On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 09:45:37 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 1/31/2014 9:40 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 1/31/14, 9:32 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/31/2014 9:25 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 1/31/14, 9:16 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/31/2014 8:50 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 20:32:59 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 1/30/2014 2:03 PM, Califbill wrote:
Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 1/28/2014 8:19 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
...if your iMac has a fusion drive, this is a pretty good read on
how it
actually works.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6679/a...s-fusion-drive





Interesting. I don't have a clue if my iMac has fusion drive or
not. I
don't think so, but I seem to recall reading something about it
somewhere.

It's obsolete tech. SSD's are cheaper now.
And you don't need them anyway.
I have an SSD for my OS. It boots faster.
BFD.
Can't tell the difference anywhere else.
My games are still on spinners, plain and not RAIDed.
No noticeable difference.
If you're moving massive files from SSD to SSD, it'll be faster.
SSD's will kill off spinners as prices fall.

Be a long time before SSD kills off spinners! Just the price
difference
per Terabyte will keep hard drives selling for years. You remind me
of a
fellow engineer when I worked for Maxtor. He stated, he could put
all the
storage anybody needed on his desktop. We were designing a 1.9gb 5"
drive
at the time. Early 1990's. He did not really have a clue about
storage
requirements. Was PC centric. When I designed disk controllers for
DEC
systems, customers were using 600 MB washing machine sized drives
and were
limited by room real estate as to how many they could install. You
have to
consider commercial storage requirements. Credit reporting
agencies, NSA,
NASA, banks and all in RAID systems.


I don't think it will be decreased price or additional capacity of
SSDs
that kill off spinners. I think it will be the fact that you just
don't
need a lot of local storage and future computers won't have it. The
trend is "cloud" storage and has been for several years.

I can't think of anything 'important' I'd trust to cloud storage.
Anything *really* important will
get dumped to paper/CD (or both) and put in the bank.


For the average, non-commercial user, how much really "important" data
is kept on a computer that could blow up at any time?

The "cloud" really isn't for storage of important data either but I'll
bet 90 percent of the user created files stored on a hard drive
could be
safely stored in the cloud, especially since there are multiple storage
spaces that can add redundancy. .



And besides, it's much easier for the NSA to suck down the data of a
zillion users from the cloud than it is to get it out of a zillion
individual computers. (It's sarcasm, fellas...don't take it too
seriously.)


If the NSA wants a photo of Sam Adams taking a dump in the back yard,
they can have it.




See, now, there's a perfect example of why you science-math guys need
more English liberal arts classes. That doggie I assume was not *taking*
a dump. He was *leaving* a dump.



Oh? So tell me. Do you "take" a nap, "grab" a nap or engage in a
restful period of temporary unconsciousness?



LOL!