Cool SSD read...

Thanks, that was interesting. I was thinking of getting a lowish capacity (64GB) SSD to host the my OS; however, it looks like Win7 might be the best point to jump into them.

I don't want to start an Apple-bashing hijack here but can someone explain this to me?

Regardless of what Microsoft does, Unsworth said he believes that Apple will have the advantage because its OS is closed, meaning Apple can drive its own development initiatives and will likely do so when it comes to SSD optimization.
Click to expand...
 
I am thinking something get messed up when typing or editing the article. I got the impression they are referring to the “closed” hardware that Mac OS is sold with. Since thats really the only thing that makes sense to me. Since when Apple decides to start selling Mac's with SSD's you can almost bet they with tweak the OS to get the most out of it.

While Microsoft really has very little incentive to develop SSD optimizations in to windows. Now I have no doubt they will and probably before Apple since we have seen how quick they were to adopt the multi button mouse or the newer HD-DVD and Blue-Ray. But when apple does optimize I think they will do a better job.

I think this is the point the linked article was trying to make.
 
I read up to the point where it says:

"If you really want to go inside [the OS numbers], Windows 98 was the fastest of all," Far said. But there's a downside: Windows 98 does not support wear-leveling technology, which evenly distributes data writes to NAND flash memory to ensure no single area of an SSD wears out faster than another. Far said his company's SSDs would wear out in only about a year when running Windows 98.
Click to expand...

Then I stopped reading. Wear-leveling is a hardware technology built into the SSD itself - it has absolutely nothing to do with the OS or any software on the machine the SSD is attached to so this is outright fluffy bullshit. An SSD has wear-leveling as part of its own internal circuitry and manages the content from there. All modern SSDs are built this way, and while the optimizations they're hinting at are for improved random write performance and not wear-leveling, it doesn't bode well when articles like this keep getting published. It's just too inaccurate to believe...

I'm sick of websites with a paragraph or two of content then another page, then another anyway... bleh.
 
That article has so many issues I don't even know where to begin........
 
Yeah, why split the article up in 4 pages to increase load times, then slow it way down with a ton of animated ads?
 
Joe Average said:
I read up to the point where it says:


Then I stopped reading. Wear-leveling is a hardware technology built into the SSD itself - it has absolutely nothing to do with the OS or any software on the machine the SSD is attached to so this is outright fluffy bullshit. An SSD has wear-leveling as part of its own internal circuitry and manages the content from there. All modern SSDs are built this way, and while the optimizations they're hinting at are for improved random write performance and not wear-leveling, it doesn't bode well when articles like this keep getting published. It's just too inaccurate to believe...

I'm sick of websites with a paragraph or two of content then another page, then another anyway... bleh.
Click to expand...

Wow... my exact reaction, I was almost ready to post the same thing word for word.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top