or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple iPad success could increase solid state drive prices
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple iPad success could increase solid state drive prices

post #1 of 50
Thread Starter 
Apple already consumes nearly one-third of total global NAND flash memory, and with its share expected to grow even more with the launch of the iPad, hard drive makers believe it could delay the transition to solid state drives in traditional PCs.

Industry sources who spoke with DigiTimes indicated that the iPad is a "significant market for flash memory in 2010," meaning that memory supplies will likely be tight again throughout the year. Multiple times in 2009 it was noted that Apple had created a flash shortage, with its iPod and iPhone line of products consuming the largest share of NAND flash.

The constant constraints have kept memory costs high for other PC makers, and also kept solid state drives, long expected to eventually replace traditional hard disk drives, at a high price. But with the iPad likely to take a large chunk of memory supplies, available in capacities up to 64GB, the matter is unlikely to change in 2010, the report noted.

"Though major chip vendors have ramped production using 30nm-class or even sub-30nm processes, NAND flash prices are still on the rise for 2010, according to the sources," the report said.

The NAND flash industry intends to transition to a 20nm manufacturing process in the second-half of 2011, which will drastically reduce prices on memory.

In early 2008, Apple embraced the solid state drive by offering it as an option in its MacBook Air, with a premium price. Solid state drives, compared to their hard disk drive counterparts, are more expensive and offer less storage.

But SSDs can also be much faster than HDDs, and lack the moving parts that can make HDDs prone to failure, particularly in mobile devices that experience a great deal of movement.



Currently, the $1,499 1.86GHz MacBook Air has a 120GB SATA HDD, while the $1,799 2.13GHz configuration comes with a 128GB SSD. Adding a 128GB SSD to a 13-inch MacBook Pro costs $350, while a 256GB upgrade -- adding just 6GB more than the standard HDD -- costs $800.
post #2 of 50
Waaah. I heard the iPad might drive up the price of anal lube, too. What WON'T it affect?
post #3 of 50
Mass production always brings prices down, in the short term prices probably will go up, but in the long term prices are gonna drop big time!

Thanks Apple for buying enough drives to start dragging the pc industry into SSD mainstream!
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
post #4 of 50
I guess that sucks for the PC makers. The price per GB for NAND is on a similar price curve as for RAM which is a more mature process. Capacities double about every 18mo and prices per GB goes down about 40% per year. The choice to include in a PC is all about cost.
post #5 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Mass production always brings prices down, in the short term prices probably will go up, but in the long term prices are gonna drop big time!...

Exactly, sooner than later I hope.

SSD is the next big thing. Memory architecture will change eventually too I hope, integrating SSD as RAM rather than storage space. Spinning disks will still have their place with their massive capacities.
post #6 of 50
AppleInsider Quote

"In early 2008, Apple embraced the solid state drive by offering it as an option in its MacBook Air, with a premium price. Solid state drives, compared to their hard disk drive counterparts, are more expensive and offer less storage.

But SSDs can also be much faster than HDDs, and lack the moving parts that can make HDDs prone to failure, particularly in mobile devices that experience a great deal of movement.

Currently, the $1,499 1.86GHz MacBook Air has a 120GB SATA HDD, while the $1,799 2.13GHz configuration comes with a 128GB SSD. Adding a 128GB SSD to a 13-inch MacBook Pro costs $350, while a 256GB upgrade -- adding just 6GB more than the standard HDD -- costs $800."



Bought a 17" MBP with a 256 GB SSD this past year and the SSD is really, really fast, quiet and seems to run cooler than the HDD MBP.

Hope that the next SL upgrade will address some of the inherent problems with SSDs regarding speed degradation over time. Haven't noticed any loss in speed in my SSD, but then have less than half full. From what I've been able to find from researching, is that there should be TRIM command support in the OS. Windows 7 is suppose to have a TRIM command, not sure if Linus has it.

I thought that the price for the SSD option for the MBP had dropped from late last year--did it go up again due to shortages?
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #7 of 50
That's good news...I hope Apple updates the MBA with a one-click glass track pad and the raccoon trim around the screen. Then expands the MBA product line to include a 15" and 17" SSD versions.

I think this would accelerate the trend to get away from having the SuperDrive in every laptop.

Another feature of the SSD is the 'instant-on.'

Best
post #8 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Mass production always brings prices down, in the short term prices probably will go up, but in the long term prices are gonna drop big time!

That's what I would think too.
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp

Never argue with idiots, they'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. - a bumper sticker

Never quote idiots, they just clog up...
Reply
http://www.grammarbook.com/punctuation/quotes.asp

Never argue with idiots, they'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience. - a bumper sticker

Never quote idiots, they just clog up...
Reply
post #9 of 50
Screw SSD, it's already obsolete that's why it's so expensive. What about SDXC?

It's supposed to have up to 2TB and access speeds twice as fast as hard drives, all on a little SD card. Made for the HD video cameras to come.

It's the introduction of this type of remove able storage that prompted Apple to start putting SD ports on Mac's. (it can access the storage, but currently not the speed)


I think Apple would be jumping all over SDXC because it's such a thin and sexy storage medium.

2TB on a iPhone makes a whole lot of room for apps and anything else.
post #10 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Currently, the $1,499 1.86GHz MacBook Air has a 120GB SATA HDD, while the $1,799 2.13GHz configuration comes with a 128GB SSD. Adding a 128GB SSD to a 13-inch MacBook Pro costs $350, while a 256GB upgrade -- adding just 6GB more than the standard HDD -- costs $800.

You can get OCZ Agility 120GB with rebate and BCB for around $130, only idiots go that route above...
post #11 of 50
ssd isnt the same as a HD, there is a limited number of write cycles to each part of the device, until drive management routines change their method of using these devices, there will be other issues brought about that hard drives dont face. its not a free lunch
post #12 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

Screw SSD, it's already obsolete that's why it's so expensive. What about SDXC?

Because it's even newer and more expensive and it doesn't come in sizes much lager than 32GB yet, nowhere near 2TB.
MacBook Pro 17" Glossy 2.93GHz, iPad 64GB, iPhone 4 16GB, and a lot of other assorted goodies.

If you're a troll and you have been slain. Don't be a Zombie.
Reply
MacBook Pro 17" Glossy 2.93GHz, iPad 64GB, iPhone 4 16GB, and a lot of other assorted goodies.

If you're a troll and you have been slain. Don't be a Zombie.
Reply
post #13 of 50
Wow! one company taking 1/3 of all the NAND... and growing. I wouldn't be surprised by Apple taking the most but when I consider the number of devices in the world that use NAND it seems very high to me.

I hope the manufactures can ahead of the NAND shortage. With another die shrink and 3-bit storage happing this year that is a potential 2.25x increase, apparently at about the same production over last year. Of course, that is for NAND, not specifically SSDs which will take longer to come to market with these technologies in place at an adequate performance and reliability level.


Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

Bought a 17" MBP with a 256 GB SSD this past year and the SSD is really, really fast, quiet and seems to run cooler than the HDD MBP.

Hope that the next SL upgrade will address some of the inherent problems with SSDs regarding speed degradation over time. Haven't noticed any loss in speed in my SSD, but then have less than half full. From what I've been able to find from researching, is that there should be TRIM command support in the OS. Windows 7 is suppose to have a TRIM command, not sure if Linus has it.

I thought that the price for the SSD option for the MBP had dropped from late last year--did it go up again due to shortages?

Hopefully the next round of MBPs offers 1) A fix to the SATA controller so any 3rd-party drive will work, 2) SATA III (6Gbps), 3) a wider range of SSDs from the Apple Store, hopefully Intel drives now that they are adequately green, and 4) TRIM.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

Screw SSD, it's already obsolete that's why it's so expensive. What about SDXC?

:sigh: Seriously, WTH!
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #14 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBFromOZ View Post

ssd isnt the same as a HD, there is a limited number of write cycles to each part of the device, until drive management routines change their method of using these devices, there will be other issues brought about that hard drives dont face. its not a free lunch

I agree wih you... \

Giovanni B. Saccone
Creativity is just connecting things (Steve Jobs)
> > > My wEb SiTe < < <

Reply

Giovanni B. Saccone
Creativity is just connecting things (Steve Jobs)
> > > My wEb SiTe < < <

Reply
post #15 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

Screw SSD, it's already obsolete that's why it's so expensive. What about SDXC?

It's supposed to have up to 2TB and access speeds twice as fast as hard drives, all on a little SD card. Made for the HD video cameras to come.

It's the introduction of this type of remove able storage that prompted Apple to start putting SD ports on Mac's. (it can access the storage, but currently not the speed)


I think Apple would be jumping all over SDXC because it's such a thin and sexy storage medium.

2TB on a iPhone makes a whole lot of room for apps and anything else.

1. SDXC requires exFAT. Which is an Microsoft proprietary format. exFAT also lacks many features that current HFS+ has and required by Snow Leopard.

2. SDXC wont have the high I/O / Random RW performance that current SSD has.
post #16 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsNly View Post

Because it's even newer and more expensive and it doesn't come in sizes much larger than 32GB yet, nowhere near 2TB.


It's starting to trickle out. If Apple could lock in a volume price on larger capacity SDXC's and get the economies of scale working they sure could make a heck of a radical product line in the next few years.

http://www.cnet.com/8301-13951_1-10457197-63.html


With a spring loaded flush mounted SD slot, people could remove their 2TB of storage from nearly any device Apple makes.
post #17 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

1. SDXC requires exFAT. Which is an Microsoft proprietary format. exFAT also lacks many features that current HFS+ has and required by Snow Leopard.

2. SDXC wont have the high I/O / Random RW performance that current SSD has.

Which prove why SSD wont overtake HDD in another 5 years, even if it is cheap enough there are simply not enough Fabs capacity to do so.
post #18 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

Screw SSD, it's already obsolete that's why it's so expensive. What about SDXC?

You are being a tad premature with the word 'obsolete', but this area of tech does offer some intriguing possibilities ten years down the line. The computer of today could become a passive generic device, while you carry around everything that matters (OS, apps, files) in your wallet! Wherever you go you just pop the card in (or more likely connect wirelessly) for your full computing use. Rather like a VCR sitting there doing nothing until you put a tape in.

I wonder if Apple's 'thinking big' includes R&D in this area?
Believe nothing, no matter where you heard it, not even if I have said it, if it does not agree with your own reason and your own common sense.
Buddha
Reply
Believe nothing, no matter where you heard it, not even if I have said it, if it does not agree with your own reason and your own common sense.
Buddha
Reply
post #19 of 50
Some of the issues and solutions regarding SSDs' degradation and slowdowns are answered in the following

Regarding TRIM commands:

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/sho...px?i=3531&p=10

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=744885

SSD Slow Down

http://www.computerworld.com/s/artic...wn_inevitable_

Reconditioning SSD

http://macperformanceguide.com/Stora...ditioning.html

Raid SSD

http://macperformanceguide.com/Revie...y_Extreme.html

Still think that SSDs are the future--just need larger capacities and lower /GB price. Look for 128 GB iPod Touch and iPad before the end of the year or early next year. Toshiba has recently come out with a 64GB NAND chip.

The new OWC Mercury Extreme SSD looks awesome.

Review

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3751
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #20 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

1. SDXC requires exFAT. Which is an Microsoft proprietary format. exFAT also lacks many features that current HFS+ has and required by Snow Leopard.

2. SDXC wont have the high I/O / Random RW performance that current SSD has.


1: Apple would make their own version of exHFS+ naturally.

2: With Apple putting out 1GHz iPads, it's not like it's a speed demon like a Mac Pro is. It seems Apple is more inclined now to produce ultra thin devices that have little need for elaborate cooling and have a long battery life. Shift any performance needs to the "cloud" or desktops.


What hobbles SSD is the price and storage size, really what's the use having a iPad or iPod Touch with only a mere 64GB? My music library alone is more than that.

The industry knows SSD's are doomed to early death, it's just a matter of time before the SDXC cranks up the production, lowers the price, increases the storage and floods the market, so they are milking their camel for all it's worth and we consumer gets stuck with flaky bulky noisy hard drives for our +64GB storage needs.

Solder that 2TB SDXC right to the logic board along with the battery, that's Apple's type thinking.

People will see, come a few years from now, why they even bothered to buy devices with pitiful 64GB storage capacities, it's a joke.
post #21 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post



Hopefully the next round of MBPs offers 1) A fix to the SATA controller so any 3rd-party drive will work, 2) SATA III (6Gbps), 3) a wider range of SSDs from the Apple Store, hopefully Intel drives now that they are adequately green.



:sigh: Seriously, WTH!

I hope that the first is true.

Agreed on your response to the second quote.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #22 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

1: Apple would make their own version of exHFS+ naturally.

Do you even have any idea what you are talking about.

Quote:
2: With Apple putting out 1GHz iPads, it's not like it's a speed demon like a Mac Pro is. It seems Apple is more inclined now to produce ultra thin devices that have little need for elaborate cooling and have a long battery life. Shift any performance needs to the "cloud" or desktops.

As you said, SSD is what Desktop needs.

Quote:
What hobbles SSD is the price and storage size, really what's the use having a iPad or iPod Touch with only a mere 64GB? My music library alone is more than that.

The industry knows SSD's are doomed to early death, it's just a matter of time before the SDXC cranks up the production, lowers the price, increases the storage and floods the market, so they are milking their camel for all it's worth and we consumer gets stuck with flaky bulky noisy hard drives for our +64GB storage needs.

Solder that 2TB SDXC right to the logic board along with the battery, that's Apple's type thinking.

People will see, come a few years from now, why they even bothered to buy devices with pitiful 64GB storage capacities, it's a joke.

You seems to have misunderstand what SDXC, SSD and NAND is all about.
post #23 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by pats View Post

I guess that sucks for the PC makers. The price per GB for NAND is on a similar price curve as for RAM which is a more mature process. Capacities double about every 18mo and prices per GB goes down about 40% per year. The choice to include in a PC is all about cost.

The 16GB SDHC card I tend to use for cameras is still stuck at about the same price as it was 18 months ago. I bought a few at $30 in between, now it's back up to $40.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

Screw SSD, it's already obsolete that's why it's so expensive. What about SDXC?

There is nothing magical about SDXC, it uses flash chips too. SDXC is just one specification for a solid state drive, and it's a removable chip not meant for main storage. It's also limited to what can be fit into a postage stamp size, and speed is similarly constrained by the flash chip that's used in it. An SSD in a more conventional drive-shaped module can fit a lot more chips and run faster because of chip banks. It's easier to find SLC chips in more conventional drive modules too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MsNly View Post

Because it's even newer and more expensive and it doesn't come in sizes much lager than 32GB yet, nowhere near 2TB.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

1: Apple would make their own version of exHFS+ naturally.

Apple already has HFS+. Which currently seems to be scaling pretty well beyond 2TB, it's supposed to scale to 8 Exabytes.
post #24 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

Screw SSD, it's already obsolete that's why it's so expensive. What about SDXC?

It's supposed to have up to 2TB and access speeds twice as fast as hard drives, all on a little SD card. Made for the HD video cameras to come.

It's the introduction of this type of remove able storage that prompted Apple to start putting SD ports on Mac's. (it can access the storage, but currently not the speed)


I think Apple would be jumping all over SDXC because it's such a thin and sexy storage medium.

I don't agree with your assessment that SSDs' are obsolete, furthermore if they are obsolete as you assert, then it why would SSDs be so expensive--unless it has antique value. SSD's are only going to get faster, cheaper and have more capacity as chips become thinner and more densely packed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

1. SDXC requires exFAT. Which is an Microsoft proprietary format. exFAT also lacks many features that current HFS+ has and required by Snow Leopard.

2. SDXC wont have the high I/O / Random RW performance that current SSD has.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

Which prove why SSD wont overtake HDD in another 5 years, even if it is cheap enough there are simply not enough Fabs capacity to do so.

Why did you respond to your own post? While SSDs may take a while to overtake HDDs, the advantages of SSDs far outweigh HDD except for HDDs storage capacity.

More on SDXC v SSD


64 GB SDXC
http://www.digitalpixels.net/2010/02...c-memory-card/

sdxc
http://www.sdcard.org/developers/tech/sdxc

OWC Mercury Extreme SSD

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other...ign=googlebase

Seems like the SSD has a slight edge over the 64 GB SDXC in read speed.

The SDXC can be used as a start up disk:

http://www.maclife.com/article/howto...c_sd_card_slot
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #25 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

Screw SSD, it's already obsolete that's why it's so expensive. What about SDXC?

It's supposed to have up to 2TB and access speeds twice as fast as hard drives, all on a little SD card. Made for the HD video cameras to come.

It's the introduction of this type of remove able storage that prompted Apple to start putting SD ports on Mac's. (it can access the storage, but currently not the speed)


I think Apple would be jumping all over SDXC because it's such a thin and sexy storage medium.

2TB on a iPhone makes a whole lot of room for apps and anything else.

What are you talking about? You aren't making a bit of sense. SDXC is a type of SSD. SSD refers to the fact that the drive uses no moving parts, not the form factor, which is all SDXC is.
post #26 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post

Waaah. I heard the iPad might drive up the price of anal lube, too. What WON'T it affect?

It won't affect your chances at getting laid.
post #27 of 50
Can we just move the whole world to SSD already. I'm getting tired of waiting for this to be standard and I bet Apple is too.
post #28 of 50
SSDs are ALREADY way too expensive... Ouch.
post #29 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126 View Post

That's good news...I hope Apple updates the MBA with a one-click glass track pad and the raccoon trim around the screen. Then expands the MBA product line to include a 15" and 17" SSD versions.

I think this would accelerate the trend to get away from having the SuperDrive in every laptop.

Another feature of the SSD is the 'instant-on.'

Best

I'm glad I bought 2 SSDs when I had the chance.
I put one in my MBP and the other in my Mac mini(HTPC).
Another benefit is absolute silence. No disks spinning up.
post #30 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

While SSDs may take a while to overtake HDDs, the advantages of SSDs far outweigh HDD except for HDDs storage capacity.

In some regard they've already overtaken HDDs. Leaving aside the better performance SSDs are already matching and beating HDDs in capacity, one of the other two important factors of beating our HDDs in the market. The other is price which is almost always the last thing.

Take the iPod Classic with a 160GB 1.8" HDD. The largest SSD in that 1.8" size is from Intel and it's 160GB, and that came out last year, before the 160GB 1.8" Toshiba HDD was even announced. Both have the same thickness.

The 2.5" HDDs are now making out at 320GB, still smaller than the 500GB you can get for the typical HDD. You can get 640GB HDDs but they have an extra platter and therefore thicker than typical notebook can accommodate. The Intel SSDs are 7mm, which seems to be the new standard for 2.5" drives. Mac notebooks use 9.5mm drives. Seagate now has a 7mm thick 2.5" HDD on the market. It loses a platter and therefore half the capacity, making it 250GB, which is less than an SSD with of the same dimensions.

Of course, the SSDs are still pricer but the price is coming down as two capacity increase methods will emerge and the inherent performance. Since SSDs are growing in capacity faster than HDDs we could see a shift from a company like Apple within a couple years. First we'll likely see it on the premium end of other vendors, but I don't think Apple will be far behind, especially if that means trimming 2.5mm off their machine thickness.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #31 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

SSDs are ALREADY way too expensive... Ouch.

That's the thing. Sure, it's nice, but it doesn't have an easy to take price. The platter drives that I happen to get are plenty quiet enough for me, and the heat/power consumption hasn't been a problem either. A notebook platter drive consumes about 2 watts max, a standard notebook CPU consumes around 30 max.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

Can we just move the whole world to SSD already. I'm getting tired of waiting for this to be standard and I bet Apple is too.

Why does it need to be standard? You can just buy it for yourself if you want it. I keep thinking my next one will be SSD, but it still hasn't happened the last two times I bought drives. I just replaced a drive that worked fine for nine years. The capacity just isn't quite there for me.
post #32 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Why does it need to be standard? You can just buy it for yourself if you want it. I keep thinking my next one will be SSD, but it still hasn't happened the last two times I bought drives. The capacity just isn't quite there for me.

It's far better. When I say, "Make it standard," I mean a concerted effort to increase storage capacities while lowering prices, so it can land somewhere near a HDD.

I know its far off in reality, but it'd be nice to see 256 gb and 512 gb SSD's built into Macs at the same current prices.
post #33 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

It's far better. When I say, "Make it standard," I mean a concerted effort to increase storage capacities while lowering prices, so it can land somewhere near a HDD.

I know its far off in reality, but it'd be nice to see 256 gb and 512 gb SSD's built into Macs at the same current prices.

Why would you think there isn't a concerted effort to increase storage capacities?

Technology advancements can only move so fast, making it faster is a matter of spending disproportionate amount of money. That money has to have a return, the more money invested, the greater the return needs to be. These plants don't spring up by themselves in three months, the same goes with scaling up the technology required to make finer and finer pitched circuitry, and mass producing the equipment needed to make them.

It seems silly to expect these businesses to make the big investments while not being willing to pay the price of the final product.
post #34 of 50
The iPad is nearly worthless to me as it's storage capacity is pitiful.

I'm not going to store things in the cloud, dependent upon a internet connection and wait forever to download what I need.

I'm not going to involve myself in a 1 or two year iPad upgrade cycle just because they managed to increase the storage a little here and there.

I need a iPad with 320GB or better, 500GB or better preferred, 2TB would be awesome!

I don't see that happening with SSD drives Apple is using, they need to move in another direction.


SSD drives should be decreasing in price, not increasing because of more demand. That's ludicrous.

The PC world is not adopting SSD drives, leaving Apple the only one buying them.
post #35 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

The iPad is nearly worthless to me as it's storage capacity is pitiful.

I'm not going to store things in the cloud, dependent upon a internet connection and wait forever to download what I need.

I'm not going to involve myself in a 1 or two year iPad upgrade cycle just because they managed to increase the storage a little here and there.

I need a iPad with 320GB or better, 500GB or better preferred, 2TB would be awesome!

I don't see that happening with SSD drives Apple is using, they need to move in another direction.

Are you being sarcastic? Doing a 2TB model this year would make it a 10lb tablet, at minimum. If you can wait 5 years, you might get it then. But I expect that your expectations would rise accordingly, and you might say you would need 16TB to carry all your files.
post #36 of 50
wow thanks Apple. Driving more expensive books, music, SSD's...what's next, my mortgage?
post #37 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post

The iPad is nearly worthless to me as it's storage capacity is pitiful.

I'm not going to store things in the cloud, dependent upon a internet connection and wait forever to download what I need.

I'm not going to involve myself in a 1 or two year iPad upgrade cycle just because they managed to increase the storage a little here and there.

I need a iPad with 320GB or better, 500GB or better preferred, 2TB would be awesome!

I don't see that happening with SSD drives Apple is using, they need to move in another direction.


SSD drives should be decreasing in price, not increasing because of more demand. That's ludicrous.

The PC world is not adopting SSD drives, leaving Apple the only one buying them.

::sigh:: Is this poster actually suggesting that a 2TB drive could feasibly have been in a tablet?
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #38 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


Of course, the SSDs are still pricer but the price is coming down as two capacity increase methods will emerge and the inherent performance. Since SSDs are growing in capacity faster than HDDs we could see a shift from a company like Apple within a couple years. First we'll likely see it on the premium end of other vendors, but I don't think Apple will be far behind, especially if that means trimming 2.5mm off their machine thickness.

If I recall the price when I bought my MBP in April 2009, was that the 256 GB SSD option was $750 and the 8 GB RAM was $1300. Now the SSD option is $650 and the 8 GB RAM option is $600. Just noticed that the SSD option for the 13" MBP is $800--why?? The base price for the 17" MBP went from about $2700-2600 to $2500
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #39 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by FineTunes View Post

If I recall the price when I bought my MBP in April 2009, was that the 256 GB SSD option was $750 and the 8 GB RAM was $1300. Now the SSD option is $650 and the 8 GB RAM option is $600. Just noticed that the SSD option for the 13" MBP is $800--why?? The base price for the 17" MBP went from about $2700-2600 to $2500

Take a look at the size of the hard drives you're upgrading from. The base model of the 17" has a larger, more expensive drive than the base model 13", 500GB and 160GB, respectively.
post #40 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woohoo! View Post


I need a iPad with 320GB or better, 500GB or better preferred, 2TB would be awesome!

I don't see that happening with SSD drives Apple is using, they need to move in another direction.

SSD drives should be decreasing in price, not increasing because of more demand. That's ludicrous.

The PC world is not adopting SSD drives, leaving Apple the only one buying them.

If you need that much capacity in your iPad you are just going have to wait. Most laptop SSDs that I've seen are about 256 GB max and I don't think that they will fit in an iPad.

Overall prices on SSDs have been dropping, however newer SSDs using newer technology are higher in price.

Still waiting for a 2 TB SDXC?

http://en.akihabaranews.com/28155/pe...-is-my-2tb-one
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple iPad success could increase solid state drive prices