Earlier quoted context omitted.
>So, what to do if the original title is misleading? I'd suggest posting an alternative, non-misleading source instead, or if none exists, don't post at all.
Then this very interesting piece would never never come to my attention. Which is surely the worst outcome.
I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)
251–260 of 261 posts
Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably chinese sellers on all those sites. I've noticed a common thread with people who complain about counterfeits is that they're literally buying alphabet soup brand fakes from chinese FBA sellers instead of buying products directly sold by amazon or from more traditional retail channels.
> alphabet soup brand fakes from chinese FBA sellers instead of buying products directly sold by amazon Does this actually make a difference? I remember the issue was that Amazon would bin devices together regardless if they're from some random third-party or direct sale, so you could have fakes mixed in with genuine and it was basically a lucky dip. Is this not still the case? Ultimately, I'd be weary of buying thin…
Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)
#253Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't strike me as being a big claim, I recently bought some RAM for a NUC a few weeks ago on Amazon only to determine that it was likely counterfeit. It came in an official box with all packaging intact.
Then how did you determine it was fake?
Running dmidecode showed that the part number didn’t match the sticker on the module.
Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
define 'cheap'? You already have the device shipped to you under $40 with packaging, shipping from China, to the distributor, to you; with a profit at the every step.
$1-5 I'd gladly pay a few bucks extra for a drive that doesn't delete my data when the power fails
For a $20 device this is 5-25% of the cost the product, assuming $40 retail cost. It would be 1-5% for a $100 product, of course.
You would pay for a such device, but 99% of people wouldn't. Now you have a product which costs 5-25% higher than all your competitors and in the world where the price dictates the sales you have no opportunity to sell your product.
NB to be sure on the prices I've checked Amazon. There are SSDs what are cheaper than many mounting trays, enclosures (without drives) and tray kits.
Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)
#255Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
The file's size could have been set by the application before copying data to it. This will result in a file which reads all zeroes. Or if it were a hardware ordering fault, remember that SSD TRIM is typically used by modern filesystems to reclaim unused space. TRIMmed blocks read as zero.
> The file's size could have been set by the application before copying data to it. This will result in a file which reads all zeroes. Hm, is that a common approach? I thought applications mostly use fallocate(2) for that if it's for performance reasons, which does not change the nominal file size. Actually allocating zeroes sounds like it could be quite inefficient and confusing, but then again, fallocate is not por…
Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)
#257Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
twitter.com is still working.
That’s not what I said.
Twitter now being called X can go undetected by users, simply because everything still works the same as before the non-completed namechange.
Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
$1-5 I'd gladly pay a few bucks extra for a drive that doesn't delete my data when the power fails
> $1-5 For a $20 device this is 5-25% of the cost the product, assuming $40 retail cost. It would be 1-5% for a $100 product, of course. You would pay for a such device, but 99% of people wouldn't. Now you have a product which costs 5-25% higher than all your competitors and in the world where the price dictates the sales you have no opportunity to sell your product. NB to be sure on the prices I've checked Amazon. T…
Whether consumers would actually pay more for a device with power protection is unclear.
Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
> $1-5 For a $20 device this is 5-25% of the cost the product, assuming $40 retail cost. It would be 1-5% for a $100 product, of course. You would pay for a such device, but 99% of people wouldn't. Now you have a product which costs 5-25% higher than all your competitors and in the world where the price dictates the sales you have no opportunity to sell your product. NB to be sure on the prices I've checked Amazon. T…
I'm not so sure price is the only competing factor for SSDs. Devices generally also differentiate on performance as well. Even on consumer-oriented Slickdeals forum (where people are posting deals) there's pretty extensive breakdowns comparing different SSDs (controllers, flash, cache design). This has been floating around for a while https://www.reddit.com/r/NewMaxx/comments/dhvrdm/ssd_guides_... Whether consumers w…