Is anyone with significant amounts of data not caching their frequently accessed data on SSD?
Poor people who can't afford an SSD? Being mostly employed, middle class people here, or talking about business instead of home use, you guys still seem to forget that SSDs are still the Lexus' of the HD world (with PCIx ssds being the ferraris).
I can barely meet my storage needs, so on the rare occasion I have $100-200 to spend on drives (maybe once per year), I have to add as much space as I can. Already have 10 different drives between my tower and a 4-bay NAS I got lucky and found in the trash, 250GBx2, 500GBx4, 750GB, 1TB, 2TB, 4TB because I can't afford to just buy 2-3 huge drives; and they're all almost full. Next time I can scrape together the money, I'd sure love an SSD, but at $150 I can't choose 250GB over 3-4TB no matter how sweet it would be, because I don't want to delete anything to make room for new data.
When people start throwing out their old SSDs like their old 500GB hard drives that I keep getting, then I might be able to add one. The 6TB and 8TB drives are great news because they might finally drive down the price of a 4TB drive, which has only dropped like $10 in a year for the cheapest model on Newegg, while 2-3TB drives dropped significantly more (this was right before xmas; they just dropped more... but still, $100 for 3TB, $140 for 4TB). Even for most regular people, the size of SSDs is just too tiny to justify the expense when they have significant data requirements.
And rotational disks days may be numbered, but it's a fairly large number. SSDs are not even remotely price competitive when you have multi-TB storage needs. A few businesses might feel the speed makes it worth while, but for the vast majority of use cases rotational disks are fast enough for, we're looking at 10+ years, IF SSDs keep dropping continuously, which isn't always the case, before SSDs can compare price-per-GB (rotational disks are dropping too).