WDC/Sandisk Corporation Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : WDC/Sandisk Corporation

WDC 157.75

+0.4%

Nov 14 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Craig Freeman who wrote (7910)	10/30/1999 11:54:00 PM
From: Gary Spiers	Read Replies (2) of 60323

Craig, If you disagree with these statements then we are in disagreement. 1) Flash can not replace DRAM in computers because the write cycle is too slow and the power consumption too high. (This was the original question to which I responded). Clearly if flash advances to the point where these two statements are false then it becomes possible. 2) DRAM, no matter how power efficient it is (or may become) requires power to maintain its state. This means that it is volatile and for me would never be an acceptable long term storage solution as a power failure would always be disastrous. In your post you said: If you measure memory by "battery life", with DRAM you are talking HOURS, perhaps DAYS. I can assure you that the OB300 I mentioned in my previous post can maintain information in its DRAM for over a month (starting with new batteries of course). This statement should not be construed as a desire by me to use DRAM as long term storage ;-) If you crank up DRAM with a hefty battery backup supply, you can reach out as far as 5-10 years. Possible but silly :-) If you measure battery life by "flash" standards as of today, you are usually talking decades. Flash does not require battery power to maintain itself - I do not understand what you are trying to say. So -- when it comes to internal memory for cameras -- it isn't hard to see how flash beats DRAM. Internal memory to do what? Storage of images - then yes use flash. Buffer images to permit multiple images to be taken quickly than use DRAM. Of course the original question to which I replied was about computers where the differences in speed/function are much more clearly defined. Unfortunately, advances in DRAM may make flash obsolete for all the same reasons. To reiterate, DRAM requires power to sustain information and I will never trust it for long term storage because of its volatility. If DRAM develops to the point that it no longer requires power to maintain information then it is no longer DRAM. GaryS Gary

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next