SSD or HDD ?

Hey Guys!
Since I joined this forum, I have spotted many users having SSD version of Aspire One (AOA 110). I am currently using the HDD version though (AOA 150).

Just wanted to know if there is any advantage in using the SSD. You got that because there wasn't HDD version yet, it is shock-proof, cheaper... etc ?

Just a thought. :roll:
Regards,
GvidoR

 

my answer would be

shock proof- i cant remember any instance that i accidentally dropped my AAO, but this little mean machine does the work of my previous laptop. (centrino duo, 1.5Gb 80 GbHdd). I recently bought a class 6 SDHC card for my files that can't be accomodated by the meager 8Gb SSD. Dimension wise, The SSD version rocks! The stock 3cell battery last for 4 hours if standy and 2 1/2 hours playing warcraft/counter-strike.

 

dropped my zif hdd ver loads of times. sometimes the cable comes out a bit, but i shake it and its fixed
the ssd was shit
so no no advantage of ssd if you want to use a real os

 

I got the ssd because it's shock proof and my AAO gets a lot more than its fair share of abuse. It runs ok,for what I use it for because I also have my workhorse laptop for the intensive stuff, but it hated the abuse. If my workhorse felt half the abuse my aao takes, it would have a HDD failure at the bare minimum

 

[DELETE ME]

 

^I have that problem on my SSD version, but I suppose there are 16gb USB drives, or I could get an external hdd. But I do like knowing that my aspire one doesnt mind the abuse.

 

An SSD might be more shock-resistant, but I figure most shocks that would crash my HDD would probably cause significant physical damage to the rest of the system too. I've owned laptops with HDDs for 17 years now (my first one was a dual-floppy model), and have never crashed a hard drive. I went for the AOA150 for the storage space and consider the extra $50 money well-spent.

 

my brother has the ssd version and is selling it because its painfully slow for xp (he cant live with linux). I bought the a150 hdd version after him because I loved the form of the aao but couldnt live with the awful r/w times of the ssd. Im completely happy with mine.

 

I got the SSD version because the HDD version was much more expensive in my country at the time.
The harddrive offers far greater capacity (120GB or 160GB vs just 8GB), and it's faster. If you switched from the HDD to the SSD, you'd be downgrading, IMO.

The SSD version can be tweaked to run XP really well however. Mine's very fast and boots up quicker than my Vista desktop rig. Moving the entire Firefox profile (not just cache) to a small persistent RAM drive really sped up web browsing. Lots of small, random writes as the browser stores URL history, everything you type into forms etc., which resulted in lots of pauses when running it from the SSD.

 

I went for the SSD version because:

1) shock-proof: especially with a portable it makes me feel safer that a fall wont destroy the HD

2) Less heat

3) Lower power consumption i.e. the umpc will run longer on a battery

4) Less noise

extra: i hate to use 1880's technology (gramophone players) in a modern device in fact i'm on the verge of going for a Raid SSD config with my desktop ... just waiting for the prices to drop a little on the Latest SSD drives (they are really fast and in RAID they will really make my current RAID of gramophones (HD's) look ridiculous
far better access time
much higher data transfer
no noise
no heat
lower power consumption

totally off topic
Being a "trekkie' i've been dreaming for years of owning what i used to call startrek memory ( those nice plastic sticks they just plug in and out of the Ships computer) and now finally after all these years it is here. I just have 1 more wish,,,, total voice control of my computers.

 

Also, let us not deny that we love the ssd version also because most of us are geeks (if not what are we doing on this forum?), we are excited at the idea of using new technologies, and it is also more challenging to, say, get it to run XP efficiently. To me, the 'new' and 'challenging' bits are vital. otherwise, the AA1 would only be a pc that is smaller and less powerful - how exciting would that make it?

My original reasons for going for the ssd was price and the fact that the ssd would be good enough for what I wanted my AA1 to do. Well it actually does more: runs XP fine and plays games...

 

I've been tormenting myself the whole day, trying to decide precicly this question! My significant other is getting me an AA1 for Xmas (she knows me only to well and I have to decide tonight on SSD or HDD, in order to get it in time for the holidays.

So thank you for this thread!

I love what woodland and simbeb said:

That is precisely what draws me to the SSD! Platters are based on 19th C technology, and the SSD is just sooo futuristic! Like woodland, I've been dreaming of trek memory for a long time now

And somehow I find the limited amount of space to one of the draws of it! It is just such a nice hackable system, and to endeavour to push it beyond its apparent capabilities is part of its charisma! For as simbeb says - with a 120+ gb HDD - its only "a pc that is smaller and less powerful".

I believe this is the answer I've been looking for. Thank you again all

 

I agree, having an SSD is a good geek symbol. But it's also quick with XP because the read speed is constant whereas a HDD's read speed is uneven and dips and peaks. The fact that the SSD uses no power and is silent is also another thing that makes it good. I did consider a HDD version but I have a big laptop for that stuff.

 

To all but especially the gramophone lovers (just teasing)

Am i totally wrong in assuming that i can boot from USB? Cause with the price, size and speed of usb sticks improving day by day it's just a matter of time that the pro's for the HD will evaporate (IMHO).

@jakupmichaelsen
lol, thanks for the compliment(s) I hope you will enjoy your AA1

@simbeb
Thx for pointing out and convincing me that i'm a geek i juzt never realized i am 1, but plz stop profiling me you're tooo good at it

 

You have a few inaccuracies in your post, first the SSD is not "quick with XP", on the Aspire it is actually painfully slow with XP, almost to the point of freezing. Secondly, the SSD does use power, in fact most of the cheaper SSD's (virtually all SSD's in Netbooks as standard) use more power than the recent low power HDD's.

With regards the "shockproof" advantage, I have been using laptops since around 1990, (with a Compaq 286 briefcase size monster), since then I have never managed to destroy a HDD, I have destroyed laptops by dropping them and breaking cases and LCD screens, I remember almost crying when I dropped my week old £1500 Toshiba Libretto and seeing the LCD with a spiderweb of cracks across it, the HDD was fine, I used the machine with an external monitor for almost 2 months waiting for the supplier to get a replacement LCD.
If you drop or treat your Netbook badly enough to damage the HDD you can be sure you will have done far more damage to the rest of the machine and LCD screen.

 

@Dave

Interesting observations.. Could you answer a questions that is nagging me plz?

I've been using RAID 0 configs for the last 2 years in my desktops so the data-transfers reached by the SSD do scare me especially when it comes to running WinXP. I'm hoping that i will be able to use WinXP by booting from a fast(er) USB stick, is that a viable option?

I didn't know about your second point ... so far i've read everywhere that SSD uses less power than a HD which would explain the "boasts" (?) that you can run the SSD version longer than the HD version when "unplugged" i.e. running on battery power.

I'm Not doubting what you say but would like some more info on the subject...

off topic:
It's hard nowadays to keep up with all the changes in technology. Is it me or are things changing more rapidly the last few years :?:

 

How's about a quick explanation of what t'heck you're talking about...like what's a HDD and what's a SSD?

 

LOL! Nice change of pace there Egdon. Personally, I think it's a mistake to go with (S)olid (S)tate (D)rives at the moment, it's premature as they are still a bit too small. I agree with the poster above who makes a good point about the durability of (H)ard (D)isk (D)rives and the liklihood of breaking the screen before one would do damage to the hard drive. We are now looking at 320 Gig HDDs for these little beasts (Acer should be introducing them into the AAO in February from what I've read, along with the 10.2" screen). Many of the Asus owners, feeling that the 160Gigs are already too small, are having having a field day swapping them out for the 320s (since it's evidently such a snap on their systems). The size difference is just too large at the moment and the advantages of the SSDs aren't really there imho. Sound, video, and photography are more and more important these days and they require huge amounts of space. Incredible as it may seem, these little guys can do a pretty decent job of handling all this stuff. In the future, the SSDs will become omnipresent, but, we are not really there yet are we? I posted an article about this a few days ago on the forum by the way: Hardware: SSDs Falling Behind Hard Drives.

At any rate, good luck with the Xmas present Jakup, you are bound to love it whatever you get. Anyone who knows their way around computers can make good use of either system, you will just have to set things up a bit differently.

 

I am running TinyXP with a class 6 SDHC card for documents,and firefox. Thee computer runs almost as fast as it did with Linpus on it. I was not referring to a bloated install of XP that mosst people try it with. If you use a copy with all the unneeded services etc. disabled, it boots in half a minute with ESET Smart Security and performs as well as most laptops I'm used to while running, if not better. Word takes less than 3 seconds to open, And firefox takes about or less than that. So please, factor in the program nLite and also the fact that XP can run perfectly on the AAO with tweaks. Mine only has 512mb RAM yet runs better than my laptop running XP with almost as many tweaks for it to run faster. I have a friend with the HDD version of the One and the same battery as me, comparing them, Mine gets 30 mins extra battery life at least, depending on the use of the HDD. This is because the HDDs in the One are not the super conservative ones you mentioned, but average ones deigned to be cheap and do the job but not necessarily be as power economical. I was also stating that compared to a HDD the SSD uses virtually no power, it was a mistyping of mine.

 

The real reason the SSD is sometimes faster than a HDD is not really because the speed is constant.

Using HDTach, my SSD reads at a constant ~34MB/s. Even at its slowest point, my desktop HDD never drops below ~60MB/s for sequential reads. This is of course a 7200 RPM desktop drive, but I doubt even a laptop HDD would dip as low as 30MB/s, especially over the first 8GB of the platters.

The big difference is access time, which is virtually 0 for the SSD but over 12ms for my desktop HDD. This makes a huge difference when reading many scattered, small files (for example when the system is booting).

Regarding XP performance, I have to agree with both “dskid807” and “Dave”. With a clean, untweaked install of XP, the SSD is painfully slow. The biggest weakness of SSDs are random, small but frequent writes. There's a huge latency for some writes, and the write speed is very low. Unfortunately, Windows loves random writes. Every time you access a file, NTFS writes to the drive to update the “Last Access Date” stamp. When you write to the drive, NTFS begins by writing to its journal so the change can be undone. Windows itself also constantly writes to its logfiles etc. When you browse the net, small amounts of data are constantly written (browser history, disk cache etc.). With a HDD, there's almost no penalty for doing this, but when using a SSD, this becomes a huge problem. The whole system can literally freeze for many seconds while the SSD performs these write operations. Either the random write speed of SSD's (affordable ones) needs to go up by a factor of 10 or more, or Windows needs to be changed to be more SSD-aware. Until then, there are numerous tweaks that can be applied to minimize random writes to the point where there are almost no freezes.