SSD for Netbook

[megabyteme]

I am still waiting to come across a reliable SSD to put in my netbook. I would like to keep it between $80 and $100. It doesn't have to be huge, but large enough that I won't have to worry about installing too many programs on C: .

Suggestions? Estimated time when you see this price point happening?

[Artemis]

Alot of netbooks/tablets already have SSD's installed by default. You would have to remove the existing hard drive though so you will need a fairly big drive. What do you use the netbook for? What apps are installed etc.? If you use/are comfortable with Linux this would be more simple since a Linux distro would use alot less space, and also stress an SSD less if you are using as the only drive.

[Oresteia]

I got a 60GB OCZ drive and used it to replace the HDD in one of my netbooks. I tried it with Windows XP, and with Windows 7. The Windows XP install was fun, and took a bit of frigging, but I got it working, and modified XP according to the recommendations for running XP from an SSD. WIndows 7 Installed straight onto it without problem. Neither of them made the netbook any better (response wise) than it had been with the original HDD. When I put linux on it there was a noticable difference, but under windows none. I'm guessing it's because of the interface speed of the netbook SATA controller, and the different memory models employed by windows and linux systems. I ended up with a netbook which was no faster than it had ever been, but with limited storage capacity. I ended up putting the HDD back in.

I don't know about exchange rates, but you can get some over here in that price point now.
http://www.maplin.co.uk/hard-drives-...lid-state-disk

[IdolEyes787]

I am still waiting to come across a reliable SSD to put in my netbook.

I believe they have antibiotics for that.

[megabyteme]

I am still waiting to come across a reliable SSD to put in my netbook.

I believe they have antibiotics for that.

Finally, somebody understands my euphemism. Antibiotics needed SOON as C: is getting LARGER.


To everybody else, I will figure out what I need. As for "no change", I had an SSD in my last netbook, and it rocked. Looking for speed, and reliability. Maybe 120GB... I've heard quite a few complaints about OCZs dying early deaths. Not so sure I want to go that route. Anyone happy with Corsair? Others?

[Artemis]

I believe they have antibiotics for that.

Finally, somebody understands my euphemism. Antibiotics needed SOON as C: is getting LARGER.


To everybody else, I will figure out what I need. As for "no change", I had an SSD in my last netbook, and it rocked. Looking for speed, and reliability. Maybe 120GB... I've heard quite a few complaints about OCZs dying early deaths. Not so sure I want to go that route. Anyone happy with Corsair? Others?

The problem with Windows and using using an SSD as your only drive is that Windows creates alot of temporary files (more so than other OSes) hence my post about 'strain' on the SSD, I should have been more clear by strain I mean wear, the creation and deletion of temp files creates wear to the nand technology used in solid state drives, so in properly configured Windows installations an SSD is used to cache commonly used files, speeding the overall system speed up, but cache file/temp files etc are configured to a mechanical drive.
The new Mac mini's have SSD's and of course the current crop of tablets based on various flavors of Android (which under the hood is a Linux 2.6 kernel) are also based on SSD's for the reason that there is less wear caused and of course less power consumption as well.
The point of this post was to give you a heads up that using an SSD as the only drive with a Windows installation, will decrease it's lifespan. That being said, from all accounts all though not the most blazingly fast in terms of speeds, Intel seems to have a high reliability among the people I know.

[megabyteme]

The problem with Windows and using using an SSD as your only drive is that Windows creates alot of temporary files (more so than other OSes) hence my post about 'strain' on the SSD, I should have been more clear by strain I mean wear, the creation and deletion of temp files creates wear to the nand technology used in solid state drives, so in properly configured Windows installations an SSD is used to cache commonly used files, speeding the overall system speed up, but cache file/temp files etc are configured to a mechanical drive.
The new Mac mini's have SSD's and of course the current crop of tablets based on various flavors of Android (which under the hood is a Linux 2.6 kernel) are also based on SSD's for the reason that there is less wear caused and of course less power consumption as well.
The point of this post was to give you a heads up that using an SSD as the only drive with a Windows installation, will decrease it's lifespan. That being said, from all accounts all though not the most blazingly fast in terms of speeds, Intel seems to have a high reliability among the people I know.

I will give Intel a serious look. As for a second drive, I am using a High-speed SD card to "ready-boost" maybe that will help. Part of what I want is the reliability fact of SSD's shock-proof, non-mechanical property. I felt very comfortable tossing my last netbook in a backpack and heading to class. As I mentioned, I don't want to spend a lot, and don't have huge storage requirements, and I can wait for the price to come down. Since a recent switch from Firefox to Chrome, the netbook has been running everything fast enough for my current demands.

[Darth Sushi]

Well, I'm using a SAMSUNG 830 Series 2.5-Inch 256GB SATA III on desktop PC. It's been 5 months now and no problems whatsoever as a boot drive. It's available in a 128GB version for around $140 which is a little more than you want. Samsung and Intel seem to get the most reliable SSD consumer reviews but Intel are usually on the high-end price range. My neighbor has a OCZ and it's been a nightmare. I hear good things about Corsair if you're looking for speed. Samsung are not the fastest but I'm happy with the results.

[megabyteme]

Well, I'm using a SAMSUNG 830 Series 2.5-Inch 256GB SATA III on desktop PC. It's been 5 months now and no problems whatsoever as a boot drive. It's available in a 128GB version for around $140 which is a little more than you want. Samsung and Intel seem to get the most reliable SSD consumer reviews but Intel are usually on the high-end price range. My neighbor has a OCZ and it's been a nightmare. I hear good things about Corsair if you're looking for speed. Samsung are not the fastest but I'm happy with the results.

Samsung SSDs have caught my eye recently. The 128GB size seems just about "right". Money remains elusive (actually, is being diverted towards a new flash for my wife's 7D), but may appear towards the end of summer. With luck, prices will be near the $100 mark, and all will come together.

Thanks for the suggestion, all of your post coincides with what I've seen- including disaster stories regarding the OCZs...

[Artemis]

While my OCZ Agility 3 120GB purrs happily along.