No More Rebooting? 320
blankmange writes: "This headline caught my eye: 'The End of Computer Rebooting.' Seems that there has been some new developments in memory technology: The new thin-film technology that could give rebooting the boot is based on resistor logic rather than the traditional transistor logic used in most PCs and other memory-enabled devices. It also is considerably faster than current memory systems and holds the promise of reducing the time required to transfer and download multimedia content and other massive files. This is great news, but what am I going to do with the extra hour or so a day?"
Finally it has happened to me! (Score:2, Funny)
When it's done, of course! (Please don't sue me Id Software)
Tech Support (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Tech Support (Score:2, Funny)
Kierthos
Re:Tech Support (Score:3, Insightful)
Say you have lingering threads with open ports or something. How are you supposed to figure that out over the phone [and recall you have to tell some 65 yr old lady trying to write her grandson how todo this].
Most of the time people run stupid third-rate programs like Go!Zilla or Gator or dare I say anything based on linux! They screw up the system and there is not much you can do.
If on the other hand you said "My modem online light is off" and they retort "reboot your PC" you can be assured they are fairly clueless.
Tom
Re:Tech Support (Score:2)
Let's see... The thread was about microsoft tech support drones. Running linux? They don't support that.
Or maybe you're saying that running something on a linux box would automagically affect the Windows box? How'sm that supposed to work?
Or maybe you're just a dumbshit that doesn't know what the fuck he's trying to say? Yeah, that covers it.
Great. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Great. (Score:3, Funny)
Oh you said recover.
Well, the one and only true solution: reformat.
Screw rebooting, there're other advantages (Score:4, Insightful)
The article glosses over what I consider the important advantages:
- [assumedly] great power savings. Great for portables and remote embedded systems.
- No moving parts! If this tech can really replace and even surpass in speed, Hard Disk Drives, reliability and performance should make a gain of at least an order of magnitude.
I've been waiting for years for computers to become eletronic-only devices. I've harped before that CRT's (vaccum tubes, for God's sake!) and HDD's need to join the Dodo in oblivion. This new tech, in the common mass storage area (HDD's, CD'c, floppies), along with flat panel technology, would put us right on the verge of that ideal. The last hurdle would be cooling without moving parts.
Re:Screw rebooting, there're other advantages (Score:2)
Replacing HDDs in terms of speed/performance/reliability is easy, and there are any number of currently available technologies that fit the bill. The reason HDDs still exist is because nothing else even comes close to in terms of price/capacity.
Re:Great. (Score:2)
We already have this... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:We already have this... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:We already have this... (Score:2)
Around here, a three year fixed price will get you 2.3 cents per kiloWatthour. One year is 8766 hours, so 300 Watts draws 2629.8 kWhs per year, or about $60. So the original poster gets a better price for electricity then I do (I live in a country with high energy taxes and no fossil fuel electricity), but I can't believe it would cost $300 anywhere.
Laptops make great servers (Score:2)
Less heat, less power, why haven't these caught on?
Or do laptops have a habit of mysteriously walking away compared to their boat anchor bretheren?
Re:We already have this... (Score:2)
I bet the energy consumption of this is much lower than a harddisk which means it will mean it will be less expensive
Besides that, yes, having computers turned on 24/7 (which my box is - I want it to be available *now* not 5 minutes after I need to lookup some info!) - just ask people with computerfarms. I'm personally involved in the Ars Technica Distributed Computing Community [infopop.net] and there are a lot of people with pretty large home farms. There is a lot of things to consider if you want to build a farm - the critical part of it is how you get the best performance for the smallest amount of money. This includes the the energy bill - removing as much hardware as possible.
Re:We already have this... (Score:5, Informative)
To make an example, I admin a small Linux cluster with 6 PCs. Each of them is a 1.3 Ghz Thunderbird, with 1.5 gigs of PC133 RAM, an average HD, and a 300W power supply. Most of the time the processors are at 100% load.
All 6 machines are powered with a 2000 VA UPS. An UPS like that is capable of delivering around 1600 Watts, but the load indicator never surpassed the mid level. So I would say that 150 Watts are more than enough for an average PC to operate. The 300-400 watts are for booting the things and spinning the drives up.
But..... (Score:2, Interesting)
Rebooting is always a great way to fix things.... they even used it one of the star trek's once.
And how the hell is windows supposed to work?
Re:But..... (Score:5, Interesting)
So, when you turn off/on your PC, you don't need to reboot, it can just put you right back where you were instantly. Unfortunately, in the context of a crash/instability, this would put you right back in an inoperable/unstable environment.
Bad writeup.
But... (Score:2)
Re:But... (Score:2, Informative)
This solution will mean no power consumption and no data loss. Plus, heat inside a casing will greately reduce. Plus computers can get smaller and big bulky hard disks vanish.
Re:But... (Score:2)
That would be because 8/10 times, your computer doesn't come back when you try to wake it up.
the downtime (Score:5, Interesting)
If you are an avid computer user, you may only get your downtime when your computer is rebooting. This is especially true in workplaces where people are "chained" to their computers trying to finish a project, etc.
Those ergonomics posters on the wall do very little to get an average 'puter user to take care of themselves.. reboots served some of this purpose.
(Maybe that is why windows crashes so much - it's Bill Gates' gift to the employee!)
In any case, perhaps all offices should institute a staggered mandatory 15 minute inactivity period every couple of hours for each active computer.
Re:the downtime (Score:2, Funny)
Re:the downtime (Score:4, Funny)
the sysadmin of a server farm would never move again!
Re:the downtime (Score:2)
Re:the downtime (Score:2)
This is actually law in some countries (for example Holland). In practice, especially for IT workers, it's not followed - mostly is a question of work culture and ignorance. Still, around here nobody (much less your manager) will comment if you do a pause once in awhile.
Re:the downtime (Score:2)
Of course, that's in you're not a contract employee like 80% of the people working in the CS industry are.
Re:the downtime (Score:2)
"Don't know what I'm gonna do with an extra hour?" (Score:2)
eh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Bad title for the article (Score:5, Insightful)
It just talks about memory that doesn't lose state when you hit the power button on your PC.
We've got to invent perfect software that can run forever without needing to be restarted, first.
Re:Bad title for the article (Score:3, Insightful)
rebooting will not die, yet. (Score:5, Insightful)
We could easily dump the memory contents onto the hard drive straigh away and we are not doing it (except in laptops, but even there it doesn't always work) This is because rebooting reinitializes various devices and takes care of the time jump (i.e. crons, anacrons, etc). The more complicated your system is the less likely it is that you are going to survive without booting.
Also, computers are now 1000 times faster than 10 years ago and they take much more time to boot (DOS did it in seconds on 286).
Re:rebooting will not die, yet. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:rebooting will not die, yet. (Score:4, Interesting)
Uh, have you seen WinXP's hibernate feature? On my 256Mb Athlon desktop, it writes the RAM to disk and shuts down in under five seconds, and comes back up (from wakeup keypress, through POST, then writes disk to ram) and is fully usable in twelve seconds. I've hibernated it with dozens of running processes and services, and not yet seen any problems on restore. I even took it down and brought it back up during a game of Deus Ex, and just kept right on playing where I'd left off.
Given a reasonably reliable OS, you should only be wiping the RAM when the system changes significantly, e.g. switching kernels or hardware. XP's hibernate feature demonstrates that merely turning the power off shouldn't require you to shut anything down. Unfortunately, I've yet to see anything that works as well on my linux boxen, including my laptop. Suggestions gratefully received!
Re:rebooting will not die, yet. (Score:2, Insightful)
Linux is way, way behind Win2K and WinXP. Too bad some people's egoes are too stuck up where the sun don't shine to admit it. I have much more respect for people who run Linux because it's Free Software (as in GPL/open source). Generally, Linux is playing catch-up when it could have been superior. It's just a matter of standardizing the platform (APIs, toolkits, wheels) a bit more. But how do you do that when everybody is working on their own thing? I think Linux is great when you want to learn CS, but it's not for the common man yet.
It's a bit unfair to bash "linux" though. "Linux" is doing okay, it's a very nice performing kernel.
Re:rebooting will not die, yet. (Score:2)
On your linux box you should be able to completely restore you session from boot in less time then windows XP is restoring from "hibernation". You just need to disable all the stuff that init is running that you don't use, and configure your window manager and applications correctly. There is no reason you shouldn't be able to log out and back in and have your session exactly as you've left it. Unfortunatly, if you want hibernation you need to get a PC with bios support for it, or you need to get a mac, on which linux will wake from sleep in less then 1 second.
Re:rebooting will not die, yet. (Score:2)
Sigh. 12 second including POST. And that's not "until you see the desktop". It restores to exactly the same state it was in when you shut it down, and is immediately available. That's a big difference; it's a genuine pause button.
Incidentally, what's your problem with WinXP? You're advocating booting a stripped down linux as an alternative (did you not read my point about "dozens of running processes and services"?) so I assume you'd accept that you can strip XP down until it's effectively Win2K. You seem to be more anti-XP than pro-any other solution. I like linux, but that doesn't mean that I have to hate XP, or to pretend that XP hibernate is a wonderful feature that I'd really like to see on my linux boxen - as I described it. Now, let's go again. Do you know of any linux solution that does effectively what XP hibernate does?
Re:rebooting will not die, yet. (Score:2)
Seriously though, the ability to turn off my computer at night, and come back in the morning and still have all my windows come up, all my files still be open, even winamp will immediately continue playing when the computer boots up. The only drawback is that all your hardware has to support it, if I plug in my TV Capture card I can't hibernate anymore.
Ummm a little question (Score:2)
Second, isnt resistor logig analog, and not binary (transistor) ?
Re:Ummm a little question (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Ummm a little question (Score:2)
Re:Ummm a little question (Score:2)
BUT the way transistor logic, logic being the keyword, is APPLIED to computing is what I spoke of and is certainly digital in nature in that application.
I however missed the point one of the above posters made of using resitance values in a binary mode. I have built both binary and analog computers, I have a fondness of Analog computing, I never thought to apply only 2 DISTINCT values to a resitance representation.
Re:Ummm a little question (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess never having worked with resitance values as absolute, It never crossed my mind good point.
I think (I may be wrong) these magnatite are almost like "core memory" from days long gone, where a single bit was represented in memory by a single wound ferrite core, and I guess like you said pull distinct values from diffferent residtance values.
This sounds, upone rereading the article, even more like core memory on a film.
My dad saw, and showed me picture, yes im that old, of core memory being produced at IBM , thousands of ferrite cores beinghand tested and added to boards. Not bad in concept , but then again bubble memory for those old enough to remeber was a great concept too, there is still one Bubble manufacturer out there I am aware of upwards of 2 gigs, theyre using it as a solid state drive instead of ram (non-volitaile with somethinglike a 500? G shoch rating ?!?!)
Re:Ummm a little question (Score:2)
This [redbrick.dcu.ie] seems to be a pretty good intro to resistor logic.
Re:Ummm a little question (Score:2)
What he meant is that transistors are inherently analog devices. We just run them at full saturation levels (almost) all the time, so that the output is flat.
He went on to demonstrate that rather impressively by building the first neural networks in VLSI, by using CMOS transistors operating in the near-linear response range. (This was more than 10 years ago now, so I can't remember exactly when that was.)
How different is this than MRAM? (Score:5, Interesting)
The press release doesn't really go into detail, so I don't know how similar (or disparate) the respective IBM and Samsung solutions are. They do both have the same net effect for users: non-volatile main memory.
This is cool stuff, but what hasn't been said is that as long as operating systems and applications leak memory, there will be a need for reboots.
Ciao.
Re:How different is this than MRAM? (Score:2)
You must be a Microsoft user.
Some of us don't have that problem.
[surak@tuxedo surak]$ uptime
9:23am up 69 days, 15:33, 3 users, load average: 0.89, 0.87, 1.10
[surak@rtuxedo surak]$ uname
Linux
See?
Re:How different is this than MRAM? (Score:2)
[weave@homebox weave]$ uptime
9:59am up 265 days, 17:11, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
[weave@homebox weave]$ ps -fp 9399
UID PID PPID C STIME TTY TIME CMD
weave 9399 9274 1 2001 ? 07:26:58 opera
I fired up Opera when I booted the computer, been running ever since. The only reason I shut it down last year was to go on vacation for two weeks and it seemed prudent at the time...
A study in power management... (Score:2)
ls-1010>sh vers
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
IOS (tm) LS1010 WA3-7 Software (LS1010-WP-M), Version 11.2(15)WA3(7), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
Copyright (c) 1986-1998 by cisco Systems, Inc.
Compiled Mon 14-Dec-98 16:54 by integ
Image text-base: 0x600108D0, data-base: 0x60448000
ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 201(1025), SOFTWARE
ROM: PNNI Software (LS1010-WP-M), Version 11.2(5)WA3(2b), RELEASE SOFTWARE
ls-1010 uptime is 3 years, 6 weeks, 5 days, 23 hours, 56 minutes
System restarted by reload at 07:54:52 MNT Sat Feb 27 1999
System image file is "slot0:ls1010-wp-mz.112-15.WA3.7", booted via slot0
cisco LS1010 (R4600) processor with 32768K bytes of memory.
R4600 processor, Implementation 32, Revision 2.0
Last reset from power-on
1 Ethernet/IEEE 802.3 interface(s)
13 ATM network interface(s)
125K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory.
16384K bytes of Flash PCMCIA card at slot 0 (Sector size 128K).
8192K bytes of Flash internal SIMM (Sector size 256K).
Configuration register is 0x102
ls-1010>
Re:How different is this than MRAM? (Score:2)
Re:How different is this than MRAM? (Score:2)
There was a story about a netware server being lost for several years behind a partition wall. Indeed the idea of a computer needing frequent reboots is very much a Windowsism.
Re:How different is this than MRAM? (Score:3, Informative)
Scared the Hell out of me when I saw my DB server with an uptime of 23 days...until I realized that it had indeed been up for 520 days. This machine gets *hammered*, too.
Re:How different is this than MRAM? (Score:2)
I think this is the same / links to MRAM articles (Score:3, Informative)
Interesting highlights:
The trasentric paper quoted Electronic Buyer's News:
The interesting elements of this:The Wired article is fairly lengthy and also details the biography of Stuart Parkin. Parkin is the IBM fellow that has been driving most of the MRAM research.
Ciao.
Re:I think this is the same / links to MRAM articl (Score:2)
So are we really talking about desktop PC's or something more like a missile fire control system on a warship which needs to work straight after being forcably power cycled, before the next bomb or antiship missile is launched at it?
Re:I think this is the same / links to MRAM articl (Score:2)
Re:How different is this than MRAM? (Score:2)
Pretty much, they might have different edge cases (MRAM might be as sensitive to outside magnetic fields as hard disks...resistor RAM might leak current if not touched for a few years), and they almost definitely will cost different amounts, which may spell life or death for them (unless there are significant speed/density differences).
True for the OS, not so much for apps because you can restart them without a whole reboot. Some even sort of do that on their own (at one point Apache's child processes would exit after X requests to prevent resource leaks from building up).
The reduced reboot time might be a big deal for laptops, but the nonvolatile nature of the new RAM types won't matter for desktops until the price is low enough to pose a threat to hard disks. It won't pose a threat to normal RAM until it's prices approach that too...which makes it disappointing that none of these articles address the estimated price of these technologies and the projected price of SDRAM and hard drives in 3 years.
how does this mean faster downloads? (Score:5, Insightful)
Last time I checked, downloading speed depended on your connection, not how fast your RAM goes. I'm sure my memory can handle more than 1.5 Mb/s but that's as fast an I can download, because that is the limit of my DSL line.
Re:how does this mean faster downloads? (Score:2, Funny)
I do remember in the old days of Windows it usually did happen....I even had to get programs that dealt with "download management"....
Re:how does this mean faster downloads? (Score:3, Informative)
The whole article is mistitled. It won't be an end to rebooting, it will be an end to cold booting.
If you want to eliminate the reboots from Windows, tell bill gates and co to make it more modular and less inter-dependent so you can insert and remove drivers just like *nix kernel modules.
Looks like NVRAM (Score:3, Insightful)
However, a cheap, fast non-volatile memory which can be written and read unlimited times could be a very useful supplement to RAM. Think journalling filesystems for example - put your ext3 journal in a 100Mbyte NVRAM device and you'd hardly need to touch the hard disk for hours at a time, given moderate use. (Eg notebooks could spin down the drive.) This is possible already, but NVRAM devices are relatively expensive and most PCs don't have them.
Poorly written summary of a poorly titled article (Score:5, Informative)
In fact, on some OSen (cough, Windows, cough) it could be very dangerous - if there's only one copy of the OS code in this combination memory, you can't reboot and reload a fresh copy from disk - meaning bugs have a significantly greater probability of rendering your system unusable.
Sounds like fun, right?
--
Damn the Emperor!
Re:Poorly written summary of a poorly titled artic (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Poorly written summary of a poorly titled artic (Score:2)
Isn't it likely that if this technology came to pass, the people responsible for various OSen would test their OS in that environment, and make changes as appropriate to support it?
Re:Poorly written summary of a poorly titled artic (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Poorly written summary of a poorly titled artic (Score:2)
Re:Poorly written summary of a poorly titled artic (Score:3, Interesting)
It would also be useful if programs could put some of their data in the nvram region, so (for instance), your emacs buffers don't go away when the power goes out. It would also be a good place to put write buffers, such that, as soon as the data is written to nvram, it will definitely make it into the filesystem, whether or not you lose power. This means that you can accumulate more dirty buffers safely and write them out in larger chunks, which is more efficient.
Keeping everything in nvram (if that were fast enough) may or may not be a good idea. You'd still want to reboot on occasion to refresh the system (load a new kernel, e.g.), but there's no particular reason you'd want to reboot at exactly those times when you power down and back up. Of course, you'd need everything to be hotswappable (replace the processor with programs running?) and restartable (disks have to be told to spin up, e.g.).
Value for money? (Score:2)
Is a rare voluntary reboot really worth the unmentioned price?
This sounds good, but... (Score:2)
Extra hour a day?! (Score:2, Funny)
"This is great news, but what am I going to do with the extra hour or so a day?"
Extra hour a day?! So... Err... You're a windows user, right?
Core Memory (Score:3, Interesting)
Don't think so... (Score:3, Interesting)
What's needed here to achieve systems that don't need rebooting is operating systems which deal with all of these unusual events and states correctly..this means they'll catch errors and will be specifically designed to allow things like dynamic update to system compoents. I'm probably a bit biased but the best example a no-more-reboots kind of environment I see today is the OSGi [osgi.org].
Computers *need* to reboot. (Score:2)
Also, what if computers weren't *allowed* to reboot. You couldn't run a dual boot system. Which is something I suspect Microsoft would like. (I had to throw in a groundless msoft conspiracy...
Very confused (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Very confused (Score:2)
Well it is partly because most computer industry journalists are morons....and partly because this stuff might replace either or both RAM and hard disks depending on the price and speed.
If it is slow it won't replace RAM. If it is expensive it won't replace disks. If it is fast and cheap it will replace both, if it is neither it won't replace either. (in most systems that is, it might hit the target to replace FLASH in cameras, or...)
It might be hard for people working on this to tell how fast/cheap they will get it, worse yet they don't really know what disk and RAM prices and speeds will do.
It's boot, not reboot (Score:2)
In any case, such memory devices would be great for storing the journal of certain file systems, or even as replacement for traditional mass storage.
Uh... (Score:2)
Flash is the speediest memory technology? Surely they mean speedier than eeprom.
How does this prevent reboots? I say without any doubt whatsoever, that the majority of reboots has to do with M$'s ~90% marketshare and numerous system level flaws. Does this memory plug its own leaks? Or do third rate OS programmers and ugly billionaire monopolists actually become smarter when exposed to this, sorta like Superman and kryptonite?
Verdict: Marketing fluff.
A different kind of suspend (Score:2)
Also, a system with persistent memory would be like the old mainframe and minicomputers that had core memory. In the event of a crash, the memory could be examined. I suppose this could be somewhat beneficial to operating system developers..
Reset Button Needed (Score:2)
Badly written summary and article (Score:5, Informative)
"The technology is highly suitable for broadband Internet connections, Hsu said, noting that it combines the features of low voltage, high speed and low power consumption."
Yes, fantastic. That's great for those broadband internet connections. Faster memory is always good, but choosing this as an application is just a moronic use of buzz words.
"Ignatiev said the new technology is about 1,000 times faster than flash, which is nonmechanical and currently the speediest memory on the market. "
Flash memory is the fastest type of memory on the market? No, it is a form of non-volatile memory, which is very slow by RAM standards.
"is based on resistor logic rather than the traditional transistor logic"
Actually, you'll find that DRAM in most modern computers are capacitative devices - the techniques to make them are the same as MOS transistors, but they do not use switching to store values, IIRC.
I wish people would not spout such rubbish.
Old concept, new medium. (Score:2)
This has been around (save-to-disk hibernation), though using non-volitile memory would increase the speed of the process could increase dramatically. It seems that they are proposing a non-volitile ram technology that claims comparable performance to the volitile memory we use today, so it would be always ready to restore from that state, even if the shutdown is unexpected (power outage, for example).
However, the annoying part of the boot process to me is the PC Bios. After it's part is done, I can tweak things to start fast, but BIOS, even after tweaking is unbearably slow. I presume on restart a computer may still go through BIOS before restoring state, and even then I presume it needs to offer the option of starting over (don't want a BSOD to be permament). I'm more interested in a BIOS that doesn't take forever to come up...
no more boot ? (Score:2, Insightful)
Perfect for a Squeak Machine! (Score:2)
The interpreter, programming tools, and even the GUI all exist as long-lived objects in this large (sometimes very, VERY large) memory space. When you aren't using Squeak, the image gets stored as a file on disk.
There are also projects to run Squeak on bare metal--no intermediate operating system like Windows or Linux. Squeak itself becomes the operating system.
This memory technology would be ideal for a Squeak machine. The image would always live in NVRAM. In such a case, there isn't a distinction between the operating system as it exists in static form (files on disk) and executing form (code in memory). There are always just objects in memory. Very elegant.
There goes my favorite saying: (Score:2)
(Yeah, yeah, there'll be a glib Windows sux reply to this one, I'm sure.)
Don't understand (Score:2)
Then I realized that they meant "turn on the computer for the first time today" booting, not RE-booting. Doesn't affect me, the only machine I ever turn off anyway is my laptop.
You spend an hour a day rebooting? (Score:4, Funny)
This is great news, but what am I going to do with the extra hour or so a day?
Find a better operating system.
Re:You spend an hour a day rebooting? (Score:2)
-l
Who is saving up for a Radeon, he thinks.
memory reducing downloadtimes? (Score:2)
Now I'm really nosy how in freak'n hell any memory technology can reduce multimedia download times? That's just non-sense, it seems the word "multimedia" must be in everything you want to sell.
Download times dependand on things like your internet connection, compression used, your providers connetion, etc. but not my memory.
I still remember an intel guy claiming thi Pentium 3 will make the internet faster... how can somebody even dare to claim nonsense like this? And the really sad thing is: nobody started laughing as he said that...
Hardware (Score:2)
Way out of context (Score:2)
This is not the end of rebooting computers and, unfortunately, not the end of mechanical hard drives.
We have the technology... (Score:2)
"Rebooting" is a disease that should be cured (Score:2)
Well, that is as cute as I can be this morning, but I hope the point is clear. I was willing to reboot an XT running MS-DOS 2.0 from time to time - it was a crude system and we didn't expect too much of it. But the "reboot" virus has spread FROM Microsoft systems all the way INTO the world of distributed controls. I actually have control system techs say to me "reboot and see what happens". Hello! It isn't supposed to be this way! Systems (particularly embedded sysetms) are supposed to work, not not work!
Faster rebooting would be a crime, not an improvement, since it would help take everyone's attention off the problem, which is that the system failed.
sPh
Biggest lie: speeds up downloading (Score:2)
Considering I can't even get DSL or Cablemodem service in SILICON VALLEY, I don't think we will be seeing memory speeds being the limiting factor in downloads anytime soon - like not in the next 10 years even if computers stopped getting faster.
Reboot problem solved long ago, called Unix. (Score:2, Funny)
The technology (Score:2)
So it is non-volatile RAM. That makes four distinct NV-RAM technologies that I know of: battery-backed SRAM (fast, expensive, and low capacity), Flash and other electrically eraseable PROM's (slow writes, wears out), magnetic RAM, and resistive memory. The first two have been on the market for years, and capacity/price are nowhere near competitive with hard drives, although they are used where capacity can be much less than a PC needs and the environment is hostile to hard drives. MRAM is now being sold in small quantities, I think, but it's too young to tell how price and performance will work out.
What I did not see was any reason at all for thinking that resistive RAM would work out to a low enough price to be a hard drive replacement. I'll believe that, with enough work on the production process, it can beat SRAM on price and Flash on write speed (these aren't hard targets), but it has a very long way to go to compete with DRAM on price or speed, and then the price has to go down another 100 times to compete with hard drives. OTOH, start selling boxes with 256M of NVRAM and good non-bloated instant-on software, and maybe people will prefer them to MS's bloatware offerings on a 30G HD...
Finally, there have been much ballyhooed nonvolatile memories before that died once they hit the market. Bubble memory was supposed to replace hard drives about 20 years ago, but most slashdotters are too young to even remember it... I do like to see another technology out there, because if MRAM stumbles, now there's another chance of getting NVRAM that doesn't require major compromises.
Real soon now.. (Score:2)
As always, multiply the marketing department's wishes with pi. In this case, 3*3.14, it's something like 9.5 years. I'd say end of 2010 at best.
Extra hour a day? (Score:2)
Core memory machines used to clear (Score:2)
1) a clear function, which will set the ram to a known good value.
2) an initialize function to recover from connections that may have been left active, and timed out while the power was off. (And probably to do other recovery that I haven't thought of just yet.)
In the old core memory machines, the core was frequently cleared without turning off the computer, and then another IPL (initial program load) was done to start a program running. These features will need to be re-invented for more modern environments if ram becomes non-volitile. Of course, design could cause only some ram to be non-volitile, in which case it could be treated as an extermely fast disk (faster than the volitile ram? That sounds unlikely, but if so it could cause interesting design changes.)
Re:Is this news? (Score:2)
More likely to have been Static RAM (SRAM) which holds it's data as long as it is powered. Dynamic RAM (DRAM) needs to be constantly accessed to retain it's data. It is also possibly to have so called Psudo-Static RAM. Which is DRAM with refresh hardware closely associated with it, e.g. on the same chip.