When SSD and USB 3.0 Come Together 158
An anonymous reader writes "USB flash drives have been a quiet revolution in computing. Their rise broke the death grip that the floppy drive had on the PC industry, and smaller capacity models have become cheap, disposable means of data transport and distribution. Yet while you can pick up a 4GB model for less than the price of a meal, large capacity drives are still prohibitively expensive. Meanwhile, solid state drives (SSDs) also utilize flash memory, but masquerade as mechanical hard drives rather than USB storage devices. Now it seems the two technologies are bashing into each other, with this article pointing to OCZ's new Enyo USB 3.0 SSD — a rather curious beast that looks like a thin external hard drive and connects via USB, but houses an SSD inside."
When Slashdot and Advertisements... (Score:5, Insightful)
When Slashdot and Advertisements come together... Slashvertisements! You could have learned as much or more by reading the press release [ocztechnology.com] where it is revealed that "Enyo USB 3.0 Portable SSDs will begin shipping this now and will be available through OCZ's extensive worldwide channel." Thank goodness, I thought I would have to wait for the next now. Also per the pr, "the Enyo features a sleek, anodized aluminum housing" ... the choice of words implies that it's a desktop SSD in a box. It would be nice to know which one, if so.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
yeah, but perhaps, like a million other technology sites, this one has seemed to have added something, by explaining why the product is so interesting, giving it some historical context, and discussing the implications. The price comparison with flash drives too -not quite what you'd find in OCZ's material.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Well fuck, what do you expect on a part TECHNOLOGY website? People arguing over Windows, Mac and Linux? That's what 4chans /g/ is for... and Linux articles. (sadly)
This is actually a fascinating short article / long summary on the history of the devices.
And since it is a USB3 SSD, that is a pretty big deal to be honest, even if the lines "this is an advertisement" were present as well.
There is nothing wrong with advertising a product, especially if it is one of the reasons we even visit this website, to d
USB3 + flash storage... inevitable? (Score:3, Insightful)
And since it is a USB3 SSD, that is a pretty big deal to be honest, even if the lines "this is an advertisement" were present as well.
Why is it a big deal? I mean, did anyone not see this coming? We have the USB3 standard coming out (well, it's already out, but a lot of people still don't have the hardware for it) - was the application of USB3 to flash storage somehow not obvious? It was bound to happen sooner or later.
What happened to "then"? (Score:2)
When Slashdot and Advertisements come together... Slashvertisements! You could have learned as much or more by reading the press release [ocztechnology.com] where it is revealed that "Enyo USB 3.0 Portable SSDs will begin shipping this now and will be available through OCZ's extensive worldwide channel." Thank goodness, I thought I would have to wait for the next now.
When will "then" be "now"?
soon...
Dig deeper ... (Score:2)
and find photo's here [ocztechnology.com] if you'd like to know more...
Re: (Score:2)
I feel kind of used, and dirty. But at the same time it's nice to be wanted for my affluence, influence and geekiness. The fact that I have ads turned off and an adblocker installed helps too.
This is nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)
From the summary: "Yet while you can pick up a 4GB model for less than the price of a meal, large capacity drives are still prohibitively expensive. Meanwhile, solid state drives (SSDs) also utilize flash memory, but masquerade as mechanical hard drives rather than USB storage devices. Now it seems the two technologies are bashing into each other"
SSDs, whether they are internal or external will continue to be exorbitantly priced, so you're not getting larger storage densities for cheaper.
This development is nothing new... I use a deconstructed external USD HDD container and just swap on SATA 2.5" drives as necessary; a SSD would just be another drive to toss on there. While SSDs are significantly faster than most thumb drives, the question at the end of the day is: "Do you have the disposable income for this storage strategy?"
Re: (Score:2)
The thing with putting a SSD in an ordinary external enclosure is that ordinary external enclosures are USB 2 at the moment and while probablly fast enough for a laptop drive (at least a laptop drive doing random access) they are going to seriously bottleneck a decent SSD.
What is the point in paying the extra for superfast storage only to bottleneck it with a shitty bus all the time?
Yeah... (Score:3, Insightful)
...but for big-time storage, mechanical drives are still king. As the technology stands now, it is pretty much useless for large-scale storage due to many different things, not the least of which is the cost. That being said, I'm curious if by the time SSDs reach the capacity, price point, and reliability needed for long term storage if they will still be relevant.
Here's to hoping, though...I love the idea of an SSD, but they still need some advancements before I consider one as my main system drive, much less for storage.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
they still need some advancements before I consider one as my main system drive
What kind of advancements are those? I've been using one for my main drive for the last year and it's great. At 32GB I do have a distinct lack of music storage space, but I have a 16GB SDHC card in the side for caching subsets of my music, as well as external HDD with all of my music on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Larger size/more affordability, for the most part. I know it's a huge performance boost to a system, but I don't want to only have a 40 GB system drive, and the larger ones get a bit too rich for my blood.
I recognize the prices are high because they are still "new", but compared to the cost of a mechanical drive their price-per-GB is outrageous.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, I was thinking you meant technical advancements. 32GB should easily be enough for your main system drive no matter what desktop OS you're running, though I haven't run any performance comparisons to see just how worth it that would be. I primarily got mine for the fact that I don't have to worry about moving it around or dropping it when it's in use :P
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
32GB should easily be enough for your main system drive no matter what desktop OS you're running
Tell that to the bastards who keep forcing their program installation directories to the system drive!
Re: (Score:2)
In Windows you can map a folder to point to a different drive (in the Manage option of my computer then in the disk manager or something like that). You could probably use that to put your Program Files somewhere else, assuming you're talking about Windows here. Not that that's a great solution for a mobile computer.
Re: (Score:2)
32GB should easily be enough for your main system drive no matter what desktop OS you're running
Hahah, 32GB of storage and 640K of memory, gotcha.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, maybe I should have said "current desktop OS". Seriously, what OS is there today that needs more than say 4GB for the base system (not including 3rd party programs or data).
Re: (Score:2)
Well for the main system drive for a typical user I think you'd be seeing a lot more reads than writes, so it seems a good choice for that. I also have the impression that HDDs these days aren't particularly reliable long term either (though I've never had a problem personally, the only times I've had a hard drive die was through a power surge in a storm). I'm really not sure how long this drive will last but I very very rarely ever need to use swap so hopefully it will last me a while before dying. And by
64GB is large scale for most businesses (Score:5, Funny)
Just because its not enough for a major bank or for you to store your porn collection on doesn't mean it isn't enough for 99% of small businesses.
Re: (Score:2)
A "porn collection" is going to be multiple or even 10s of terabytes.
We're not even talking about that here. Just a few high-res photos or some home videos can easily blow away 64G.
Regardless, there just isn't any reason for small businesses or home users to care about SSD. The performance gains are marginal along the lines of fixating on a few more fps in your FPS.
Re: (Score:2)
I have yet to buy a SSD, but everyone I hear who has bought one says that they will never go back to a system without one. SSDs aren't there to replace your mass storage, they are there to replace your boot drives.
My system right now has 3 HDDs, I have 2 performance 640GB HDDs in Raid 1 for the OS and programs, and a 1.5TB slow spinning HDD for my movies and any other very large storage that I don't feel needs to be duplicated. SSDs aren't trying to replace my media HDD, for the foreseeable future this task
Re: (Score:2)
Yet, not everything needs "big-time storage".
I plan/hope to migrate all but one or two of my systems (that's 40+) to RAIDed SSDs from the current 10k-15k SAS and SCSI drives in them now. I wouldn't be losing any capacity - much of which is not currently being used, anyway. These aren't storage systems, they're network appliances which back up to actual storage elsewhere (or use the storage on another host).
With hard disk failure rates approaching or surpassing 50% within the first 6 months for some manufact
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, quit buying cheap crap... My failure rate across 170 servers and two SAN arrays is less than 1.5% per year.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you mean RAM cache at the storage engine level, it makes little to no sense at the desktop PC level [anandtech.com]. You just add more system RAM and let the OS handle caching. It costs too much to add a bunch of DIMMs to the storage chain. In a SAN or just an immense disk pool, sure, it probably makes sense to have some RAM-based volumes.
Re: (Score:2)
And? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I've heard that one before. He says "In the Army, they teach us to wash our hands," then YOU say, "Well in the Marines, they teach us not to shit on our hands." Then, from one of the stalls, someone shouts "Zing!"
Re: (Score:2)
And more importantly, when did clothes catch on around here? I need to get with the times.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah. It seems I may have some apologising to do.
Re: (Score:2)
cargo-shorts on the other hand...
Title says USB 3.0 (Score:2, Insightful)
It'll make a big difference when the USB 3.0 systems arrive.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, because if the current Gigabyte mobos are anything to go by then you'll get faster occasional external drive transfer and slower graphics!
(At least, that's what I found when investigating my latest purchase - I wanted to pay a little more a "future-proof" with a USB3 mobo, but enabling USB3 or their new SATA dropped the PCIe16 down to an x8)
Re: (Score:2)
The trouble is that the LGA1156 platforms are somewhat lacking in terms of PCIe expandability. There are 16 2.0 lanes off the CPU which can be used for either one x16 device or two x8 devices. Much the same applies to lower end LGA775 stuff (with LGA775 the chipset determines PCIe configuration)
There are some (6-8 depending on chipset) lanes off the southbridge but they only run at 1.0 speeds.
PCIe bridges can provide a protential way out of this predicament (e.g. by taking 1.0 x4 from the southbridge and pr
Re: (Score:2)
You can get 64 Gb flash drives on newegg for less than $150. I remember when I bought a gigabox that was 5 gig for more than that.
You young whippersnapper! At my first job, we spent $60,000 to get our Multimax up to 1GB of disk. Get offa my lawn!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pfff. I remeber when a 5 MB drive cost $3,000
The six million dollar gigabyte?
Not quite. $600,000 gigabyte.
What's their target market? (Score:3, Funny)
I mean obviously it's posers with more money than sense who simply must have the latest gadget just so they can show off that they're the first to have it, while being secretly disappointed and wishing that they'd waited for the next version.
But the iPad doesn't have a USB 3 port, so there's no overlap with people who might buy this and people who can use it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Pretty sure USB 3 is designed to be backwards compatible. That makes it an even more perfect device for iPad users because they don't even get the full functionality out of it.
Actually they do have their uses (Score:2)
Finding standards is a pain.. (Score:4, Informative)
SATA 2.0 - 3 GBit
SATA 3.0 - 6 GBit
USB 2.0 'highspeed' - 480MBit (Tricky fact: USB 2.0 connection can still be 'lowspeed')
USB 'superspeed' - 4.8 GBit.
Going by what the article says, I think that the e-sata specification should have included some power providing abilities. Preferably enough to run a 2.5" HD/SSD on it's own.
I mean USB specifications are actually changing to be able to provide even MORE power. Looking at the octopus nest behind my computer, I count elimination of cables as a GOOD thing. If I could have a Monitor with 1 cable(at the cost of an even beefier power supply in my computer), power my DSL modem via PoE, I'd be happy. I love my bluetooth mouse, but am too paranoid to go with a wireless keyboard until they come out with one with more serious encryption.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference isn't just bandwidth and whether it provides power.
USB uses a lot of CPU, while SATA uses none at all.
This may change for USB 3.0 though, I don't know.
Re: (Score:2)
USB uses a lot of CPU, while SATA uses none at all.
Do you happen to have a source on this? I mean, I remember shopping for full modems specifically because 'winmodems' sucked down CPU time for their operation, but near the end, it didn't matter.
I highly doubt that SATA really uses 'none at all', I'm sure there's some CPU utilization with SATA.
Re: (Score:2)
You are too paranoid.
What I have to wonder is just why you personally are worth the effort it would take to snipe your wireless keyboard and decrypt the bluetooth connection?
My life is just not that interesting.
besides what type of protection do you have form a standard tempest attack on your wired keyboard?
Re: (Score:2)
I love my bluetooth mouse, but am too paranoid to go with a wireless keyboard until they come out with one with more serious encryption.
Don't conventional, wired keyboards put out enough RF noise to be effectively sniffable anyway?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't conventional, wired keyboards put out enough RF noise to be effectively sniffable anyway?
Yes, but the equipment required to do it is both far more expensive and shorter ranged than with wireless.
Bluetooth, for example, has been picked up from over a mile away.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I want "wall power" to be as far away from my data cables as possible.
As is, I've only got power, video, network & USB coming from the back of my machine. Compared to how bad it could be with an Atari 800 style Octopus, what comes out of the back of a proper PC is not such a bad thing really.
Wall warts and devices that have no need or business being external are what contribute to computing messes. In this respect, most Macs cause more chaos then they fix with their fancy proprietary connect
Re: (Score:2)
Is there any particular reason you couldn't encapsulate USB inside of DVI and eliminate a cable that way? There ARE good reasons to isolate power from data, at least until all connections are optical. It should happen eventually. A cheap piece of fiber is cheaper to make than a decent piece of copper, it's just some strands of plastic... at least for low-bandwidth applications. And you get isolation in the bargain. This sort of thing (single-cable connection) will make a lot more sense when we get an optica
Re: (Score:2)
Thats called Light Peak, by Intel...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_Peak [wikipedia.org]
Also HDMI 1.4 does not have USB in, but has ethernet...
Less cables? maybe, eventually.... But by the time you get the latest all-in-one, you will have some new technology coming along that offers something extra that you will want... So you will end up with a mix of new tech cables and old tech cables anyway
Re: (Score:2)
Less cables? maybe, eventually.... But by the time you get the latest all-in-one, you will have some new technology coming along that offers something extra that you will want... So you will end up with a mix of new tech cables and old tech cables anyway
Once you have a 'generic' interface like USB that's both fast enough and capable of providing power, what else do you need?
USB has 'replaced' PS2, serial, parallel, and game* ports. Heck, it can even replace sound ports with what's essentially an external sound card. Heck, it even replaced PCMCIA ports in some cases - USB memory keys instead of mini hard drives in a PCMCIA card.
The only real reason it hasn't replaced monitor cables is bandwidth - there's simply not enough.
Bluetooth, wireless networking, P
Re: (Score:2)
It was also proprietary, only manufactured by Apple, incompatible with existing DVI connectors and required that you spend $150 on an Apple-branded adapter which was only available from Apple to use it if you hadn't already purchased on of the few Apple computers which used Apple's new port.
This wasn't a case of Apple introducing something brilliant which was ignored by the bigoted masses becase it came from Apple, it wa
Re: (Score:2)
ADC was quite nice, but it had a few problems. One was that it was too big to go on a laptop. If you bought a Mac laptop while Apple was pushing ADC, it came with USB, FireWire, and DVI ports, but not ADC. Since power went through the ADC connector, you needed a y-shaped cable to connect a laptop even if it had been possible to include a full ADC connector, because it didn't have enough power to drive the monitor. It also complicated the graphics card, because it had to have traces to connect the USB an
Re: (Score:2)
Power down a monitor cable is IMO a bad idea.
If you put mains down there you have huge product safety issues since the mains would have to be safely insulated all the way from the PSU to the display connector or you would need huge warnings to stop system builders electricuting themselves.
If you put 12V down there then you would need to seriously uprate the PSU (depending on how big a monitors you want to support you may be talking hundreds of watts). You may also have volt drop issues.
If you put a higher b
Re: (Score:2)
It's called a Laptop/Notebook/NetBook
Re: (Score:2)
Well it really depends on the keyboard. Bluetooth keyboards tend to draw less power (and have a longer range) than some other proprietary protocols, in my experience anyway.
At any rate, you should definitely be using NiMH batteries, not NiCd. They have about double the capacity on average (~1400mAh vs ~700mAh for AAs), and they have a much flatter voltage curve, which means you get more useful life in all respects.
NiMH batteries (Score:2)
I use rechargables in my mouse, it generally lasts 2-3 weeks before I have to swap.
I think the biggest problem isn't the amount of power the device draws, but more the self-discharge rate. A LiIon of the same bulk/weight would hold twice again as much power, but also wouldn't be losing 5-10% of it's charge per day.
It's the sort of application that's actually more suited towards alkalines. I had a set of those last for over two months when I was attending some training out of town.
If you can find some 'low
USB 3.0? (Score:4, Interesting)
What about Light Peak? Why upgrade to a minor speed bump when the next available speed bump is hundreds of times faster?
Light Peak has enough bandwidth to replace USB 2.0, FireWire 800, DVI/HDMI, Ethernet 1000... all at once, on the first revision no less. Will USB 3.0 ever take off?
Re:USB 3.0? (Score:5, Interesting)
Light Peak, if it actually comes out as specified, looks like it will be an awesome advancement: it'll change datacenter storage, home storage, and pretty much everything else overnight.
The crux will be how it's licensed and how it's designed: will it be licensed like USB (ie, liberally) or like Firewire (ie, barely)? Will it be designed to allow for people to abuse the specifications (ie, USB) and still work, or will it be painfully restrictive, allowing only "good" devices to work (ie, Firewire)?
If it behaves as an interface and costs like USB, it'll fly off the shelves, I think. I'm hoping so, and looking forward to it. But, frankly, I can see it becoming the future equivalent of something like iSCSI or FC: too awesome and capable for the consumer, and it's got such an incredible profit margin we're going to keep it Enterprisey.
Re: (Score:2)
to me at least it seems that light peak is something intel dreamed up when their bid to make usb3 intel exclusive for a year go torpedoed. And its not helping that they have apparently partnered up with apple on it, given how apple seems to be going back to its proprietary ways thanks to the success of the iphone platform.
Will light peak only work with on board video? (Score:2)
Will light peak only work with on board video?
also E-net on Light peak you will still E-net as long light runs may cost a meny times more then E-net and light peak routers and switches may be very high cost.
Another nit... (Score:2)
... daisy-chaining. One of the supposed advantages to both FireWire and USB was that you could daisy-chain devices. But in practice, how many devices ever actually contained an upstream port so you could use this feature? I have a FW external hard drive that had an additional port, and I can and do use that as a link in a daisy chain. But no other device I own, either USB or FireWire, supports this. You have to plug them straight into the computer or get a hub. Since my main machine is a laptop and has exac
Re: (Score:2)
Light Peak devices are 6 years away (at best). USB 3 devices are here now. Will USB3 take off? It already has.
Re: (Score:2)
Light Peak devices are 6 years away (at best). USB 3 devices are here now. Will USB3 take off? It already has.
Well, I wouldn't go that far. USB3 is out, but personally I feel like it's "early adopters" using it at this point. After a couple years, once new machines have included it for a while and a fair number of people have upgraded, then maybe it will have "taken off"...
Re: (Score:2)
Followed by R&D, licensing debate, standardization, product development, product release, product uptake.
Go read about how long it took from first silicon to widespread adoption for USB2, which was built on top of a proven technology.
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing that matters is what Intel builds into its chipsets.
Absoloutely, built into intel chipsets means cheap and easy to support which brings success.
This is why esata is fairly common these days. If the design has a sata port to spare routing it out is relatively cheap. The downside of ESATa is that you generally only get one port and the desigeners didn't include power (yes I know powered ESATA soloutions exist now but there are many unpowered ports still out there).
This is where things get inter
Disposable?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Can we please stop "disposing" of things, especially complex, hard-to-recycle things like electronic devices?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can we please stop "disposing" of things, especially complex, hard-to-recycle things like electronic devices?
Sure, all we have to do is stop progress.
Re: (Score:2)
Disposable is the wrong term but I can not think of the a better term.
How about giveable or loanable? I don't mind giving someone a cheap flash drive with data on it as a form of transport. Or I don't mind loaning one to someone. Hopefully they will reuse or return it to me for reuse but if that doesn't happen I am not out a large amount of money.
Of course I have a 128 MB drive sitting in a drawer that I have no Idea what to do with. Might use that a way to give digital pictures to someone in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
indeed, while internet makes file exchange easy, one should not underestimate the bandwidth and flexibility of sneakernet.
heck, even if the net should be down, sneakernet may still function.
Re: (Score:2)
Or privacy.
Yes I could just post my family videos on youtube but...
Plus if you have an old 128mb drive or an old 256, or 512mb flash drive why not keep using it as a floppy? Just pass it on or lend it out.
The other choice is to burn a CD or DVD and just how many of those are in landfills now?
Re: (Score:2)
Disposable is the wrong term but I can not think of the a better term.
I think the word you are trying to find is "Consumable"
Is this even special? (Score:2)
Didn't I read something about SSD including a USB (electrical) interface anyway? Or maybe it was one of the new SATA standards.
Re: (Score:2)
My mistake, I think I was thinking of mini-pci which I think is that the EEEPC uses for its SSD (though I think it's a mangled version without the USB). It's really been a long time since I looked into it.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, from wikipedia:
PCI Express Mini Card (also known as Mini PCI Express, Mini PCIe, and Mini PCI-E) is a replacement for the Mini PCI form factor based on PCI Express. It is developed by the PCI-SIG. The host device supports both PCI Express and USB 2.0 connectivity, and each card uses whichever the designer feels most appropriate to the task. Most laptop computers built after 2005 are based on PCI Express and can have several Mini Card slots.
"Bash into each other." (Score:2)
Such an awkward phrase... if only we had a single word for it.
Single drive, eSATA+USB connections (Score:2)
I'm sure it's a niche product that will go away after USB3 becomes widespread, but for now it's a nice mix of both worlds.
how about one that looks like an external floppy (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was with you up until "are a bit too easy to misplace". Is your only motivation the small form factor of USB sticks? You can always get a bigger form factor, or just glue some floppy-disk-shaped plastic onto it, to make it hard to lose.
I think being able to have the USB stick flush (or internal) with the computer would be moderately cool, though. I don't know if it's cool enough to try and force the industry to decide on a standard form factor :P
Re: (Score:2)
>> I think being able to have the USB stick flush (or internal) with the computer would be moderately cool, though. I don't know if it's cool enough to try and force the industry to decide on a standard form factor :P
This has been standardized, it's called SD. Keep the card attached to your computer normally. You can copy working copies of important stuff that you are doing as a delta from your last backup and in case you lose your undo history by quitting vi.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Minor point, but wouldn't "shitty balls" go better with USB? Trolls these days.. no class.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, fucking someone up the ass isn't really high up on my priorities list, nor on the list of my girlfriends as far as I've known, so yeah I wouldn't know :p
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It isn't really news. It's notable because it's the first one with USB 3.0, which is still basically inferior to the transfer speeds of other technologies, but has the capacity to power the drive with only one cable/connection.
Re: (Score:2)
The current eSATA standard (eSATAp) provides power, and some flash drives have supported it for a while. So really, the only thing significant is that this is the first SSD manufacturer to bother with USB 3.0.... :-)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You can fit various OSes onto a floppy disk, that doesn't mean that floppies have a large capacity. It's all relative. These days I can barely fit a quarter of my music collection into 16GB, but for me 16GB is the sweet cost/size point for USB devices at the moment.
Re: (Score:2)
and by USB devices I meant USB flash drives, I do have a 2.5" 500GB USB HDD for proper media storage and occasional backups.
Re: (Score:2)
4 GB is not a large capacity? I can install Ubuntu in 4 GB. A DVD holds just over 4 GB. I keep a Win7 and an Ubuntu install on my 4 GB stick.
So someone is shipping an SSD with a USB 3 interface. If it's as big as my 4 GB stick, then you'll interest me.
Get off of my lawn.
You keep both on a 4GB stick? Special stick when windows 7 needs between 10-16GB (depending on what version and what options).
Re: (Score:2)
I guess it means the setup of Win7(2.8GB) and ubuntu(700MB)
Re: (Score:2)
Forget USB4, SATA and all the others, Light Peak has the capacity to replace everything.
Re: (Score:2)
And maybe that's it -- maybe once Windows can boot from USB it makes it hard for MS to keep tying an install to a "PC" since Windows installed to USB is kind of independent of the PC.
You can move a disk from PC to PC with sleds, but that won't make Windows independent of the PC because of its driver model. You'll need precisely the same hardware installed in the same slots in both PCs to avoid confusing Windows. Some motherboards have disk emulation for USB. I think it's a BIOS function. You can run Windows on USB on them. Netbooks are the most typical examples since they don't come with optical drives and users may or may not have them.
Re: (Score:2)
What counts as "configure it properly"?
Will it actually install to USB, or do you have to get cute and clone a SATA disk to a USB disk?
And I thought the limitation, also brought to Win7, was related to how Windows handled the USB driver load and losing the handle on its boot volume in the process.
Re: (Score:2)
That meant that if you attempted to move the drive to a system that needed a different HAL you got an instant BSOD.
You could also move the drive to a system that simply needed a different storage driver, and you'd also get an instant BSOD, with BOOT_DRIVE_INACCESSIBLE, IIRC.
If the boot drive is on a storage controller or RAID cards that is not supported by the driver's built-in to Vista or Windows 7 you will need to make sure the appropriate drivers are installed before moving the drive but that is fairly easy to do for most controllers.
Under Windows 9x, however, you could move the drive to a machine which was totally different, and the system used BIOS calls and fallback drivers, then detected the hardware in the system, and finally rebooted under the 32 bit drivers. Under Linux, of course, as long as your kernel or initrd has appropriate storage drivers, autoconfiguration is typic
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I had mod points, I'd give you an "Informative". That sounds like a good system.
I use Acronis to create images of my data and boot drives on one of two external HDD's. One is always off the premises.
Re: (Score:2)
Err, you better have the storage capacity to back up those spinning drives too. People do dumb crap, like drop their notebook, or kick their tower over on accident, and sometimes this will kill the drives instantly. The SSD is much more likely to survive such an event. On unmanaged systems most users are not going to have SMART running, or if they do pay attention to the logs that the drive is running 80C. Or they'll just ignore the clicks of death until the day their computer boots and says 'Operating syst
Re: (Score:2)
What I would like to see is a unified bus - right now we do have USB and SATA, both are very similar to use and behavior. If there were fewer types of interfaces in a computer then the number of components should go down and the hardware should be both cheaper and more reliable.