On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 6:29 PM, Alan Grimes <alonz...@verizon.net> wrote:
> All this raises an interesting question: How much effort is it > reasonable to expect a user to undertake just to use one of these > drives? I mean it's going to be very tough to argue that it should > require more than "plug in -> add partitions > boogie" I mean half of > what I'm hearing about how to set these up sounds like superstition > based on how flash was 10 years ago. =\ I mean there needs to be a > protocol where the drive communicates with the operating system what it > needs, and the OS should just do it, and the user shouldn't know about > it prior to running utilities on the volume/drive... > > It is really not reasonable to expect the user to know, understand, and > actively administrate delicate tuning parameters for specific makes and > models of drives and evolving tools to use these drives. Right now my > drive is set up as if it were a black box that contains bits. I don't > think it's reasonable for me to do anything more than that. =\ And, on the range of OSes that cater to users who don't care to know, understand, or actively administer their systems they tend to detect that it's an SSD, enable trim, and then let the user suffer with the defaults, getting better performance than a spinning disk, even if they're not getting the *most* out of their drive. For the users that *do* wish to, there's options, whether via a different OS, third party software (like Samsung Magician for their drives on Windows), or manually adjusting the settings for the drive in their OS. They do tend to 'just work', but like anything else, you don't get the best performance out of them by expecting them to just plug in and go. Even spinning disks benefit from some tweaking of filesystem parameters away from the defaults for best performance under specific workloads. -- Poison [BLX] Joshua M. Murphy
