Slashdot Mirror


When SSD and USB 3.0 Come Together

An anonymous reader writes "USB flash drives have been a quiet revolution in computing. Their rise broke the death grip that the floppy drive had on the PC industry, and smaller capacity models have become cheap, disposable means of data transport and distribution. Yet while you can pick up a 4GB model for less than the price of a meal, large capacity drives are still prohibitively expensive. Meanwhile, solid state drives (SSDs) also utilize flash memory, but masquerade as mechanical hard drives rather than USB storage devices. Now it seems the two technologies are bashing into each other, with this article pointing to OCZ's new Enyo USB 3.0 SSD — a rather curious beast that looks like a thin external hard drive and connects via USB, but houses an SSD inside."

158 comments

  1. When Slashdot and Advertisements... by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When Slashdot and Advertisements come together... Slashvertisements! You could have learned as much or more by reading the press release where it is revealed that "Enyo USB 3.0 Portable SSDs will begin shipping this now and will be available through OCZ's extensive worldwide channel." Thank goodness, I thought I would have to wait for the next now. Also per the pr, "the Enyo features a sleek, anodized aluminum housing" ... the choice of words implies that it's a desktop SSD in a box. It would be nice to know which one, if so.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:When Slashdot and Advertisements... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yeah, but perhaps, like a million other technology sites, this one has seemed to have added something, by explaining why the product is so interesting, giving it some historical context, and discussing the implications. The price comparison with flash drives too -not quite what you'd find in OCZ's material.

    2. Re:When Slashdot and Advertisements... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      When Slashdot and Advertisements come together... Slashvertisements!

      Nonsense, why anyone can submit a story to Slashdot!

    3. Re:When Slashdot and Advertisements... by somersault · · Score: 1

      I feel kind of used, and dirty. But at the same time it's nice to be wanted for my affluence, influence and geekiness. The fact that I have ads turned off and an adblocker installed helps too.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    4. Re:When Slashdot and Advertisements... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Look through ACs link. There is nothing there suggesting that you can pay to post a story to Slashdot.

      Apparently there is some sort of bar that some people see that you can buy space on, I guess I have it turned off. There are also the other clearly labeled ads.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    5. Re:When Slashdot and Advertisements... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well fuck, what do you expect on a part TECHNOLOGY website? People arguing over Windows, Mac and Linux? That's what 4chans /g/ is for... and Linux articles. (sadly)

      This is actually a fascinating short article / long summary on the history of the devices.
      And since it is a USB3 SSD, that is a pretty big deal to be honest, even if the lines "this is an advertisement" were present as well.
      There is nothing wrong with advertising a product, especially if it is one of the reasons we even visit this website, to discuss things relating to technology and science.

      I'd have probably not heard about this at all until it was already out for like a year.

    6. Re:When Slashdot and Advertisements... by GNious · · Score: 1

      geek.net : "millions of geeks around the world contact us on this phone-number without international country code" ... hmm

    7. Re:When Slashdot and Advertisements... by Kashgarinn · · Score: 1

      In other news: USB 2.0 has been successfully used wit ATA and Serial-ATA!

      Film at 11.

  2. Backups! by lemur3 · · Score: 1

    backing up files just keeps on getting easier, and faster.. it sure is great!

    *hint hint hint*

     

    1. Re:Backups! by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      What I would like to see is a unified bus - right now we do have USB and SATA, both are very similar to use and behavior. If there were fewer types of interfaces in a computer then the number of components should go down and the hardware should be both cheaper and more reliable.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  3. This is nothing new by Machupo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the summary: "Yet while you can pick up a 4GB model for less than the price of a meal, large capacity drives are still prohibitively expensive. Meanwhile, solid state drives (SSDs) also utilize flash memory, but masquerade as mechanical hard drives rather than USB storage devices. Now it seems the two technologies are bashing into each other"

    SSDs, whether they are internal or external will continue to be exorbitantly priced, so you're not getting larger storage densities for cheaper.

    This development is nothing new... I use a deconstructed external USD HDD container and just swap on SATA 2.5" drives as necessary; a SSD would just be another drive to toss on there. While SSDs are significantly faster than most thumb drives, the question at the end of the day is: "Do you have the disposable income for this storage strategy?"

    --
    *insert pithy sig here*
    1. Re:This is nothing new by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      The thing with putting a SSD in an ordinary external enclosure is that ordinary external enclosures are USB 2 at the moment and while probablly fast enough for a laptop drive (at least a laptop drive doing random access) they are going to seriously bottleneck a decent SSD.

      What is the point in paying the extra for superfast storage only to bottleneck it with a shitty bus all the time?

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  4. Yeah... by Pojut · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...but for big-time storage, mechanical drives are still king. As the technology stands now, it is pretty much useless for large-scale storage due to many different things, not the least of which is the cost. That being said, I'm curious if by the time SSDs reach the capacity, price point, and reliability needed for long term storage if they will still be relevant.

    Here's to hoping, though...I love the idea of an SSD, but they still need some advancements before I consider one as my main system drive, much less for storage.

    1. Re:Yeah... by somersault · · Score: 2, Informative

      they still need some advancements before I consider one as my main system drive

      What kind of advancements are those? I've been using one for my main drive for the last year and it's great. At 32GB I do have a distinct lack of music storage space, but I have a 16GB SDHC card in the side for caching subsets of my music, as well as external HDD with all of my music on it.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:Yeah... by Pojut · · Score: 1

      Larger size/more affordability, for the most part. I know it's a huge performance boost to a system, but I don't want to only have a 40 GB system drive, and the larger ones get a bit too rich for my blood.

      I recognize the prices are high because they are still "new", but compared to the cost of a mechanical drive their price-per-GB is outrageous.

    3. Re:Yeah... by rockNme2349 · · Score: 1

      I have yet to buy a SSD, but everyone I hear who has bought one says that they will never go back to a system without one. SSDs aren't there to replace your mass storage, they are there to replace your boot drives.

      My system right now has 3 HDDs, I have 2 performance 640GB HDDs in Raid 1 for the OS and programs, and a 1.5TB slow spinning HDD for my movies and any other very large storage that I don't feel needs to be duplicated. SSDs aren't trying to replace my media HDD, for the foreseeable future this task will be covered by spinning discs. SSDs are going to replace my boot drives. I wouldn't be surprised to see slightly higher level consumer PCs start shipping with two drives in the near future.

      --
      Sewage Treatment Facilities - "Our duty is clear."
    4. Re:Yeah... by davepermen · · Score: 1

      I'm using them now since around 2 years in all my systems except for the networked storage, and could never look back. what advancements other than much faster, quiet, less powerconsuming, reliable on shock/shake do you need? i'm happy with all that :) and centralization of the data led to the allowance for small cheap ssds on the systems, and huge cheap storage on the home server. the result is the most cost optimal highest performing and most consistent to use setup of >1 computers (5 in my case).

    5. Re:Yeah... by somersault · · Score: 1

      Ah, I was thinking you meant technical advancements. 32GB should easily be enough for your main system drive no matter what desktop OS you're running, though I haven't run any performance comparisons to see just how worth it that would be. I primarily got mine for the fact that I don't have to worry about moving it around or dropping it when it's in use :P

      --
      which is totally what she said
    6. Re:Yeah... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Yet, not everything needs "big-time storage".

      I plan/hope to migrate all but one or two of my systems (that's 40+) to RAIDed SSDs from the current 10k-15k SAS and SCSI drives in them now. I wouldn't be losing any capacity - much of which is not currently being used, anyway. These aren't storage systems, they're network appliances which back up to actual storage elsewhere (or use the storage on another host).

      With hard disk failure rates approaching or surpassing 50% within the first 6 months for some manufacturers and lots (regularly) I'd argue that we've reached the point where SSD system drives Make Sense. They're at least on parity with cheaper OEM drives, and likely with most "Enterprise" disks as well.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    7. Re:Yeah... by afidel · · Score: 1

      Actually the near to midterm future is tiered storage with fast ram cache first, then SSD's and finally big slow, cheap disks (or perhaps big fast moderate cost disk if you have a database too large to fit into SSD cache and your application can't stand the high latency of SATA). This is the design of the new Sun storage servers and also the design that Netapp uses (I'm sure there's others but those are the two big ones I'm aware of) and I think it's the way that makes the most sense since it most efficiently utilizes the expensive (on a $/GB) SSD resources.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    8. Re:Yeah... by AllyGreen · · Score: 1

      I might be out of date, but isn't there still a big problem with write speeds? And is there not a limited life span of about 3-5 years for usage?

      As I said, may be out of date!!

    9. Re:Yeah... by Bakkster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      32GB should easily be enough for your main system drive no matter what desktop OS you're running

      Tell that to the bastards who keep forcing their program installation directories to the system drive!

      --
      Write your representatives! Repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics!
    10. Re:Yeah... by afidel · · Score: 1

      With hard disk failure rates approaching or surpassing 50% within the first 6 months for some manufacturers and lots (regularly) I'd argue that we've reached the point where SSD system drives Make Sense.

      Uh, quit buying cheap crap... My failure rate across 170 servers and two SAN arrays is less than 1.5% per year.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    11. Re:Yeah... by NFN_NLN · · Score: 1

      32GB should easily be enough for your main system drive no matter what desktop OS you're running

      Hahah, 32GB of storage and 640K of memory, gotcha.

    12. Re:Yeah... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If you mean RAM cache at the storage engine level, it makes little to no sense at the desktop PC level. You just add more system RAM and let the OS handle caching. It costs too much to add a bunch of DIMMs to the storage chain. In a SAN or just an immense disk pool, sure, it probably makes sense to have some RAM-based volumes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    13. Re:Yeah... by afidel · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the GP was talking about big time storage, to me that means SAN =) And the ram cache I was thinking of is battery backed for writes which system ram obviously can't do, and even for SSD's a bit of ram cache allows you to reorder writes which can greatly improve throughput and life.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    14. Re:Yeah... by somersault · · Score: 1

      Okay, maybe I should have said "current desktop OS". Seriously, what OS is there today that needs more than say 4GB for the base system (not including 3rd party programs or data).

      --
      which is totally what she said
    15. Re:Yeah... by somersault · · Score: 1

      In Windows you can map a folder to point to a different drive (in the Manage option of my computer then in the disk manager or something like that). You could probably use that to put your Program Files somewhere else, assuming you're talking about Windows here. Not that that's a great solution for a mobile computer.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    16. Re:Yeah... by somersault · · Score: 1

      Well for the main system drive for a typical user I think you'd be seeing a lot more reads than writes, so it seems a good choice for that. I also have the impression that HDDs these days aren't particularly reliable long term either (though I've never had a problem personally, the only times I've had a hard drive die was through a power surge in a storm). I'm really not sure how long this drive will last but I very very rarely ever need to use swap so hopefully it will last me a while before dying. And by the time it does die then SSDs will be even cheaper, more reliable and capacious :)

      --
      which is totally what she said
  5. And? by carp3_noct3m · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are plenty of things on the market that address this issue. You can get 64 Gb flash drives on newegg for less than $150. I remember when I bought a gigabox that was 5 gig for more than that. If you really must have the extra space, I doubt that the max 256 GB model of this SSD is worth it, just get a sata dock, or a regular external, as the speeds of SSD are going to fairly useless on a USB 2.0 system most people have today. The other point to USB flash drives is their portability, I carry about three at all times in my pocket, I don't think I'd want to carry one of these in a pocket. It's interesting, but this is just a slashvertisment.

    --
    "It's ok, I'm completely secure as long as my iron is off"
    1. Re:And? by NekSnappa · · Score: 1

      What is the fascination with putting shit in your pockets around here lately?

      --
      I want to shoot the messenger!
    2. Re:And? by medcalf · · Score: 1

      You can get 64 Gb flash drives on newegg for less than $150. I remember when I bought a gigabox that was 5 gig for more than that.

      You young whippersnapper! At my first job, we spent $60,000 to get our Multimax up to 1GB of disk. Get offa my lawn!

      --
      -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
    3. Re:And? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Last week, I was in the bathroom, washing my hands after taking a piss. Some guy exits one of the stalls and starts cleaning his hands. I noticed his hands are covered in shit and when I do a second take, I see there's a fucking turd in his shirt pocket. I assumed he was just orion-blastar crazy but if you've seen people stuffing shit in their pockets, maybe there's something else going on?

    4. Re:And? by confused+one · · Score: 1

      Pfff. I remeber when a 5 MB drive cost $3,000

    5. Re:And? by somersault · · Score: 1

      And more importantly, when did clothes catch on around here? I need to get with the times.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    6. Re:And? by liquiddark · · Score: 1

      I believe it was only pants that went out of fashion.

    7. Re:And? by somersault · · Score: 1

      Ah. It seems I may have some apologising to do.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    8. Re:And? by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Oh, I've heard that one before. He says "In the Army, they teach us to wash our hands," then YOU say, "Well in the Marines, they teach us not to shit on our hands." Then, from one of the stalls, someone shouts "Zing!"

    9. Re:And? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pfff. I remeber when a 5 MB drive cost $3,000

      The six million dollar gigabyte?

    10. Re:And? by hitmark · · Score: 1

      cargo-shorts on the other hand...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    11. Re:And? by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Pfff. I remeber when a 5 MB drive cost $3,000

      The six million dollar gigabyte?

      Not quite. $600,000 gigabyte.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
  6. Re:Woo! by Machupo · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    --
    *insert pithy sig here*
  7. Oh, please. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously:

    Yet while you can pick up a 4GB model for less than the price of a meal, large capacity drives are still prohibitively expensive.

    4 GB is not a large capacity? I can install Ubuntu in 4 GB. A DVD holds just over 4 GB. I keep a Win7 and an Ubuntu install on my 4 GB stick.

    So someone is shipping an SSD with a USB 3 interface. If it's as big as my 4 GB stick, then you'll interest me.

    Get off of my lawn.

    1. Re:Oh, please. by somersault · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You can fit various OSes onto a floppy disk, that doesn't mean that floppies have a large capacity. It's all relative. These days I can barely fit a quarter of my music collection into 16GB, but for me 16GB is the sweet cost/size point for USB devices at the moment.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:Oh, please. by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      4 GB is not a large capacity? I can install Ubuntu in 4 GB. A DVD holds just over 4 GB. I keep a Win7 and an Ubuntu install on my 4 GB stick.

      So someone is shipping an SSD with a USB 3 interface. If it's as big as my 4 GB stick, then you'll interest me.

      Get off of my lawn.

      You keep both on a 4GB stick? Special stick when windows 7 needs between 10-16GB (depending on what version and what options).

    3. Re:Oh, please. by somersault · · Score: 1

      and by USB devices I meant USB flash drives, I do have a 2.5" 500GB USB HDD for proper media storage and occasional backups.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    4. Re:Oh, please. by mehrotra.akash · · Score: 1

      I guess it means the setup of Win7(2.8GB) and ubuntu(700MB)

  8. What I'd like to have... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I'd like to have is basically a SSD disk that can be inserted like a floppy disk. A write protection switch would be nice, too. You'd probably just have a face plate somewhere near the optical drive, which connects to the motherboard or add-in card. This form factor would be nice, even if it was a bit thicker than the classic 3½ inch floppy disk. These small and flimsy USB memory sticks are a bit too easy to misplace. Hot swapping would be a plus compared to internal drives, and a light to tell if there's anything unwritten in the buffer/it's being written to. You'd eject with a button (which would be smart enough to not do it if there's stuff unwritten), and if it fails, either have a hidden button or something to remove it manually.

    1. Re:What I'd like to have... by xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D · · Score: 1

      I was with you up until "are a bit too easy to misplace". Is your only motivation the small form factor of USB sticks? You can always get a bigger form factor, or just glue some floppy-disk-shaped plastic onto it, to make it hard to lose.

      I think being able to have the USB stick flush (or internal) with the computer would be moderately cool, though. I don't know if it's cool enough to try and force the industry to decide on a standard form factor :P

    2. Re:What I'd like to have... by fulldecent · · Score: 1

      >> I think being able to have the USB stick flush (or internal) with the computer would be moderately cool, though. I don't know if it's cool enough to try and force the industry to decide on a standard form factor :P

      This has been standardized, it's called SD. Keep the card attached to your computer normally. You can copy working copies of important stuff that you are doing as a delta from your last backup and in case you lose your undo history by quitting vi.

      --

      -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

    3. Re:What I'd like to have... by cynyr · · Score: 1

      www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817998038 Looks like what you are looking for. hotswap (if your motherboard and OS support that) flush with the case. As for a write protection switch, that should be easyish, to do in linux if you wanted. Set one bay to RO, the other to RW, using UDev rules and /etc/fstab. Then choose your bay and you either get write protection or not.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
  9. What's their target market? by Rogerborg · · Score: 2, Funny

    I mean obviously it's posers with more money than sense who simply must have the latest gadget just so they can show off that they're the first to have it, while being secretly disappointed and wishing that they'd waited for the next version.

    But the iPad doesn't have a USB 3 port, so there's no overlap with people who might buy this and people who can use it.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:What's their target market? by somersault · · Score: 2, Funny

      Pretty sure USB 3 is designed to be backwards compatible. That makes it an even more perfect device for iPad users because they don't even get the full functionality out of it.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:What's their target market? by dylan_- · · Score: 1

      That makes it an even more perfect device for iPad users because they don't even get the full functionality out of it.

      The transfer speed might be the same, but of course the superior USB3 connection will give a very open, transparent and natural sound, without any harshness, to your AAC files.

      --
      Igor Presnyakov stole my hat
  10. Finding standards is a pain.. by Firethorn · · Score: 3, Informative

    SATA 2.0 - 3 GBit
    SATA 3.0 - 6 GBit

    USB 2.0 'highspeed' - 480MBit (Tricky fact: USB 2.0 connection can still be 'lowspeed')
    USB 'superspeed' - 4.8 GBit.

    Going by what the article says, I think that the e-sata specification should have included some power providing abilities. Preferably enough to run a 2.5" HD/SSD on it's own.

    I mean USB specifications are actually changing to be able to provide even MORE power. Looking at the octopus nest behind my computer, I count elimination of cables as a GOOD thing. If I could have a Monitor with 1 cable(at the cost of an even beefier power supply in my computer), power my DSL modem via PoE, I'd be happy. I love my bluetooth mouse, but am too paranoid to go with a wireless keyboard until they come out with one with more serious encryption.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
    1. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Looking at the octopus nest behind my computer, I count elimination of cables as a GOOD thing. If I could have a Monitor with 1 cable(at the cost of an even beefier power supply in my computer), power my DSL modem via PoE, I'd be happy.

      Funny that you mention this, because this is EXACTLY what Apple was trying to do a full decade ago with the Apple Display Connector. It was a single cable that ran from the case to the monitor that carried power, DVI, USB, and Firewire. It was incredibly handy, and it got rid of a lot of the tangle behind the desk. Of course, at the time everyone called it unnecessary because it was coming from Apple. Not surprisingly, however, this is the type of change that can only happen when it's being forced on the industry by a single company.

    2. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I could have a Monitor with 1 cable

      It's called an iMac

    3. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Personally, I want "wall power" to be as far away from my data cables as possible.

      As is, I've only got power, video, network & USB coming from the back of my machine. Compared to how bad it could be with an Atari 800 style Octopus, what comes out of the back of a proper PC is not such a bad thing really.

      Wall warts and devices that have no need or business being external are what contribute to computing messes. In this respect, most Macs cause more chaos then they fix with their fancy proprietary connectors.

      If all of your cables are going from point A to point B then you hardly need a special purpose cable really.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by loufoque · · Score: 1

      The difference isn't just bandwidth and whether it provides power.
      USB uses a lot of CPU, while SATA uses none at all.

      This may change for USB 3.0 though, I don't know.

    5. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Is there any particular reason you couldn't encapsulate USB inside of DVI and eliminate a cable that way? There ARE good reasons to isolate power from data, at least until all connections are optical. It should happen eventually. A cheap piece of fiber is cheaper to make than a decent piece of copper, it's just some strands of plastic... at least for low-bandwidth applications. And you get isolation in the bargain. This sort of thing (single-cable connection) will make a lot more sense when we get an optical interconnect to displays.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      You are too paranoid.
      What I have to wonder is just why you personally are worth the effort it would take to snipe your wireless keyboard and decrypt the bluetooth connection?

      My life is just not that interesting.
      besides what type of protection do you have form a standard tempest attack on your wired keyboard?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    7. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Minwee · · Score: 1

      Of course, at the time everyone called it unnecessary because it was coming from Apple.

      It was also proprietary, only manufactured by Apple, incompatible with existing DVI connectors and required that you spend $150 on an Apple-branded adapter which was only available from Apple to use it if you hadn't already purchased on of the few Apple computers which used Apple's new port.

      This wasn't a case of Apple introducing something brilliant which was ignored by the bigoted masses becase it came from Apple, it was a case of Apple pushing a vastly overpriced product onto the market and finding that it was unable to compete with the existing free and cheaply licensed alternatives.

      So at the time it was called unnecessary because it actually was unnecessary. Everyone called it overpriced because it was coming from Apple.

    8. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Ellie+K · · Score: 1

      but am too paranoid to go with a wireless keyboard.

      Should a wireless mouse be encrypted too? Sorry. But seriously, wireless keyboard is great, but the batteries go FAST. NiCd rechargables are expensive and stop holding a charge after awhile too!

      --
      tempus fugit
    9. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My laptop has an eSATA/USB combo port that will power a compatible enclosure as well as provide eSATA speeds with a single cable connection. Drives are the only reason you need that kind of speed, at least until LightPeak drops.

    10. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      ADC was quite nice, but it had a few problems. One was that it was too big to go on a laptop. If you bought a Mac laptop while Apple was pushing ADC, it came with USB, FireWire, and DVI ports, but not ADC. Since power went through the ADC connector, you needed a y-shaped cable to connect a laptop even if it had been possible to include a full ADC connector, because it didn't have enough power to drive the monitor. It also complicated the graphics card, because it had to have traces to connect the USB and FireWire cables to socket (or even controllers for these things on board), which drove costs up.

      It's only now, when computers are increasingly using 1-2 chips for all controllers that this makes sense, and even now it doesn't really make sense to run power through the same cable (unless its bidirectional, like FireWire, and you can power the laptop from the monitor).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    11. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It should change for USB 3. USB 3.0 has (mandates?) DMA transfers

    12. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      It's called a Laptop/Notebook/NetBook

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    13. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      I love my bluetooth mouse, but am too paranoid to go with a wireless keyboard until they come out with one with more serious encryption.

      Don't conventional, wired keyboards put out enough RF noise to be effectively sniffable anyway?

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    14. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by droopycom · · Score: 1

      Thats called Light Peak, by Intel...
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Peak

      Also HDMI 1.4 does not have USB in, but has ethernet...

      Less cables? maybe, eventually.... But by the time you get the latest all-in-one, you will have some new technology coming along that offers something extra that you will want... So you will end up with a mix of new tech cables and old tech cables anyway

    15. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are too paranoid.
      What I have to wonder is just why you personally are worth the effort it would take to snipe your wireless keyboard and decrypt the bluetooth connection?

      My life is just not that interesting.
      besides what type of protection do you have form a standard tempest attack on your wired keyboard?

      Maybe he's not so much paranoid as he is cynical about the quality of the encryption. I've personally seen a "secure" keyboard pick up someone else's typing. A helpdesk call saying "my machine is acting funny" and about 5 minutes patience with notepad open showed that his "secure" bt keyboard's trans/receiver had locked on to someone else's "secure" wireless keyboard too. What if that guy had typed in "www.schwab.combobjones54321"

    16. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Less cables? maybe, eventually.... But by the time you get the latest all-in-one, you will have some new technology coming along that offers something extra that you will want... So you will end up with a mix of new tech cables and old tech cables anyway

      Once you have a 'generic' interface like USB that's both fast enough and capable of providing power, what else do you need?

      USB has 'replaced' PS2, serial, parallel, and game* ports. Heck, it can even replace sound ports with what's essentially an external sound card. Heck, it even replaced PCMCIA ports in some cases - USB memory keys instead of mini hard drives in a PCMCIA card.

      The only real reason it hasn't replaced monitor cables is bandwidth - there's simply not enough.

      Bluetooth, wireless networking, PoE, etc.. All can help eliminate cables. I think my biggest desire is to see data cables shipping MORE power. USB, PoE, demonstrate it can be done. I'm not going to worry too much that my TV needs it's own power plug, but it'd nice to be able to power a 3.5" based USB HD with just the USB cable. Heck, I like the idea I've seen where your monitor has a USB hub you can plug your keyboard/mouse/whatever into. I've even seen keyboards with a small port you can put the mouse into (just get a mouse with a short cable, but as I use bluetooth...).

      AS for HDMI having ethernet instead of USB - well, HDMI has useful length of 15 meters without repeaters or anything, just using a good quality cable. USB has a fairly hard limit of 3 meters. Ethernet, at ~100 meters, will have no problems. Besides that, USB is still working on 'embedded host' protocols so you can do stuff like plug a keyboard into a phone to type on the phone.

      *What you used to plug things like joysticks into.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    17. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Well it really depends on the keyboard. Bluetooth keyboards tend to draw less power (and have a longer range) than some other proprietary protocols, in my experience anyway.

      At any rate, you should definitely be using NiMH batteries, not NiCd. They have about double the capacity on average (~1400mAh vs ~700mAh for AAs), and they have a much flatter voltage curve, which means you get more useful life in all respects.

    18. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Power down a monitor cable is IMO a bad idea.

      If you put mains down there you have huge product safety issues since the mains would have to be safely insulated all the way from the PSU to the display connector or you would need huge warnings to stop system builders electricuting themselves.

      If you put 12V down there then you would need to seriously uprate the PSU (depending on how big a monitors you want to support you may be talking hundreds of watts). You may also have volt drop issues.

      If you put a higher but still relatively safe DC voltage down there (e.g. the 25V that apple used) the PSU would have to be completely redesigned to add another high current rail.

      I agree that it would have been a good idea to put USB down there though.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    19. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      USB uses a lot of CPU, while SATA uses none at all.

      Do you happen to have a source on this? I mean, I remember shopping for full modems specifically because 'winmodems' sucked down CPU time for their operation, but near the end, it didn't matter.

      I highly doubt that SATA really uses 'none at all', I'm sure there's some CPU utilization with SATA.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    20. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Don't conventional, wired keyboards put out enough RF noise to be effectively sniffable anyway?

      Yes, but the equipment required to do it is both far more expensive and shorter ranged than with wireless.

      Bluetooth, for example, has been picked up from over a mile away.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    21. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Should a wireless mouse be encrypted too?

      Mainly worried about password sniffing; mouse only gives you xy data and clicks.

      With online banking if somebody gets ahold of my passwords they can do a transfer of my assets - and I'm NOT guaranteed to get them back.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    22. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      What I have to wonder is just why you personally are worth the effort it would take to snipe your wireless keyboard and decrypt the bluetooth connection?

      Thousands of dollars in bank accounts and investments?

      With them using my actual passwords, I'm not likely to get my money back either.

      With my training I know just how easy it is, I know it's vanishingly unlikely, but I can't help but be uneasy about it. Which is why I used the word 'paranoid'.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    23. Re:Finding standards is a pain.. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The only real reason it hasn't replaced monitor cables is bandwidth - there's simply not enough.

      USB2 is total shit because it requires a crapload of CPU intervention. IEEE1394 has security issues but at least I can max out my disks mounted on it without producing a noticeable bump in CPU usage. Put the same disks on USB2 (they're WD disks with eSata, USB2, and 1394) and transfer data from one to the other, and you're looking at over 5% CPU use... on my Phenom II X3 720 running Linux. Further, transfer rates are cut by about a third! In short, you'd have to include a fairly powerful microprocessor as a coprocessor if you wanted to use USB2 for anything that serious. Presumably USB3 doesn't have this problem, but I have no personal experience with it.

      AS for HDMI having ethernet instead of USB - well, HDMI has useful length of 15 meters without repeaters or anything, just using a good quality cable. USB has a fairly hard limit of 3 meters.

      USB data should be encapsulated with HDMI data, rather than adding more wires. The problem of course is that even dual-link HDMI leaves little bandwidth free for such pursuits after carrying high-resolution video.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  11. I don't get it by ProfMobius · · Score: 1

    Flash drives are flash drive. They are plugged in USB and recognized as such. SSD are using the same technology as flash drives with a SATA interface. External mechanical hard drives are using a SATA to USB adaptor to work in USB. So basically, all the technology is already existing.

    They replaced the SATA interface with a USB interface (like in a normal tumb drive) or just dropped a normal SSD inside a normal SATA 2.5" external box et voila !

    What's the news here ?

    --
    EULA : By reading the above message, you agree that I now own your soul.
    1. Re:I don't get it by Yamata+no+Orochi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It isn't really news. It's notable because it's the first one with USB 3.0, which is still basically inferior to the transfer speeds of other technologies, but has the capacity to power the drive with only one cable/connection.

    2. Re:I don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've had that for a while now. Most new laptops have an eSATA/USB combo port. What's all the excitement for again?

    3. Re:I don't get it by Yamata+no+Orochi · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what that link is in response to. That's a USB 2.0 hard-drive enclosure for regular 2.5" hard-drives.

      We're talking about SSD using a USB 3.0 connection.

    4. Re:I don't get it by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      The current eSATA standard (eSATAp) provides power, and some flash drives have supported it for a while. So really, the only thing significant is that this is the first SSD manufacturer to bother with USB 3.0.... :-)

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    5. Re:I don't get it by Yamata+no+Orochi · · Score: 1

      That's...exactly what I just said.

    6. Re:I don't get it by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Although you didn't say it, the way you worded your post sounded like you were implying that eSATA couldn't power drives.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  12. When they come together... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It will be like the finger of god.

    1. Re:When they come together... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rachel/Enyo 2005. Why vote for the lesser horror?

  13. Title says USB 3.0 by archer,+the · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It'll make a big difference when the USB 3.0 systems arrive.

    1. Re:Title says USB 3.0 by IBBoard · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because if the current Gigabyte mobos are anything to go by then you'll get faster occasional external drive transfer and slower graphics!

      (At least, that's what I found when investigating my latest purchase - I wanted to pay a little more a "future-proof" with a USB3 mobo, but enabling USB3 or their new SATA dropped the PCIe16 down to an x8)

    2. Re:Title says USB 3.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      My question is why bother with USB 3.0? The only practical purpose for those transfer speeds is for an external SSD. These drives are already using SATA, and the external drive enclosures are just converting to USB anyway. Why not cut out a layer of conversion and just go with e-SATA? Ports for e-SATA are already here, and external hard drives are already using them. You're going to have to add ports to your system anyway when USB 3.0 comes out (and if you're really unlucky, get a motherboard that can handle said ports). Just add an e-SATA port, which will hook right into the SATA slot that's been on all motherboards from the past 6+ years.

    3. Re:Title says USB 3.0 by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      The trouble is that the LGA1156 platforms are somewhat lacking in terms of PCIe expandability. There are 16 2.0 lanes off the CPU which can be used for either one x16 device or two x8 devices. Much the same applies to lower end LGA775 stuff (with LGA775 the chipset determines PCIe configuration)

      There are some (6-8 depending on chipset) lanes off the southbridge but they only run at 1.0 speeds.

      PCIe bridges can provide a protential way out of this predicament (e.g. by taking 1.0 x4 from the southbridge and providing 2.0 x1 to a couple of devices) but add to the cost. Bridges that can work with the x16 port are even more expensive and tend to run hot as well so they are generally only seen on gamer boards.

      It still stikes me as strange to split the graphics port though, especially as to connect two devices they would still need a bridge (afaict the lanes from the CPU cannot be split into anything smaller than x8)

      By contrast the LGA1366 with X58 and ICH10 (afaict the only common LGA1366 configuration) gives you 20 lanes of fast PCIe off the northbridge and 6 lanes of slower PCIe off the southbridge.

      One big problem i've run into is that while PCIe configuration is an important issue when selecting a motherboard (particulally a LGA1156 one with lots of extra IO devices onboard) it's often difficult to find that information. Workstation and server boards usually have a block diagram in the manual but consumer and gamer boards don't so you have to either guess or try to find a review that gives you the information.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    4. Re:Title says USB 3.0 by eharvill · · Score: 1

      eSATA requires external power. I don't think USB 3.0 does. If that is true, USB 3.0 has a huge advantage in my book....

      --
      At night I drink myself to sleep and pretend I don't care that you're not here with me
  14. Re:Woo! by somersault · · Score: 2, Funny

    Minor point, but wouldn't "shitty balls" go better with USB? Trolls these days.. no class.

    --
    which is totally what she said
  15. USB 3.0? by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What about Light Peak? Why upgrade to a minor speed bump when the next available speed bump is hundreds of times faster?

    Light Peak has enough bandwidth to replace USB 2.0, FireWire 800, DVI/HDMI, Ethernet 1000... all at once, on the first revision no less. Will USB 3.0 ever take off?

    1. Re:USB 3.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Firewire 800 had the bandwidth to replace USB 2.0. It can do a lot better job of sustaining throughput as well. Both could power external drives, and FireWire can push a lot more power (15-20 W (1.5 A @ 11-14 V) IIRC) than USB 2.0 (2.5 W (500 mA @ 5 V) standard, 5 W (1 A @ 5 V) or so extended). Yet I notice a distinct lack of disappearance of USB 2.0 in favor of FireWire, even after all the Apple royalty nonsense got resolved.

      The only thing that matters is what Intel builds into its chipsets. If LightPeak is in there, then you might have a point. If USB 3.0 is built-in to the chipset and FireW--I mean, LightPeak is an external (read: additional cost) chip, then there's going to be a lot less LP stuff out there.

      BTW, USB 3.0 is probably lower-power than LightPeak, so you're not going to see a lot of LP external drives or . Fiber optic circuits are a lot harder to design and can consume a lot of power compared to an equal-bandwidth copper implementation.

    2. Re:USB 3.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Light Peak will die like Firewire did; it's not backwards compatible with the stuff everyone already has, it's perpetually two years away, and the hardware needed to implement it is more expensive.

    3. Re:USB 3.0? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Light Peak, if it actually comes out as specified, looks like it will be an awesome advancement: it'll change datacenter storage, home storage, and pretty much everything else overnight.

      The crux will be how it's licensed and how it's designed: will it be licensed like USB (ie, liberally) or like Firewire (ie, barely)? Will it be designed to allow for people to abuse the specifications (ie, USB) and still work, or will it be painfully restrictive, allowing only "good" devices to work (ie, Firewire)?

      If it behaves as an interface and costs like USB, it'll fly off the shelves, I think. I'm hoping so, and looking forward to it. But, frankly, I can see it becoming the future equivalent of something like iSCSI or FC: too awesome and capable for the consumer, and it's got such an incredible profit margin we're going to keep it Enterprisey.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    4. Re:USB 3.0? by Surt · · Score: 1

      Light Peak devices are 6 years away (at best). USB 3 devices are here now. Will USB3 take off? It already has.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    5. Re:USB 3.0? by hitmark · · Score: 1

      to me at least it seems that light peak is something intel dreamed up when their bid to make usb3 intel exclusive for a year go torpedoed. And its not helping that they have apparently partnered up with apple on it, given how apple seems to be going back to its proprietary ways thanks to the success of the iphone platform.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    6. Re:USB 3.0? by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Light Peak devices are 6 years away (at best). USB 3 devices are here now. Will USB3 take off? It already has.

      Well, I wouldn't go that far. USB3 is out, but personally I feel like it's "early adopters" using it at this point. After a couple years, once new machines have included it for a while and a fair number of people have upgraded, then maybe it will have "taken off"...

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    7. Re:USB 3.0? by capo_dei_capi · · Score: 1

      Nah, seems apple played a major role in the development of light peak, hence it's unlikely that it will be "enterprisy". But then again, FireWire was also mostly an Apple thing and never took off...

    8. Re:USB 3.0? by capo_dei_capi · · Score: 1

      Light Peak devices are 6 years away (at best)

      Where did you get that from?!
      According to this, Light Peak will be available to manufacturers by the end of this year.

    9. Re:USB 3.0? by Surt · · Score: 1

      Followed by R&D, licensing debate, standardization, product development, product release, product uptake.

      Go read about how long it took from first silicon to widespread adoption for USB2, which was built on top of a proven technology.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    10. Re:USB 3.0? by capo_dei_capi · · Score: 1

      Well, let's see USB 3.0 is fundamentally different from USB 2.0, its specs were passed in Nov. of 2008, and the first devices appeared on the market in early 2010. At the time Intel hands the specs over to the manufacturers, they likely are going to have working chips that are at least sufficient for storage tasks, and IMO that's what counts since where else do you need the bandwidth of USB 3.0? Keyboard I/O? I think not.

    11. Re:USB 3.0? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      The only thing that matters is what Intel builds into its chipsets.
      Absoloutely, built into intel chipsets means cheap and easy to support which brings success.

      This is why esata is fairly common these days. If the design has a sata port to spare routing it out is relatively cheap. The downside of ESATa is that you generally only get one port and the desigeners didn't include power (yes I know powered ESATA soloutions exist now but there are many unpowered ports still out there).

      This is where things get interesting with USB 3, intel claim to be behind it but afaict they haven't actually put it in any of their chipsets yet. Intel are also behind light peak afaict.

      Though personally I think lightpeak will end up as a niche product whatever happens. Even if the core functionality is in the chipset those optical transcievers will add hugely to the cost.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    12. Re:USB 3.0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ligght Peak doesn't replace anything on the software side. It's a high speed interconnect that will replace cables. USB and DisplayPort aren't going anywhere. You still need a communications protocol to send data THROUGH Light Peak.

  16. Will MS ever allow Windows to boot from USB? by swb · · Score: 0

    (And I mean normally, not through the use of third-party hacks or PE mode or whatever).

    I mean, it's kind of getting to the point where with USB3 drives a person really could, for many situations, not even NEED a SATA disk connection except for the fact that Windows is too retarded to boot from USB. It's not hard to see a future USB4 standard on par with or faster than a current SATA standard or a line of motherboards that for size or simplicity's sake omit SATA ports altogether.

    What gives with MS refusal to allow boot from USB? Even if performance is suboptimal either from a speeds & feeds perspective or a too-many-IRQs perspective (still true with USB 3?), the flexibility it would provide would be enormous.

    And maybe that's it -- maybe once Windows can boot from USB it makes it hard for MS to keep tying an install to a "PC" since Windows installed to USB is kind of independent of the PC.

    1. Re:Will MS ever allow Windows to boot from USB? by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Forget USB4, SATA and all the others, Light Peak has the capacity to replace everything.

    2. Re:Will MS ever allow Windows to boot from USB? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      And maybe that's it -- maybe once Windows can boot from USB it makes it hard for MS to keep tying an install to a "PC" since Windows installed to USB is kind of independent of the PC.

      You can move a disk from PC to PC with sleds, but that won't make Windows independent of the PC because of its driver model. You'll need precisely the same hardware installed in the same slots in both PCs to avoid confusing Windows. Some motherboards have disk emulation for USB. I think it's a BIOS function. You can run Windows on USB on them. Netbooks are the most typical examples since they don't come with optical drives and users may or may not have them.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Will MS ever allow Windows to boot from USB? by wbo · · Score: 1

      You can move a disk from PC to PC with sleds, but that won't make Windows independent of the PC because of its driver model. You'll need precisely the same hardware installed in the same slots in both PCs to avoid confusing Windows.

      That was true on versions of Windows prior to Vista. Prior to Vista the hardware for the PC was detected at install time and the appropriate HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) was installed. That meant that if you attempted to move the drive to a system that needed a different HAL you got an instant BSOD. In Vista (and Windows 7 as well) Windows determines which HAL to use during boot time so you can easily move a Windows install from one machine to another even if they have very different hardware. If the boot drive is on a storage controller or RAID cards that is not supported by the driver's built-in to Vista or Windows 7 you will need to make sure the appropriate drivers are installed before moving the drive but that is fairly easy to do for most controllers.

      Where I used to have to maintain OS images for every hardware configuration I manage, I now only have 2 images. One for 32-bit Windows 7 (for older hardware that can't support 64-bit) and one for 64-bit Windows 7.

      Also both Vista and Windows 7 support booting via USB you just have to configure it properly. Windows 7 can even boot from a VHD file (basically a disk image) which can be on any drive that is accessible at boot time.

    4. Re:Will MS ever allow Windows to boot from USB? by swb · · Score: 1

      What counts as "configure it properly"?

      Will it actually install to USB, or do you have to get cute and clone a SATA disk to a USB disk?

      And I thought the limitation, also brought to Win7, was related to how Windows handled the USB driver load and losing the handle on its boot volume in the process.

    5. Re:Will MS ever allow Windows to boot from USB? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      That meant that if you attempted to move the drive to a system that needed a different HAL you got an instant BSOD.

      You could also move the drive to a system that simply needed a different storage driver, and you'd also get an instant BSOD, with BOOT_DRIVE_INACCESSIBLE, IIRC.

      If the boot drive is on a storage controller or RAID cards that is not supported by the driver's built-in to Vista or Windows 7 you will need to make sure the appropriate drivers are installed before moving the drive but that is fairly easy to do for most controllers.

      Under Windows 9x, however, you could move the drive to a machine which was totally different, and the system used BIOS calls and fallback drivers, then detected the hardware in the system, and finally rebooted under the 32 bit drivers. Under Linux, of course, as long as your kernel or initrd has appropriate storage drivers, autoconfiguration is typical.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  17. 64GB is large scale for most businesses by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just because its not enough for a major bank or for you to store your porn collection on doesn't mean it isn't enough for 99% of small businesses.

    1. Re:64GB is large scale for most businesses by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      A "porn collection" is going to be multiple or even 10s of terabytes.

      We're not even talking about that here. Just a few high-res photos or some home videos can easily blow away 64G.

      Regardless, there just isn't any reason for small businesses or home users to care about SSD. The performance gains are marginal along the lines of fixating on a few more fps in your FPS.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  18. Disposable?! by Yvan256 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    smaller capacity models have become cheap, disposable means of data transport and distribution

    Can we please stop "disposing" of things, especially complex, hard-to-recycle things like electronic devices?

    1. Re:Disposable?! by satoshi1 · · Score: 1

      No.

    2. Re:Disposable?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A useful resource in this regard (and, yes, this works.)

      http://www.freecycle.org/

      (Although flash drives aren't so much disposed of as, well, "misplaced.")

    3. Re:Disposable?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't be a douchebag. it disposable if I don't mind losing it or giving it away.

    4. Re:Disposable?! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Can we please stop "disposing" of things, especially complex, hard-to-recycle things like electronic devices?

      Sure, all we have to do is stop progress.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Disposable?! by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Disposable is the wrong term but I can not think of the a better term.
      How about giveable or loanable? I don't mind giving someone a cheap flash drive with data on it as a form of transport. Or I don't mind loaning one to someone. Hopefully they will reuse or return it to me for reuse but if that doesn't happen I am not out a large amount of money.
      Of course I have a 128 MB drive sitting in a drawer that I have no Idea what to do with. Might use that a way to give digital pictures to someone in the future.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:Disposable?! by hitmark · · Score: 1

      indeed, while internet makes file exchange easy, one should not underestimate the bandwidth and flexibility of sneakernet.

      heck, even if the net should be down, sneakernet may still function.

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    7. Re:Disposable?! by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Or privacy.
      Yes I could just post my family videos on youtube but...
      Plus if you have an old 128mb drive or an old 256, or 512mb flash drive why not keep using it as a floppy? Just pass it on or lend it out.
      The other choice is to burn a CD or DVD and just how many of those are in landfills now?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    8. Re:Disposable?! by r_jensen11 · · Score: 1

      Disposable is the wrong term but I can not think of the a better term.

      I think the word you are trying to find is "Consumable"

    9. Re:Disposable?! by Zimmel · · Score: 1

      Good point, I think that recycle-ability should play a growing and mandated part of any designs now.... I don't think that poor people in China, India and other places should continue to pay the cost of throw away culture.

    10. Re:Disposable?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably the most insightful comment of the week.

    11. Re:Disposable?! by bluej100 · · Score: 1

      Insightful. It would be more compelling to worry about our grandchildren if it didn't appear that they will be profoundly better equipped to deal with their problems than we are.

  19. Is this even special? by Richy_T · · Score: 1

    Didn't I read something about SSD including a USB (electrical) interface anyway? Or maybe it was one of the new SATA standards.

    1. Re:Is this even special? by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      My mistake, I think I was thinking of mini-pci which I think is that the EEEPC uses for its SSD (though I think it's a mangled version without the USB). It's really been a long time since I looked into it.

    2. Re:Is this even special? by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      Ah, from wikipedia:

      PCI Express Mini Card (also known as Mini PCI Express, Mini PCIe, and Mini PCI-E) is a replacement for the Mini PCI form factor based on PCI Express. It is developed by the PCI-SIG. The host device supports both PCI Express and USB 2.0 connectivity, and each card uses whichever the designer feels most appropriate to the task. Most laptop computers built after 2005 are based on PCI Express and can have several Mini Card slots.

  20. Span/stripe 4x4gb GIGABYTE IRAM REAL SSD's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So you have a 16gb spanned/striped single SSD unit to bootup from, and one that uses DDR2 RAM in the GIGABYTE IRAM, instead of units that use slower and less lasting FLASH RAM (with FLASH RAM's slower write cycles and lesser longevity).

    So, as an "alternate idea" here, well... You can do this and boot up into Windows by doing that with a GIGABYTE IRAM, and enjoy faster write speed on it "to boot" (pun intended), which can come in useful for say, pagefile.sys placement also plus logging and temp ops taking place faster than they would on FLASH RAM based SSD solutions (and more, like webbrowser caches too... really anything that performs writes as well as reads will gain on this type of SSD (one NOT based on FLASH RAM, but DDR2 instead)).

    APK

  21. The Dirty Secret by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    Nobody wants to talk about the fact that these things are actually considerably more expensive than their already-high retail price. You MUST have the storage capacity to keep them fully backed up at all times. When a standard-issue hard drive crashes, it usually gives you some hint that there's a problem. Maybe it starts running hot, maybe it starts making noise, maybe you start getting write errors or the partition goes missing (but the data is still salvagable). In 20 years and more HDD's than I can count, I've never once had one just plain quit. I've had that unpleasant experience twice with jump drives. Fine and dandy one minute, dead as a carp the next time I plugged it in and hour later. Neither had been anywhere, done anything...just sat there on the desk waiting for a few minutes (to be accurate, in one case overnight). Attempts to recover data via software intended to address the problem were unsuccessful.

    Until this problem is addressed effectively, I'm going to be very careful about investing in large SSD's.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    1. Re:The Dirty Secret by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I use an SSD as my system disk, and a RAID10 array of 2TB disks for storage. I image the SSD to the RAID10 array once a week (Ghost, with a boot CD that automates the process). Seems to work so far.

    2. Re:The Dirty Secret by foldingstock · · Score: 1

      Flash drives are very cheaply manufactured (and thus have low life expectancy) compared to SSD's, which are supposed to be of much higher quality.

      Also, modern SSD's should last considerably longer than most modern mechanical hard drives.

      I agree with you, though, and won't be investing much into SSD's until they have a more proven track record.

    3. Re:The Dirty Secret by PlusFiveTroll · · Score: 1

      Err, you better have the storage capacity to back up those spinning drives too. People do dumb crap, like drop their notebook, or kick their tower over on accident, and sometimes this will kill the drives instantly. The SSD is much more likely to survive such an event. On unmanaged systems most users are not going to have SMART running, or if they do pay attention to the logs that the drive is running 80C. Or they'll just ignore the clicks of death until the day their computer boots and says 'Operating system not found'.

      I don't trust either technology to keep a single copy of my data safe. If it's important, backup and distribute at geographically distinct locations.

    4. Re:The Dirty Secret by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      If I had mod points, I'd give you an "Informative". That sounds like a good system.

      I use Acronis to create images of my data and boot drives on one of two external HDD's. One is always off the premises.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    5. Re:The Dirty Secret by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      Good point, and I have to confess that I did exactly what you say with a PC (knocked it right off a desk). I was lucky enough to have the drive still work afterwards. I didn't trust it, though, and replaced it immediately. And I DO back up. As far as I'm concerned, a bigger drive just means you have more to lose if it screws up.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  22. "Bash into each other." by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    Such an awkward phrase... if only we had a single word for it.

    1. Re:"Bash into each other." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Procreate?

      Or am I doing it wrong?

  23. Single drive, eSATA+USB connections by Fencepost · · Score: 1

    There are other curious beasts out there, such as Kanguru's e-Flash which has both eSATA and USB connectors. It's steepish at $105+ for 32GB (vs $60 or so for 32GB USB), but not absurd. 64GB also available.

    I'm sure it's a niche product that will go away after USB3 becomes widespread, but for now it's a nice mix of both worlds.

    --
    fencepost
    just a little off
  24. Re:Woo! by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    If you get "S" on your balls doing that, then you're doing it wrong.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  25. how about one that looks like an external floppy by josepha48 · · Score: 1

    seriously, I wouldn't mind one like that because my system wont boot from external usb drive, but will boot from external floppy :(

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!
    Does slashdot hate my posts?

  26. Will light peak only work with on board video? by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    Will light peak only work with on board video?

    also E-net on Light peak you will still E-net as long light runs may cost a meny times more then E-net and light peak routers and switches may be very high cost.

  27. USB3 + flash storage... inevitable? by Tetsujin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And since it is a USB3 SSD, that is a pretty big deal to be honest, even if the lines "this is an advertisement" were present as well.

    Why is it a big deal? I mean, did anyone not see this coming? We have the USB3 standard coming out (well, it's already out, but a lot of people still don't have the hardware for it) - was the application of USB3 to flash storage somehow not obvious? It was bound to happen sooner or later.

    --
    Bow-ties are cool.
  28. What happened to "then"? by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

    When Slashdot and Advertisements come together... Slashvertisements! You could have learned as much or more by reading the press release where it is revealed that "Enyo USB 3.0 Portable SSDs will begin shipping this now and will be available through OCZ's extensive worldwide channel." Thank goodness, I thought I would have to wait for the next now.

    When will "then" be "now"?
    soon...

    --
    Bow-ties are cool.
  29. Another nit... by sean.peters · · Score: 1

    ... daisy-chaining. One of the supposed advantages to both FireWire and USB was that you could daisy-chain devices. But in practice, how many devices ever actually contained an upstream port so you could use this feature? I have a FW external hard drive that had an additional port, and I can and do use that as a link in a daisy chain. But no other device I own, either USB or FireWire, supports this. You have to plug them straight into the computer or get a hub. Since my main machine is a laptop and has exactly 2 USB ports, it's sometimes an issue.

    I hope Light Peak devices do a better job at this. Lack of device support for daisy-chaining isn't a huge deal, but it's at least somewhat of a pain in the ass.

  30. Dig deeper ... by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    and find photo's here if you'd like to know more...

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  31. Re:Woo! by somersault · · Score: 1

    Well, fucking someone up the ass isn't really high up on my priorities list, nor on the list of my girlfriends as far as I've known, so yeah I wouldn't know :p

    --
    which is totally what she said
  32. NiMH batteries by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    I use rechargables in my mouse, it generally lasts 2-3 weeks before I have to swap.

    I think the biggest problem isn't the amount of power the device draws, but more the self-discharge rate. A LiIon of the same bulk/weight would hold twice again as much power, but also wouldn't be losing 5-10% of it's charge per day.

    It's the sort of application that's actually more suited towards alkalines. I had a set of those last for over two months when I was attending some training out of town.

    If you can find some 'low self discharge' type NiMH cells, you might get a LOT more lifespan between charges.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
    1. Re:NiMH batteries by Agripa · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what you guys are doing but both my last 2 x AA wireless keyboard and my current 2 x AAA wireless keyboard last months between charges. I used normal NiMH AAs for the earlier one and now use low discharge AAAs for the new one. I've never actually run down the 2 x AAA one yet. My 2 x AA low discharge NiMH mouse goes about 2 months.

      I do not buy any new NiMH cells that are not low discharge. The earlier cells were all pretty poor replacements for good NiCd cells.

    2. Re:NiMH batteries by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Don't have a wireless keyboard, but my wireless mouse has some cheap NiMH cells in it that aren't low discharge. I'm too cheap right now to replace them. I have 4 batteries, two in the mouse, 2 in the charger. Mouse quits working right, I swap them.

      As for usage - gaming, browsing, pretty much constant when I'm home.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    3. Re:NiMH batteries by Agripa · · Score: 1

      That is the system I try to use for all portable electronics. I much prefer swapping good standard AA or AAA cells to fixed lithium cells. My optical mouse goes for more than 2 months and swapping takes about 30 seconds. The only item I regularly use which does not use standard cells is my mp3 player although it does have a user replaceable lithium battery. I am waiting on a good AA using netbook but do not have high hopes.

      As far as low discharge NiMH cells, I have had good results from Sanyo's Eneloop cells. Their old low discharge NiCd cells are what I used to use in high reliability applications.

    4. Re:NiMH batteries by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      The problem you run into with netbooks and such is that LiIon has about double the energy density of NiMH. Now, in 'micro' applications the extra charging and protection circuitry reduces or even eliminates this advantage.

      But in netbook and larger sizes, the added mass of the charging/protection circuitry is negligible, so you actually get better performance from the LiIon. You could probably make cell phones last quite a bit longer - but the form factor isn't quite right for AA cells - you'd have to make the phone thicker.

      You pay quite a penalty for AAA.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    5. Re:NiMH batteries by Agripa · · Score: 1

      The problem you run into with netbooks and such is that LiIon has about double the energy density of NiMH.

      In the best case, lithium chemistry cells have twice the energy density by weight but by volume it is a lot closer. They also have a high cost considering their relatively short life span. A standardized lithium battery size that was ubiquitous and user replaceable would be nice. I would trade any extra energy density for the long life and lower cost of lithium-iron-phosphate.

    6. Re:NiMH batteries by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      I know, but when you start getting into the larger cells the weight savings can be quite substantial; then there's also that Lithium polymer is much more flexible in shape than NiMH to reduce the volume cost. Another thing to consider is that NiMH tends to be around 66% efficient at charging, while LiIon is over 90%.

      I'd go with Lithium Iron for any appliance I plan on using for more than 2-3 years even without the lower cost. They say that, on average, LiIron has equal capacity after a year, on average, more afer that.

      It wouldn't be a bad thing if I could get another MP3 player that runs on a AA.

      Let's see:
      Laptop: Lithium - It's just too big.
      Netbook: AA batteries; it'd be what, 4-8 of them? Preferably integrate a charger.
      Flashlight, MP3 player, Bluetooth mouse/keyboard, Electric toothbrush(Effectiveness gains probably minimal; but it's 'funner'): AA, between 2-4

      Then just pack a charger; preferably one that does individual cells, not pairs.

      I like to avoid AAA because of the substantial energy cost for minimal volumne savings. C/D cells are too much of a pain to get 'real' rechargables for. 2400mAh vs 2200 for the AA.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
  33. Actually they do have their uses by celtic_hackr · · Score: 1

    These would come in quite handy in extreme environments. Well at least extreme in regards to motion. Very useful in say a rough terrain spy vehicle. With a device like this expensive, heavy, shock protection for a normal hard drive would not be necessary. It would come in quite handy in blackboxes, and such. In other words there is certainly a market out there beyond gadgeters. It would be a nice feature in a AI car, you could pack a lot of rules and patterns in and retrieve them in rapid succession. Oh, yeas, I see uses for this that would make it worth the high cost. You could just strap this into your lightweight self-driving EV prototype and gain a huge boost over your competitors.

    DOH! There goes my secret R&D weapon!

    Unfortunately, I see no where to buy one of these. Thank goodness Amazon still has one of Super Talent's 128 GB 3.0 USB RAIDDrive flashdrives! Whew!
    http://www.amazon.com/Super-Talent-RAIDDrive-Flash-STU28GSRK/dp/B0037FU7AI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1273175768&sr=8-1

  34. Cheap! by UK+Boz · · Score: 1

    If water can be cheaply broken down into hydrogen and oxygen.. Why does it cost hundreds of millions of dollars to put a rocket in orbit when America is surrounded by the stuff!

    --
    www.boznz.com Simple solutions to complex problems.