<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Evolution of Storage</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.voicehero.com/2008/03/18/the-evolution-of-storage/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.voicehero.com/2008/03/18/the-evolution-of-storage/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 17:00:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: louzucaro</title>
		<link>http://blog.voicehero.com/2008/03/18/the-evolution-of-storage/#comment-67</link>
		<dc:creator>louzucaro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 19:13:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://louzucaro.wordpress.com/?p=25#comment-67</guid>
		<description>Yeah, that&#039;s a pretty darn big failure rate...thanks for the link.

I agree that for most people, traditional HDs are the best bet. Hopefully in a few years, just as it was with flat-panel displays, the failure rate will drop significantly along with the price.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, that&#8217;s a pretty darn big failure rate&#8230;thanks for the link.</p>
<p>I agree that for most people, traditional HDs are the best bet. Hopefully in a few years, just as it was with flat-panel displays, the failure rate will drop significantly along with the price.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SomeAudioGuy</title>
		<link>http://blog.voicehero.com/2008/03/18/the-evolution-of-storage/#comment-66</link>
		<dc:creator>SomeAudioGuy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2008 18:29:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://louzucaro.wordpress.com/?p=25#comment-66</guid>
		<description>Another issue with SSD is it&#039;s new. Gizmodo is reporting on rumors of an almost 20% failure rate on SSD:
http://gizmodo.com/369294/20-percent-of-ssd-notebooks-failing

With traditional hard drive prices falling to below $0.30 per GB, I think it still makes sense for people to pick up spinning disks. Two 750GB internal drives will only run you about $280. 
1.5 TB, That&#039;s HUGE storage (or really good redundant storage) for not a lot of green.
And with newer power saving tech (Western Digital for example can vary speed between 5400RPM and 7200RPM to save electricity) it&#039;ll be a while before SSD really does provide a substantial enough consumer benefit to compensate for its price premium.

Great post!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another issue with SSD is it&#8217;s new. Gizmodo is reporting on rumors of an almost 20% failure rate on SSD:<br />
<a href="http://gizmodo.com/369294/20-percent-of-ssd-notebooks-failing" rel="nofollow">http://gizmodo.com/369294/20-percent-of-ssd-notebooks-failing</a></p>
<p>With traditional hard drive prices falling to below $0.30 per GB, I think it still makes sense for people to pick up spinning disks. Two 750GB internal drives will only run you about $280.<br />
1.5 TB, That&#8217;s HUGE storage (or really good redundant storage) for not a lot of green.<br />
And with newer power saving tech (Western Digital for example can vary speed between 5400RPM and 7200RPM to save electricity) it&#8217;ll be a while before SSD really does provide a substantial enough consumer benefit to compensate for its price premium.</p>
<p>Great post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
