On 11/02/2016 22:25, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
I don´t think it is proven that SSDs fail earlier than HDDs. So far none of
the SSDs I use have failed and one is almost 5 years, still thinking about
itself that it is actually almost new according to SMART data. And the only
reason it isn´t older is that it is the first SSD I got. I expect it to live
on for years to come.
So do you have any factual data to prove your claim?
So far I didn´t see any proof that SSDs fail more often or earlier than
harddisks.
Thanks,
There can be any proof or factual data yet because this is a very young
technology. But what we know is that there is a limited number of write
cycle. Of course hdd can fail with mechanical problems ssd don't have.
From what i read, ssd are much much faster, but, at the time i read,
hdd can be more reliable. And the cost of reliable ssd are no comparable
with hdd.
What i know is that usb key that are sold to be 'almost' eternal,
(relatively to computer evolution) dies very often, too 'young'. I can
understand someone wanting to preserve it's lifetime avoiding too much
write cycle, for example system in ssd, /var and /home in hdd. i would
do the same. Your experience is your experience. it can't be an
everybody rule.
My laptop is in use since 2007, with the same HDD, that's 9 years, and i
except too to live on for years.
hervé
