Okay.................

Submitted by devin3627 on Fri, 07/25/2008 - 2:41pm

thats what optimizers are for. i know that windows isnt optimizing the powers of SSDs. they are TOTTALY different technology. They still can work faster anyday.

Login or register to post comments

eh?

Submitted by whisp on Wed, 07/23/2008 - 11:54am

 so xp is more "optimized for flash memory solid-state disks", then vista? how would that be?

"we Plan for Tomorrow, but we Live for Today"

Login or register to post comments

Ironic data.

Submitted by StormEffect on Wed, 07/23/2008 - 10:34am

It was already shown that these same drives are some of the worst SSD performers in XP as well.

Something is wrong with the drives. Everyone else can post high speeds in both XP and Vista. 

At some point, people need to stop blaming Vista and take responsibility for their work. This drive works terribly on XP as well, so they might as well just blame Microsoft in general and leave out the big fat VISTA label. 

Login or register to post comments

Linux with LogFS shows an improvement

Submitted by audiokiwi on Wed, 07/23/2008 - 9:35am

I recently ran a comparison of linux ext3 and linux logfs (http://www.logfs.org - a filesystem optimized for flash and SSD drives) on my EEE 901. In the Phoronix Test Suite's (http://www.phoronix-test-suite.com/) disk benchmark I got about a 10% increase in scores. Also, the database test had an increase of 3% or so.

I wonder how NTFS compares to ext2 on a ssd drive. Ntfs is probably slower since it has more writes than ext3. Vista can't use the simpler FAT32, which has less writes than NTFS since it has less data. Also, Vista defrags and indexes in the background, which is really bad since fragmentation is not a major problem with SSD since they have random acess.

Login or register to post comments

Sandisk is a terrible

Submitted by Digital-Storm on Wed, 07/23/2008 - 9:20am

Sandisk is a terrible company anyways. All there products suck.

Login or register to post comments

Oh puhleeeze.  Next we'll

Submitted by amacieli on Wed, 07/23/2008 - 8:59am

Oh puhleeeze.  Next we'll be blaming Vista for global warming.  Y'know, there really isn't THAT much to blame Vista for - the Vista-bashing is getting really tired, almost (but not quite) as tired as incessant iphone coverage.

Login or register to post comments

SSD's on Leopard

Submitted by skhills on Wed, 07/23/2008 - 8:56am

I'd be interested to see hard drive benchmarks on a macbook air with and without a SSD.  Would this support or put down SanDisk claims?

Login or register to post comments

As our 6 Sigma gugu would say, "Show me the numbers"

Submitted by Talcum X on Wed, 07/23/2008 - 8:50am

 Set up a system with 2 SSD drives (one with XP and the other Vista) and compare times.  Then post your findings.  Finger pointing doent tell us anything.

***********

Every morning is the dawn of a new error.

Login or register to post comments