CEO of Seagate: Nobody uses SSDs for storage

[GrimNeo]

I love my SSD's. Can't wait to get more when they get cheaper.

[Daegun]

 

SSD's have a much longer lifespan than you think.

 

It's absolutely worth it for an OS drive.  ~4 years ago I bought some $100 40 GB SSD solely for windows and haven't looked back.

 

These days you can get 500 GB for $150-200 which isn't too shabby.  It's enough for most casual users, and ideal for laptops.

 

 

 

Quite frankly, I think HDD's will always be around for storage.  Much like how video tapes are still used for a lot of applications like security footage.  

 

I think most users will fully transition to SSD's though in the next few years except for power users.  Prebuilts will have some 500 GB- 1 TB SSD and that will satisfy most people.

 

 

 

Definitely. Most people I know that have computers (not enthusiasts) could probably get by on a 240gb ssd and be fine. For the majority of users, an ssd will have nothing but upsides to it. I just wanted to point out that Seagate isn't insane or 'trying to save their  sinking business model' when they say that people don't use ssds for storage. (Unless I'm getting that wrong, and they just meant 'people don't use ssds' which i'm pretty sure no one would be stupud enough to say)

[Notional]

 

@sgloux3470

that's the point am not willing to spend 100-120$ for 512 GB of storage. I rather get a 1TB 7200RPM for fraction of the cost. I mean I would grab a nice 60 GB one just for my OS and simple things for like 50 bucks but nothing larger.

 

 

That's fair, but you would still get an SSD for the OS and software (non games). That makes a huge change on performance after all.

 

While HDD may be around for quite a while yet, they all look the same and no longer have the unique and attractive designs which older HDD with better overall build quality had. Eg:

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Hard-Disk-Drive-IDE-Samsung-SpinPoint-SP2001H-20GB-Rev-A-PUMA20-2002-07-/131052214398 (I know its on Ebay, but I'm looking at buying that one to replace my one with its damaged IDE connector-my slower version the SV2001H is still good however)

http://www.a1usedcomputers.com.au/shop/prodView.asp?idproduct=2477

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Western-Digital-Caviar-280-vintage-85-3MB-IDE-hard-drive-WD-AC280-/151539875299 (I've got one except its got  no bad blocks or mechanical faults-its good as new after all these years of use)

http://redhill.net.au/d/110.php (And yes it  is slower than as advertised by Seagate, but they are reliable)

 

No HDD speaks pimp my PC more than older ones with the labels removed. Newer HDD just don't look as good on display as an SSD or their predecessors..

 

I know right:

Yup that's a Wester Digital drive, NON modded.

[Dabombinable]

That's fair, but you would still get an SSD for the OS and software (non games). That makes a huge change on performance after all.

 

 

I know right:

Yup that's a Wester Digital drive, NON modded.

I'm actually going to buy 4x 250GB versions of that Samsung Spinpoint-they are definitely the best HDD I've ever used (the 20GB versions), and when combined with an Intel boot SSD-pimp my storage.

[burnttoastnice]

The next 2 SSDs I plan to get: A 128 or 256GB one for my Laptop (brand undecided) & Intel's new high-speed 3D Flash when that comes out.

[Aruxx]

idk. kinda true for me. i don't see myself owning an ssd anytime soon. i'll stick to trusty old hdds.

 

I thought that, but then I got an SSD.  Holy balls it's fast, but cloning data was a bit of a pain..

[ChrisxIxCross]

Hahaha and Im here just waiting till NVME drives become affordable.

[BuckGup]

I heard somewhere there is a new way to make the SSDs or a new memory or something but it would make SSDs cheaper to make then Hard Drives. 

[Sakkura]

 

But i don't think it's gonna come close to HDDs any time soon. 1.5 cents per GB.

 

Well no, but the gap is shrinking. And it has been shrinking for a long time.

 

in North America, maybe .. here, not so - and let's not include the discounts

comparing that cost per Gb to the cost of GB for HDDs .. doesn't even come close - 0.08$ / Gb

 

It's as true in Europe as it is in North America. I paid more for a 120GB OCZ Agility 3 than I did for a 256GB Crucial MX100, and that was all because prices went down over time. Of course SSDs are still a lot more expensive than HDDs, but the gap is shrinking.

[Sakkura]

 

@sgloux3470

that's the point am not willing to spend 100-120$ for 512 GB of storage. I rather get a 1TB 7200RPM for fraction of the cost. I mean I would grab a nice 60 GB one just for my OS and simple things for like 50 bucks but nothing larger.

 

 

You can get 250GB for like $70 though, so a 60GB SSD is really pointless.

[Misanthrope]

No, most people have laptops that they have a bunch of stuff on. You might believe the bullshit about no one using PCs anymore but that doesn't make it true.

 

Netflix and Hulu don't change anything? Like at all. They replace optical media that was never stored anyway.

 

Also you're not addressing the idea that a PC isn't only a glorified games console. Most people use them for their jobs, and most people have a decent amount of data associated with their work.

 

Like I said, it's grand that you don't need a HDD. Sales indicate that you are the minority here.

 

Sales numbers aren't bullshit. Now it does not means that people with laptops stop using them or that they're breaking down, but if you cannot understand or accept that literally millions or new users are coming with the widespread adoption of smartphones then there's no argument that would ever persuade you: can't help a blind man that refuses to see.

[d3sl91]

I don't primarily use SSD's for storage on my desktop, although, I easily could if I moved everything to my NAS (I just don't want to). I do, however, plan on grabbing a 1TB SSD pretty soon, and that will, honestly, cover all my "on-device" storage needs. Between a NAS and cloud storage... I really don't need much more than 500GB on my "stuff" drive. Getting older, and having a cooler/quieter system for getting work done is more important than having all my games installed at the same time. Heck, all the games I currently play, easily fit on my 256GB "games" SSD. 

 

My laptops all use SSD's only, and not HDDs. 

 

Will my Media Library be put on SSD's anytime soon? No. Why? Purely price, and that is the ONLY reason. "Data on a failed SSd is irrecoverable" Doesn't matter one bit to anyone who properly backs up their data like they should be anyway. 

[carolkarine]

For me double the price is when Ii'll likely 100% make the switch. If one SSD is cheaper than 2 HDDs in raid 1, good enough for me. Not that SSDs don't fail, but that's my price line.

Couldn't you think about an ssd as an internalized raid array? As it can cut off bad sectors and rebuild the data on them on saved, clean sectors (kinda like striping) it seems quite similar.

[The Gaige]

I use SSDs for boot drives & thats about it!

[CatzRuleZWorld]

I'm a nobody... I have a MBA and a desktop. My desktop only had a SSD in it. I do have a external hard drive but that's mostly just for back ups

[byalexandr]

Lol all I use is a single SSD.

[Psykomantis00]

Nobody uses expensive media to store things when there is a cheaper alternative? Who would have thought? Drop the price and people will use them for storage. I already do and when the price of a 1tb ssd drops below 250 I'll buy two and not have to worry about anything for a long time. 

[Yoinkerman]

Maybe when SSD's get cheaper and don't die out as easily. Maybe then I'll use them. Or I'll pick up  a cheap SSD and place my OS on it.

 

They're great as a boot drive.  Any rational human being has backups anyway.

[Godlygamer23]

Maybe when SSD's get cheaper and don't die out as easily. Maybe then I'll use them. Or I'll pick up  a cheap SSD and place my OS on it.

I've had my Intel 520 SSD for three years and it's still going strong. According to CrystalDiskInfo, I've written 20TB of data to it.

[skatblast]

Next time I buy some storage, I'm going to go with an SSD just to prove him wrong. Even if I don't get as much storage as I would like (not that it matters, just going to be for games anyways)

 

Storage is not games and programs. Storage is music, videos, docs etc. And for that he is right. Obviously a lot of people use ssd's for programs

[Trik'Stari]

Storage is not games and programs. Storage is music, videos, docs etc. And for that he is right. Obviously a lot of people use ssd's for programs

data is data. If I had the money, I wouldn't have an HDD on my PC, I would have a terabyte worth of SSD's (or a 1tb SSD)

 

When not being used, there is no difference between games, images, videos, music, programs, etc. They all take up space.

[d3sl91]

Storage is not games and programs. Storage is music, videos, docs etc. And for that he is right. Obviously a lot of people use ssd's for programs

I wonder what the CEO was talking about, really. Because 0's and 1's are still 0's and 1's - no matter what they end up becoming. 

[MattLantis]

I mean I have an SSD, and like everybody I know with a baller computer has one, so FUCK YOU SEAGATE

[martinrox1568]

i've had 13 year old hard drives run to this day 24/7.

 

nope. speaking the whole truth.

 

So you are saying once ssd's cheapen down to hdd prices, you'll stick with the tried and tested harddrive? Because I don't know whats so trusty about hard drives. They are many times more likely to fail than ssd's even though there has been decades to perfect hdd's. It doesn't matter if you've had a hard drive that lasted 13 years. People yell at back blaze for their lack of sample size, but yours right now is 1.

[Dabombinable]

I've had my Intel 520 SSD for three years and it's still going strong. According to CrystalDiskInfo, I've written 20TB of data to it.

Some SSD that I've seen endurance tested have had well over a petabyte of data written to them, so if the same tests hold true for that Intel 520, you should see well over a decades use out of it.