Penny-Sized Flash Module Holds 16GB

nerdyH writes "Intel describes its new 2GB to 16GB SSDs (solid state disks) as 'smaller than a penny, and weighing less than a drop of water.' The parts are '400 times smaller in volume than a 1.8-inch hard drive,' Intel boasts, 'and at 0.6 grams, 75 times lighter.' Sampling now, with mass production set for Q1 2008, the Z-P140 is described as an 'optional' part of Intel's Menlow chipset, built in turn as part of Intel's vision for Linux-based Mobile Internet Devices (MIDs)."

Comments

Big deal

[BrianPan]

All flash memory has been smaller than a penny and weigh less than a drop of water for a long time. Adding a package-on-package controller is an obvious next step. There's no big revolution happening here.

Re:Big deal

[Eternauta3k]

All flash memory has been smaller than a penny and weigh less than a drop of water for a long time. Adding a package-on-package controller is an obvious next step. There's no big revolution happening here.

What do you know about marketing?
:P

Re:Big deal

[BrianPan]

Touche. I probably would have gone with "new flash still smaller than a quarter, still doesn't explode in your system."

I guess Slashdot submissions also have to be "sold" to the editors to be front page worthy.

Re:Big deal

[JCSoRocks]

Ummm cave dweller much? We've already got 100 GB+ solid state drives. This one is obviously crazy expensive but you can get 32GB models for a more reasonable price - around $400 I think.

Re:Big deal

[russ1337]

we're way way off topic here, but to complement your story:

A buddy of mine had a job interview for an office job - in the telecoms field, and had previously only ever worked as a precision machinist (CnC type stuff in coveralls) since he left school. He asked my advice on what to wear to the interview (and subsequent job) because I worked in a corporate environment. I helped him chose a suitable suit, tie etc, and gave him some simple dress tips (for the corporate environment - and wasnt entirely sure what his office culture was like, but thought better dress up than down.

He was the only guy applying for the job that wore a tie - let alone a jacket. He got the job and wore his jacket and tie to work every day, (jacket off during working hours). In 6 weeks they made him the manager.

I've always reckoned it was that he *looked* like the boss, and it 'looks bad' with him sitting in a cube with the polo-shirts and tee-shirts. The fact he wasn't a complete muppet helped too.

Next time you think your boss is an idiot and wonder why he's your boss, you'll probably notice that the only difference between him and you, is that he dresses nicer.

So that is why the article made it to the front page - it was wearing a tie. Articles wearing greasy coveralls and have food stains down the front have no chance.

Re:Big deal

[noidentity]

And the smallest sticks are too damn small already. A friend got one of those Micro SD or something and I was surprised he hadn't already lost it in the carpet. Maybe good for having a normal-sized watch with GB of memory, but otherwise too easy to lose.

Re:Big deal

[danbert8]

Well, since we're off topic, I have another similar situation... My first day on the job as a co-op, I wore a shirt and tie, and my boss told me not to wear a tie because I was making everyone look bad (I'm pretty sure he was joking). Some people like a more casual environment.

Re:Big deal

[h4rm0ny]

It is unfortunate that in this modern corporate world, where two candidates being equal in nearly all aspects, the one nicely dressed candidate tends to be considered better 'management material'.

In an interview, part of it is undoubtedly due to the perception that one has gone to greater effort. Allowing for those interviewers with where suit-obsession is particularly ingrained, I'd say the perception of greater effort is most of it. Going to greater effort is understandably an indicator of who really wants the job and who really prepares for and applies themselves to it. However, there are other ways of showing preparation and commitment. The last interview I had (as interviewee, that is), I had prepared hand-out copies of the talk I was giving in good quality folders, separate summary sheets on the best paper that I could buy and I had rehersed my presentation and supplementary topics quite thoroughly. I didn't wear a suit and most definitely didn't wear a tie. I think it was a black t-shirt and black trousers, if I recall correctly. Would wearing a suit have made me look like I was going to an even greater effort? I don't think it would have, actually. For a start, I wouldn't have actually felt comfortable, I would have felt like a salesman. I was nervous enough without feeling like I wasn't being true to myself. A tie is a garment without practical purpose (other than for people assaulting you). It is descended from cravats the sole reason for being was to show you were fashionable and had money. Much like the impractical toga of ancient rome, it demonstrated that one was a person without need to perform a manual job. To many of us, the tie is similarly obnoxious, it's resemblance to a leash a further issue again.

In my interview, I feel that I gave the impression of someone that had gone to considerable effort to prepare for the interview. And I think dressing in simple, comfortable cloths (I'll concede that washed and clean is important) showed that I wasn't about appearances. If I had worn a suit I would have created the impression that I wanted to appear as if I had gone to considerable effort to prepare. I would have come across as slick. I wanted to show that what you saw was what you got - a valuable impression to make in an interview.

And let us not forget, that one shouldn't start wearing suits, unless one wishes to be stuck wearing suits. ;)

(Oh, for reference I should mention that I have been a manager for several years, though I very recently took a non-managerial position because I wanted to keep my hand in in actual programming and transition to large-scale project management later on.)

You can either complain about it or use it to your advantage

I choose both of those and a third option of my own advantage. Let me give the Non-Suit Manifesto. In your comment, I'm inferring that complaining about it is akin to fruitless whining. That isn't necessarily the case, though we may differ on what complaining means. I'm posting on the subject here and now (eloquently, I hope, regardless of whether or not you agree), and this could be considered complaining. I'm similarly eloquent in dismissing the superficiality of judging people by appearance when or if the subject arises at work. I hope you don't leap to the conclusion that this means I jump up and down whining on the subject - I just nip any such attitudes in the bud as and when they arise.

Secondly, as regards using it to my advantage, you are referring here to wearing a suit but in fact any mode of dress can be used to your advantage with imagination. Many sucessful people play off their image of being non-suits (e.g. Richard Branson likes to spin the showman and radical angle). As a manager, I never once wore a tie or come to think of it, smart shoes. In all honesty, I played off it. I had a very close working relationship with my staff and everyone saw me as someone they coul

Ultramobile devices

[morgan_greywolf]

I could see ultramobile devices using these. Not only are they small, but they consume only about 300 mW of power active, and 1.1 mW in sleep mode.

We're starting to get to a point where wearable computers will be practical. You'll be able to sew a whole computer right into a jacket or a sweater. Throw in one of those wearable displays, abd forget lugging around that heavy laptop!

Re:Ultramobile devices

[Thanshin]

Isn't energy source the bottle neck? Why don't they advertising mainly the power consumption?

Anyway, the data by the time we can have a powerful computer hidden inside a jacket, the data will be stored at home and accessed through wireless communications, so the only really useful advance in memory is power consumption.

Re:Ultramobile devices

[wattrlz]

You can also forget about ever boarding a commercial airline.

That's nothing

[techpawn]

I lost a few gig of SD memory in a keyboard one time by accident. So, we're actually moving backwards in size.

And next year...

[yuri82]

And in 2009 they will have it with 64GB, and the year after 256GB...

They probably have the technology for 256GB now, but why waste it all on one release?

Er, so what?

[Speare]

Okay, so they made a chip that would fit in a microSDHC form factor. Is it faster? Is it lower-power? Is the interface more convenient? Is the chipset to host it already commonplace? Why would I want yet-another-memory-stick-format product in the already-crowded marketplace?

Re:Er, so what?

[tangent3]

and most importantly, how much does it cost per GB, compared to Flash?

Re:Er, so what?

[MBCook]

Read the story. This isn't to replace SD cards. This is a little chip to be built onto the motherboard of cell phones or iPods to hold the data, and for that it is much smaller than other offerings.

Re:Er, so what?

[Speare]

Okay, so they don't want to encase it in a piece of plastic with a big slider-pad for contacts. I'm sure SanDisk would be okay with direct integration of their storage chips onto motherboards too. I stand by my comment: this appears no different from existing capacities already available on the market. Why the huge press event?

Re:Er, so what?

[ivan256]

microSD caps out at 8GB right now, and even those aren't readily available...

Doubling capacity isn't press-release worthy anymore?

Re:I want one

[garcia]

But isn't this yesterday's news? Or did I read it on yahoo over breakfast. I long for the days when slashdot was for news I didn't see on Yahoo first. But this is still cool technology. And means I should keep putting off buying a new iPod.

I long for the days when Yahoo posted something and there was a community of people that responded to the content of the blurb (not the article of course!) and you got responses in the range of trolls all the way through insightful discussion, commentary and links to other pertinent (or not so) information.

Errr wait, nevermind.

It's three times bigger than microSD

[adam1101]

The dimensions of this module are 18x12x1.8mm, which is more than three times the volume of microSD (15x11x0.7mm, which includes a plastic housing). Now some of the other features are nice (IDE controller, high speeds), but the size isn't anything amazing.

Not 400 times smaller

[Anonymous Coward]

400 times smaller in volume than a 1.8-inch hard drive

Why do people say things like this?
Its size is 1/400 of a 1.8-inch hard drive, not 400*(the smallness of a 1.8-inch hard drive).

Re:Not 400 times smaller

[Paul_Hindt]

Why don't they instead just say 0.0045 inches?

Memory low...

[nonos]

.. please insert coin !

Breakfast Cereal

[Easy2RememberNick]

It would make a great breakfast cereal if you had a whole bunch of them in a bowl covered in milk, and yes, of course, it would be called GigaBites.

Re:I want one

[jackpot777]

...I should keep putting off buying a new iPod.

Ah, we've all been there with technology. When I got my 2nd gen. iPod nano, I thought "wow, colour screen" and now I'm thinking "hmmm, no video."

Time to meander like the old man I am: I found a 3.5" floppy at home last week where I had written on the label: 'put onto new computer, maybe 1.4GHz'. Oooh, with 256 megs of RAM and a nice big 40 Gig hard drive... I just checked eBay, there's a HP WorkStation X2000 P4 going in the US for two hundred dollars with 512MB of RAM, and still with SCSI for my old scanner.

Or I can wait twenty years and they'll have a nanobot one for free in my Corkflakes (sans SCSI).

I've heard this before

[CarpetShark]

I lost a few gig of SD memory in a keyboard one time by accident. So, we're actually moving backwards in size.

I've heard that story before, except then, the SD memory was a flute, and the keyboard was... well... at band camp.

Re:English Penny

[GogglesPisano]

Now this is a prime example of why standard units are so important.

As I understand it, here on Slashdot, size is expressed in units of Library of Congresses. Let's do a few quick calculations:

So, uh, lessee... a US penny is .75 inches across... the Library of Congress has approximately 530 miles of shelf space... ...carry the two...

That means that this new chip is 2.2334E-08 Library of Congresses in size.

Happy to Help!

Incorrect unit for size used please correct it.

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

I find that the summary uses "penny size" to describe the size of the chip. Slashdot Standard Units Manual, clearly states that the preferred units for length is football fields, (as in my bookshelf is 0.01 football fields wide).

Similarly preferred units data size is libraries of congress (as in sigfile in /. should be less than 80 femto libraries of congress)

For weight it is locomotives. As in "The sun weighs 3.72 tera locomotives)

And for flow rate it is Amazon river. The new regulations reduced the maximum flow rate for shower heads from 1.6 atto amazons to 1.2 atto amazons.

For volume the preferred units is number of Earths that could be stuffed into it. As in "The asteroid Gzibpat has the volume of 0.1 micro Earths.

So please recalculate the volume of the chip in Earths and resubmit the story.

Truth in advertising

[somepunk]

When I saw them comparing pennies for volume and water for weight, I knew there was some funny business afoot. A drop of water weight a damn lot less than a penny, so (even allowing a lot of room for variation in density) this flash thingie is likely a lot smaller than a penny, or a lot heavier than a drop of water, or they would have chosen some smaller familiar item to compare it with. That, combined with the fact that a "drop of water" is not exactly a well defined quantity, and it screams out for a fact check.

A quick google brought up a freshman chemistry lab report, in microsoft word format, even. Not exactly the paragon of authority, but it is well known that freshman chemistry students have a far greater respect for the truth then marketers.

Their value for the mass of a drop of water is .025 grams, which is twenty-four times less than the .6 grams that the mass of the flash memory. I thought so.

It isn't hard to imagine a .6 gram drop of water, actually, just to be fair to those dorks, but I don't think it would resemble the familiar ones that most of us are accumstomed to.

Re:English Penny

[serialdogma]

Why deal with old pre-1707 English pennies, when a new one pence piece is called a penny? At 2cm diameter, this would be still quite small.

Re:I want one

[stuboogie]

"Or I can wait twenty years and they'll have a nanobot one for free in my Corkflakes (sans SCSI)."

Corkflakes??

Is there going to be a corn shortage in the future due to global warming or will we find out that cork is not only high in fiber, but is great for your cholesterol!!