I see reali-stec is back posting again. For those not familiar with his scam, here's some recommended reading:
He also went into full STEC cheerleader mode just two weeks before the recent crash from $18 to $8.32!!!!!
So you decide, is he a
1. Corporate pumper boy/whore
2. Shilling for hedge fund short traders.
3. A complete moron who doesn't have a job or clue, so he wastes his time pumping STEC 24/7
Well maybe your right, but I say NOT. Just because the world markets are SHT doesn't mean advances in technology will stop. SSD technologies are continuing to advance. Film storage still exists, but was replaced as the leading storage media by spinning disks.......... SSD's will replace HHD, but not right away, but slowly and in 3-5yrs. HHD will still exist and be used, but marginally in enterprise.
Most enterprise HHD hace a 3yr warranty.
STEC's enterprise SLC products have a 5yr warranty
enterprise MLC products have a 3yr warranty
Flash storage will increase their share of the market every year going forward.
Your IBM engineer friend should know IBM is promoting SSD's and putting them in all there new systems.
IBM white paper
Customer I/O demands have outpaced the performance capabilities of traditional HDDs.
Latencies associated with spinning platters and moving arms limit the speed of HDD data access.
SSDs’ near instantaneous data access removes this I/O bottleneck, creating a paradigm shift in
I/O performance. Applications throttled by poor I/O performance can benefit greatly from SSDs.
As demonstrated in the above scenarios, SSDs result in a substantial improvement in I/O
performance, which translates to increased business output, reduced energy consumption and in
some cases decreased cost
The superior performance of SSDs must be balanced with cost. Multi-tiered storage solutions can
provide that balance. An application’s hot data can be moved to SSDs, while less active data can
remain on lower cost HDDs. With the introduction of the commands and tools to help balance the
performance critical data onto SSDs customers can benefit greatly.
Customers wishing to learn how solid state disk technology can be best utilized for their IBM i
workloads should contact their sales team for IBM products and services. Sales teams needing
technical sales assistance should submit a request for technical sales assistance via Deal Hub
Eight SSDs replacing HDDs in a RAID 5 configuration
Finally, consider the case where we use 8 SSDs in a RAID 5 configuration. We have to replace 82 HDDs. We'll assume 80% reads.
The HDDs have an application IOPS bandwidth of 175 x 82 / (0.8 + 4 x 0.2) = 8969 IOPS. We'll need data with an access density of at least 8969 / (69 x 7) = 19 IOPS/GB.
Given sufficient access density with enough data, SSDs can be a quantifiable cost effective alternative to HDDs. They can also provide significant performance benefits which also are of benefit, though how much will depend on your situation. Long term, the price of SSDs will continue to drop and they will become more prevalent. There is also the choice of purchasing SSDs directly attached to servers, or those in disk subsystems such as the DS8000.
More IBM white papers
You really do wonder about reali-stec and some of the other STEC bulls on this board.
If they are not STEC employees, hedge funds who own the stock, or being paid to pump up the firm, then they got to be the biggest losers on Yahoo to keep on promoting the stock.
How long have we been waiting for SSDs to finally take off?
Forget the 10x higher cost than disk drives, SSDs still have problems with program erase cycles that limit their use. These problems only get worst as the linewidths shrink and the cells get closer together.
I have a retired engineer friend who used to work in IBM storage. He tells me, he wouldn't touch an SSD for long term storage of critical data.
Now that the storage centers are moving to SAS and cheaper interfaces, everybody is jumping into the pool.
SSDs will become nothing but a low margin and low profit commodity product.
Great story, eh?
I don't think the price action was too out of line at around 20$ based on the fundamentals at the time, but just like any tech stock, it got killed on ANY sign of weakness.
That being said I think that buying in at well under 10 times trailing earnings after the collapse is a pretty good deal which is what I did.