Intel has announced two new solid state disk drives made on its leading-edge 34nm process. The two new SSDs are X25M SATA parts weighing in at 80GB and 160GB, and they're meant to replace Intel's existing X25M drives in those capacities, but at 60 percent less cost and with better performance. The 80GB X25-M is $225 in lots of 1,000 (down from $595), and the 160GB is $440 (from $945). That's some serious discounting, and it may well drive even more SSD uptake in the coming quarters despite the ongoing IT spending crunch.
The problem is that by the time we get 500GB SSDs for $100, you'll be able to by 10TB hard drives for the same price. With such cheap storage, you'll decide that it's worth putting your entire DVD collection online and 500GB will seem utterly inadequate...
Not really a problem. What's the advantage of storing your downloaded videos/music/data files on an SSD? Streaming them from an SSD won't make the video go faster, and neither would you want to. So for these kind of files, an HDD is sufficient and its about mass-storing of data.
But the other demand is high speed low latency storage for I/O intensive OS/applications. Because the only bottleneck left by modern computing is the disk, this is largely responsible for all the slowness of new computers. Whenever people say a computer is "slow" its often a fragmented harddrive thats seeking its ass off, and slowing down the whole computer because the CPU cannot continue until data from the HDD has arrived.
This is also partly a software defect; software could be constructed to rely less on intermittend harddrive access, or allow to do this before its actually required and can slowdown the pc. Unfortunately, many software does not utilize I/O in a proper (fast) way. The result can be a system bottlenecked ultimately by the HDD and not the CPU-memory subsystem which should be the ultimate bottleneck.