Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Seagate Technology -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FJB who wrote (7735)	1/22/2011 2:43:04 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 7841

When I saw the forecast for taking over data center storage, I thought no way will there be enough NAND, but even at 70% bit growth a year it can be done. Installed NAND capacity was 11.5 exabytes in 2010. Sorry, I'm not following what you're saying. Here is the math according to Luczo: Even though users might wish to and could afford to adopt SSD storage on their computers the lovely stuff can't be made in sufficient quantities. Seagate quotes an industry estimate that there will be a total notebook HDD capacity of 95EB (exabytes) shipped in 2011 with 69EB in 2010. It says - you can almost see the glee on its face - that just 11EB of flash was made in 2010, with around 93 per cent of shipments used for smartphones and other embedded applications. This left a pathetic 0.77EB (770PB) for notebooks, which would have allowed around one per cent of notebook HDD storage to be replaced by SSDs last year. There will be a minor boost in NAND fab capacity this year, maybe enabling 2EB to be used for notebooks. Any demand for notebook SSDs over this amount will cause shortages which will send prices up, ultimately crushing the demand. What Seagate seems to be saying is: "NAND flash may well be preferable to HDDs for notebooks but it's supply-constrained so we are alright for the time being." Connect the dots for me, I must be dense here. How will NAND capacity for sufficient to actually take over HD storage? Or are you saying that of course it won't be?