>You can get 100GB drives for ~$150. How much cheaper does it have to be?
I wish SSD enthusiasts would accept this simple fact: SSDs are not that reliable yet. RAM is reliable, barring a power outage.
If you want reliability, you at the very least need to buy Intel. Now your "cheap" drive isn't so cheap. We can't cheaply RAID them either so because the storage industry is so set in its way, they still haven't released much in the way of TRIM enabled RAID cards.
So lets say I wanted to do this in any way that was remotely reliable. I'd have to pay for a TRIM enabled RAID1 card and two 160gb SSDs, preferably intel. Now your $150 solution is more like $1500 solution.
Depending on garbage like OCZ is really asking for a fall. Business as well as consumers have been burned by the current crop of "fast but highly unreliable SSDs."
Unfortunately, we're probably years away from a cheap AND reliable SSD storage solution that can run for 5 years with the fail rate of a spinning disk. In the meantime I'm running expensive Intel SSDs and not worrying. I can't imagine selling OCZ to Joe or Jan consumer, inflating the price of their computers $200 for a mild speed boost. Not to mention laptops don't usually have a second slot for another drive. Either SSD all the way or spinning disk. Half-assed caching solutions have historically been big failures.