4 ms·

It is important to note that Pure Storage is a vendor of all-flash storage solutions, so there may be some exaggeration in their claims.

hammyhavoc 3y ago
Yes, I would take it with a very large can of salt.
candiodari 3y ago
For one they totally neglect that NAND loses data over time. Granted, not fast. But a 10 year old flash drive is more likely than not to be unreadable. This problem has not been resolved. Hard drives, while they do have a finite lifespan, can probably survive 100 years or more. Furthermore, the components likely to fail can be replaced. Surprisingly CD-ROM (and DVD-ROM and ...) are going to last for centuries or millennia. Even writable CD-ROM will do. They also have the advantage that if necessary you can read them through a microscope. So failing components don't matter that much. With enough patience you could read them with a microscope, pen and paper.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  The more limited life span, lack of warning about impending failure, and greater cost (at the drive sizes I want) are why I haven't moved to SSDs yet. The speed advantage over platters is nice and all, but isn't really a factor for me.
- stevefan1999 3y ago
  > NAND loses data over time All kinds of data medium loses their information over time. Even the novel you wrote in highschool 10 years ago (as an example) with pen & paper would lose ink overtime due to evaporation. There is a reason books are lost in time. There is one and probably only one exception to this: flowing data. Only data that is constantly refreshed would stay on forever.
  - candiodari 3y ago
    Ok, sure. But NAND loses data FAST compared to hard drives.
- taskforcegemini 3y ago
  hard disks generally don't do well when left to rut. and if you need to repair it, fitting replacement parts my not be easy to come by anymore. writable cd-roms are also not very reliable for long term storage. quality of the material surely makes a big difference, but lifespan is about 10 to 20 years. that being said, I still have floppies from end of the 80's that still work

hammyhavoc 3y ago

Yes, I would take it with a very large can of salt.

candiodari 3y ago

For one they totally neglect that NAND loses data over time. Granted, not fast. But a 10 year old flash drive is more likely than not to be unreadable. This problem has not been resolved. Hard drives, while they do have a finite lifespan, can probably survive 100 years or more. Furthermore, the components likely to fail can be replaced. Surprisingly CD-ROM (and DVD-ROM and ...) are going to last for centuries or millennia. Even writable CD-ROM will do. They also have the advantage that if necessary you can read them through a microscope. So failing components don't matter that much. With enough patience you could read them with a microscope, pen and paper.

JohnFen 3y ago
The more limited life span, lack of warning about impending failure, and greater cost (at the drive sizes I want) are why I haven't moved to SSDs yet. The speed advantage over platters is nice and all, but isn't really a factor for me.
stevefan1999 3y ago
> NAND loses data over time All kinds of data medium loses their information over time. Even the novel you wrote in highschool 10 years ago (as an example) with pen & paper would lose ink overtime due to evaporation. There is a reason books are lost in time. There is one and probably only one exception to this: flowing data. Only data that is constantly refreshed would stay on forever.
- candiodari 3y ago
  Ok, sure. But NAND loses data FAST compared to hard drives.
taskforcegemini 3y ago
hard disks generally don't do well when left to rut. and if you need to repair it, fitting replacement parts my not be easy to come by anymore. writable cd-roms are also not very reliable for long term storage. quality of the material surely makes a big difference, but lifespan is about 10 to 20 years. that being said, I still have floppies from end of the 80's that still work