[citation][nom]de5_roy[/nom]it looks like almost every market analyst is predicting grim future for hdd prices. it could be a push to popularize other storage mediums like ssds and cloud. ssds are good but they're still pricier and cloud tends to fail quite spectacularly. the lower capacity hdds could make a comeback in prebuilt pcs. future looks bleak.[/citation]
unless we find a way for silicon to cost less per wafer to produce, it will never become significantly cheaper 500gb at 100$ for a hdd is still 20 cents per gb, and that is cheaper than an ssd even if the ssd was using a 10nm process.
the cloud wont happen, at least not soon, due to our interent, and that wont change even if we assume hdds stay the same price for 5 years.
and smaller hdds wont happen either, i mean we are thinking the old days of 20-40gb of space right
i mean right now we have what, at least 500gb platters, the flood could be just the reason to scrap all the older hdd platter types and focus on the bigger ones, i really don't think you will see much of the smaller ones once flooding subsides.
the future isnt as bleak as you are thinking, its just a really cloudy time
[citation][nom]nottheking[/nom]One thing I'm looking to see is how the SSD market is shaping up. I'd be surprised if the price spike in HDDs hasn't convinced a significant portion (at least a couple percent) of the market to shift to getting SSDs instead.Ultrabooks tend to use SSDs, not HDDs. As they're manufactured differently, in different facilities, there weren't any shortages with the Thailand floods. As a result, they didn't see the same price increases.Chances are SSD prices may go up, but only a small amount: this increase would just be due to the increased demand for SSDs to take up the slack from HDDs, but also, due to the more robust semiconductor market, it could almost certainly expand production much better to meet this increased demand.[/citation]
ultrabook or netbook.... cant tell the difference really, but the cost is far higher. seriously, even with a laptop hdd costing more, they are still cheaper than an ultrabook. you have to remember, whole sale hdd prices aren't much more than they use to be, retail is where we are getting screwed and screwed hard, even if a harddrive cost 100, it now costs 120 from a pre built cost, but for us, if the harddrive sold for 100, it now costs 120, we get charged 230+
[citation][nom]DRosencraft[/nom]Yeah... I'm definitely not going that route. Call me paranoid, but I much rather keep an eye on my own data than trust it to some data-bank out there. Hacking, lost files, server crashes, shut down servers, spotty internet service for whatever reason... at least if i have the drive when something goes wrong i'm enpowered to do something about it. I couldn't care less if cloud storage utterly fails... but that's just my opinon. On another note, that really sucks for the PC industry. They've already been under pressure and now they have to contend with a supply shortage on a critical component. I'd like to say this will help the transition to SSDs, but the price-point still isn't ideal there and the average consumer doesn't know enough about the technology to understand the tradeoff between SSD performance and HDD size. But, you've gotta start somewhere, right?[/citation]
you forgot that one douche who puts some cp on it and whole servers are confiscated due to it.
[citation][nom]amk-aka-Phantom[/nom]The average consumer doesn't understand why these "SSD hard drives" (heard that pearl recently from some customer) are so expensive with such little capacity. I guess I gotta build a demo rig with an SSD to demonstrate the power to them Most consumers don't realize that they do not need more than 100GB storage in their laptop. Is it really that difficult to keep all the movies/music/pictures on an external drive? (Then you don't need to sync data between your devices, as well!) Thus they look for laptops with bigger storage.[/citation]
they arent expensive because of performance, they are expensive because of the chips are silicon based, if i am correct, and silicon cost a crap ton to make, by my math, 1 wafer gets about 21tb of storage, and that 1 wafer costs about 50grand, im also assuming the cost for ssd production are less than a cpu, at least design wise, and less failed parts.
but i have to disagree on the more than 100gb on a laptop.
i personally ripped all my dvds and encoded them, and use that laptop as a portable media center
i can also assume that if the laptop is used by anyone under the age of... lets say 30, even 250gb is a bit little.
however i do think that laptops should have some form of inter graded ssd storage, like about 40gb of space on motherboard, with 35gb reserved for windows and 5gb for small applications, it would drive the price up by about 100$ but in exchange it would allow for longer battery life and probably pay for itself if it didnt even come with a hdd, and the user could install or have their own installed.
[citation][nom]schmich[/nom]I doubt they'll ship less because of the low supply of HDD. They will ship less because of prices going up due to the HDD shortage. There isn't going to be a scenario where there are simply no computers in stores due to a lack of HDDs. It's the price for consumers, that's all.[/citation]
or that so long as the computer still works, a 2 core system is more than most people need,
[citation][nom]schmich[/nom]Ultrabook are just overpriced underpowered thin laptops. If you think about prices or performance then an ultralaptop isn't for you.As for SSDs, they're overrated. They cost tons, sacrifices lots of storage and only decrease load times. I rather pay LESS for MORE storage and put that saved money on a better C/GPU.[/citation]
yea i came from that perspective a while ago too, where the ssd would decrease load time, and i could wait.
then my hdd got hammered by something its over all speed into the sub mb range, and i thought it was in pio mode for some reason.
once that was over, i took a look at how much of a load my hdd is really under at any given time, and realized i have less than half the performance i should, not due to the hdd failing, but because of how often its accessed, and how much.
mix that with me needing more than 8gb of ram, and i jumped on an intel 120gb drive that was priced at 1$ a gb, its a christmass present, so i cant tell how good it is yet, but i do know how hard i work my computer, it will defiantly be an asset, if you are still reading this, try taking inventory of everything use use at once, and use programs to see how much your harddrive is preforming. we don't say use a ssd exclusively, but to use it as a boot, because thats going to get the crap accessed out of it.
[citation][nom]xerroz[/nom]I wouldn't be surprised if this is a whole conspiracy to make that happen. (Yeah I know about the floods and all that but news can always be twisted, like say, the supply being short when it isn't)[/citation]
no, for cloud to take off, internet would need to also, no caps, and at least a 100mbit up and down line, alot of the country still has sub 10mbit down and .5up hell im on a 50 mbit down, but only get 3 up. and for a conspryasy like this you need government help, and it is in their best interest for the cloud, but at the same time, infrastructure isn't there yet, they will help it along when it is convient, but now when we could take a month+ to upload what we currently have.
[citation][nom]jimmy-bee[/nom]Yeah for stupid tools who have faith in it. With all the hacks being continually done, SONY, Facebook and on and on they can keep their pay us a monthly fee to hold your data crap.[/citation]
i would trust the cloud with homework, significant photos, game saves, and other stuff. the only reason you wouldn't is either you were never in a fire that took everything and see no reason for off site storage, or you are so paranoid that a hacker five a flying ... about your grandmas last living healthy photo.
cloud has its use, and i have used a gmail account as a cloud storage when it came out, granted it hasn't had much use as of late, but still.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram