Slashdot Mirror
Ultra Fast Disk Drives With No Moving Parts
saccade.com writes "Let's face it, the slowest part
of PC's today is the disk drive. Bit
Micro has come up with a nifty solution - flash memory based
disk drives available in typical
disk
form-factors. These e-disks are electrically compatible
with ATA, SCSI, etc. but run orders of magnitude faster - access
times down to 40 usec and transfer rates over 100 MB/sec. What's
the catch? Cost. Currently going for just under $1K/G, a 30G model
I recently held in my hand was worth much more than my car. However,
as flash memory prices drop, so do the price of these drives.
Within the decade the spinning hard disk may go the way
of the floppy and CRT."
This isn't exactly new. They've come down substantially in price and gone up in volume, but these have been around for years. It is my understanding that the most significant use was (is?) laptop drives for extremely rugged, shock-resistant portables.
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
Because I'm pretty sure most of us were aware of high cost flash media disks.
...to store data by etching bits with a stylus into Faberge Eggs.
Are we done yet with the whole 'floppies are dead' stories? I regularly use floppies because it's easier to plop in a floppy, copy one file and pop out the floppy than it is to put in a USB drive, wait for your pc to recognize it (don't know about Macs), copy the file then have to correctly disconnect the USB drive
What about those machines which don't have USB drives or who aren't on a network? What then? Floppies will be around much longer than anyone thinks and for good reason.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Within the decade the spinning hard disk may go the way of the floppy and CRT.
You mean it'll still be the default option on most new PCs and in use by ~90% of PC users?
The reason hard disks etc are seperate devices is because they have mechanical parts that require motors etc to work. If this is going to be replaced by memory chips then why not just integrate the whole lot on the motherboard as just another plug in memory module? Why make it slower by passing it through SCSI or ATA not to mention the extra cost of including the interface electronics?
I know that 10000 writes seems like a lot, and perhaps it is. Anyone knows how this figure looks for normal harddrives?
Still it seems to me that the limited number of writes sets the biggest limitation.
Within the decade the spinning hard disk may be capable of holding terabytes, or even petabytes, on a single platter. And it will be orders of magnitude cheaper than solid state storage as we know it. I doubt that hard drives will go the way of the dodo anytime soon.
Just as a comparison, look at how many backup solutions still use tape media (and use it very effectively and cheaply, I might add).
Have fun: Join D.N.A. (National Dyslexics Association)
Sure, hard drives are slow, but that's not my main problem with them. They *are* a bottleneck, but since most applications get the hard disk access "out of the way" at the very beginning and load everything they need into RAM, I could deal with slow hard drive technology for the rest of the forseeable future, if only...
... they were reliable. Hard drives are the only PC components that have ever died on me. Actually, that's not quite true - I had a CD-rom die once, and a few fans here and there; what do all these have in common? Mechanical parts. And when it comes down to it, what do most users value most in their computers? The files on their hard drives. Spinning death traps is what they are. Spinning, clicking, grinding death traps.
I don't know much about flash memory technology or the reliability associated with it. I don't give a hoot how fast it is. If it's solid state (no moving parts) and can guarantee me it won't one day decide to utterly destroy itself, I'm sold.
I dug a bit and found this in the manufacturer's FAQs:
QUESTION: What is the lifespan of the E-Disk® flash drive if wear-leveling algorithm is not utilized? How much improvement will BiTMICRO's wear-leveling algorithms make to this number?
ANSWER:
The wear-out life of an E-Disk® flash drive is directly proportional to the number of flash memory physical blocks in the device. The greater the number of flash memory blocks in the flash drive (and therefore total capacity), the longer the wear-out life of the device. As an example, arithmetic computation will show that a 34GB E-Disk flash drive fitted with flash chips rated at an endurance limit of 1 million erase/write cycles will have an endurance life of 1,024,000,000 seconds (or 32.47 years) when written continuously at 34MB/sec (or 2,937.6GB Erase/Write per day). This is the worst possible scenario where all I/O is 100% write and caching is disabled. E-Disk erase/write endurance can be more than 15 times the computed value if the multiplier effects of full associative caching and the results of BiTMICRO's accelerated erase/write endurance verification and testing are included.
take a look at this raid 0 floppy setup: http://ohlssonvox.8k.com/fdd_raid.htm
yes, I know that it would cost more and we would still have moving parts. It's also slower.
But just imagine a room with ~21300 FDD (30 gigs) stacked to the ceiling blinking and spinning like mad.
I don't read replies by ACs.
Flash uses a so-called "floating gate" to hold charge. The floating gate sits between the control gate and the source/drain/body of the transistor. When electrons are stored on the floating gate, the transistor is prevented from turning on, producing a zero. When there's no charge, the transistor turns on normally, producing a one.
Visit the
Probably, a better HD-replacement solution would be based on MRAM, which is being steadily developed and is going to become available quite soon (the article linked mentions late 2004).
Computers make very fast, very accurate mistakes