
Paging: 4GB PATA (I have loads of these, I just cycle them as they die)
My Documents/temporary files & short archival storage: 12TB NAS
Local "scratch" (for eg Photoshop, not that I use Photoshop, some games that seem to need ludicrous amounts of temporary storage): 8GB RAID1 PATA
My Win7 laptop syncs to the Documents folder when I connect to the network, as does my XP netbook (which has a 160GB SATA spinny thing but hey, can't complain about that since I only paid £35 for it!). I tend to keep that folder to stuff that I'm currently working on, so it's rarely larger than half a Gig.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Hmm. I've heard about junctions but haven't messed with Volume Mount Points yet. I do know that "bad stuff" can happen if Windows doesn't see what it expects to see with respect to layout though. Maybe I'll try again next time I reinstall Windows.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
You have it backwards. You're putting your fastest storage under the files accessed the least. Put /usr and /home on SSD for performance, and let the boot process basically take care of your typical system binaries.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Maybe you're right. But I strongly suspect that if I profiled disk accesses that I would see the SSD being hit for reads far more often than my home directory. But I should do that just to be sure.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Re:Zero Because: (Score:3, Informative)
Price per gigabyte is too high. I don't need to be able to max out my SATA bandwidth.
Spoken like someone who has never actually used an SSD. It isn't just the bandwidth: latency is also considerably lower. It's expensive, sure, and very few people "need" it, but practical speed increase is a full order of magnitude in many cases (I'm only using SATAII, also, which my SSD more than saturates. Upgrading to SATAIII should net me a 50% increase or more in bandwidth). But then, so is the cost/gigabyte.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Yes, I misspoke some by not stating how I did not need the latency improvement either. Yes, I have seen SSDs in action and it is impressive how quickly the computer boots and files load but that already takes less than one percent of one percent of my time on my computer, so it's almost entirely irrelevant to my needs.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Yeah, I find that having a 10 second break between levels is useful for responding to IRC and getting a general breather in. Honestly, now that I think of it, power consumption is where I would probably find the best benefit as it is. Maybe reliability, too, if I can get 1M wear cycles and a controller with good wear leveling.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Re:Zero Because: (Score:3)
The benefit of that time is being able to reflect and realize that you have more than one option for OS. I'm not smug about knowing my OS running a virtual Windows installation is faster than your physical installation, I'm just happy you have that extra time to focus before you log in and break down in frustration.
Well, if there was a decent linux alternative to OneNote, Windows would be gone like a shot.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Well, if there was a decent linux alternative to OneNote, Windows would be gone like a shot.
Depending on what you consider a decent alternative, here are some suggestions [alternativeto.net].
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
The worst thing is OneNote isn't even that good, just the best of a bad bunch.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:5, Interesting)
Spoken like someone who has never actually used an SSD. It isn't just the bandwidth: latency is also considerably lower.
If you're speaking average, yes, it's considerably lower. However, if you speak worst case, random committed writes can be much worse for SSD than for HDD, if you have a relatively busy drive that can't do its housekeeping because it's never idle for long enough, and have reached write amplification time[*], a single block committed write can take a LONG time (close to a second is common, and if really unlucky, more than that) as the drive has to erase and write to multiple sectors.
While occasional stutters and no guaranteed minimal random write speed is fine for most use, and a win because of a great average, it's not fine for all use.
[*] What about TRIM, I hear the cries from the peanut gallery? TRIM needs idle time in which to do its housekeeping (or the cure would be worse than the ailment), alleviates but doesn't solve the write amplification problem, and does not work on RAID. Oh, and it reduces the life span of the drive by causing extra write cycles.
Longevity is not improving but going down on newer generation SSDs.
SLC = 100,000 write cycles
MLC = 10,000 write cycles
TLC = 5,000 write cycles
What the consumer cares about is price. And yes, TLC is a heck of a lot cheaper than SLC, but it's cheaper for a reason.
This is anecdotal so don't put too much weight on it, but In the last couple of years I have replaced five hard drives (two of them were 15 years old), but have a stack of more than two dozen failed SSDs. Last one as late as yesterday.
Use SSD when it makes sense, but understand what you buy, and when it does not make sense.
On a normal desktop or laptop which is backed up daily, hell yes, the speed is awesome.
On a RAID running real time databases where guaranteed IO is needed but average speeds are uninteresting, not so much.
tl;dr: SSD is a boon, not a panacea
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
I assume that USB memory sticks and SD cards are involved in the solid state count. And most people do have at least one of them.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
I thought vacuum tubes were too expensive, so I moved to solid state.. Two tubes per bit gets pricey when it exceeds a couple of K bits. ;-)
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
I'd be a little more worried about power consumption :)
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Since when have solid state drives been about maxing out your SATA bandwidth? It's about random read/write speeds, not sequential read/write speeds.
Re:Zero Because: (Score:2)
Twice now, things got crappy and I realized the thing was full because some idiotic program was writing out some inane 30GB cache file to it, and I had to fix the program to not do that or else redirect the cache file to my spinny HD's. Otherwise it's been great. Really fast, and I hardly ever hear my HD's spin up unless I'm working with large files.
Between 0 and 25% (Score:5, Funny)
I have some data stored in the memory of my computer. For long-time storage I use harddrives.
Re:Between 0 and 25% (Score:2)
Re:Between 0 and 25% (Score:2)
Seriously, 10 TB on SATA? You really must not care about how fast people access and store data. Either that or you have like 5 people sharing video storage or something so it's just streaming massive blobs. Oh wait, you listed a laundry list of Microsoft stuff, obviously you don't care about performance of your NAS.
Re:Between 0 and 25% (Score:2)
Between 0 & 25 (Score:2)
Zero? (Score:5, Insightful)
Have a hard time believing that none of the people who clicked "zero" (31% right now) own a smartphone, a portable music player, a tablet, a digital camera or a USB thumb drive.
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
I own a cheap phone only reserved for calls and maybe texts, my Ipod Classic uses a HDD, I own no tablet nor do I own a camera much less a digital one, and I continue to frequently lose my USB thumbdrives (none in hand now), which is as good to me as not having any at all.
While I can't say for the other 31%, I can say for myself that I made sure to double check before answering the poll with assurance.
Re:Zero? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
I've got a USB stick on my keychain that holds things like my ssh keys and PuTTY executables. That's permanent storage.
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
So if you lose your physical keys (or they get stolen), you've got to replace the public key on all of the servers you have access to? That's kinda annoying.
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
If they are protected by a strong passphrase you will have plenty of time to replace it. My public key is protected with a passphrase with 130 bits of entropy.
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
Have a hard time believing that none of the people who clicked "zero" (31% right now) own a smartphone, a portable music player, a tablet, a digital camera or a USB thumb drive.
Less than 1% is zero, right?
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
Why not? Some people prefer phones that are phones, listen to music on their home or car stereos, don't take pictures, and don't need or want a tablet. Even some old-school geeks of the type that Slashdot still has plenty of. People with Slashdot IDs in the range of mine.
Now me, I'm an old school geek in some respects, but I do have a smart phone, digital camera, "mp3" player*, and a handful of thumb drives. But I certainly know people who don't.
* I assume it plays mp3s, though I've never used it with anything but oggs.
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
I do, but I don't consider them to be "storage".
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
I have nothing on my smartphone, mp3 player, tablet, digital camera and thumb drives that ISN'T backed up (stored) on my non SSD primary drives.
They are temporary platforms that hold the data before I move it over/copy it to my storage. Bit like my ram.
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
I do own a thumb drive. But it's not for "storage". It's for "sneaker net" between offices.
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
You sound pedantic.
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
If you have 3 terabytes HDD (thats a low estimate, with all the HDDs most of us have lying around, you might have in the vicinity of 10TB, but lets go with 3 TB for now), 1% of that is 30gb (HDD manufacturer math, 1TB=1000GB). A 16 gig iPhone, for example, would still leave you well under 1%. A 32GB would just push them over, into the 1%. Many may have no USB sticks, as I don't.
If folks start including RAM - well, that'd just be silly. RAM isn't generally storage, although it could be used as such in particular setups.
It's quite easily concievable that a large number of people have less than 1% of their storage as solid state. My GF doesn't, even including her RAM. The 256Mb on her Nokia phone doesn't go very far.
Re:Zero? (Score:2)
25, 50, 75 (Score:5, Funny)
No poll option for 25, 50, or 75 percent! Do you have any idea how much planning it too to achieve a perfect 50% balance of SSD and HDD with nothing but 240GB and 3TB drives?!? I'll give you a hint: I have 720 TB of storage, a new, dedicated air conditioner, and three mortgages.
by mass or volume? (Score:2)
I have some old, heavy, low-capacity hard drives. And I have some new, light, high-capacity flash drives. Which counts for more?
It's gonna be a whille for the numbers to change (Score:2)
Most geeks are gonna have backup drives for digital media whose size far outstrips any solid state media they have. Myself I've got a 64GB SSD boot drive (no tablets/smart phones) and 2TB+ of hard drives.
We're starting to get relatively close in price - now just a factor of 20 (SSD $1/GB, HD $0.05/GB), but I'd not be surprised if hard drives remain cheaper for at least another 10 years.
non-descriptive subject line (Score:2)
I don't like the nature of solid state storage, I know that it will fail at some time in the future, although that may be after 10 years of hard use. So I avoid it. Then it occurred to me that 90% of my storage that is in daily use is SS, iPhone, iPlod, etc, I can't get away from it, it's haunts me, in a good way?
Re:non-descriptive subject line (Score:2)
What storage is not solid state? (Score:3)
Re:What storage is not solid state? (Score:2)
If your magnetic media is in a solid state, it's not rotating and you're not getting any data into/out of it.
Solid State == no moving parts
Re:What storage is not solid state? (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_physics [wikipedia.org]
Re:What storage is not solid state? (Score:2)
solid state has meant "no moving parts" since my father was a child in the 40's
Re:What storage is not solid state? (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_physics [wikipedia.org]
Re:What storage is not solid state? (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_(electronics) [wikipedia.org]
flash memory on Apple devices? (Score:2)
If we're counting total local storage including hard drives and devices like the iPhone, iPad and iPod, the zero to 25 percent answer will be the appropriate one for most posters here.
It'll still be a number of years until truly reliable, high-density SSD's become viable, though I think by 2020 we may see SSD's using the same case size as current 1/3 height 3.5" internal Serial ATA drives store as much as ten terabytes and sold at reasonable prices. Ultrabook-type laptops by 2020 may store as much as two to four terabytes by 2018 or so.
Just ordered some (Score:2)
Right now, I have 960 gigabytes of hard disc space (three 250GB drives, a 120GB drive, and a pair of old 20GB drives) spread between several desktops and external enclosures. I have a further 14.25GB in USB flash drives. That totals up to about 1% of my storage being solid-state, if you exclude the stacks of optical media and the old box of floppies still laying in my closet. And all my SD flash cards. And my old Gamecube memory cards (also flash). And my phone's internal memory (also flash). But those I don't count, because they're not used for primary storage of anything, only temporary or archival storage (or, for the 'cube, storage incompatible with PC hardware).
However, I've got quite a bit of new gear coming in. A 1TB hard drive to upgrade my 'main' desktop, a 750GB hard drive in my new laptop, and a 128GB SSD to go into that laptop's second drive bay, are all currently being shipped. When they arrive, they will immediately (nearly) triple my total storage capacity, while also boosting the solid-state percentage to 5%.
Coupla camera cards, usb sticks... (Score:2)
No fancy SSD drives, no ipads or smartphones, just a couple of ancient 128Mb camera cards (yes that's megabytes now get off my lawn) and a thumb drive (I think that's 8Gb).
0X25 % (Score:2)
Redudant Options (Score:2)
"% of my digital storage that is solid-state: "
Zero
and
I do not store stuff digitally.
wouldn't storing your stuff in a non digital format constitute Zero?
dunno .. just being anal
PS: magnetic media isn't digital either at the media level
The Windows Profile problem (Score:2)
Windows doesn't support redirecting your Users directory; opening the door for leaving the OS on your SSD and mass storage on traditional drives. Yes, you can remap the users folder on your own, but their documentation states pretty clearly that the user directory is hard-coded in places, like update scripts, that will break your system if you try this.
Once this is resolved, I'll definitely give SSD drives a shot.
Re:The Windows Profile problem (Score:2)
Re:The Windows Profile problem (Score:2)
The MS documentation clearly states that this is not supported and why. It's not based on "reasoning" or what my gut tells me. Go out and do the research on your own.
Comment removed (Score:2)
My crayon on toilet paper storage is solid state. (Score:2)
Mostly, until I know they're going to search the room and I have to flush it. Then, not so solid. Backing up is a real bitch too.
Until it breaks (Score:2)
Above 0, until my SSD breaks again.
100% (Score:3)
Mainly Solid State (Score:2)
100% solid state. (Score:2)
Because i don't know any storage media that's in liquid or gaseous form, or a plasma.
All in all? (Score:2)
I don't see how I will get a significant impact on the SSD-percentage of my storage without winning the lottery.
Re:Flash Drives (Score:2)
Re:Flash Drives (Score:2)
What else do people use them for, if not storage?
Re:Flash Drives (Score:2)
Windows 7 swap space of course!
Re:Chuck Norris (Score:5, Funny)
Has 110% of hist storage in SSD.
2005 4chan is that way ---->
Re:Chuck Norris (Score:3)
Re:Chuck Norris (Score:3)
Chuck Norris doesn't even need storage! When he wants to shows someone a picture, he uses his fists to embed the picture into their mind!
Re:Chuck Norris (Score:2)
He strikes with such precision that the ensuing concussion creates a new memory within the lucky victim's mind.
Sheesh, do it right.
Re:Cache (Score:2)
Re:my storage is analog you insensitive clod (Score:2)
theres 2 options for that dink
Re:Doesn't anybody use pendrives? (Score:2)
I do, but I don't consider the data on them to be "storage". If I am taking my laptop out on the road, I use a USB flash drive as a temporary backup until I get back home. I also use them to transfer files from one computer to another by sneakernet.
Re:Doesn't anybody use pendrives? (Score:3)
Re:Paper ftw. (Score:2)
There.
Re:Percentage by what measure? (Score:2)
I have 5 SATA SSDs, 2 mSATA SSDs, a plethora of flash based storage in the form of thumb drives, SD, microSD, CF, etc and maybe only 10 or 11 spinning drives in regular operation. Discount the fact I have about 200 drives laying around the garage and my percentage by type is at 50% or better! By capacity it remains well under 25% though.
Re:Obligatory "Poll Optiona Suck" Rant (Score:2)
And to think I had looked at the options at first and thought, everybody is covered by exactly one of the options, no way anybody can reasonably complain about the available set of options. You proved me wrong. And actually I think everybody is honest about what storage they do have and correctly calculate it will end up in the 0-25 group. So maybe the set of options shouldn't be as evenly distributed on the growth curve as you suggested, but rather be more dense around the point on the growth curve where we think people are right now. That of course requires some a priori knowledge of the outcome, but I guess whoever suggested that poll did have at least some knowledge about how much storage is solid-state and how much is not. Without such a priori knowledge the first six options suggested sounds right.
Re:Let's face it... (Score:2)
And those who chose anything less than 100% don't care about science terminology.