>>26355
>and die much faster compared to long-lasting HDDs?
lmao in what fucking reality? I've used SSDs since 2010, all of them are still alive. Meanwhile, none of the HDDs I bought in the same timeframe are alive, all of the data was lost. There will be a huge void in data produced between 1990-2020 because humanity thought it was a good idea to store data in delicate metal plates that spin at 5000+RPM and get permanently fucked up with a small nudge.

>>26405
>I've used SSDs since 2010, all of them are still alive. Meanwhile, none of the HDDs I bought in the same timeframe are alive
yup, this
I know it counts as anectodal rather than factual data, but I struggle to believe none of these retards have noticed this obvious pattern.
I have a pile of dead hdds, most with very few hours of use before they died, while I also have lots and lots of ssds that are almost a decade old, regularly used, and even the chinkiest ones never die.
the oldest most abused drives have barely half their tbw rating of writes, about 1/20 of their actual lifespan, and 50k+ hours of usage.
I have yet to have an hdd last more than 10k hours before shitting the bed, i've seen high end 3.5" nas drives do 90k hours, but that's with spindown disabled, turn that fucker off and it's not spinning up ever again, consumer hdds (especially modern smr ewaste) under regular usage conditions are going to last way less than an aliexpress ssd.
>There will be a huge void in data produced between 1990-2020 because humanity thought it was a good idea to store data in delicate metal plates that spin at 5000+RPM and get permanently fucked up with a small nudge.
this part however makes zero sense, what the fuck did you mean by this?
...you understand the concept that data can be copied to a new drive, right? data centers constantly replace hard drives (data is automatically re-constructed with raid), it's likely no drives made in 2020 are still in use in a data center.
same goes for regular users, people will still upgrade drives and shit from time to time, plus you're supposed to have backups anyways, nobody is writing data to an hard drive and letting it rot as an archival method

>>26378
>hdds literally last decades
all my HDDs die after 6 or 7 years max

>>26407
and thats why i stopped using them altogether.
nvme masterrace

>>26355
SSDs no matter the interface are great for the OS or for any disk you need really fast response times. A HDD RAID array for storage and decent storage throughput.

>>26355
what's the point of having a computer in your pocket when you can't perform a quick jewgle search? kys you knuckle dragging mongoloid.

>>26378
Hard drives will either survive a nuclear Holocaust or will die in catastrophic fashion after 5-6 months with absolutely no in-between. Usually the latter.

>>26357
Will I have a great day today?

>>26403
>those prices
YOWIE WOWIE

i fucking hate you retards so much

>>26400
>>26403
>>26404
>>26413
I paid $450 for a 7.68TB MLC U.2 drive like 4 years ago. Even QVOs where still $800
You where always paying an absolute premium for the privilege of it being slightly more convenient and it ultimately being a slower drive. IDK how that doesn't turn anyone off immediately.