Slashdot Mirror

48-bit LBA was already introduced in CF 5.0 - "CF 6.0 Ultra DMA Mode 7 along with 48-bit addressing defined in the CF 5.0 specification" http://compactflash.org/2010/cf-6-0-introduces-industry-leading-performance-and-feature-enhancements/

2TB limit is questionable - "The proposed new specifications have the potential to extend theoretical maximum capacities beyond two terabytes" http://www.sandisk.com/about-sandisk/press-room/press-releases/2010/2010-11-29-sandisk,-nikon-and-sony-propose-industry-standards-for-next-generation-high-speed-memory-card-format

CF cards tend to 'wear out' after a certain number of write cycles. Most estimates of lifespan range from 100K to 500K write cycles. (Working from memory - could be off a bit.)

CF cards cost more per MB than traditional magnetic/rotating media drives. The cost means that the largest currently available cards may not be practical for most applications. However, CF-to-ATA adapters are nifty options for single purpose systems and homebrew firewalls.
PS Go RTFA. Actually go read the Compact Flash FAQ and then go RTFA.

Gee, bubba, I don't know. Why don't you head on over to the CompactFlash (yes, no space, since you're trying to be pedantic) Association site, and check it out for yourself. In case you're too thick to manage, though, I'll spell it out:

CompactFlash cards are designed with flash technology, a non-volatile storage solution that does not require a battery to retain data indefinitely. CompactFlash storage products are solid state, meaning they contain no moving parts, and provide users with much greater protection of their data than conventional magnetic disk drives. They are five to ten times more rugged and reliable than disk drives including those found in PC Card Type III products. CF cards consume only five percent of the power required by small disk drives.

Gee, does it sound like they believe that a four gig hard disk qualifies as a compact flash card? Let's see... they said that they're solid state... no moving parts... and better than magnetic disk drives.

What is this, the ignorance parade?

Forgot to link to the new specification.

Try this.

IDE to Compact Flash Adapter

Flash Storage Solutions

Read all this thread if you will be storing sensitive information

How Compact Flash can keep your data safe?

This guy has an opinon different from mine. He says that, all of a sudden, he lost hundreds of picture. Well, I've been working with Compact Flash for more than one year, now, and the ONLY time I gost corrupted data was when I took the card off the camera while it was writing. Then the camera could not read any picture. They seemed to be lost. But later I put that CF in my CF reader, and ran a chkdsk. It found lost chains, that I saved as files. And recovered ALL pictures except for the bottom half of the one it was writing at the very moment when I removed the CF. It probably corrupted the FAT (same way as hard disks, when the computer is not properly shut down).

And I do think CF is more reliable than Microdrive.

The CFA provides the CompactFlash Specification as a free download from the CFA web site. The CompactFlash and CF(logo) trademarks are licensed at no charge and no royalty to CFA members. This has encouraged industry to quickly adopt the CF form factor into as many new devices as possible.

Application for membership requires the applicant to read, understand, and agree to fully support and abide by, all of the principles, policies and procedures as set forth in the SD Card Association's By-laws, Antitrust Guidelines and Intellectual Property Policy.

Flash chip technology advances have allowed flash chips to achieve sustained data transfer rates of 5-7MB/sec

I beleive USB 1.1 supports a rate of 12MB/s so it looks anything more (like the 480MB/s of USB 2) wouldn't really help you.

I tend to like compact flash the best of any of the competeing memory standards currently. Once you get that small size doesnt really matter that much to me. It is definitly the cheapest, available in the largest sizes, and from everything I have heard it is by far the most durable.

Still, keyboards communicate at 1.5 mbs. This should be plenty for now, unless you have keyboard with hub, or builtin card reader or so. I think this more points out that the customers want the fastest whatever they'll actually be able to use it or not. They want a keyboard at 480 mbs, 'cos they can say that they have it, or because they belive that it is going to be better. But it is not. Most equipment, like hard drives, cdroms, and so don't use a full 480 mbs. Some hardrives might do however... But a keyboard? Would the average user benefit from a USB keyboard? I don't think so. They're (yet) more exspencive, they are although a bit better in some aspects, but (almost) anything you can do on a USB keyboard, you can do on a PS2/DIN keyboard. The only exception I can think of, is when you have flash card readers and so on builtin, as mentioned above, but even then 11 mbs should be enough, with a transerrate of 11 mps, you get roughly 1.2 MB/second theoretical, I would guess under one MB second at maximal in real life. A compact flash, can transfer 8-16 MB/sec. Memorystick has a rate of 14.4mbs write speed, and 19.6 mbs read speed, thus I guess the average user would not get a real difference between full-speed(11 mbs)USB and High speed @ 480 mbs. 1.5 would although be a bit to slow. If you have a card on 128mb, it would take ~15 seconds to read it out, and ~20 to write full. However, I've not tested this, so this is just a estimate.

CF seems to be the industry standard since Handspring kept their springboard slot all to themselves.

Propriatary hardware is Bad, sure enough, but there's probably other reasons why CF is still here and Springboards are gone...

Maybe the huge number of CF-using digital cameras that provide a large base of users to keep price low...

The fact that you can use a CF peripheral (With adapter) in both your PDA and Laptop is handy... The fact that CF is (to some degree) pin-compatable with PC-Card slots makes the adaptor dirt cheap, too.

But the big reason is probably how old CF is - the Compact Flash association was founded in 1995, about the time USR aquired Palm, and (IIRC) four years before Hanspring was even formed.

I'd say that the fact that the Cornice drives don't use a standard interface is a serious limitation, since it doesn't gain them anything in speed and keeps the drives from being used in a huge array of CF-capable devices. 3GB MicroDrives are available, so the density of the Cornice drives isn't anything special. The drives themselves are about twice as fast as the current crop of microdrives, but the real selling point of the Cornice drives appears to be the price point.

and the $4,000 a year license cost is hardly prohibitive to any hardware manufacturer.

I agree- especially considering membership in the CompactFlash Association costs $2500-$5000/year.

Oh and for that to work, everyone needs a removable hotswap hard drive bay.

Those already exist. For smaller storage, you can use a CF card. For larger storage, you can connect the hard drive to the computer through a FireWire(tm) brand IEEE 1394 interface.

Here is a link to the MultiMediaCard Association. How are MultiMedia Cards different from CompactFlash or PCMCIA cards? Why are they necessary?

Here is the devils Question: How is the MultiMediaCard a tool of the content providers to implant a technology to subvert fair-use rights and user freedom / How does the choice of MultiMediaCards & Secure Digital tie in?

Sorry if I dont feel warm and fuzzy about Palm's adoption of a standard that will ultimately be the means to extend RIAA/MPAA/"Content Owners" rights while displacing my own as a private citizen... (Assumption of guilt built into technology required by collusive monopolies)

And Further - why would i want to spend my money to buy this device if it entails adopting a technology that provides me zero benefit... and 'them' the real benefit (see afore mentioned 'Citizen-Fucking-Method(TM)')

- OR - Am I being overly pessimistic about what 'Secure Digital' Could possibly mean...

> Is DataPlay the next big thing, or
> something to avoid?

Moving the conversation from SDMI, which is just a technology good for keeping honest people honest...

In general, people should be somewhat leery of rotating drives for digital content storage.

Rotating drives simply consume too much power for battery-powered apps-- you have to drive a motor and a laser. I picked up a Dataplay datasheet at CES and power dissipation figures were curiously absent.

Furthermore, to make a Dataplay-ready device, I have to assume that manufacturers will have to incorporate a proprietary drive slot, adding to the cost. Ergo, to reap the cost/MB benefits of a Dataplay disk, a consumer has to swallow the hidden cost of the special drive. Consumers like cheap, though. Sure, flash memory may be costly, but the slot costs practically nothing thanks to the existence of standards bodies like the CompactFlash Association.

In short, Dataplay (and Iomega's HipPocketWhateverzip, by extension) are gonna get creamed if the following comes to pass-- The introduction of a low-cost, high-capacity, solid-state technology that uses standard flash slots (CompactFlash, SmartMedia, etc.)

Based on what any self-respecting tech-head reads in the trades, this isn't too far off, right? For example, process shrinks (0.13-micron and below?) are making it possible to produce chips with higher densities and at higher volumes. The first chips to be run on such processes will be memories, since companies will test out a process with a memory product first before qualifying it to make other products.

All things considered, I fall into the "avoid" camp, myself. From a silicon and hardware perspective, there are just too many nifty advancements on the horizon. I'd love to hear what Slashdotters might have to offer from a hardware and design perspective.

You might want to take a look at the CompactFlash Association.

and I think the equivalent for SmartMedia is the SSFDC Forum.


--
Jonathan Hunt

Compact Flash (CF) and SmartMedia. I wish I knew who contolled these formats

You might want to take a look at the CompactFlash Association.

They're a non-profit, mutual-benefit corporation that promotes adoption of CompactFlash as a worldwide, ultra-small, removable storage and I/O standard.

--
Jonathan Hunt

I realize that this is going to illicit a strong response from the readers but here goes:
Ever consider a WindowsCE product? I bought a Casio E100 8 months ago and have feel it was the best purchase Ive ever made.
When I saw my first PDA, I knew I had to have one, but recognizing how limited the hardware was, I resolved that I would resist my horrible 'first adopter' tendencies and wait for the 'next gen' products. When the E100 became available I thought it was sufficiently spec'd to be useful. 8/8 ROM/RAM, Industry Standard Compact Flash (none of this springboard stuff), Stereo Output (portable MP3), Excellent 65k colour TFT Screen (was showing StarWars Trailer on this guy 4 hours after release). It is still the best specs available in a PDA. I have a 96MB CF(for MP3s), a 56k CF (bought @ less than $80 through a promotion), and an Ether CF (onto the network I go).
I purchased a Nokia 56xx(forget exact model #) and use the adapter ($150!!!!) to dialup my ISP.

No hassle internet - no 'services', or 'content products'

This setup set me back a bit (600+80+600+150 $CDN(subsidized by the odd 'deal' and my employer))but I feel it is the only VIABLE portable/wireless computing solution available (presently).

Sure its WinCE - but it really does perform its duty. The OS is not the only reason I bought the device. Please be objective about my decision to buy this setup - Im as much a lover of GNU/Linux and free(dom) software as you are, but what were my choices to match this performance?

Short answer: the Canon PowerShot rocks!

Background:

Early 1999 my wife & I were planning a vacation & I wanted a digital camera. After some research, (and two-hours of owning a very bad Agfa) I decided on the Canon PowerShot A5 Zoom. My criteria (and rationale) were:

• Small size
  This was going to be in my pocket or in a small cam bag for this trip.
• Aspheric glass lens
  Even within the size constraints, I wanted good picture quality. I also wanted actual focusing, not "focus-free", which is weasel-speak for fixed focus. Hint: avoid cheaper Agfa.
• LCD display
  For previewing pix, composing close-ups, end-of-arm shots, etc.
• Optical viewfinder
  Research indicated that even the best LCD was hard to see in bright sunlight. Also, always having to hold the camera away from your face amplifies jitter.
• Compact Flash
  Compact flash (CF) v. SmartMedia v. floppys. Floppys are slow, SmartMedia has low capacity. CF is about the same price as SmartMedia & comes in very high capacities.

The A5Z was then "last years model", about to be replaced by the A50. The A50 is essentially identical, but with a higher resolution. So, the A5Z was cheap ($350). I added a battery charger ($90), two more rechargable (NiMH) batteries ($30 x 2) and a second 8MB CF ($40). Remember, these are early '99 prices. Total cost: $570.

There were several cameras with similar capabilities (Olympus, Nikon and Minolta) but none were as small OR as cheap.

The results since then have been excellent. I have been very happy. Several of my friend have tried it, and bought their own A50's. They really like theirs as well.

The current versions of this camera are, the A50, S10 & S20. The S series has added USB, even higher resolution and Type-II CF (which can take a hard drive). If I was buying a new camera today, I think the S20 would be my baby.

One recommendation though: do buy a charger and extra batteries.

--