From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 24 18:48:03 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5CB61065670 for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:48:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from corky1951@comcast.net) Received: from QMTA06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.56]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 997D78FC0C for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:48:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from corky1951@comcast.net) Received: from OMTA04.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.35]) by QMTA06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 7p0t1c0070lTkoCA6uo4gp; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:48:04 +0000 Received: from comcast.net ([98.203.142.76]) by OMTA04.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 7uo21c0011f6R9u8Quo2CZ; Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:48:03 +0000 Received: by comcast.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:48:00 -0700 Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:48:00 -0700 From: Charlie Kester To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20090624184800.GD15815@comcast.net> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20090622230729.GA20167@thought.org> <20090623201041.GA23561@thought.org> <20090623205944.GA43982@Grumpy.DynDNS.org> <20090624010922.GA24335@thought.org> <20090624093223.GF3468@ece.pdx.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090624093223.GF3468@ece.pdx.edu> X-Mailer: Mutt 1.5.20 X-Composer: VIM 7.2 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Subject: Re: you're not going to believe this. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:48:03 -0000 On Wed 24 Jun 2009 at 02:32:24 PDT freebsd@t41t.com wrote: > >The lifetime and reliability of SSDs are less-than-or-equal-to the >lifetime and reliability of spinning magnetic drives, so don't buy an SSD >for that. Whether SSDs use less power is an open question. There's a lot >of data going either way. The last comparison I saw suggested spinning >drives average less power than their SSD counterparts. In any event, it's >not clear-cut yet. SSDs probably do generate less heat (but I've not seen >data on that). Of course, the access time on an SSD is order(s) of >magnitude less than for a spinning drive, and that's cause enough for >lots of people to buy one. SSD's are/should also be favored in devices that are prone to mechanical shocks. E.g., tablet PC's, and handheld devices like cellphones, music players or game players.