Read the CNET article from today.
Still think Seagate is missing the mark here. 8GB is not enough for a cache and a lot of solutions will be using a Tiering approach.
Pure SSD in a notebook and a Tiered SSD + HDD architecture in desktops make the most sense. Plus, these SSHD's don't have any place in the enterprise.
Still no mention of any SSD tech coming from Seagate.
Hybrids are great for cheap/mass storage. Also, it is hard to market/sell "low" end Laptops/Notebooks with an SSD solution against Tablets right now.
STX is going to squeeze out every last bit of profits in their HDDs/Hybrids drives until SSDs drop in prices which probably won't be until late 2014/2015. STX is still selling record number of HDDs and exceeding estimates.
SSDs for mass storage (512 GB+) are still too expensive for go average user who just wants storage space. A 2 TB Hybrid is still cheaper than a 512 GB SSD.
Sentiment: Strong Buy
Most mobile devices will soon be all SSD following Apples lead. Comparing an SSD to a HDD is pretty dumb as it is not the same thing. It's like comparing onboard video graphics to a dedicated video card. Yeah they technically do the same thing but serve two different purposes. Just the fact that an SSD drains less power is a big deal for something mobile as manufactures and users are always looking for longer lasting devices. Add in the fact that it has no moving parts, so you don't have to worry about losing your data if you drop it like with an HDD. Also, it produces less noise and less heat. HDDs will always serve their purpose as a mass storage device but will not be used to store an OS and apps. In the enterprise, SSDs will mainly be used as a cache in the datacenter and all SSD in user workstation as they do not require a lot of storage space.
Right now, 256GB of SSD is enough storage space for most typical users. Most tablets only have 64GB of space and people are fine with that. The cloud will continue to evolve making storage space less important for a user. Most people are now streaming their audio and video using services like Spotify(music streaming like Netflix) and Netflix. I believe this is the future as I now have access to thousands of songs from any device no matter where I am all for a measely $5 a month(no ads). This means I don't need storage space for any music downloads or movies (if you use Netflix). Where I work, a 40GB drive is enough for a user because all they use it for is storing the OS and Apps and we store all their docs and email on the server. The point here is that less and less people are storing a bulk amount of data locally.
I think Apples approach of the fusion drive is the way to go and what most manufacturers will end up doing until SSD pricing comes down far enough where they will go all SSD. Until then, a user who needs more space could use an external drive for bulk data or the cloud. Most mobile users would glady do that for a higher performing/longer lasting device that is cool and quiet.
As far as hybrids go, they are a good upgrade to an HDD but definitely no SSD. They also use more power than a regular drive don't they? If the ssd or hdd portion fails then the entire drive is shot isnt it? The heat and noise is still an issue. The risk of losing your data is still there if you drop it. Clearly, SSD is the way to go but if you take a fusion type(ssd+hdd) approach, if one drive fails the other is still usable plus you have the option of upgrading to a newer or larger size of each if needed.
" until SSDs drop in prices which probably won't be until late 2014/2015."
heh not even then! you are looking at 2020 before a SSD is priced the same as a HDD, and this is only IF more fabs come online. i doubt any will because all NAND fabs are losing money right now. so it is a chicken and the egg thing.
JJ you are the worst in this sector. i have yet to see you make a good call!
pure garbage you spew!
look people like hybrids, simple as that, they are cheap and fast, the next gen one even be better, so quit giving bad advice you tool!
you should really crunch the #'s in Hybrids. They are much more expensive than their 4 cylinder sister and if you calculate the higher car price and better gas mileage you basically have to own the car for 7-8 years before it becomes a better choice cost wise than the gas engine, assuming you drive approx. 12,000 miles per year. Not sure about you but I know no one who keeps car for that long. Now if you are just buying for the Green factor then so be it . But they are not cost effective to the average driver. at least not right now
hybrids are krap plain and simple just like everything you write you hateful little monster !! Only person giving bad advice is you jack rear !! You obviously don't know SHI___^TE about storage devices and certainly don't know your way around a PC so yeah stop giving STUPID and KRaRPY opinions!! Not that anyone with half a brain would listen to a #$%$ like you!!! COMO LA MIERDA!!