solid state external drive or normal spinning type?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Hi, in choosing an external hard drive i have narrowed it down to a choice
between a small laptop type in an external case or a small portable solid
state type of 60 GB.

is there any advantage in getting the normal laptop type since the
solid state one has no moving parts; which i thought would have been an
advantage. but on the other hand if they were that much better i guess the
soldi state type would be fitted to laptops, but they are not.

any advice please about the relative merits of the two different types?
thanks.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"jw 1111" <blue.star77@REMOOVEvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:Up0Ve.4431$st1.1787@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
> Hi, in choosing an external hard drive i have narrowed it down to a choice
> between a small laptop type in an external case or a small portable solid
> state type of 60 GB.

Are you sure the solid state drive isn't 2GB ?
A 60GB solid state drive would be VERY expensive, way out of
consumer level, which solid state drive have you seen?

> is there any advantage in getting the normal laptop type since the
> solid state one has no moving parts; which i thought would have been an
> advantage. but on the other hand if they were that much better i guess the
> soldi state type would be fitted to laptops, but they are not.

Cost.

> any advice please about the relative merits of the two different types?
> thanks.

--
Mike
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

jw 1111 <blue.star77@REMOOVEvirgin.net> wrote:

> Hi, in choosing an external hard drive i have narrowed it down to a choice
> between a small laptop type in an external case or a small portable solid
> state type of 60 GB.

> is there any advantage in getting the normal laptop type

Price basically.

> since the solid state one has no moving parts; which i thought would have been
> an advantage. but on the other hand if they were that much better i guess the
> soldi state type would be fitted to laptops, but they are not.

Yes, basically because of the price.

> any advice please about the relative merits of the two different types?

Basically 60G solid state is very expensive.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3ojk6tF66vh6U1@individual.net...
> jw 1111 <blue.star77@REMOOVEvirgin.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi, in choosing an external hard drive i have narrowed it down to a
>> choice between a small laptop type in an external case or a small
>> portable solid state type of 60 GB.
>
>> is there any advantage in getting the normal laptop type
>
> Price basically.
>
>> since the solid state one has no moving parts; which i thought would have
>> been an advantage. but on the other hand if they were that much better i
>> guess the soldi state type would be fitted to laptops, but they are not.
>
> Yes, basically because of the price.
>
>> any advice please about the relative merits of the two different types?
>
> Basically 60G solid state is very expensive.

the novatech nddisk7 60 GB external slimline memory is £72 u.k. [ 132 $
u.s.] buying on line which i think is not much more than a normal laptop
memory is it?
>
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"jw 1111" <blue.star77@REMOOVEvirgin.net> wrote in message
news:dc1Ve.4446$st1.826@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>
> "Rod Speed" <rod_speed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:3ojk6tF66vh6U1@individual.net...
>> jw 1111 <blue.star77@REMOOVEvirgin.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, in choosing an external hard drive i have narrowed it down to a
>>> choice between a small laptop type in an external case or a small
>>> portable solid state type of 60 GB.
>>
>>> is there any advantage in getting the normal laptop type
>>
>> Price basically.
>>
>>> since the solid state one has no moving parts; which i thought would
>>> have been an advantage. but on the other hand if they were that much
>>> better i guess the soldi state type would be fitted to laptops, but they
>>> are not.
>>
>> Yes, basically because of the price.
>>
>>> any advice please about the relative merits of the two different types?
>>
>> Basically 60G solid state is very expensive.
>
> the novatech nddisk7 60 GB external slimline memory is £72 u.k. [ 132 $
> u.s.] buying on line which i think is not much more than a normal laptop
> memory is it?

thats a "normal" spinning disk type
novatech ndisk 2 60GB @ £72
http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?NOV-ND260


this one is "solid state":
2GB usb flash drive @ £64
http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?NOV-MS2GBU

--
Mike
 
P

peter

Distinguished
Mar 29, 2004
3,226
0
20,780
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

> the novatech nddisk7 60 GB external slimline memory is £72 u.k. [ 132 $
> u.s.] buying on line which i think is not much more than a normal laptop
> memory is it?

What is "nddisk7"?

I think you are mistaken. Those are NOT solid state hard disks.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Mike Redrobe" <mike@redrobe.net> wrote in message
news:Of1Ve.106877$G8.103803@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "jw 1111" <blue.star77@REMOOVEvirgin.net> wrote in message
> news:Up0Ve.4431$st1.1787@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
>> Hi, in choosing an external hard drive i have narrowed it down to a
>> choice
>> between a small laptop type in an external case or a small portable solid
>> state type of 60 GB.
>
> Are you sure the solid state drive isn't 2GB ?
> A 60GB solid state drive would be VERY expensive, way out of
> consumer level, which solid state drive have you seen?
>


this one. i thought it was solid state but am not sure now.

http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/products/a751x1y0z1p0s0n0m1
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Peter" <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote
>> this one is "solid state":
>> 2GB usb flash drive @ £64
>> http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/specpage.html?NOV-MS2GBU
>
> Look at fantastic speed of this drive! No moving parts, implemented using
> memory chips.

It may not be the fastest, but you can kick it across the floor and it'll
still work.

--
Mike
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Mike Redrobe" <mike@redrobe.net> wrote in message
news:hkeVe.107212$G8.31880@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
> "jw 1111" <blue.star77@REMOOVEvirgin.net> wrote
>>
>> this one. i thought it was solid state but am not sure now.
>>
>> http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/products/a751x1y0z1p0s0n0m1
>
> The cost should tell you whether it is or not.
> Solid state (flash) is around £40/GB Hard disks are around £0.35/GB
>
> --
> Mike
>
gulp ! sorry. my mistake :(
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Previously jw 1111 <blue.star77@remoovevirgin.net> wrote:
> Hi, in choosing an external hard drive i have narrowed it down to a choice
> between a small laptop type in an external case or a small portable solid
> state type of 60 GB.

Are you sure about it being solid-state? Solid-state 60GB should cost
more than $10000 (I did not find prices on the web, bad sign).
One reference I found was $91000 for a 32 GB disk-backed RAM system,
which may or may not be more expensive than flash. I also found
one 4GB solid state disk for $2600.

> is there any advantage in getting the normal laptop type since the
> solid state one has no moving parts; which i thought would have been an
> advantage. but on the other hand if they were that much better i guess the
> soldi state type would be fitted to laptops, but they are not.

> any advice please about the relative merits of the two different types?
> thanks.

Solid state is massively more reliable and seldomly has complete
disk failures. In your size range it is usually used only in extreme
environments, for ultra-reliability applications and when extreme
large databases have to be accessed extrememly fast.

Arno
 
P

peter

Distinguished
Mar 29, 2004
3,226
0
20,780
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

> Solid state is massively more reliable

Not always:
http://www.bitmicro.com/products_edisksan_2U_RAID_fc.php
....
Pure Solid State/Non-Volatile
MTBF - 400,000 Hours
+5 to + 35 degrees C
10,000 feet Altitude


> and seldomly has complete
> disk failures. In your size range it is usually used only in extreme
> environments, for ultra-reliability applications and when extreme
> large databases have to be accessed extrememly fast.
>
> Arno
>
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Previously Peter <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> Solid state is massively more reliable

> Not always:
> http://www.bitmicro.com/products_edisksan_2U_RAID_fc.php
> ...
> Pure Solid State/Non-Volatile
> MTBF - 400,000 Hours
> +5 to + 35 degrees C
> 10,000 feet Altitude

Well, yes. Also a cheap USB dongle is technically "solid state"
but does not match classical SSDs in reliability.

Arno
 
P

peter

Distinguished
Mar 29, 2004
3,226
0
20,780
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Arno Wagner" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:3olloqF6ifp1U1@individual.net...
> Previously Peter <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> >> Solid state is massively more reliable
>
> > Not always:
> > http://www.bitmicro.com/products_edisksan_2U_RAID_fc.php
> > ...
> > Pure Solid State/Non-Volatile
> > MTBF - 400,000 Hours
> > +5 to + 35 degrees C
> > 10,000 feet Altitude
>
> Well, yes.

Bitmicro E-Disks are not cheap, yet not massively reliable. Popular hard
drives have better reliabilty.

> Also a cheap USB dongle is technically "solid state"
> but does not match classical SSDs in reliability.

That comes with no surprise. Do you have any reliabilty info on "USB
dongles"?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Arno Wagner" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:3olfqaF6f59iU1@individual.net
> Previously jw 1111 <blue.star77@remoovevirgin.net> wrote:
> > Hi, in choosing an external hard drive i have narrowed it down to a choice
> > between a small laptop type in an external case or a small portable solid
> > state type of 60 GB.
>
> Are you sure about it being solid-state? Solid-state 60GB should cost
> more than $10000 (I did not find prices on the web, bad sign).
> One reference I found was $91000 for a 32 GB disk-backed RAM system,
> which may or may not be more expensive than flash. I also found one 4GB
> solid state disk for $2600.
>
> > is there any advantage in getting the normal laptop type since the
> > solid state one has no moving parts; which i thought would have been an
> > advantage. but on the other hand if they were that much better i guess the
> > soldi state type would be fitted to laptops, but they are not.
>
> > any advice please about the relative merits of the two different types?
> > thanks.
>
> Solid state is massively more reliable

> and seldomly has complete disk failures.

That's like saying that even the hostbus interface is more reliable than
regular IDE or SCSI.

> In your size range it is usually used only in extreme
> environments, for ultra-reliability applications and when extreme
> large databases have to be accessed extrememly fast.
>
> Arno
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"Arno Wagner" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:3olloqF6ifp1U1@individual.net
> Previously Peter <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > > Solid state is massively more reliable
>
> > Not always:
> > http://www.bitmicro.com/products_edisksan_2U_RAID_fc.php
> > ...
> > Pure Solid State/Non-Volatile
> > MTBF - 400,000 Hours
> > +5 to + 35 degrees C
> > 10,000 feet Altitude
>
> Well, yes. Also a cheap USB dongle is technically "solid state"
> but does not match classical SSDs in reliability.

That's fine if it is more reliable.

>
> Arno
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

"jw 1111" <blue.star77@REMOOVEvirgin.net> wrote in message news:phaVe.6953$zw1.1582@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net
> "Mike Redrobe" <mike@redrobe.net> wrote in message news:Of1Ve.106877$G8.103803@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> > > > "jw 1111" blue.star77@REMOOVEvirgin.net> wrote in message news:Up0Ve.4431$st1.1787@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
> > > Hi, in choosing an external hard drive i have narrowed it down to a choice
> > > between a small laptop type in an external case or a small portable solid
> > > state type of 60 GB.
> >
> > Are you sure the solid state drive isn't 2GB ?
> > A 60GB solid state drive would be VERY expensive, way out of
> > consumer level, which solid state drive have you seen?
> >
>
>
> this one.
>
> http://www.novatech.co.uk/novatech/products/a751x1y0z1p0s0n0m1

> i thought it was solid state

Yeah, clear as day says 'Solid State'.

> but am not sure now.

No? What gave you that idea?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Previously Peter <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:

> "Arno Wagner" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:3olloqF6ifp1U1@individual.net...
>> Previously Peter <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>> >> Solid state is massively more reliable
>>
>> > Not always:
>> > http://www.bitmicro.com/products_edisksan_2U_RAID_fc.php
>> > ...
>> > Pure Solid State/Non-Volatile
>> > MTBF - 400,000 Hours
>> > +5 to + 35 degrees C
>> > 10,000 feet Altitude
>>
>> Well, yes.

> Bitmicro E-Disks are not cheap, yet not massively reliable. Popular hard
> drives have better reliabilty.

Actually MTBF is only part of the story. Bit-error rate is another.
There may also be SSDs that are optimised for speed only, I agree.
SSDs used to be only an option for special reliability needs, I guess
there is a whole set of products targetted at different usage
scenarios now.

Also reliability of SSDs is usually used under conditions like
shock and vibration (nearly indestructable) or for example in
non-standard gas mixes, low/no air pressure, humindity or the like.
SSDs will do pretty well under thse conditions while HDDs die
very fast.

One other thing: For HDDs component life (the time the MTBF is
valid) is usually 5 years. For SSDs it can be 30 years or around.
Very important for equipment that cannot be easily replaced.

Also note thet the eqipment you reference is not an SSD, but a whole
box with PSU and the like. The SSD itself may actually have a
better MTBF then the whole box. It is especially difficult to
get PSUs with > 500.000h MTBF. It is also expensive to
measure MTBFs in this range so since you need to operate
many units for a long time. 500.000h is just about 2% failure
rate ber year.

>> Also a cheap USB dongle is technically "solid state"
>> but does not match classical SSDs in reliability.

> That comes with no surprise. Do you have any reliabilty info on "USB
> dongles"?

No. Just that I and people I know had failures on not too much used
ones. I solved this by buing branded dongles where the brand name may
have something to loose. I also copy everything important (like slides
for a talk I am about to give) to two different dongles.

Arno
 
U

user

Splendid
Dec 26, 2003
3,943
0
22,780
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> wrote:
> Previously Peter <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
>> "Arno Wagner" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>> news:3olloqF6ifp1U1@individual.net...
>>> Previously Peter <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>>>> Solid state is massively more reliable
>>>
>>>> Not always:
>>>> http://www.bitmicro.com/products_edisksan_2U_RAID_fc.php
>>>> ...
>>>> Pure Solid State/Non-Volatile
>>>> MTBF - 400,000 Hours
>>>> +5 to + 35 degrees C
>>>> 10,000 feet Altitude
>>>
>>> Well, yes.

>> Bitmicro E-Disks are not cheap, yet not massively reliable. Popular
>> hard drives have better reliabilty.

> Actually MTBF is only part of the story.

He didnt say anything about MTBF.

> Bit-error rate is another. There may also be SSDs that are
> optimised for speed only, I agree. SSDs used to be only an
> option for special reliability needs, I guess there is a whole
> set of products targetted at different usage scenarios now.

Corse there are.

> Also reliability of SSDs is usually used under conditions like
> shock and vibration (nearly indestructable) or for example in
> non-standard gas mixes, low/no air pressure, humindity or the like.
> SSDs will do pretty well under thse conditions while HDDs die very fast.

Irrelevant to the normal use of both types of storage.

> One other thing: For HDDs component life
> (the time the MTBF is valid) is usually 5 years.

Wrong, that is an entirely different concept, the design life.

> For SSDs it can be 30 years or around.

Not with mass market retail SSDs.

> Very important for equipment that cannot be easily replaced.

Tiny part of the market now.

> Also note thet the eqipment you reference is not an SSD, but a whole
> box with PSU and the like. The SSD itself may actually have a
> better MTBF then the whole box. It is especially difficult to
> get PSUs with > 500.000h MTBF. It is also expensive to
> measure MTBFs in this range so since you need to operate
> many units for a long time. 500.000h is just about 2% failure
> rate ber year.

MTBF wasnt even being discussed.

>>> Also a cheap USB dongle is technically "solid state"
>>> but does not match classical SSDs in reliability.

>> That comes with no surprise. Do you have any reliabilty info on "USB
>> dongles"?

> No. Just that I and people I know had failures on not too much used
> ones. I solved this by buing branded dongles where the brand name
> may have something to loose. I also copy everything important (like
> slides for a talk I am about to give) to two different dongles.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (More info?)

Previously 123 <123@pam.com> wrote:
> Arno Wagner <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>> Previously Peter <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> "Arno Wagner" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>>> news:3olloqF6ifp1U1@individual.net...
>>>> Previously Peter <peterfoxghost@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>>>>>> Solid state is massively more reliable
>>>>
>>>>> Not always:
>>>>> http://www.bitmicro.com/products_edisksan_2U_RAID_fc.php
>>>>> ...
>>>>> Pure Solid State/Non-Volatile
>>>>> MTBF - 400,000 Hours
>>>>> +5 to + 35 degrees C
>>>>> 10,000 feet Altitude
>>>>
>>>> Well, yes.

>>> Bitmicro E-Disks are not cheap, yet not massively reliable. Popular
>>> hard drives have better reliabilty.

>> Actually MTBF is only part of the story.

> He didnt say anything about MTBF.

Hey Rod, are you blind? Look 13 lines above.

Arno
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom