I agree with tomatthe, but I can hazard a most-likely guess: They needed for fast space, so they installed a second SSD. One for the OS, one for data, and apps fly.
I agree with tomatthe, but I can hazard a most-likely guess: They needed for fast space, so they installed a second SSD. One for the OS, one for data, and apps fly.
What you say about apps makes sense but wouldn't a sufficiently large SSD be just as good. The workstation config proposed about $675 for 2 SSDs at roughly $1.58 and $2.20 per Gb (220Gb at $485 and 120Gb at $190). I'm not questioning the config as much as planning a future system and expecting some price drops in the SSD space. From a maintenance perspective losing one or all your SSDs would be about the same inconvenience assuming a decent recovery process and some free time.
For example, a 512gb SSD or the 2 proposed drives assuming prices about equal.
(Note: let's also assume we won't need the SSDs for such system-overhead things as RAID caching - just OS and apps)