Skip to main content
No. of Recommendations: 0
My computer crashed, and I lost all the links I followed for market timing. Would someone post:
DBE for Dow, S&P, NASDAQ
NHNL, (NASDAQ 13? WK avg)
Point and Figure for % Bullish
VIX
Fear and Greed
Anything else?

TIA,

Hank
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Here's a few links you might like
http://schrts.co/cYNAvxSe
The MACD above are based on EMA and show the EMA(9)>0, EMA(13)>0 and EMA(13)>EMA(42)
for the bull correction in a bear market signal.
http://schrts.co/FanSKKyq

For the SMA(200) compared to 10 days earlier (slope estimate) and dbe try
http://schrts.co/KCMsuWGD
The chart near left top of graph says the values are within one, so this may creep positive in a couple of weeks-these are the Inferior Five days and today's
performance looks like that is the correct designation!

A couple not asked for--search tool
http://www.datahelper.com/mi/search.phtml

and two sites for WER and ETF screens
http://tradesim.info/

https://www.etfscreen.com/

Hope this helps.

rrjjgg
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
My third line in my last post is misleading. I didn't mean to say EMA(9)>0 since it's currently below zero, just that the MACD allow the values of EMA(9) to be easily compared to 0.
Ditto for the other two MACD I mentioned.

rrjjgg
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Fear and Greed
http://money.cnn.com/data/fear-and-greed/?iid=EL

DBE (S&P) (If you want it for the Dow, replace $SPX with $INDU)
http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$SPX&p=D&yr=1&m...

NASDAQ NHNL (ema13)
http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$NAHL&p=D&yr=0&...

Tails
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
My computer crashed, and I lost all...

Perennial lesson, back up your stuff!

Elan
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Perennial lesson, back up your stuff!

Thanks for the reminder. Just backed up my favs
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I don't use a reminder.

I use Carbonite; nothing like having a chore done in the background without any input:

https://www.carbonite.com/


Alan
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Perennial lesson, back up your stuff!

Thanks for the reminder. Just backed up my favs


Keep a watch on slickdeals. Every so often Bestbuy has an 8TB (8!!) WDC external drive on sale for $130. Like this: https://slickdeals.net/f/12588325-8tb-wd-easystore-external-...

It's got a RED (or a white-label RED) 3.5" internal disk in it. Lots of people buy these and shuck the drive to install in a desktop computer. I've got 5 empty cases lying around. ;-)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Perennial lesson, back up your stuff!

I did, but unless you've backed up your bookmarks, you don't have your links, even if you've backed up all your files. I now have a monthly tickler to back up bookmarks.

NB
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
My computer crashed, and I lost all the links I followed for market timing. Would someone post:
DBE for Dow, S&P, NASDAQ
NHNL, (NASDAQ 13? WK avg)
Point and Figure for % Bullish
VIX
Fear and Greed
Anything else?


What does it take to get computer users to make backups of their file systems? Computers, in my experience, have crashed ever since about 1956. And with all the progress since then, they can lose a million times more data now than they did then. Depending on the operating systems, the frequencies of crashes can be quite low. Once Windows got up to the XP version, I stopped getting crashes. In Linux, since about the release of Red Hat Linux 7, I have gotten crashes only because of hardware failures. Once when power flickered on and off too rapidly as it was being restored after storm Sandy.

So users should make a full backup just before each crash. Since users do not know when the crash will occur, they should make one often enough so the amount lost will not matter too much.

I make a backup automatically onto a removable external hard drive every night when I am normally asleep, and automatically once a week to magnetic tape overnight. Also a backup to tape on the first of the month that goes into the safe deposit box at the bank.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Perennial lesson, back up your stuff!

Thanks for the reminder. Just backed up my favs


Generally, that is a terrible way to do it. The next crash, it will be something that you need that you have not backed up. Is nothing else on your computer worth saving?

I back up almost everything on my machine except movies and pictures that I backup only when a significant amount is added or changed.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Perennial lesson, back up your stuff!

I did, but unless you've backed up your bookmarks, you don't have your links, even if you've backed up all your files. I now have a monthly tickler to back up bookmarks.


Bookmarks are not stored in files? If not, where are they stored? In Firefox, they are in a file called places.sqlite. Windows users might want to look at something like this:

https://www.howtoguides.org/where-are-firefox-bookmarks-stor...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
What does it take to get computer users to make backups of their file systems? Computers, in my experience, have crashed ever since about 1956. And with all the progress since then, they can lose a million times more data now than they did then. Depending on the operating systems, the frequencies of crashes can be quite low.

When a disk head decides to gouge a rut in the platter, it doesn't care what OS you are running.


My last serious backup of a home system took 5 boxes of floppy disks-- 50 floppies. Roughly 70 MB.

Nobody backs up their computers anymore because it just isn't feasible. How do you back up even a 2TB disk? Approximately 8 hours per TB. So, about 16 hours. Unless you want to verify; then add another 16 hours. Don't get me started on "cloud" backups. That's a joke. I cannot imagine how long it would take to upload 1TB.

And these days, 2TB isn't rare in a home computer. I'm seeing 4TB, 6TB, and 8TB desktops advertised all the time.

And people get sloppy. After you've spent an entire weekend doing a backup once a month for 2 years...and never needed to restore anything...you'll soon stop doing backups.


I make a backup automatically onto a removable external hard drive every night when I am normally asleep, and automatically once a week to magnetic tape overnight. Also a backup to tape on the first of the month that goes into the safe deposit box at the bank.

Come on! Magnetic tape??
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
<< Nobody backs up their computers anymore because it just isn't feasible. How do you back up even a 2TB disk? Approximately 8 hours per TB. >>

Ray, I thought you would know better....;-)

Again, I use Carbonite. After the first full back-up, it only backs up files that have changed. This takes a couple minutes, and is done at night, automatically.

It couldn't be easier.


Alan
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
What does it take to get computer users to make backups of their file systems? Computers, in my experience, have crashed ever since about 1956. And with all the progress since then, they can lose a million times more data now than they did then. Depending on the operating systems, the frequencies of crashes can be quite low.

When a disk head decides to gouge a rut in the platter, it doesn't care what OS you are running.


True enough, but most crashes are due to software errors, operator errors, ... And some OSs crashed more than others. For example, I could never keep Windows 95 running a whole day without a crash. At the same time, Red Hat Linux 5 would run for weeks and once in a while the windowing system would lock up, but the OS was still up. I could just login from another terminal and reset it without rebooting. By the time I got Red Hat Linux 7, it never crashed again except for hardware failures. I remember running RHL 7.3 24/7 for about six months, and it did not crash. That machine was about 12 years old, had 64 Megabytes of RAM and could not take any more, and had a single Pentium processor. Not worth upgrading any more. And by then, I had two other computers, one running Red Hat Enterprise Linux 3 and the other running CentOS 4. Linux file systems are journalling, so even if the system crashes (not from actual hardware disk head crashes), they can usually recover. I do not know how Windows file systems work these days; perhaps they do this too, but when I first had to use them, they were pretty pathetic; I believe you still have to defragment them from time to time.

I remember head crashes though. Where I used to work, our little lab had about six DEC PDP11/45 and 11/70 machines that each had two hard drives on them. Each hard drive had 10 heads. These machines ran 24/7 running UNIX. Well one fine evening a head crashed on a disk and that took out one side of that platter, but the dust caused the rest of the heads to crash. That threw off so much dust that by the next morning all the heads crashed on all the drives. One hell of a mess! We had on-site technicians from DEC so we called them in and they said there was a slight problem. They might have had a dozen spare heads, but not nearly enough. And they had to clean up the drives before they could put in the new heads. They vacuumed everything out, but they then needed to get the rest of the crap out of the big magnets in the head positioning system. This they did by hand with a strong light, infinite patience and a lot of Scotch Tape. It took them several days to do the cleanup, by which time they got some more heads from the factory in Massachusetts. You should have seen those platters! Not only was the oxide scraped off, there were deep grooves cut into the aluminum. And the heads were ground off right down to the supporting arms.

Luckily, we did full backups of those systems every night.

My last serious backup of a home system took 5 boxes of floppy disks-- 50 floppies. Roughly 70 MB.

I never found floppy disks to be reliable enough to use. The last time I bought a box of new floppy disks, I could not even format about 30% of them. And a backup on one of them could rarely be read back. My last few computers have not even had floppy drives on them.

Nobody backs up their computers anymore because it just isn't feasible. How do you back up even a 2TB disk? Approximately 8 hours per TB. So, about 16 hours. Unless you want to verify; then add another 16 hours. Don't get me started on "cloud" backups. That's a joke. I cannot imagine how long it would take to upload 1TB.

And these days, 2TB isn't rare in a home computer. I'm seeing 4TB, 6TB, and 8TB desktops advertised all the time.


You don't think the IRS backs up their computers? You imagine the NSA does not back up theirs? Almost all relational database management systems I know of (e.g., IBM's DB2, Oracle, even postgreSQL do that, pretty much automatically.

And people get sloppy. After you've spent an entire weekend doing a backup once a month for 2 years...and never needed to restore anything...you'll soon stop doing backups.

Sure, and then, when the excrement hits the ventilator, sloppy people lose data.

I make a backup automatically onto a removable external hard drive every night when I am normally asleep, and automatically once a week to magnetic tape overnight. Also a backup to tape on the first of the month that goes into the safe deposit box at the bank.

Come on! Magnetic tape??


Sure. I can get 160 GBytes on a little cassette. I have one of these on my machine and a spare one on the shelf. You cannot get them any more. I can get more onto my external 2 TByte hard drives, but I cannot put many of those in my safe deposit box. I can get many of the cassettes in there.

https://www.tandbergdata.com/default/index.cfm/support/disco...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Backups oops! I was under the impression that I was automatically backing up weekly but this thread
made me do a check. Turns out the backup software was pointing to the incorrect nonexistent disk
location. I was 3 month behind, pays to check over your automated computer tasks occasionally.

I never found floppy disks to be reliable enough to use.

As one who designed tape, hard and floppy disks and memory systems back in the days of floppies there
were reliable options available but not in most low cost consumer versions. Tested old tapes and disks
with known errors including missing magnetic material on our and competitor products. There was a
dramatic difference between the performance of systems but the cheapest at any performance level
was the one that sold the most in the consumer marketplace.

Still using tape for backup! You can't buy a reasonably priced external tape drive with media anymore.
A 2 TB external disk is only ~ $60 is only 4.5x3x0.4 inches roughly the size of a tape cassette and has the
advantage of random access if only a selected file is corrupted or accidently deleted. I gave replaced my
last tape backup 10 year ago. But if your tape is still doing the job get as much life out of it as you can.

RAM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Still using tape for backup! You can't buy a reasonably priced external tape drive with media anymore.
A 2 TB external disk is only ~ $60 is only 4.5x3x0.4 inches roughly the size of a tape cassette and has the
advantage of random access if only a selected file is corrupted or accidently deleted. I gave replaced my
last tape backup 10 year ago. But if your tape is still doing the job get as much life out of it as you can.


My tape drive(s) are still working fine,and I even have a few cartons of new tapes,and about a dozen cleaning tapes. I will use them as long as my computer has an Ultra 320 SCSI controller.

I do use Western Digital external USB3 Passport drives (750 GBytes for Windows, 2 GBytes for Linux) for my daily backups. They are about the size of two of my tape cassettes.

But I remember using tape drives like these:

https://www.floridamemory.com/items/show/266584
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I've mostly gone to the dark side and have things in the cloud.
All of my MI spreadsheets, scripts, myriad pictures, videos, docs etc, probably 90% of which could be deleted anyway.
(how many stupid cat videos does one need? I guess when you have kids, you need all of them plus more every day).
The only thing I don't have there are old tax returns, which I just put on an external HDD.
I even use an online password manager now, although an offline one like Keepass might be smarter but more complicated.

I have a buddy who long ago put his huge CD collection into some super high fidelity gigantic audio files.
He has some fancy RAID setup for storing, backing up, and accessing it.
I just use ** music service, and for really old LP's that aren't streaming, fire up the record player.

I really would rather that I had all my stuff to myself with my own backups but I've turned out to be too lazy for all that effort.



Mark
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
By happenstance I was just copying a 7.7GB file from a hard disk to a USB3 flash drive, so I timed the tranfer.
7.7GB in ~7 minutes. Doing the math, it would take a tad over 15 hours to transfer 1TB.

Copying the same file across a 1GB network to another computer, gives a time on 20.25 hours to transfer 1TB,

For backing up my critical data, I have it all in one directory tree and use rsync to copy it to another computer on the network. To a RAID5 filesystem, so as to avoid a disk going bad.

------------
Carbonite? Great, yeah. Copy only files that have changed. Yeah. Rsync does that, too. Nothing magic there. It's when you upload new file(s) that the slow transfer rate hits you. That, and when/if the company goes bankrupt.

------------
You don't think the IRS backs up their computers?

Of course they do. Businesses do. Individuals mostly don't. To do serious backup, you use something like RAID-5 or Raid-6, or some other multiple-copy redundant media. Every TB of your data takes 3 or 4 times that much media space for the redundancy. Which means 3 or 4 times the cost.

I run ZFS on my own primary & secondary backup systems. The zfs mailing list I follow, people talk about 100's of tera-byte of data. A thing that I find grimly amusing: people talk about replacing a failed disk in a mirror and the disks & filesystems are so large that while the re-silver (read: rebuild the swapped-in disk) is taking place, it takes so long that sometimes another disk will fail before the re-silver is finished.

-------------
You know why people's computers get large and larger disks (in addition to saving movies, etc.)? Because you've got so many files that it takes too long to go through them and decide what you can delete. It's literally cheaper to throw another 4TB disk in than to spend the time & effort to delete old stuff.

-------------
I've mostly gone to the dark side and have things in the cloud.

My wife found out about "the cloud" the hard way. She has a kindle, a fire, and one other thing I don't know the name of. Reads books, listens to audio books, etc. on them. Before we left on a looong cruise, she checked to make sure everything worked. Then when we got on the ship and out of sight of land, she discovered that the bulk of everything was in the cloud.....which meant that none of it was accessible on the ship.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Nobody backs up their computers anymore because it just isn't feasible. How do you back up even a 2TB disk? Approximately 8 hours per TB. So, about 16 hours. Unless you want to verify; then add another 16 hours. Don't get me started on "cloud" backups. That's a joke. I cannot imagine how long it would take to upload 1TB.

And these days, 2TB isn't rare in a home computer. I'm seeing 4TB, 6TB, and 8TB desktops advertised all the time.

And people get sloppy. After you've spent an entire weekend doing a backup once a month for 2 years...and never needed to restore anything...you'll soon stop doing backups.


Nonsense. Sure it's feasible. I have about 600GB of stuff on my computer. I have two external 2TB drives. So each drive can store up to three copies of the whole kit and kaboodle. I do a full system backup every weekend, Saturday night, and it takes about ten hours while I sleep (mostly). I keep one drive at my son's house, and every month or two I swap the drives.

Everybody has experienced a total crash at some point. So there's no excuse for getting sloppy. Do you lock your door when you leave your house, even though nobody has broken in in 20 years?

I used to shut down my computer every night, and I'd get a disk crash every couple of years. Now I keep the computer on all the time. I just disconnect it physically from the internet when I'm not using it, to reduce the chance of hackers doing damage. It hasn't crashed in several years.

Elan
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I can get more onto my external 2 TByte hard drives, but I cannot put many of those in my safe deposit box.

I 2TB hard drive is about the size of your cell phone.

Elan
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I used to shut down my computer every night, and I'd get a disk crash every couple of years. Now I keep the computer on all the time. I just disconnect it physically from the internet when I'm not using it, to reduce the chance of hackers doing damage.

I found out, experimentally, what was already known by professionals like Google, that what really kills hard drives is starting them up and stopping them (mostly the former). And when I really cared, I was running Linux where (at the time) it was difficult to power down a hard drive and keep the system up (though times have changed), so I just left them running 24/7. And in the last 19 years or so, none of them went bad. I had one computer with six 10,000 rpm SCSI hard drives, another with two of those, and a third with simple WD 7200 rpm drives. One of those simple drives quit after about 12 years. It did not exactly crash, but it was hard to get it to spin the disks.

As far as disconnecting from the Internet, I do not bother. My rationale is that my router has a primitive firewall in it that will not accept incoming traffic except what is in response to what I send out. My OS also has a firewall that is even more strict and controls both what comes in and what goes out. The easiest way to hack my computer is to masquerade as my software supplier, including their encrypted and signed updates, and download something really nasty. But even there, they would have to do a man-in-the-middle attack at just the right time. IMAO, if the really nasties wanted access to my machine, they would break into my house and install a suitable key logger.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
2TB hard drive is about the size of your cell phone.

I am cheap: While my cell phone is thinner than my WD-Passport 2TB hard drives, it is longer and the same width as my external hard drives.

I am not arguing against using external hard drives for backups. For many purposes, I think they are ideal. And the costs per byte, and the cost in bytes per cubic inch, are now comparable to magnetic tape. I recognize that the handwriting is on the wall.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I found out, experimentally, what was already known by professionals like Google, that what really kills hard drives is starting them up and stopping them (mostly the former).

Any idea whether SSD's are more or less reliable than standard disks? My desktop has a 1 TB SSD.
I used to leave computers on all the time but this one starts up and shuts down in less than 10 seconds so I turn it off at night.

Mark
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Bookmarks are not stored in files? If not, where are they stored?

Many thanks, Jean David. A Google search turned up the following:

The location of the file is in your user directory then in the path "AppData\Local\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default." If you want to modify or delete the bookmarks file for some reason, you should exit Google Chrome first. Then you can modify or delete both the "Bookmarks" and "Bookmarks.bak" files.

So I can get right back to the last set of bookmarks I had.

Just have to wait for my new computer to arrive - Friday. 512 GB Solid State drive this time.

Hank
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
But I remember using tape drives like these:

Me too, Your picture is an IBM 727 ~ early 60's, I used those in the late 60's. I worked on the next
generation competing with the IBM 3400 series. One tape controller (all the electronics except the tape
drive servos) could control eight ( if I remember correctly). Roughly $50K for the controller and eight
drives at $15K each in 1970. More than $600K in today's dollars for a max of l.5 GBytes on line with
a worst case access time of 60 seconds. But in reality most systems were not bought they were leased
and came with an onsite customer engineer to minimize down time. As we all recognize we have come a
long way.

I have SSD plus a RAID 5 redundant hard disk system at home with still another drive for weekly backup.
Have used RAID systems on multiple system upgrades over the last 20+ years and in that time I can only
remember two drives fail. Never any down time just replaced the bad drive and continue playing.

RAM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Any idea whether SSD's are more or less reliable than standard disks?

I did a lot of hardware design until about 1965. Some of this design involved equipment that could not be repaired, so the reliability had to meet MTBF specifications established by an agency of the US government. In those days, the highest failure rates (surprisingly to me) were connectors (i.e., plugs and sockets). I think non-tantalum electrolytic capacitors were next. Things with moving parts were next. ...

So, while I have no data, I would expect that SSDs are likely to be more reliable than rotating disks of the same capacity. On the other hand, rotating disks that I used (the 10,000 rpm SCSI ones) never failed, and some of them I ran almost 24/7 for 10 years.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Any idea whether SSD's are more or less reliable than standard disks?

Each individual block in an SSD has a limited # of times it can be written. Therefore many wear leveling techniques have been written into the SDD's firmware.

Google the following terms:


ssd wear leveling
ssd write cycle limit
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1

I am not arguing against using external hard drives for backups. For many purposes, I think they are ideal. And the costs per byte, and the cost in bytes per cubic inch, are now comparable to magnetic tape. I recognize that the handwriting is on the wall.


Speaking of handwriting is on the wall----more and more web sites don't work with any version of a browser that Windows XP supports. And the latest current versions of more and more programs won't work on XP because of a missing entrypoint in a key Windows dll.

So it looks like I'm going to have to upgrade from XP before much longer.

------------
600GB? Man---I have 400GB in pictures alone. Extended family and world-spanning vacations will do that to you. Darn digital cameras. ;-)

I've got about 5 TBs of data on my main desktop system.
Three (3) 2TB drives and a 1TB and a 500GB spinning, and a 240GB SSD. Got a couple of 4TB and 8TB disks that can't be used on XP--another reason to upgrade from XP.

All the important (financial & investing) is on the 500GB drive, the pictures are on the 1TB drive. Even still have the DOW data files that we used way back when to backtest the Foolish Four strategy. Those are the two things I keep backed up. Most of the rest of the stuff is papers, books, videos, music, programs, etc. that can mostly be easily replaced or re-downloaded.
A bit of belt & suspenders backup----1st level backup is a dedicated computer (powered up daily, automatically) with a mirrored RAID, which then replicates to a seldom-powered-on computer in the basement with 3 WD Blacks in a RAIDZ (similar to RAID-5) ZFS filesystem.

---------------
I go back and forth on the never powerdown thing. The only disk crash I've had in the last 15 years was one that just died solid while I was using the computer. Other than that, just drives starting to go flakey and throwing S.M.A.R.T. errors. Powered down or always up doesn't seem to make any difference. My wife's computer has never had a disk replaced in the last 20 years except to upgrade to a larger one--no failures ever, and she shuts it down once or twice a day.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
So, while I have no data, I would expect that SSDs are likely to be more reliable than rotating disks of the same capacity.

The problem with SSDs is that they have a limited number of erase-write cycles before they die. I understand that the latest ones do all sorts of fancy things to reduce the number of such cycles. For one thing, that's why they come in oddball sizes like 240GB instead of 256GB. There's actually 256 (or more) physically onboard, but the difference is reserved for logically replacing SSD pages that have failed. Pretty wierd to think that an SSD has a fairly powerful CPU onboard itself.

Unknown how much actual lifetime a typical consumer grade SSD has. I think we'll find out when suddenly they all start dying in droves. Read lifetime is very long, no wear there. It's only writing (actually page erasing) that is the wear factor.

An 8TB SSD goes for about $1500. An 8TB WD Red spinning rust drive is about $150. Big price difference. For $450 you can put 3 of them in a RAID-5 and get virtually unlimited MTBF. As of yet, SSD is no competition from the prie aspect. You can write that sucker all day long forever. Write the SSD all day long for very long and it will fail hard.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Speaking of handwriting is on the wall----more and more web sites don't work with any version of a browser that Windows XP supports. And the latest current versions of more and more programs won't work on XP because of a missing entrypoint in a key Windows dll.

So it looks like I'm going to have to upgrade from XP before much longer.


Well this computer (Dell T7600) came with Windows 7 Professional. So that is what I have when I need to run TaxAct and the Garmin program that updates the maps of my GPS. Dell also needs it if they feel the need to update the BIOS or do remote hardware debugging. Otherwise, I run Linux.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The problem with SSDs is that they have a limited number of erase-write cycles before they die. I understand that the latest ones do all sorts of fancy things to reduce the number of such cycles. For one thing, that's why they come in oddball sizes like 240GB instead of 256GB. There's actually 256 (or more) physically onboard, but the difference is reserved for logically replacing SSD pages that have failed. Pretty wierd to think that an SSD has a fairly powerful CPU onboard itself.

Unknown how much actual lifetime a typical consumer grade SSD has. I think we'll find out when suddenly they all start dying in droves. Read lifetime is very long, no wear there. It's only writing (actually page erasing) that is the wear factor.

An 8TB SSD goes for about $1500. An 8TB WD Red spinning rust drive is about $150. Big price difference. For $450 you can put 3 of them in a RAID-5 and get virtually unlimited MTBF. As of yet, SSD is no competition from the prie aspect. You can write that sucker all day long forever. Write the SSD all day long for very long and it will fail hard.



Those darned kids and their new-fangled hard drives!

Samsung's latest 4TB 860 EVO SSDs are expected to handle writing over 1,300GB/day over the 5-year warranty.
https://www.zdnet.com/article/samsung-860-evo-v-nand-ssd-off...

Color me 'not concerned'.

Yeah, they fail the $/GB test, but having gone 100% SSD in my latest build, I'd be hard press to go back to HDD.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Samsung's latest 4TB 860 EVO SSDs are expected to handle writing over 1,300GB/day over the 5-year warranty.

I found this write-up that said most people write a few TB per year, and the 840 series Samsung SSD was showing some issues at around 300TB https://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experi...
My computer has a Samsung 850 series SSD. Probably it's good for a hundred years at my rate of use.
Some other brands went to PB range before failing.

Yeah, they fail the $/GB test, but having gone 100% SSD in my latest build, I'd be hard press to go back to HDD.

Me too, so much faster with the SSD.


Mark
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
600GB? Man---I have 400GB in pictures alone. Extended family and world-spanning vacations will do that to you. Darn digital cameras. ;-)

Yup, at least 400GB is photos and videos. The biggest other part is probably VL downloads going back 25 years, but that's a drop in the bucket.

If the backup time started bothering me I'd separate out the pictures, which are very static. But it hasn't been worth the effort so far.

Elan
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
As of yet, SSD is no competition from the price aspect.

Sure, because it's like comparing the price of a Ford pickup to a Formula 1 race car. SSDs are lightning fast compared to spinning hard drives.

Elan
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
But I remember using tape drives like these:

https://www.floridamemory.com/items/show/266584


So do I and hooked up to a IBM 1401.

George
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
So do I and hooked up to a IBM 1401.

My first real computer was one of these:

32768 words of RAM (magnetic core) was in one of these; a word was 36 bits.
https://www.ithistory.org/sites/default/files/hardware/IBM%2...

The front panel looked like this; no monitor, no keyboard, no mouse.
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/bd/e4/a3/bde4a3872fd902931f29937b9...

The CPU, now on a little chip, occupied the two cabinets, in the shape of the letter L to the left of the console. The card reader is behind the man seated at the console. This was the main input device.

http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL61-0420.jpg

https://www.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/mainframe...
Print the post Back To Top