Slashdot Mirror


BitMicro Takes Wraps Off 832 GB Flash Drive

Lucas123 writes "BitMicro has unveiled an 832GB NAND flash drive that will begin shipping later this year. The E-Disk Altima drive is expected to have sustained read rates of up to 100MB/sec and up to 20,000 I/O operations per second. The device features a SATA 3.0 G/bps interface. No pricing as of yet."

241 comments

  1. Mortgage? by mudetroit · · Score: 5, Informative

    Unless they came up with some radically cheaper method of producting them this will basically probably require a mortgage to go out and buy.

    1. Re:Mortgage? by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 1

      I think sacrificing your first born (or at the very least his college fund) will be more in line.

      --
      I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    2. Re:Mortgage? by xENoLocO · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but can it run on USB power?

      --
      "The need to build the internet comes from something inside us, something programmed... something we can't resist."
    3. Re:Mortgage? by AuntieWillow · · Score: 1

      Want One!
      And although it will take a mortgage, you won't have to vacuum your ssd :)
      (Or mow the lawn!)

    4. Re:Mortgage? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, maybe I'm not up to date, but I always thought first-borns run on food, just like anyone else.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    5. Re:Mortgage? by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      They'll have to go to Morgan Stanley, and even then, in this sub-prime market, what are the odds?

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    6. Re:Mortgage? by knight24k · · Score: 1

      I think sacrificing your first born (or at the very least his college fund) will be more in line.
      Mine just became a teenager...so I can trade him in on one of these?? Done deal!!

      I get a nice big flashdrive and I don't have to fight with him over the MMO account. Wow, this is the best new years ever!
    7. Re:Mortgage? by Pinchiukas · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can only imagine the reactions of people who will have to come up with that in a few months when they heard it from the management.

    8. Re:Mortgage? by theoverlay · · Score: 1

      The flash manufacturers are migrating their nand production to samller processes and it is not unfeasible to see drives of this capacity sub-$1000 within this year when mass production begins. see http://infiniteadmin.com/index.php/slc-versus-mlc-nand-devices/ for more excellent info.

    9. Re:Mortgage? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      So big deal. Wait 18 months, and it will cost half as much. Still can't afford it? Wait another 18 months....

    10. Re:Mortgage? by Linker3000 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Poors Law?

      --
      AT&ROFLMAO
    11. Re:Mortgage? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      But what if you have a Progress database on it?

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    12. Re:Mortgage? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      USB 16GB Flash drives cost $66.25. 852GB would mean 54 of them, for $3577.50, not even enough to buy a new car, let alone a house.

      In fact, 8 7-port USb hubs for $240 would make the while contraption work for $3817.50. Plugged 2-deep into 4 PC USB ports could give 4x40MBps when fully parallelized.

      If this drive costs more than $4000, and more than about 40-60MBps is overkill, then there really isn't any point.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    13. Re:Mortgage? by mcrbids · · Score: 1

      Unless they came up with some radically cheaper method of producting them this will basically probably require a mortgage to go out and buy.

      Not really. See below for a price guesstimate that puts the price at between $1,000 and $6,000. I paid around $1,000 for a 300 GB, 10k SCSI "Enterprise level" drive a year ago. This price has dropped to about $700 today, but you can't get drives bigger than 300 GB.

      If this flash drive offered similar/better performance (or in this case, bigger size) then the price could easily be worth it to the right customer.

      And no, I don't keep SpongeBob torrents on any of my eight, $1,000, 10k SCSI drives. But the money that they make for me makes their price cheap.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    14. Re:Mortgage? by Corwn+of+Amber · · Score: 1

      No, Screwer's Law. What kind of prices are those? They never cost that much to produce. Overpriced to beyond dreams of affordability, just because it's "new". I'm not buying one before they're CHEAP.

      --
      Making laws based on opinions that stem up from false informations leads to witch hunts.
  2. Sorry by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 0, Insightful

    If I can't buy it yet, then it doesn't exist yet.

    1. Re:Sorry by the_g_cat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mmh, I can't remember being able (all financial considerations put aside) to buy a Soyouz, an Arianne V or a Spache Suttle for that matter. Does this mean they don't exist?

    2. Re:Sorry by AvitarX · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yes

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    3. Re:Sorry by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      If I can't buy it yet, then it doesn't exist yet. Umm, yeah, let's mod this comment up for every story about an announced product. "Specs for the Playstation 4..." "Yeah, but it's vapor until I can buy it. (Score 3, Interesting)"

      Wise use of mod-points, there.
      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    4. Re:Sorry by modecx · · Score: 5, Funny

      If I can't buy it yet, then it doesn't exist yet.

      F-22 Raptor: so expensive that it's practically invisible!

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    5. Re:Sorry by Butisol · · Score: 1

      I think every new SSD development is fantastic news, be it a success or a flop. It's a bit early to break out the champagne, but affordable SSDs are rapidly approaching, and these stories are welcome good news heralding the upcoming storage revolution. Some of these SSD technologies are destined to be dead ends, but it's important to know what doesn't work as well as what does, and I'm glad these companies are burning money (not my money, haha) to bring us these marvels. The $1000+ SSD that only big corporations, the military, or enthousiasts can afford is infinitely better than the SSD that doesn't exist at all. It's coming!

    6. Re:Sorry by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 4, Funny

      You can't buy a house with your credit and income. Do no houses exist?

    7. Re:Sorry by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      Some people can...

      Sometimes I wish I was one of those people.

    8. Re:Sorry by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      If I can't buy it yet, then it doesn't exist yet. And vice-versa ! (should insightful quotes work both ways around ?)

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
  3. cost estimate by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The cheapest I ever heard of a 2 GB flash drive was about $15, so this is over 400 of those put together or $6000. Even if they had some volume discount, I think anything under $1000 for an 800+GB flash drive is unthinkable... right?

    --
    stuff |
    1. Re:cost estimate by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 3, Funny

      the same could be said of a 800 GB hard drive years ago. i'll explain in mathematical terms: as time, thats our X axis, increases, the Y value decreases. If you guessed Y to be the cost, give yourself a chimichanga. If you guessed Y to be anything else including, but not limited to, goat milk, give yourself a wedgie.

    2. Re:cost estimate by TeknoDragon · · Score: 3, Informative

      more likely they will be using anything from 4gb - 64gb chips (Samsung announced 25/10/07)

      If they are shooting for video editing only that price would be right, but the enthusiast & business market will IMO want something under $2000. TFA suggests business application.

    3. Re:cost estimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      32 GB NAND Flash SSDs are going $250. This would be about $6500, which is inline with your numbers. I will personally be shocked if it comes in below $5000. SSDs are high price and currently a niche market at best. Honestly, they need to fill the gap with more varied size drives. 32 GB are really the most reasonably priced.

    4. Re:cost estimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Be sure to look at $/MB prices from around the time when hard disks were still measured in MB. That was just 15 years ago. Now we're on the verge of 1TB hard disks becoming mainstream. It's funny how people who have grown up right in the epicenter of the most staggering miniaturization and integration races of all time still don't grasp what "2 times the performance or capacity in x months" means.

    5. Re:cost estimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, years from now they may be giving them away free in cereal boxes, but '192939495969798999' is talking about today, not years from now.

    6. Re:cost estimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      zOMG that means cars should be like $5.99 now since they were hella expensive back in the day, right?

      lrn2economics

    7. Re:cost estimate by rogerdewhite · · Score: 2, Informative

      2GB spot prices for MLC are ~$5.50...so we're talking $2,300 for the raw MLC NAND alone. Considering this thing is probably built with SLC NAND and you're looking at $5,000+ for the NAND...add in controllers, boards, packaging & profit and suddenly $6,000 looks like a screaming deal.

    8. Re:cost estimate by seanadams.com · · Score: 2, Funny

      I am confused. Surely the global population of pirates factors into the equation somehow?

    9. Re:cost estimate by tdelaney · · Score: 1

      I read that this one actually uses MLC. Don't know how that fits with the 100MB/s, but then I'm in software, not hardware.

    10. Re:cost estimate by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 4, Funny

      the curve of time to car value is far different from the curve of technology value over time. For example, a car is considered an antique after a certain period of time, in which its value goes up (if properly maintained and restored)!

      try selling a nintendo or an old watch calculator made in the 80s in 10 years, I doubt you'll get more than a 5-10 bucks. The point is, the car analogy has yet again made someone look like an idiot :P

    11. Re:cost estimate by Andrew+Kismet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Which Nintendo? Because a Nintendo Virtual Boy will definitely go UP in value over the next 10 years.
      The NES/Famicom probably won't go up much, but as supply drops due to (1) no longer being manufactured (2) damage and disrepair over time, the price of a pristine NES will definitely go up.

    12. Re:cost estimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the same could be said of a 800 GB hard drive years ago. i'll explain in mathematical terms: as time, thats our X axis, increases, the Y value decreases. If you guessed Y to be the cost, give yourself a chimichanga. If you guessed Y to be anything else including, but not limited to, goat milk, give yourself a wedgie.
      If you don't think too good, don't think too much.
    13. Re:cost estimate by Znork · · Score: 1

      currently a niche market at best.

      Yep, I'm just having trouble imagining exactly what that niche market is; for that price you can obtain vastly superior performance simply by dumping the money into RAM and disk spindles instead.

      You'd have to have some very artificial constraints and a very odd load to actually find a situation where the money would be well spent (as in large mis-programmed database running on a 32bit-only machine that cant have more than 1 sata controller).

    14. Re:cost estimate by eyrieowl · · Score: 1

      maybe. but check out the "Vintage Computing Products" section on ebay. it's not pennies and nickels....

      the time frame may be different, but those old computers/game systems/calculators will be "antique" and "collectible" too.

      which doesn't make it a good analogy.

    15. Re:cost estimate by beh · · Score: 1

      There are two points here -

        a) the X axis is time - yes, storage becomes cheaper; but how long will it be before it becomes *truly* affordable. Given the drive size, I would expect them to go more after the business market, rather than end-users - as such, the price decrease will not be too quick.

        b) Some items may well fade out and be replaced with something 'better' instead of falling below certain thresholds (luxury items usually fall into this category) - though, I don't quite see this as a luxury item that people would buy because of status...

      The really important bit about the announcement is that the drive has enough space to hold roughly 1.8 million ZX Spectrum 48K games... ...eh - wait - there weren't that many... :-/

    16. Re:cost estimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      spluh! The point was that the cost and price of manufactured goods does not decrease uniformly or even at all in the "real world". That it may appear to do so in the "high tech" electronics sector is only a reflection of the relative immaturity of the technologies and buyer psychologies involved.

      If you would like a more topical example, consider the price of an electric toaster. It has certainly come down in relative price (relative to the average purchasing power), but nowhere near the several orders of magnitude that, for example, computer RAM has.

      The point is: past cost/price trends are extremely poor indicators of future ones, in the high-tech marketplace.

      Allow me to spell it out even clearer: at what point do we reach a price point reflecting {cost of raw materials + energy used + labour} for flash RAM? It may be well before any utopic dreams of $1 terabit flash chips are realized...

    17. Re:cost estimate by ACMENEWSLLC · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't know if BitMicro is among these, but there are manufactures that have figured out how to mass produce very large USB drives at a fraction of todays costs. There have been articles in Google news, and patents are pending on various methods.

      I think we discussed this on /. not long ago?

    18. Re:cost estimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'll explain in mathematical terms: as time, thats our X axis, increases, the Y value decreases. If you guessed Y to be the cost, give yourself a chimichanga. Wow. So does that mean when El Taco Loco raised the price of a chimichanga from $5.25 to $5.65 we were actually going backwards in time??!? That's far out.

      I think I'll just have a basket of chips.
    19. Re:cost estimate by berashith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The term "car" is being applied generically here, which is unfair. If the term computer were being used equally generically then we would have a comparison to make. The cost of cars has stayed high, but the value of the pieces are always getting better and better. If cars were limited to the same models, features, power and efficiency that they had in the late 50s, but continued to be produced in massive amounts, then the cost would be absurdly low.

    20. Re:cost estimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A 2GB SD flash card is currently $12.99 at Frys in Austin. #4901601. Price good through tomorrow.
      FYI.

    21. Re:cost estimate by John+Betonschaar · · Score: 1

      Try carrying a 8-drive raid array with you when you're travelling.

    22. Re:cost estimate by phoenix321 · · Score: 4, Informative

      "There is a lot more computing in this world than what can be found in data centers and offices, young Padawan."

      Really, there is. Computers that fly, sail, drive or are employed in low power, low heat, low noise, high vibration, high dust, high heat, low heat environments. Be creative: That starts with laptops in the space shuttle and surely doesn't end with onboard systems of surveillance planes. All Gigabyte-intensive operations where you do not have an unlimited power socket in the wall and/or have other considerations about weight and shock tolerances.

      And all of these applications have powers with large checkbooks behind them, who will write off 5000USD as merely half a percent price increase for much better reliability and power consumption.

    23. Re:cost estimate by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      True, but I'm sure you could build an exact Model T car VERY cheaply today. But you won't have leather seats, A/C, power doors, windows, or locks, airbags, seatbelts, any electronics, etc.

    24. Re:cost estimate by IdleTime · · Score: 1

      For a price of $1000 I'll buy one! heck yeah, it can reduce the time it takes for me to run some really I/O intensive testcases drastically and the price is worth it. Not to mention that having the disk encrypted is now not a drawback performance wise, so yeah, I'll buy one or more!

      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    25. Re:cost estimate by gwern · · Score: 1

      Hm, yes, it will go up, but not indefinitely, and I suspect not too much either. Why? There is still a large supply out there, and the number of people who played the NES in its hey-day is obviously going to slowly go down. For those who *do* want to play the NES and its games, there is competition from emulators and ROMs: why clutter up your living room with an antique box when you could simply play it on your GameCube/Wii/computer (maybe even for free)? The experience might even be better than that of the original NES; you could use a controller which doesn't murder your hand with its tiny size and brutal edges, a system vastly more capable than the NES which makes possible all sorts of software enhancements, unreleased and new NES games etc.

    26. Re:cost estimate by Intron · · Score: 1

      To get the size they run many chips in parallel from a custom controller, so that gives them good performance. MLC is the cheapest and highest density, but also has shorter life than SLC. Although life won't be a problem with a hgue capacity and decent load leveling.

      --
      Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
    27. Re:cost estimate by Gonarat · · Score: 1

      Put a drive like this into a laptop like the Toughbook, and you would have a machine that could take quite a bit of abuse. No worries about a hard drive crash if the unit is dropped while the machine is running. A drive like this also takes less power, so battery life would be increased.

      The only question I have is what is the lifetime (namely number of read/write cycles) of NAND memory. The article also asked this question, so it sounds like this may be a question that still needs to be answered, at least for a real-world product.

      --
      Beware of Sleestak
    28. Re:cost estimate by adisakp · · Score: 1

      2 GB for $15 isn't the best deal at 7.50/GB. I just got a 8GB usb key at under $4/GB. You can pick up an A-DATA 8GB usb key for just over $30 -- just search on A-DATA to get the details.

      I actually picked one of these drives up at MicroCenter for $29.99 after rebate.
      Pros: big storage for a usb key, waterproof case.
      Cons: slow data rates compared to many other usb key devices

    29. Re:cost estimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your example's even worse, dumbass. Why don't *you* go learn some economics? It sounds like you could use it.

    30. Re:cost estimate by the_fat_kid · · Score: 1

      that's just anti-ninja propaganda

      --
      -- Sig under construction...
    31. Re:cost estimate by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 1

      I will personally be shocked if it comes in below $5000.

      This year.

      In 10 years, one of these will come for free with McDonalds Happy Meal.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    32. Re:cost estimate by falconwolf · · Score: 1

      Surely the global population of pirates factors into the equation somehow?

      Yeah, the RI/MPAA will want their cut. One of these drives can hold thousands of songs and of course the RIAA will want at least a dollar per song. Or they could hold hundreds of movies, and the MPAA will want at least a $10 per movie, $15 for HD movies.

      Falcon
    33. Re:cost estimate by aminorex · · Score: 1

      In fact, if you were to mass-produce something with the functionality and safety and efficiency of a Model T today, you probably could pull it down around $200. But nobody wants it. The law prohibits it.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    34. Re:cost estimate by turing_m · · Score: 1

      "i'll explain in mathematical terms: as time, thats our X axis, increases, the Y value decreases. If you guessed Y to be the cost, give yourself a chimichanga."

      That would be real cost, not dollar cost. Inflation could well make the nominal price increase faster than Moore's Law can knock it down. If the Y axis was "Cost, denominated in equivalent litres of goat milk", it might actually be closer to the real price, and hence, more correct.

      Now go out in two years and buy yourself a $500 microwave burrito.

      --
      If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
    35. Re:cost estimate by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      True, but I'm sure you could build an exact Model T car VERY cheaply today. But you won't have leather seats, A/C, power doors, windows, or locks, airbags, seatbelts, any electronics, etc.

      Yeah. But it wouldn't have to be black.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    36. Re:cost estimate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, the car anology just doesn't fit. the car is old tech but they keep strapping new tech onto it. power steering, power brakes, automatic transmission, fuel injection, power windows, power locks, power sunroofs, heater, ac, electronically adjustable seats with lumbar support, airbags, gps, onstar....
      plus, they keep having to improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.

      there's lots of R&D there and cars don't sell in high volume...at least not in the same volume as USB jump drives. if they still made cars exactly like they did in the late 60s or 70s, they would be Pretty Damn Cheap(R). However, you'd probably have to spend $100 in gas to go 10 miles.

    37. Re:cost estimate by rayzat · · Score: 1

      For enterprise class storage this seems pretty reasonable. the two high end drives which only produce ~150 IOPS are 146GB FC and 300GB FC these drives typically run in 1k-2k range, although they can be purchased cheaper then that someplaces. So 852GB is ~6 146GB drives, or about 6k on the low end, which put the price on par for a superior performing product. Now add in the power savings from having fewer drives, using a more power efficient technology, using less cooling for the disk. Look at the money saved on drawers, extra FC cables,SFPs, and actually fewer enterprise level disk systems because in all Enterprise level systems the bottle neck is the number of spindles. Big pictures the flash drives will probably be cheaper up front, provide significant power savings( Go Green ), and reduce very expensive data center footprint. I'm actually surprised there isn't a big flash based data enterprise class storage solution out there yet.

    38. Re:cost estimate by Keruo · · Score: 1

      They already have that covered.

      --
      There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
    39. Re:cost estimate by kayditty · · Score: 0

      why clutter up your living room with an antique box when you could simply play it on your GameCube/Wii/computer (maybe even for free)?


      why buy an original artwork when you can download a bitmap of it on google images?

      (semi-serious question! no, I wouldn't buy an antique game console or piece of art. what the hell is wrong with those people?)
    40. Re:cost estimate by skeeto · · Score: 1

      (Samsung announced 25/10/07)

      WTF month is the 25th? LOL!!1! Don't you know there are only 12!

      (I am kidding. I also think the non-US way is better myself, though I am not used to it yet.)

    41. Re:cost estimate by Andrew+Kismet · · Score: 1

      I quite deliberately said pristine, as those ARE in short supply.
      And you're right, emulation (especially official emulation under Live Arcade and Virtual Console) is definitely going to hit the retrogaming market prices. Oh well, more antique boxes for me to clutter my living room with. :D

  4. new iPod in the fall? by ksheff · · Score: 1

    What form factor do the current hard drive based iPods use? 1.8"? I can see Apple wanting a smaller version of this for their next gen devices.

    --
    the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
  5. Sweet by Quasar1999 · · Score: 1

    Now Apple has the technology to support flash based player of HD content in a year or two, once the price of this drops. 832 Gigs should be enough for at least 50 HD movies.

    --

    ---
    Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
    1. Re:Sweet by bagboy · · Score: 1

      Why would you want to watch a HD Movie on that tiny-ass screen? Good waste of bits if you ask me.....

    2. Re:Sweet by ILuvRamen · · Score: 0

      Don't you mean like 20 HD movies? And plus, since when has Apple ever made a decision that would benefit the customer. Their servers can't handle downloading HD movies so they say screw it. Plus who would watch it on a tiny screen? It's HD! I don't think the screen can even display 1280 pixels across (which I think is 720p).
      The one and only reason I'd buy that drive is to speed up my boot time cuz it's been slow forever and it's all hard drive IO that takes it forever. The processor doesn't even max and I've got 2GB of fast ram. Other than that, maybe web servers could use this to really quickly serve up tons of tiny files. That actually would be a pretty significant upgrade to web servers.

      --
      Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
    3. Re:Sweet by Firehed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why would you waste that much space as part of a disk with effectively zero seek time on HD movies? They don't need that kind of performance - even a 4200RPM standard hard drive would have more than enough throughput (and with tech like accelerometer-based head parking, durability shouldn't be too much of an issue). Use it as an OS disk. Better yet, use it for databases - the seek times would be fantastic for the application, and unless you're constantly updating rows (rather than just inserting new ones), the write cycle limit on flash-based storage is unlikely to become an issue.

      It's not as if you need a portable video library anyways. Stick a few on your device and go. Your battery life is by far going to be the limiting factor. Apple would be much better off trying to create a mobile video streaming device than to waste so much flash memory on a portable device.

      Sure, in five years then I'll probably have a terabyte of flash memory in my car key that only costs eight bucks. And at that point, this kind of thing would make sense. Right now, that's a TON of flash storage that would carry a huge price that would make it beyond impractical for portables. If you want a mobile HD player, create something with a 720p screen and one of those brand new 500GB laptop drives and stick half a gig of RAM in as a massive buffer.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    4. Re:Sweet by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 1

      The Creative Zen players have infrared remotes!

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    5. Re:Sweet by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I have a Nano and I watch movies and TV shows on it all the time. Mind you, they are encoded at 320x240 so as not to eat up too much space, but If I had 800 GB of space I probably wouldn't take the time to convert the file especially for my iPod.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    6. Re:Sweet by jay42jay · · Score: 1

      iPods have a really low maximum resolution. In fact the highest resolution it can display is really for its video out and if you watch it on your screen you're still only getting at 320x240. Do you really think they make 3" 720p screens? Even if they did you've have to use a magnifying glass to reap the benefit. Besides, you can't just stick any video on there and expect it to work.

    7. Re:Sweet by Bandman · · Score: 1

      Right. But the port on the bottom can output to whatever you'd like, and play it on your 90" DLP TV

    8. Re:Sweet by Eternauta3k · · Score: 1

      If I had 800 GB of space I probably wouldn't take the time to convert the file especially for my iPod.
      And your nano, when asked to decode it, will promptly suicide.
      --
      Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
    9. Re:Sweet by DigitAl56K · · Score: 2, Funny

      What has this got to do with Apple?

    10. Re:Sweet by nebosuke · · Score: 1

      Updates wouldn't affect the lifetime of any current (and presumably future) SSDs any more than inserts due to wear levelling.

    11. Re:Sweet by Lifyre · · Score: 1

      What about those of us who use it as a mobile music library for our vehicles? Granted I don't even use my 30GB much less 800+ but just because the battery doesn't last that long doesn't mean having a large hard drive isn't useful. Especially if we can start pushing video from our PMP's to those vehicle entertainment systems everyone seems to be selling these says.

      --
      I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
    12. Re:Sweet by Kyokushi · · Score: 1

      Probably because if you're using it for read only purposes, it could outlive mechanical-based HDDs? IIRC SSDs have limited write cycles, not reads.

    13. Re:Sweet by Firehed · · Score: 1

      That was my point. But DBs are not like a page file where you're constantly banging on the same file with updates. Unless your drive is very near full capacity, this will generally be a non-issue from wear leveling regardless of use whether you're hitting the same file over and over or whether you're expanding an existing file. Early SSD use often lead to dead drives (or, more often, CompactFlash cards) from page file writes, but that's before controllers implemented wear leveling, not to mention the increase in flash durability as a whole.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
  6. Sounds awesome by angryfirelord · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Too bad that it'll probably cost more than my car. :p

    1. Re:Sounds awesome by GregPK · · Score: 1

      Only if you drive a domestic. ;)

    2. Re:Sounds awesome by sethstorm · · Score: 1

      Only if it's a Japanese import with more than an underpowered engine under the hood.

      --
      Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    3. Re:Sounds awesome by DavidHumus · · Score: 1

      Well, it certainly won't cost more than my car, a Bugatti Veyron. Of course, I don't actually own a car, but this is the one I don't own.

  7. Re:SLASHDOT SUX0RZ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    quit posting pictures of your face!

  8. hmm. by apodyopsis · · Score: 3, Funny

    no idea of pricing yet, but several major limbs and a contract signed in your own bodily fluid was hinted at.

    832GB SSD?! holy cow thats going to be dear.

    Now tell me why anybody should want this outside of the media/video industry...

    1. Re:hmm. by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      Now tell me why anybody should want this outside of the media/video industry...

      a porn hoarder who demands high performance?

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    2. Re:hmm. by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Funny

      Now tell me why anybody should want this outside of the media/video industry...

      We've found Bill Gates' Slashdot user account.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    3. Re:hmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      If your not gonna have the biggest E.penis it may as well be the fastest.

    4. Re:hmm. by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      Hassle free household media server?

      The various media in my house, shared among four PC's comes to well over 600Gb. It would be more, but I don't have the room to rip all my DvDs yet, and it grows, thanks to my various subscriptions, by several Gb a month. Having all that on one fast access solid state device would be serious bonus.

    5. Re:hmm. by easyTree · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Now tell me why anybody should want this outside of the media/video industry...
      To lower power consumption/size/weight of laptops?
    6. Re:hmm. by Wordsmith · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For all the same reasons someone would want a big hard drive (I've got a TB in a mainstream machine that cost me just over $1,000, and I'm sure I'll someday use it up with various media I've purchased, downloaded or recorded off TV). And they might prefer this due to the longer life, better access speed and lack of noisy moving parts.

      -Lou

    7. Re:hmm. by TeknoDragon · · Score: 1

      :)

      I'd take one for my gaming laptop. I could live with something as small as 200 gigs, but if they're going to give me 4x that much I'll take it!

    8. Re:hmm. by Amouth · · Score: 1

      i would love to have a raid 5 setup with this on the db server here at work.. with that kind of sustained data rate .. hummmm

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    9. Re:hmm. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

      Exactly. But I'm thinking more of a raid 10 fibre channel san. Maybe in a couple years when the price/performance hits the right mark.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    10. Re:hmm. by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      You don't actually need really fast disks on the backend to serve up streaming video etc. to front-ends. Remember it's compressed until it gets decoded by the front-end, that helps. For instance I have an HDHomerun that can stream two HD streams from OTA or QAM tuners - it has a 100meg NIC on it and uses less than 10megs with both streams going. They have an 8 tuner unit - it has a Gig NIC on it and really, are you can't stream faster than the NIC anyway right? 5400RPM IDE drives can handle your HD video streaming needs so long as everyone in the house doesn't hit the same disk for different streams all at once.

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    11. Re:hmm. by Nos. · · Score: 1

      Why? You could pick up two 500GB drives for less than $300 (CDN) and have 1TB of space for a very reasonable cost. SATA drives in a RAID setup can break 200MB/sec sustained read. Unless you trying to watch 10 movies at the same time, you're not going to need any more than what SATA can provide now, and at substantially lower cost. Heck, buy 3 or more drives go RAID 5 and get some redundancy out of it as well.

    12. Re:hmm. by wattrlz · · Score: 1

      Because he can?

    13. Re:hmm. by MBCook · · Score: 2, Funny

      I would have thought he would have had a much lower UID.

      Or did you lose your password a few times Bill?

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    14. Re:hmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know why you'd _need_ 832 GB, but this is essentially a hard drive replacement, with the added benefit of access speed not scaling inversely with size.
      You probably only need something 10-30% that size right now, but who's complaining? There's no advantage to making it smaller.

    15. Re:hmm. by sc7007 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Now tell me why anybody should want this outside of the media/video industry... I work in the seismic data processing industry (oil and gas exploration). We regularly (almost every project) deliver datasets to clients that are on the orders of 1-5 TB. Many of our milestone QC datasets for clients are 500-750 GB. Putting these on a flash drive or portable hard drive is much faster than a bunch of 3592E tapes, plus easier and quicker for the client to access. Flash drives certainly have the advantage over USB hard disks of being faster to write to (usually). If these were cheap enough, and they will be at some point, I could see these being commonly used. On the other hand, maybe just a solid state portable disk drive, which these are just a variant of, will be cheaper (time and money).
    16. Re:hmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Databases. Scientific applications.

    17. Re:hmm. by Fweeky · · Score: 1

      25*76G 2.5" 15kRPM drives + shelf: ~£6500, ~900G RAID-10, ~4000 IOPS, 2U + server, 200W.

      2*832G 2.5" SSD: £????, 800G RAID-1, ~40,000 IOPS, fits in 1U server, 10W.

      They could be £5k each and still be rather attractive, though the crappy write performance on SSD's reduces their appeal rather a lot.

    18. Re:hmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      "If your not gonna have the biggest E.penis it may as well be the fastest"

      Perhaps you are unaware that "fastest" in this context is generally not considered a good thing?

    19. Re:hmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's no advantage to making it smaller.
      Uh, cost?
    20. Re:hmm. by Artraze · · Score: 1

      > To lower power consumption/size/weight of laptops?

      Perhaps, but a quick search on newegg says that the largest laptop hard drive is 320GB. Also, most laptops these days ship with a 80GB drive. So this would offer more than twice the current max storage and more than 10 times the common amount! I would have to say that at that point it's really just because they can. If it was just for improving laptops it'd be around 256GB so you could still have a huge solid state disk, but at a quarter of the price (though still completely unaffordable I imagine).

    21. Re:hmm. by jackpot777 · · Score: 1

      I was thinking: maybe for the entertainment systems in long-distance flights. No moving parts.

      --
      Shiny. Let's be bad guys...
    22. Re:hmm. by the_one(2) · · Score: 1

      It's a really nice UID though! XD Really close to 2^20. I'm envious =)

    23. Re:hmm. by glittalogik · · Score: 1

      I can think of at least one scenario where it is...

    24. Re:hmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He never said 640k ought to be enough for anyone, it's an urban myth. Whenever I ask someone for a citation for this comment, I usually get: "duh, Bill Gates said it" - which tells you something about the kind of people that spread this bs.

    25. Re:hmm. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He never said 640k ought to be enough for anyone, it's an urban myth. Whenever I ask someone for a citation for this comment, I usually get: "duh, Bill Gates said it" - which tells you something about the kind of people that spread this bs.

      Oh he said it all right. Here's a quote: "640k should be enough for anybody!" -- Bill Gates

    26. Re:hmm. by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Suppose you have a system to needs to go from standby to fully functional as quickly as possible. I've heard that oil exploration companies like SSD-based systems for just that reason. Don't know why they can't just leave the system on all the time.

      High-end servers designed to operate on a battlefield, or anywhere else where the system is likely to get knocked around. You can ruggedize a hard drive, but a component without moving parts will always be tougher than one with.

      Media is one industry where I don't see a big market for SSDs. Sure, they're faster than HDs — but HDs are fast enough.

    27. Re:hmm. by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Flash drives certainly have the advantage over USB hard disks of being faster to write to (usually).
      What about eSATA HDDs? Not a lot slower than flash drives, and a whole lot cheaper.
    28. Re:hmm. by RobertM1968 · · Score: 1

      In addition to power consumption, a heavily accessed server (email, multi-homed web, etc) would benefit from the decrease in access time, which of course is a wonderful boon for reading fragmented files.

      I've found, that even with very large disk cache (1/2 a gig), when hosting numerous high traffic sites, even with NO fragmentation (HPFS or a defragged drive), many disk reads (from different files) are required. With no fragmentation, the seek/access time goes from the HDD standard to much nearer to zero (respectively). With fragmentation, the difference is remarkably greater.

      It's amazing what head movement to handle a few hundred reads from different files/threads can do to data throughput. And with 50GB of data and a few gigabytes of images, a 1/2 gig disk cache is only so helpful in minimizing disk reads (and thusly only so efficient in minimizing throughput loss from trying to handle a few hundred simultaneous non-cached requests). Even with striping, heads need to move...

      And of course, since most admins like maintaining logs, every read requires a write someplace else on a disk (though of course the smart thing to do is have the logs on a different disk on a different SCSI/SATA/IDE chain (SCSI for me, thanks) - but sometimes that isnt an option (my backup server - not worth it for the few times it is used).

      What I'd love to see are these released with a U640 SCSI interface... I'd love to chain 14 on a cable...

    29. Re:hmm. by moezaly · · Score: 1

      Ive heard his password was hacked for being too anal and not using a firewall on his Windows box....

  9. Yawn by Rie+Beam · · Score: 2, Informative

    They've already announced a 1.6TB flash drive for launch around mid-2008.

    1. Re:Yawn by MTgeekMAN · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yes, but that 1.6 TB drive is Fiber Chanel. The one in the article is a 2.5" SATA drive. Much more useful for the average person.

    2. Re:Yawn by lazyforker · · Score: 3, Informative

      The drive you linked to is 3.5" and 1.6TB; whereas the drive in TFA is 2.5" and 832GB. I assume they're aiming for a different market with this product. In fact the 2.5" might be ideal as a storage device for an HD video camera. Small, light, low power consumption, less susceptible to shocks etc. Or if you have a high performance laptop with which you perform video editing and want to avoid carrying bags of external FW drives, cables, PSUs, spare batteries etc etc this would be pretty cool to have *in* the laptop.

  10. 832? by teslar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, that's an odd number, what's the motivation behind it? I can see that 832 = 512 + 256 + 64 = 2^9 + 2^8 + 2^6, but I still fail to see the logic there.

    1. Re:832? by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, that's an odd number

      No. It is even.

      --
      See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    2. Re:832? by TeknoDragon · · Score: 1

      generational storage pools to assist with write-leveling perhaps?

    3. Re:832? by Rickz0rz · · Score: 5, Informative

      832 = 64 * 13 Perhaps they are using 13 64mB modules.

    4. Re:832? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what is a millibyte?

    5. Re:832? by mr_mischief · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The thing is, 13's not exactly a power of two. To access 13 modules, you'd need the same 4 control lines as 16 modules. Perhaps it's actually 16 * 64 and three are specifically for redundancy and wear leveling?

    6. Re:832? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what is a millibyte?


      An eighth of a bit? I guess that would be just the little serif hanging off the top of the 1.

      Or maybe it's a 45 degree arc of a 0.
    7. Re:832? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      probably 64 * 16, 13 of which "usable", since this is a professional unit it's expected to have a few chips for redundancy.

    8. Re:832? by EMH_Mark3 · · Score: 1

      Who cares about control lines? The flash chips are what's expensive, not the addressing lines.

      --
      Burn the land and boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me
    9. Re:832? by araemo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Perhaps they couldn't physically fit more than 13 modules into the same space as a 3.5" HDD?

      Either way, it nicely explains the 1.6TB version (128MB modules instead of 64MB modules..)

    10. Re:832? by easyTree · · Score: 3, Funny

      what is a millibyte?
      It's what you'll be getting from my pet mPede shortly =)
    11. Re:832? by SeaFox · · Score: 2, Funny

      Perhaps it's actually 16 * 64 and three are specifically for redundancy and wear leveling?

      Perhaps they are giving the formatted capacity.

      I know. I don't believe it either.
    12. Re:832? by sectionboy · · Score: 1

      No. It's actually 8*64 - they figured out a new way to define 1GB=660 764 199 byte (2^30/13*8), and patented it!

    13. Re:832? by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      The design makes no sense if it's really 13. Why have 16 possibilities, three of which are invalid?

      They could just as easily make a 512 GB unit with three chip select lines and only 8 flash modules if they wanted to cut costs. It'd still sell.

      The flash chip cost is built into the base cost of the drive, too. It's the design and development time they need to recover on top of parts cost to make a profit. Why complicate things when it's natural to develop binary products based on powers of two?

      If it really is 832 GB total but you have to count space for wear-leveling out of that, what does it really count as for storage? Why wouldn't they publish that number, since very few people will care about the portion not useful to them and might sue for improper advertising?

    14. Re:832? by cafucu · · Score: 1

      832 = 64 * 13 Perhaps they are using 13 64mB modules. Wow! An 832mB flash drive...stop the press!
      --
      :%s:work:/.:g
    15. Re:832? by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      That'd be the only reason I could think of to make use of precisely 13 modules. I'm still betting on the 832 GB being the capacity after space dedicated to wear-leveling is considered. No, wait, not betting. I'm too broke to bet right now. Umm, "suspecting" is a better word.

    16. Re:832? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps that was the most they could physically fit in this sized drive?

    17. Re:832? by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wouldn't it make more sense if you thought of 26*32 instead of far-fetched assumptions?

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    18. Re:832? by Whiteox · · Score: 1

      You guys might just have to re-calculate.
      Don't the HD manufacturers' determine that 1000MB=1GB?
      So 832GB doesn't translate into a power of 2.

      Someone else do the calc. My brain is fried.

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    19. Re:832? by bdjacobson · · Score: 1

      Or, there's simply some unused address space?

      Everything doesn't have to be powers of two.

    20. Re:832? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Even 832 is a bit odd.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    21. Re:832? by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      So they're using 5 control lines and have 6 unused chip addresses? I think the 13 * 64 is far more likely.

      However, the company knows the economics of their own solution better than any of us, so they might have had the motivation to do something really odd.

  11. I want one by jollyreaper · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think I'm going to need a bigger keychain.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  12. nothing to see here... by bcrowell · · Score: 0

    ...move along. No price, no specific release date, not yet in beta, no evidence that they actually have working hardware.

    The sweet spot right now seems to be around 16 or 32 Mb. You can get an 16 Mb flash drive for about $150, but 32 Mb is more than twice the price. The article speculates that there will be demand soon for huge flash drives on high-performance servers. Wouldn't it make more sense to accomplish the same thing with a hybrid drive that has both a platter and flash inside? It seems more likely that flash-only will continue to be adopted on laptops like OLPC, or maybe for low-end servers as a way of saving electricity.

    1. Re:nothing to see here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? How does any of that make sense? First of all I assume you mean either Gb or GB, because Mb (or MB) would be ridiculous. Secondly, how do hybrids help anything? All they do is give you all the problems of both technologies with the benefits of neither. There are numerous companies with planned releases of flash drives in the >100GB range for 2008. Your information is outdated and your logic is flawed.

    2. Re:nothing to see here... by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1
      Flash drives are going to be very handy for orgs like Google and Netflix, businesses that write once to the drive and don't change the data often (read up on the GFS/Google File System for further details). The drives will just sit there spitting out data quickly and use little power, while not needing to be replaced often due to the read-heavy nature of their use.

      On the other hand, you wouldn't want to use the flash drives in a DB server that is write-heavy, and go through drives like Kleenex.

    3. Re:nothing to see here... by Not_Wiggins · · Score: 4, Funny

      The sweet spot right now seems to be around 16 or 32 Mb. You can get an 16 Mb flash drive for about $150, but 32 Mb is more than twice the price.

      Can't... resist...

      1999 called... they want their flash pricing back. ;)

      Or, if you'd like, I'd be willing to sell you some 32Mb flash cards for, shall we say, $100 a piece? ;)

      (Sorry.)

      --
      Diplomacy is the art of saying, "Nice doggie!" until you can find a rock.
    4. Re:nothing to see here... by Slashcrap · · Score: 3, Funny

      no evidence that they actually have working hardware.

      This is a good point and you are right to be cautious. Obviously there will be massive technological challenges to overcome in order to move past the current state of the art, which is loads of flash connected to an SATA interface, to this new paradigm of having shitloads of flash connected to an SATA interface.

      I'm not an expert, but I'm thinking perhaps they can start by adding more flash?

    5. Re:nothing to see here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sweet spot right now seems to be around 16 or 32 Mb. You can get an 16 Mb flash drive for about $150, but 32 Mb is more than twice the price. What year are you living in?
    6. Re:nothing to see here... by CodyRazor · · Score: 0

      1991 called, they want their joke back.

      --
      So Skulldilocks threw acid on the schoolchildrens' faces, cause somebody from the bible told her to do it!
  13. Will it run... by dotancohen · · Score: 1

    Nice, but will it run Pen Drive Linux?

    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    1. Re:Will it run... by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Mi>Nice, but will it run Pen Drive Linux?

      No, it requires WinVista, and you can't have the patches installed either.

      After all, nobody will ever need more than 832 Gig.

      And we all know that plugging in a flash drive in an unprotected socket, is totally safe ...

      -----

      That said, this would make for a cool back up drive for most laptops ...

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    2. Re:Will it run... by rapidweather · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Seems like we've slashdotted the Pen Drive Linux site.

      Ok, I'm running my linux (see screenshots, below) from a 2 GB SanDisk Micro Cruzer drive at this time,
      on a Gateway 2000 Pentium II. Use these files to kick off the Flash Drive, using loadlin. You have to have a small msdos drive in the computer, or a partition on a larger drive with msdos, put the files there. Documentation is included in the tarball, also, a copy of the Rapidweather Remaster CD is needed also.

    3. Re:Will it run... by sexconker · · Score: 1

      And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why Linux will never take over the desktop.

    4. Re:Will it run... by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      This from the guy who's nick is a synonym for fucking nuts. Linux will take over desktops as long as it fills the needs of people, and I guarantee you that you wouldn't get Windows or OSX filling the need of the GPP.

    5. Re:Will it run... by sexconker · · Score: 1

      My "nick" is from a video game, thank you very much.

      Wanna bet? How long does Linux need? 2 more years? 5 more? 10?

      No matter how good Linux is, there will always be a few things that prevent it from going mainstream. (Unless there is a major, major change.)

      It's different- The masses simply don't want to learn anything new.

      It's complicated- The people who do want to try something new often can't because they don't know what root means, and they don't know what a kernel is. Don't forget that there are dozens of different flavors of Linux.

      Lack of support- A forum with a bunch of nerds is not support. Drivers for the most common hardware is not support. Telling people to go out and buy the wireless card using a certain chipset is not support.

      Linux will never have its year of the desktop until Linux devs actually figure out what a desktop is to 90% of people.
      Sitting on an ivory tower OS, squawking "FREE! FREE! SECURE!!" doesn't help.
      Bitching on the internet about some comment the almighty Linus made doesn't help.

      Linux is great, but it has been run like a fan club.
      Windows and Mac OS have been run as businesses, but that doesn't mean they're evil, steaming piles.

      This is common knowledge, and I'm sorry you don't want to accept it.

    6. Re:Will it run... by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why Linux will never take over the desktop. No, this is how to install Linux on a pen drive. Installing Linux (specifically Ubuntu) on a desktop is easier than installing Windows XP. I know, I've done them both tens of times. I can't talk about how easy Vista is to install, because I've never done that, but I'd like to see the instructions for installing any version of MS Windows on a pen drive. I doubt that it'd be simpler than what you see here.
      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    7. Re:Will it run... by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Yes, Ubuntu is easy (when it all works as it's supposed to, which is usually does). Other flavors of Linux, not so much.

      I was specifically referring to the general acceptance in the Linux crowd of the need to jump through hoop after hoop.
      Regular users will not subject themselves to such things.

      Regular users also aren't interested in running their OS off of a flash drive.

    8. Re:Will it run... by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      > Yes, Ubuntu is easy (when it all works as it's supposed to, which is usually
      > does). Other flavors of Linux, not so much.

      That might be true of hard-core distros such as slackware and gentoo, but Fedora, SUSE, and Debian all had rather painless installs. Even on pain in the ass equipment, such as this Dell Inspiron with ATI graphics (not the model that _comes_ with Ubuntu preinstalled).

      > I was specifically referring to the general acceptance in the Linux crowd of
      > the need to jump through hoop after hoop. Regular users will not subject
      > themselves to such things.

      Agreed on that point. It's the details now, like getting USB sticks to mount and such.

      >Regular users also aren't interested in running their OS off of a flash drive.

      You'd be surprised. That's why U3 is getting popular. One XP-to-Ubuntu switch that I made was specifically because she wanted to carry her OS with her. I even showed her how to pop the battery out of the university computer's motherboards, to reset the bios password, so that she could boot from the USB stick. Who needs a Mustang to impress women these days?

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  14. Servers? by jeremy128 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would expect that a drive like this would be nice for servers (if cost was no consideration) because of the lack of moving parts, and lower heat production. I don't know for sure, but I would bet that these would take a lot less juice than a conventional hard drive. I wouldn't be surprised if they lasted longer, as well (no moving parts no wear down).
    That said, I want a laptop with one of these.

  15. Google should just by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    buy NAND. Then we'll have more Google stories about big numbers to flood /. with!

  16. Reading the fine print ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From their web site:

    * Up to 64 GB at 8.5 mm height

    So ... it's 2.5" wide and as tall as a shoebox. Nice.

    1. Re:Reading the fine print ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      8.5 mm is about 0.33 inches.

    2. Re:Reading the fine print ... by dltaylor · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      8.5 mm is about 1/3 inch. millimeters are 1/10 of centimeters (which are 1/100 of meters)

      mod parent "stupid american"

    3. Re:Reading the fine print ... by wmshub · · Score: 1

      Cut him some slack. Maybe he just wears extremely tiny shoes.

    4. Re:Reading the fine print ... by kylearin · · Score: 1

      Maybe this is what is meant:

      8.5mm height / 64 GB,

      832 GB * 8.5mm / 64 GB =

      13 * 8.5mm = 110.5mm = 11.05cm = roughly as tall as a shoebox?

    5. Re:Reading the fine print ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, that's what I meant. To get the capacity they're talking about, the drive is huge!

  17. New drive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Want! Want now! This is just what I need for the laptop.

  18. 832 Gigs by RandoX · · Score: 1

    832 gigs should be enough for anyone.

  19. the marketing dept has picked a name for it: by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Porntropolis 832 (tm)

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  20. Re:SLASHDOT SUX0RZ by easyTree · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    It's reassuring to know that there are people more retarded than me knocking about.. I come here regularly cause I'm a hopeless geek. This person hates coming here yet lives here to spam his photo album..

  21. No potential customers yet either by MikeRT · · Score: 1

    No pricing as of yet

    No customers capable of affording it either.

    1. Re:No potential customers yet either by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      No customers capable of affording it either.

      ORLY? You don't suppose the oil and gas industry would have any use at all for high-capacity, low-power, no-moving-parts data storage?

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
  22. I thought flash went bad over time by alextheseal · · Score: 0, Troll

    I thought flash died after a limited number of state changes. Has this been solved while I slept or should we be expecting 2009 to be the year of data loss?

    1. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 4, Informative

      I swear at least one person has asked this question in every flash-drive related article on /. for the last 5 years. Yes, there is a limited number of writes - usually in the 100,000 to 1 million range depending on the quality of flash used. No, it isn't a problem in any practical terms for common uses. Using wear-levelling a flash drive should work out a great deal more durable than existing hard drive technology.

      --
      Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    2. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      It still has the 'problem' of limited writes, but the problem has been greatly reduced by load-leveling techniques and general improvements to the technology.

      Often it is a combination of factors like having backup space (Sell a 120gig HD as a 100gig HD) and load leveling which makes sure that you aren't always writing to the same memory location.

      So while it is still an issue, it has largely been addressed. I wouldn't use it on anything that is write-heavy, but for most situations you won't notice much of a difference.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    3. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, there is a limited number of writes - usually in the 100,000 to 1 million range depending on the quality of flash used but if these drives/chips are solid state with no moving parts what is there to "wear out" ? can this be fixed or is it a design flaw ?

    4. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by Skapare · · Score: 2, Informative

      So if I use one of these to record the nightly news every day in UNcompressed high definition, it will wear out in just over 273 years in the worst case, or last nearly 2738 years in the best case. It's more likely to be stolen as primitive relic in that time frame :-)

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    5. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by LighterShadeOfBlack · · Score: 1

      but if these drives/chips are solid state with no moving parts what is there to "wear out" ? can this be fixed or is it a design flaw ? I'm not a solid-state expert or anything, but as far as I know it is an inherent limitation of the technology, so it is not something that can be fixed without moving to another technology (and there are several future technologies waiting in the wings which don't seem to have this issue, eg. MRAM). Instead of trying to explain it poorly myself, I'll just steal a whole chunk out of this 'Flash Quality' summary [PDF]:

      Write Endurance
            The one common issue of concern to most media designers is write endurance. Media write integrity
            of a flash device now greatly exceeds that of a magnetic disk drive; however this comparison is rarely
            acknowledged.
            Data is stored on a flash device by the injection and depletion of a charge on a floating gate. Each time
            a write or erase operation occurs, there is an infinitesimal breakdown of the oxide layer on the floating
            gate that holds the data bit charge. This phenomenon doesn't occur in a read operation. This slow
            breakdown eventually degrades the cell where it does not allow an exchange of a charge and can no
            longer be erased or written to. In early years of flash technology "Write Endurance" was limited to
            only a few thousand cycles but over the years semiconductor manufacturers have improved this
            technology where typical limits of a flash cell endurance now vary between 300,000 and 2 million
            erase/write cycles depending on the technology.
      --
      Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
    6. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Well, the electrons are moving.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    7. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by piojo · · Score: 1

      Do you know if wear-leveling techniques depend on free space? If so, I could see problems with certain usage scenarios.

      --
      A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
    8. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by GlassHeart · · Score: 1

      No, a large write once a day is hardly the worst case usage scenario for a flash drive. In fact, it's almost the best case scenario and is unrealistic for a desktop computer's usage pattern.

      The worst case is something akin to having just one sector free, which means any write will fill up the drive, and the next write to the same spot will require an erase first. So if you want to destroy your flash, fill it up with data, and then constantly rewrite a small file.

    9. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by quazee · · Score: 1

      The fact is that they don't.

      The current SSDs emulate a 'classical' 512-byte block device, just like any hard disk.
      This is not the most efficient design, however, doing otherwise would be prohibitively expensive (due to incompatibility with existing software).
      In a classical 512-byte block device, there is no distinction between a 'free' block, and a 'busy' block.

      Hence, the 'address space' of the SSD is "virtualized", and the amount of the physical memory is greater than the addressable amount. The physical blocks themselves can be greater than 512 bytes as well.

      If you repeatedly rewrite the same 512-byte block, the wear-leveling algorithm spreads the writes over a set of physical locations.
      In an ideal implementation, this set will be as large as the difference between the physical memory size and the virtual size.
      However, this would make efficient implementation difficult, thus the set of 'free blocks' is actually much smaller, and the actual set depends on the address of the block being rewritten.

      --
      throw new SuccessException("Sig read successfully");
    10. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by piojo · · Score: 1

      Thank you, that's good to know.

      --
      A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
    11. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      A good wear-leveller will swap high-activity sectors with low activity ones every-so-often, so it would still get to wear-level the entire disk.

    12. Re:I thought flash went bad over time by GlassHeart · · Score: 1

      You misread my scenario. A wear-leveler will indeed avoid wearing down the same erase unit when the disk is nearly full, but every write will then still trigger an erase. It won't destroy an erase unit as quickly as if you didn't have a wear-leveler, but it's closer to a worst case.

  23. It's twice 416 by Kilraven · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Which was their previous high late last year.

    http://www.bitmicro.com/press_news_releases_20070911.php

    The bit I'm slightly skeptical on is the environmental specs. While -40C and +85C are becoming a more common standard, not many SSD manufacturers can reliably hit past -25C and +75C. This may not seem that big of a deal, but in some industries - which would currently be the only ones spending Close to the $10k (judging by current pricing for extended/extreme versions of these drives) for them initially - this is huge if true.

    --
    I didn't want to leave this blank.
  24. rugged field computers by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Maybe the miltary or JPL would adopt these first, willing to pay $10-20K for a terabyte solid-state non-violatile memory. Its still cheaper to have a company do these for you than to have them custom built.

  25. where are holographic drives? by zymano · · Score: 1

    Taking too long

    1. Re:where are holographic drives? by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      Not sure, but the answer seems to strangely shift depending on the angle I'm viewing it from.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  26. Preinstalled? by cashman73 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does it come with a free copy of Duke Nukem Forever preinstalled?

    1. Re:Preinstalled? by jamesh · · Score: 1

      Does it come with a free copy of Duke Nukem Forever preinstalled?
      No. It won't fit.
  27. U3 by OglinTatas · · Score: 1

    They are probably using 16 modules, but 192 GB is reserved for that damned U3 partition.

    Yeah, I'm still waiting for a Linux or OS X U3 removal tool, because I don't do Windows.

  28. I think Roy said it best... by ninjamonkeypirate · · Score: 1

    I'm sorry, are you from the past?

  29. Raid by aztektum · · Score: 1, Insightful

    They simply raided two of their 416GB drives :)

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
  30. USB power, that's not the question. by Tatarize · · Score: 5, Funny

    But, can it blend?

    --

    It is no longer uncommon to be uncommon.
    1. Re:USB power, that's not the question. by Neanderthal+Ninny · · Score: 1

      Yes, it will look like iphone sans the display. http://www.willitblend.com/videos.aspx?type=unsafe&video=iphone If you have that type of money available then contribute to /. or some other better cause.

    2. Re:USB power, that's not the question. by lostguru · · Score: 2, Funny

      what kind of sick person would blend their first born, freak

      --
      Jayne: "These are stone killers, little man. They ain't cuddly like me."
      98% of America's teens drink alcohol, smok
    3. Re:USB power, that's not the question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Inquiring minds need to know.

      It's the Internet. Somebody had to go there...

  31. Two Words. by lstellar · · Score: 1

    "Moore's Law." Live it. Breathe it. Love it.

    --
    art is science made clear. -cocteau
    1. Re:Two Words. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Moore's Law." Live it. Breathe it. Love it. Ummm, by my count, that's actually 8.
    2. Re:Two Words. by PHPfanboy · · Score: 1

      You're both right. He wrote that 4 years ago.

      --
      29 mpg. YMMV.
  32. 100 MB/second ... .why limit it? by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 1

    Here's my thought. You're already putting a ton of expensive stuff into this device, so why not divide the space into two or four internal channels and use RAID 0 on them?

    That way you'd get 200 - 400 MB/sec, halfway to or completely saturating your SATA bus. You don't get any real penalties, as you only get write-faults on the flash, and you've already included hardware to handle that. Besides, fitting 4B into 80B or 1B into 20B still gives you the same ratio, so it's not even going to wreck havok on wear leveling as far as I can tell with my very simple line of thought.

    Definately wouldn't be doubling price or even close to it.

    Alright, maybe, just maybe, on a windy day when the moon is aligned properly with jupiter, you might get a 50% increase in seek speed, so you'll go from 0.1 ms to 0.15 ms.

    --
    We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    1. Re:100 MB/second ... .why limit it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm ... RAID 0 and your comment of "You don't get any real penalties" don't really go together.
      What were to happen to your data if one of your drives were to die ? :-)

    2. Re:100 MB/second ... .why limit it? by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 1

      SSDs don't have moving parts, so they don't fail in normal usage like HDDs do.

    3. Re:100 MB/second ... .why limit it? by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Here's my thought. You're already putting a ton of expensive stuff into this device, so why not divide the space into two or four internal channels and use RAID 0 on them?

      How do you know they aren't doing this already? 100MB/s from a flash drive is pretty fast by my standards.

  33. If you need to ask the price ... by Skapare · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... then you can't afford it, yet. Wait a couple years and pick them up in the discount bin at Walmart.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  34. That by xx01dk · · Score: 1

    is SO going in my Eee.

    --
    There is simply too much glass..
  35. 20,000 I/O operations per second??? by Weaselmancer · · Score: 1

    Doesn't that mean you can burn out the flash memory in about two minutes because of the limited number of write cycles?

    ...

    Ok, I'm kidding. Wear leveling. But it was just too obvious of a /. thing to not post it. At least I didn't make an In Soviet Russia joke. Right?

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:20,000 I/O operations per second??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In soviet Russia wear levels you!

    2. Re:20,000 I/O operations per second??? by splutty · · Score: 1

      Depends on the amount of O really. Or for that matter I, depending on from which point you're looking at it :)

      20K read operations will be no problem at all. 20K write operations will wear it down, but then again, see your own link :)

      --
      Coz eternity my friend, is a long *ing time.
  36. Moores law is not sufficiently advanced by Colourspace · · Score: 1

    That this will not be as big as a house. Fact.

  37. 832Gigabit? Maybe? by kai6novice · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Everyone is so exciting about the 832GB. Maybe it's just a marketing strategy. It's 832Gigabit, which is equal to 104GigaByte SSD. I think this sound more reasonable. Might cost about $550-$600 when it comes out. (just guessing)

  38. Yeah but... by penguin_dance · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but will it run on Vista?

    ducks

    --
    If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
  39. Re:SLASHDOT SUX0RZ by The+Great+Pretender · · Score: 1

    Oh , I thought it was a kitty cat.

    --
    A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
  40. Toy lovers will buy it first. by Neanderthal+Ninny · · Score: 1

    Like all other new technology devices the "toy" lovers with deep pockets will buy these first just like the iPhone. After a few months and they work out the bugs and increase to 1TB drive and faster speed then I may think about buying one.

  41. 832? Even Bigger! by ohtani · · Score: 1

    GB != Gb

    And heck, screw the 832. I want the 1.6 TERABYTE version:
    http://www.trustedreviews.com/storage/news/2007/11/22/BritMicro-Announces-1-6TB-3-5in-SSD/p1

    Only thing is this one is 3 1/2" so it won't work well for a laptop HD

    --
    Pancakes. Oh I blew it.
  42. Wrong question. by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    If, say, 50GB flash drives were sufficiently cheap to produce, the Blu-Ray/HDDVD format war would be over. The winner: USB-movies. That move would have significant advantage. For instance, imagine not having to worry about scratches, heat, or accidentally putting your film through the wash&dry (I, stupidly, did this once, and was quite pleasantly surprised).

    Further, imagine being able to fit a large movie collection on a small shelf near the player and being able to carry movies around in your pocket.

    Imagine players not bound by the medium: as larger capacities are available, they just plug in like everything else. No need for complicated gearing and lasers and whatnot. Obviously, eventually the transfer rate will be insufficient, but the processing power will probably also need to be upgraded to match newer codecs, so that's not really a problem.

    Further, USB is pretty future proof. It's so useful, ubiquitous now and doesn't take up much space really, that legacy ports are likely to be included for decades.

    Players already have USB ports, and the drives of 50GB capacity already exist. You can do each of the things I've mentioned individually with either flash or small hard disks, but it just hasn't been put together, and the price of ICs hasn't come down enough for a "thumb-drive" release to be viable.

    I often wonder what it would cost to produce a custom read-only "thumb-drive" if you anticipated a production run of the order of a blockbuster DVD release.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    1. Re:Wrong question. by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Dude, you forgot about the DRM. How are you going to integrate usable DRM onto a USB drive? If you can't, the industry won't support you, and you're SOL. Besides, a 50GB USB stick will always cost more than a 50GB plastic disc.

  43. High-end database transaction market by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Non-rotating machinery is really nice for databases and transaction journalling - this stuff is likely to be significantly cheaper and more reliable than Battery-Backed RAM disks which are the main alternative, or than putting more RAM onto your CPU's motherboard. You could do a multi-tier database that journals to smaller Flash drives and then spools out to rotating disks, but this is big enough that it may be a cleaner solution.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  44. Can it blend? by radarvectors · · Score: 1

    It cannot. But will it?

    1. Re:Can it blend? by xENoLocO · · Score: 1

      It took me a second to get this... but now that I do, it's F'n hilarious. Easily one of the most overlooked comments on slashdot in 2008.

      --
      "The need to build the internet comes from something inside us, something programmed... something we can't resist."
  45. Tooooo Sloooooow by billcopc · · Score: 1

    What's the advantage of having an 832gb SSD versus a pair of 500gb drives in RAID-0 ? Lower power consumption, yes, but I don't see anyone putting a $6000 SSD in a $600 Dell. Faster seeking, sure, but the 100mb/sec throughput seems rather puny when compared with recent Intel chipsets that can shove over 300mb/sec in RAID-5 with good SATA hard drives. Heck, why not split it out into four 200gb SSDs and RAID them ?

    I clearly have a short-sighted view of the industry, because I work with massive amounts of audio/video. My sole focus with storage solutions is maximum throughput. For reliability there's RAID 5/6, and for speed there's Ram. Where do these SSDs sit ? What's their ideal purpose ?

    Over a decade ago, hard disks were slow and solid state drives were orders of magnitude faster. I remember fooling around with a 2gb SSD in the mid-90's, when 100mb/sec on a PC was mind-blowing. Mind you, that was a DRAM-based SSD, not flash. It pretty much maxed out the PCI bus. I would expect a modern SSD to push at least 1gb/sec over PCI-E, considering how cheap DDR2 ram can push upwards of 3gb/sec in real-world scenarios. Where is that breakneck product ? Something like a modernized, heavy-duty version of the Gigabyte i-Ram would kick ass in these media-rich times.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Tooooo Sloooooow by toddestan · · Score: 1

      It's a 2.5" drive, which gives it a few advantages in the context that it will be used in a laptop:

      1. Lower power consumption.
      2. Much increased shock resistance.
      3. Massive amount of storage space. The largest spinning platters laptop drive I see on the market now is 320GB, or less than half the size. Even if you bought one of those laptops that support 2 drives, you would still only have 640GB (which ought to be enough for anyone, etc...)

      For a desktop, I don't see any real big advantages. It would be completely silent, but a newer low noise harddrive in a good case is pretty near silent anyway.

  46. Bingo by PCM2 · · Score: 1

    Be creative: That starts with laptops in the space shuttle and surely doesn't end with onboard systems of surveillance planes.

    And bring it down to earth, too. As I just replied to somebody else before I saw your post, think about the oil and gas industry. Alaska. Siberia. Offshore platforms. The deserts of Kuwait. And when it comes to checkbooks, same rule applies.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  47. Re:SLASHDOT SUX0RZ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought it was a kitty cat lapping up someone's barf

    look at the barf dripping from the cat's jowls

  48. rugged by falconwolf · · Score: 1

    Flash drives certainly have the advantage over USB hard disks of being faster to write to (usually).

    What about eSATA HDDs? Not a lot slower than flash drives, and a whole lot cheaper.

    I don't know if they do, do eSATA HDDs have moving parts? Aren't they just regular external HDDs? Flash drives don't have moving parts therefore they are rugged, which is something you want in exploration.

    Falcon
  49. Several more words... by More_Cowbell · · Score: 1

    Moore's Law has nothing to do with storage?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moores_law
    Yes I know there are many variations on the original theme, but then, those were not postulated by Moore, were they?

    --
    Experience teaches only the teachable. -AH
    1. Re:Several more words... by lstellar · · Score: 1

      Moore's Law actually has as much to do with storage as it does processor speed. Also, it equates to price reduction. It couldn't be more relevant in this context.

      --
      art is science made clear. -cocteau
  50. obligatory by wikinerd · · Score: 1

    imagine a beowulf cluster of these!

  51. I wonder if you thought before posting: by wild_berry · · Score: 1

    No, but the flash memory is silicon transistors. That's where Moore's Law applies.

  52. Super speculation math post! by Xest · · Score: 1

    How about 12x64gb and 16x4gb ?

    That's 832gb right there. Okay, so that sounds like a botched number right? Not entirely, as mentioned elsewhere they've also announced a 1.6tb disk, they could make this simply by replacing the 4gbs with 64gbs (well that gives just around 1.75tb but you could drop some 64gbs for 4gbs) if they're roughly the same physical size.

    I'd guess they're just filling the drive with the most cost effective blocks they can and over time will just scale up the lower capacity blocks to higher capacity blocks to increase drive sizes.

    It's speculation and I really don't know much of the way drives like this work or are designed but should my assumptions be correct then this seems a viable explanation - that whilst they could just release a 1.75tb drive now it really would cost too much, 12x64gb and 16x4gb is probably some price sweet point now whilst scaling up to a full 28x64gb may really push the price up to the truly unacceptable levels.

    1. Re:Super speculation math post! by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's 10 * 64 GB and 6 * 8 GB, which uses exactly 4 chip select lines. The 1.6 could then be 10 * 128 and 6 * 64.

      There might be unused address space, but I'd go for a solution that has as simple of a custom PCB as possible.

  53. BitMicro Pricing.. by DoctorDyna · · Score: 1

    If these are anything like the drives I priced from BitMicro about a year ago (you have to e-mail for price) then they are probably many (many) thousands of dollars. AFAIK, BitMicro has catered more to the industrial (hard drives for aerospace) realm.

    I'm not sure that any drives they may be making now aren't in the same class, a [price] class that would make consumers shit a purple Twinkie, considering in 2005 their U320 155gb drive was supposed to cost north of $75,000 US.

    And, what about this? Why are we dancing around this drive when they already make a 1.6 TB model?

    --
    Windows has more viruses because linux has more virus coders.
  54. Your joke sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How did the parent's stupid pun get rated a 5?

  55. Yes SSD drives are SOOOOOO expensive by initdeep · · Score: 1

    That's why I have a $2000 Dell XPS m1330 sitting next to me with a 64GB SSD drive in it.
    It was SOOOOOOO expensive that I couldn't afford to buy one.

    Oh wait.

    And if you haven't used a computer with an SSD drive in it, maybe, just maybe, you should do the intelligent thing ans SHUT YOUR PIE-HOLE unless you have actual experience and can comment intelligently.
    Typical /. morons spouting fetid drivel from their warped little brains.