81–88 of 88 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
not really. it's just a pci card. just make sure you get one with a mac compatible firmware.
It's just a PCI card, buried beneath 51 disassembly steps: https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/iMac+Intel+21.5-Inch+EMC+2389+G... A bit more complicated than I'd like :)
Before the "floods" you could get a WD Blue 1TB for $30 sometimes after rebate. Now they are $50 Something about supply/demand doesn't make sense here.
Uh, the floods were real, killed real people, and damaged real property. No need for the scare quotes. > Something about supply/demand doesn't make sense here. Yep. It feels like there's a price-fixing investigation that runs periodically in each PC component market that finds solid evidence of price fixing and then forces the prices down.
I was trying to landmark that specific event as a measure of before and after.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That drive certainly is a bit strange. For one, I would imagine lot of the potential performance is wasted by a SAS connector. That said, it might be of interest to enterprises from a few different angles (largest drive available for that form factor, easier to manage, great performance, etc). Anything that widens adoption will serve to drive prices even lower. SSDs don't necessarily beat HDDs on price per GB, they j…
> And as the original poster pointed out, for many that's already the case. Because we're seeing, at the same time, a drive away from owning media and instead streaming them, and/or storing data increasingly in The Cloud® and only having a small working set locally. All those off-loaded will have to be stored somewhere by someone, and that someone will most likely keep using spinning rust for its better price. And if…
But if the Cloud is made up of hard drives, then hard drive manufacturers still win. Look up "Backblaze Pods" if you don't believe me.
I mean, if everyone just stores data in the "Cloud", its mostly composed of hard drives anyway. You just no longer own or maintain the hard drive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And as the original poster pointed out, for many that's already the case. Because we're seeing, at the same time, a drive away from owning media and instead streaming them, and/or storing data increasingly in The Cloud® and only having a small working set locally. All those off-loaded will have to be stored somewhere by someone, and that someone will most likely keep using spinning rust for its better price. And if…
> storing data increasingly in The Cloud® But if the Cloud is made up of hard drives, then hard drive manufacturers still win. Look up "Backblaze Pods" if you don't believe me. I mean, if everyone just stores data in the "Cloud", its mostly composed of hard drives anyway. You just no longer own or maintain the hard drive.
If drives in the Cloud are, on average, utilized more efficiently (both in terms of less unused drive capacity being purchased, and existing drives being used for more of their design life and not being tossed because the device they are in is end-of-life even if the drive isn't) than traditional locally-deployed (both client and server) drives, then increasing cloud use could mean the manufacturer's still lose (in terms of year-over-year sales) even with total storage increasing, if the increase in average efficiency outpaces the increase in storage, so that annual drive sales drop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uh, the floods were real, killed real people, and damaged real property. No need for the scare quotes. > Something about supply/demand doesn't make sense here. Yep. It feels like there's a price-fixing investigation that runs periodically in each PC component market that finds solid evidence of price fixing and then forces the prices down.
Sorry, the quotes were a bad use of markup, I didn't mean to sound like the floods weren't significant. I was trying to landmark that specific event as a measure of before and after.
I'm not calling you out; the practice has mystified me for ages and I see an opportunity to gain some information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
2009 Mac Pro 2.66 quad here. just did a 3.46 hex cpu upgrade. 32GB 1333 RAM sm951 AHCI pcie m2 boot drive (700MB/700MB) nvidia 1080 when it comes out. bootcamp for games. 40" 4K Philips in os x for everything else.
If you want ultimate speed then take the RAM module out of Slot 4 because that CPU natively wants a triple-channel arrangement
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had corruption issues with an OCZ drive on a machine with unstable power. Since adding a UPS the drive has been rock solid.
We had corruption / sudden death issues with OCZ even on machines with redundant power supplies. I do not recommend them.
And then it would work perfectly well again...for a while.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Close to 100% of the SSD failures I've seen have not been from being left off for a few years, nor from actual flash media failure, but from firmware bugs or, occasionally, mechanical failure. (I've had very small sample size of SSDs not being powered up for a few years, but the few I have powered up after not powering on for years have had all their data retained. Ask me in another 15 years or so, though.)
Part of what you count as firmware bugs may have been cases of data/firmware corruption caused by unexpected power loss.
* there's the story I posted about the OCZ V1 drives eating paste periodically while behind redundant power.
* there was a fun problem of some OCZ Deneva 2 drives deciding that they would simply drop off the port and not come back without a cold power cycle, behind redundant power (and a related story about the drives being in such a state, and the AHCI init code on the BIOS getting confused and hanging forever, which was what actually necessitated the cold cycle).
* there was the really fun case someone I worked with came up with where they found a way to reproducibly brick a particular family of SSDs using only about a TB of IO on a 480 GB SSD. (And by "brick", I mean "call the manufacturer, it's not coming back.")
* there was the SandForce bug once upon a time which caused the affected SSDs to not show up correctly as disks under Windows when on SATL because the firmware reported an empty "version" field, and while all the other OSes tested were content with this, and Windows when not using SATL was content with this, Windows when using SATL would report the disk as an "Unknown Device" for this.