Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Unveils World's First UFS Storage Cards, Could Replace MicroSD (pcworld.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Samsung has unveiled the world's first UFS card that could one day replace microSD cards in devices. The UFS card is based on the Universal Flash Storage 1.0 Card Extension standard and will be available in capacities from 32GB to 256GB. With a UFS card, users will be able to read 5GB of data, or a full resolution movie file, in 10 seconds, Samsung claims. For comparison, a UHS-1 microSD card would take 50 seconds to do the same. UFS cards will be able to fit into a wide range of devices like smartphones, tablets, cameras, and drones, but the devices will need a specific UFS card slot, which could take some time. Samsung claims the 256GB UFS card has a sequential read speed of 530MBps. The random read speed is 20 times faster than a microSD card. The sequential write speed is about 170MBps, which Samsung estimates is two times faster than microSD cards. The random write speed is 350 times faster than microSD, Samsung claims. The Universal Flash Storage 1.0 Card Extension standard is intended to replace the eMMC standard, which is used in low-cost laptops and Chromebooks. Samsung didn't disclose pricing or availability for the UFS storage cards. It's worth noting that Toshiba does also make UFS storage cards, but they have yet to release any based on the UFS 1.0 Card Extension standard.
Samsung has unveiled the world's first UFS card that could one day replace microSD cards in devices.
Great. Another incompatible storage card standard... Just what everybody was asking for.
UFS cards will be able to fit into a wide range of devices like smartphones, tablets, cameras, and drones, but the devices will need a specific UFS card slot, which could take some time.
Of course if can fit into a lot of devices if those devices are designed for it. Would it have killed them to make it backwards compatible with the hardware that already exists? I'm sure it has all sorts of lovely features but is it really too much to ask for the designers of this shit to think about future proofing their designs as well as backwards compatibility?
They do.
MicroSD slot is back in the Galaxy S7 and Galaxy S7 edge.
Looks like they realized dropping it in the S6 line was a mistake.
You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
What possible incentive is there for them to make it backwards compatible.
Selling cards to the owners of the millions of devices that already exist. Providing an upgrade path will keep people using your standard. By not making it backwards compatible there is a strong risk it will fail to be adopted.
They want to sell and obsolete as many devices as fast possible, one way to do that is with constantly changing and evolving the standards ensuring enough improvements to make a replacement desirable
If they want to sell more cards and hardware, keeping it compatible is the fastest way to do that. Even if I want this technology it is going to be years most likely before I have a device that can use it. So they are pushing any possible sale to me out by a long time. On the other hand if the card is compatible with what I have already, even with reduced performance, there is some chance I buy one immediately.
I don't agree with this strategy but it makes good business sense. Hell they don't even provide OS upgrades for most smartphones.
I don't think it is good business at all. It think it is a very short sighted strategy that has been tried before and usually fails.
And the lack of OS upgrades is one of the big reasons why I tend to shy away from most Android devices (with some notable exceptions). While there is a lot I like about Android better than iPhones, Apple at least continues to support their products after you buy them which matters to me at least. (Given what Apple charges they damn well should support them too...)
Given removable storage and finite data volumes on mobile plans, cloud storage is a niche requirement.
The way I (and I suspect many) people use SD and especially micro SD cards is kinda fire and forget. In other words, there's some device that needs one, so I decide what size I want and shove it in there. Mostly it remains there for the life of the device.
In some cases that is correct which of course raises the question of why you need to complexity of removable storage if you never plan to remove it. I see people complain about this in regards to certain smartphones (looking at you Apple) but I think Apple and you are correct that in 99% of the cases the removable storage adds complexity and cost for a feature that never gets used. Most of my staff at work has Android phones of one type or another and I can say confidently that none of them ever remove their removable storage cards even when they've bothered to install one.
The only piece of removable storage I use with any regularity is the SD card in my good camera. SD cards (and CF) are not going to be replaced in cameras any time soon so this new standard provides zero benefit to me. Occasionally I use a USB memory stick and similarly USB isn't going anywhere. I just don't see the point of this thing.
So again what is the point of developing yet another removable card hardware standard without making it compatible with what we already have? I'm excited about stuff like USB-C because it eliminates complexity (or will in due time). I want some really well designed standards that last a long time and that work gracefully with older hardware. I have zero use for an incompatible standards cash grab that doesn't work with any hardware I own or am likely to buy.
Other than in the professional occupations is there really any need for a new format that is only 5x faster? Does the current top transfer speed cause latency with the devices that use it?
Yes.
Other than a speed increase is there anything else different that means we need to make obsolete all the microsd format and switch to this new one?
Only a 5x speed increase? Is that all?
Seriously, perspective, get some. Consider history. Realize that your questions are beyond ridiculous.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
A quick back of an envelope calculation suggests that something in the order of 100 million people use underground railways in big cities every year. Until those underground railways have universal wifi coverage, that's a lot of people wanting to listen to music when they're out of range of the internet.
Why can't we just use a universal, standard unit like X so we know how many times faster than a CD it is?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Except for those vendors who try to release a more geeky friendly device. With removable parts rarely seem to make any sucess. Unlike the Desktop PC of old were you paid an average of $2,000 for a system, that you will want to upgrade over time. We are now spending $300 - $600 for a cheaper device that we normally keep for just as long.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Yeah, my phone plan gives me 1 GB/month. That's down from 2 GB/month that my plan originally offered. But that's okay. I don't use a lot of data beyond occasional web browsing. To get 5 GB, I'd have to pay an extra 25 bucks per month. Streaming my music library is out of the question. Or I could take that 25 bucks and get a very large SD card as a one-time purchase. Luckily Samsung realized that this is important to many, many people and brought it back with their latest line. Sorry, but your claims are ridiculous.
WiFi is also commonly unavailable.
For what it's worth, I don't think many people care about having a swappable battery so they can swap it out in the middle of the day. A swappable battery is good for those of us who don't want to throw away our otherwise perfectly functional 800 dollar pocket computer when the battery dies in two years.
at some point people will look at the 1 256GB, 2 128GB, 3 64GB, 5 32GB, 12 16GB, 7 8GB, 3 4GB and 4 1GB SD cards they already have and decide they're good, thanks anyway.
I come here for the love
It seems that UFS at least gets rid of that useless DRM in SD cards.
SD means "secure digital" with "secure" meaning DRM. And not only it is an unwanted feature for most users but it also wastes a significant amount of space (10% according to Wikipedia).
In my opinion, what has made it SD cards niche is Android's crappy storage model which makes using your external card more complicated than it ought to be.
this signature has been removed due to a DMCA takedown notice
For the unaware, SDHC maxes out at 32GB. You then have the option of using SDXC which maxes out at 2TB but there is a problem, SDXC specification mandates the use of exFAT which [surprise!] is restricted by patent by Microsoft. What this means is that memory controller may be optimised for exFAT I/O modes which may result in undefined behavior or brick it if you decide "i'll just format this to EXT4". UFS on the other hand, does not specify even needing a filesystem, so it's more like a SSD than a memory card.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Lets look at your 800 dollar "pocket computer", in terms of economic value, rather than dollars spent.
800 / 24 = $33.34 / month in value amortized across two years .
Let me ask you, do you get $33.34 in value for your phone, each and every month? My guess, is that you do. Do you use every last feature on your phone, every month? Probably not, but that is almost irrelevant. So, you extend your life of your phone, perhaps a year, maybe by adding a replaceable battery.
815 / 36 = $22.64 /month. So, you "save" $11 month (not really).
Instead of buying a "top of the line" (Samsung/Apple) cell phone, packed with features you you don't always use, you can go for a more middle of the road model like the top of the line Nexus (and avoid the bloat and crap installed by your carrier) for the same "$22.64/mo" you're getting out of the top of the line model, and extra battery, replacing your phone every other year instead of every three years, getting better technology more often than trying to extend your expensive eye candy purchase an extra year.
This doesn't even include options for even cheaper phones, more often.
So, in summary, you can buy a "Name Brand Signature Model Cell Phone" every three years, or get a less expensive phone, with all the things you're likely to actually use every two years, for the exact same money. And trust me, when I say this, in three years, your three year old phone is REALLY old, and tired. and in two years, a cheaper phone is going to out perform your now aging phone that you're still going to have to hold onto another year simply to break even.
So, while you THINK you're doing yourself a favor and saving money, you're likely not doing any such thing, and in the end, in two years, you're gonna want to buy that flashy shiney (since you've already proven that is what you're really doing, buying top of the line model ) and buy a new phone anyway. It is better to not lie to yourself, admit you're being foolish and get a better phone every two years, than it is to hold onto a old tired phone every three.
Lastly, when you drop and break your "expensive phone", or lose it on the taxi ride, or have it stolen out of your purse(man bag) at the club, you'll feel much better if it was not quite as costly to replace.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Besides the technical issues with exFAT, implementing it also comes with with the requirement of paying Microsoft royalties. That has done a lot of damage to the SDXC format by inflating the price of all SD cards larger than 32GB and encouraging many devices to stick to only supporting SDHC even though the SDXC spec is now more than 7 years old.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
> In my opinion, what has made it SD cards niche is Android's crappy storage model which makes using your external card more complicated than it ought to be.
Total bullshit.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.