4 ms·

Samsung ships low-cost 128GB SSDs

16 points by echair 18y ago

ia 18y ago
"The company hasn't named customers or prices..." Suckered in by the headline... again.
- jm4 18y ago
  I wonder if people actually read these articles before voting them up. There is absolutely nothing informative here. A more appropriate headline could have been "Drive manufacturer, Samsung, still making drives". That has about as much substance as this article. In any case, it certainly would have been more correct since announcing that manufacturing has started is not the same as shipping. There are no quotes or even a hint at how the drives will be priced to support the "low cost" claim. The closest thing is the mention that Samsung has "started mass production of 128GB solid-state drives based on multi-level cell (MLC) technology that should dramatically reduce the cost of switching to flash storage in notebooks". It doesn't get any more vague than that. Besides, "low cost" is a relative term. A 128GB SSD on New Egg is $3k. If Samsung managed to produce new drives at a third of that cost I guess you could say the drives are "low cost" in comparison, but it's certainly not low cost when you're considering putting one in a $2k laptop. This is just bad journalism.
  - wmf 18y ago
    Prices are dropping rapidly; I have a hunch that this Samsung drive is the same as the 128GB OCZ SSD that is selling for under $600.
ashleyw 18y ago
It really depends how low priced it is. SSDs are probably the future, but they don't have enough of an advantage for me to care to pay more than a standard hard drive - which in fact likely has more storage anyway! Bring me a SSD which is the same cost or less per GB and I'm there, until then I'll just be waiting...
- pchristensen 18y ago
  I'd pay extra for a smaller drive that used less power and ran cooler. The article also said it ran faster than spinning disk hard drives.
  - cstejerean 18y ago
    How much extra would you pay?
    - pchristensen 18y ago
      That depends on when my current POS dies.
josefresco 18y ago
A 6 word headline with 3 of them being incorrect. Is that a record? Production != shipping, and they didn't name a price.
- cstejerean 18y ago
  At least it got the Samsung and 128GB SSD part right.
- pchristensen 18y ago
  At least they named the right company.
stcredzero 18y ago
I wish manufacturers of flash devices were a lot more up-front about read vs. write speeds and details on wear-leveling. What I would love: a drive that would tell you when it was 1 month from failure. In the meantime, there's this 2.5" CF Raid 5 adaptor: http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/23/centurys-sata-adapter-supports-3-cf-cards-cheap-ssds-for-all/ http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/23/centurys-sata-adapter-sup...
- wmf 18y ago
  SMART exists; the SSD makers just need to use it.

16 points by echair 18y ago

ia 18y ago

"The company hasn't named customers or prices..." Suckered in by the headline... again.

jm4 18y ago
I wonder if people actually read these articles before voting them up. There is absolutely nothing informative here. A more appropriate headline could have been "Drive manufacturer, Samsung, still making drives". That has about as much substance as this article. In any case, it certainly would have been more correct since announcing that manufacturing has started is not the same as shipping. There are no quotes or even a hint at how the drives will be priced to support the "low cost" claim. The closest thing is the mention that Samsung has "started mass production of 128GB solid-state drives based on multi-level cell (MLC) technology that should dramatically reduce the cost of switching to flash storage in notebooks". It doesn't get any more vague than that. Besides, "low cost" is a relative term. A 128GB SSD on New Egg is $3k. If Samsung managed to produce new drives at a third of that cost I guess you could say the drives are "low cost" in comparison, but it's certainly not low cost when you're considering putting one in a $2k laptop. This is just bad journalism.
- wmf 18y ago
  Prices are dropping rapidly; I have a hunch that this Samsung drive is the same as the 128GB OCZ SSD that is selling for under $600.

ashleyw 18y ago

It really depends how low priced it is. SSDs are probably the future, but they don't have enough of an advantage for me to care to pay more than a standard hard drive - which in fact likely has more storage anyway! Bring me a SSD which is the same cost or less per GB and I'm there, until then I'll just be waiting...

pchristensen 18y ago
I'd pay extra for a smaller drive that used less power and ran cooler. The article also said it ran faster than spinning disk hard drives.
- cstejerean 18y ago
  How much extra would you pay?
  - pchristensen 18y ago
    That depends on when my current POS dies.

josefresco 18y ago

A 6 word headline with 3 of them being incorrect. Is that a record? Production != shipping, and they didn't name a price.

cstejerean 18y ago
At least it got the Samsung and 128GB SSD part right.
pchristensen 18y ago
At least they named the right company.

stcredzero 18y ago

I wish manufacturers of flash devices were a lot more up-front about read vs. write speeds and details on wear-leveling. What I would love: a drive that would tell you when it was 1 month from failure. In the meantime, there's this 2.5" CF Raid 5 adaptor: http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/23/centurys-sata-adapter-supports-3-cf-cards-cheap-ssds-for-all/ http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/23/centurys-sata-adapter-sup...

wmf 18y ago
SMART exists; the SSD makers just need to use it.