5 ms·

How much does 10GB of HDD space cost these days? I would rather have the OS be able to recover from corruption or deletions than save 5 bucks or something.

gwern 15y ago
5 bucks is way too high. The cheapest drive with 4 eggs on http://forre.st/storage#hdd http://forre.st/storage#hdd is is 23gb/$; 10/23 * 100 or 43 cents.
qjz 15y ago
Space on a hard drive is finite, no matter how much it costs, and the size requirement makes it particularly unattractive for running in a VM, compared to a leaner OS.
- zedpm 15y ago
  I run only SSD in my desktop and I was running out of space for VMs. I decided to move a VM to my NAS and I discovered, happily, that it runs great on the NAS, connected over Gig-E. I moved the rest of my VMs over there and I really don't notice a difference in performance.
viraptor 15y ago
Too much if you want a one off install like I did this week. When you want a quick VM and one app, why waste more space/time? I know this is not a common usecase, but I was actually wondering - when most apps won't run on XP anymore - what is the minimal-windows going to be? Also, not sure what you mean by recovering from deletion... How could any system recover from that?
- MatthewPhillips 15y ago
  You purchased a Windows XP license simply to run one app?
  - viraptor 15y ago
    No, I bought one years ago - it doesn't go bad with time ;)
barrkel 15y ago
My SSD system drive is about 40% allocated to Windows. It wouldn't be so bad but the location of many space hogs is not configurable. You just have to live with wasting quite a bit of expensive high performance space, rather than cheap bulk drive space. Performance of the rest of the system suffers, as only critical apps can benefit from being installed on the SSD. 10GB is a low usage ime. Installer directory alone approaches that on my system, much less winsxs.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

gwern 15y ago

5 bucks is way too high. The cheapest drive with 4 eggs on http://forre.st/storage#hdd http://forre.st/storage#hdd is is 23gb/$; 10/23 * 100 or 43 cents.

qjz 15y ago

Space on a hard drive is finite, no matter how much it costs, and the size requirement makes it particularly unattractive for running in a VM, compared to a leaner OS.

zedpm 15y ago
I run only SSD in my desktop and I was running out of space for VMs. I decided to move a VM to my NAS and I discovered, happily, that it runs great on the NAS, connected over Gig-E. I moved the rest of my VMs over there and I really don't notice a difference in performance.

viraptor 15y ago

Too much if you want a one off install like I did this week. When you want a quick VM and one app, why waste more space/time? I know this is not a common usecase, but I was actually wondering - when most apps won't run on XP anymore - what is the minimal-windows going to be? Also, not sure what you mean by recovering from deletion... How could any system recover from that?

MatthewPhillips 15y ago
You purchased a Windows XP license simply to run one app?
- viraptor 15y ago
  No, I bought one years ago - it doesn't go bad with time ;)

barrkel 15y ago

My SSD system drive is about 40% allocated to Windows. It wouldn't be so bad but the location of many space hogs is not configurable. You just have to live with wasting quite a bit of expensive high performance space, rather than cheap bulk drive space. Performance of the rest of the system suffers, as only critical apps can benefit from being installed on the SSD. 10GB is a low usage ime. Installer directory alone approaches that on my system, much less winsxs.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]