<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Engadget - Comments for Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us</title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link>
<description>Engadget Comments for Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2008 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[256Gb?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[PhilxBefore]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 12:21PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[Yeah. It doubles every time just like RAM. 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 etc.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[imacmatt09]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 12:25PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[REALLY?!]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[PhilxBefore]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 12:28PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[Meh! Someone call the sarcasm police.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[imacmatt09]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 12:33PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[Incorrent, it's not 256Gigabits, it's 256GigaBytes<br>(Gb = Gigabits, GB = Gigabytes)<br><br>It freaked me out at first, like the flash on a wii is 512Mb NOT MB meaning it's something idiotic like 486MB =/]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Obsidian desire]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 2:04PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[@Obsidian: That's not the difference between Megabits and Megabytes.  Megabytes are 8 Megabits, so if the flash on the wii was really 512mbit, it would be only 64MB, not 486MB.<br><br>The 486MB vs 512MB is due to formatting and possibly due to system reserved space.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[James]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 3:10PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[But now that they say the SSD-based lappys have a higher failure rate, I just can't get excited.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Sean M.]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 12:30PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[SSDs just aren't suited to most OS's, since OS's tend to do a lot of reading/writing constantly.  SSDs have a drastically shorter rw life-span than traditional HDDs.  Good for storage though.  The only benifet to putting them in laptops over traditional HDDs is they're a bit more vibration-safe.  But traditional HDDs aren't terrible vs vibration, and to be honest, if your laptop is sustaining that much trauma, it's probably going to have other failures as well.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Lars]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 4:45PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[Is there really a difference between sequential and random read/write speeds on an SSD?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[wintermute]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 12:31PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[weee]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Acerguy]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 12:39PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[Yes, though not nearly as big of a difference compared to hard drives.<br><br>That said, my RAID arrays kick 65/50 MB/sec in the pussy.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Ty]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 4:24PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[but will it play doom?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Acerguy]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 12:36PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[OH COME ON!]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[PhilxBefore]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 12:38PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[usually, when anyone else says it, i detect the underlying sarcasm.  however, you say it like you just joined the internet.  le sigh.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[teej]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 3:28PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[I wanna see it blend!!!]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[retro77]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 12:51PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[Considering the "price upon request" part of the entire thing, I hope to god it doesn't blend!]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[y3k.nik]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 1:15PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[I'm pretty sure a few more people would be a lot more excited for "The world cheapest 256GB SSD"]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[kal326]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 1:45PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[if you look at the spec sheet on the website, it says that its only 9.5mm thick. is that not the 256GB version?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 2:16PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[The drives are 9.5mm thick for all capacities except 256MB (which is 12.5mm).  See <a href="http://www.supertalent.com/products/ssd-consumer.php?type=SATA" rel="nofollow">http://www.supertalent.com/products/ssd-consumer.php?type=SATA</a>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[craig]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 2:58PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[Most importantly.. Will It Blend?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Bobby]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 2:18PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[sooo...pricing available upon request?  c'mon, you really didn't already send them a request so you could tell us the price in an update?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[umm....hello???]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 2:56PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[Price is $5,950 and sold only to OEMs. <a href="http://www.jkontherun.com/2008/03/supertalent-to.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.jkontherun.com/2008/03/supertalent-to.html</a>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin C. Tofel]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 3:23PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[The thinnest SSD requires the fattest wallet.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Loonie]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 3:24PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[...thats what she said.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[OneLove]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 3:46PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[I can't wait when SSD gets cheaper...]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Junkie]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 26th 2008 8:18PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[Rummy what's the real production cost..<br>(like iPhone, which is $40 nad selling for $400 :))]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[iWicko]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mar 27th 2008 1:33AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on Super Talent ships "world's thinnest" 256GB SSD, still too thick for us]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/26/super-talent-ships-worlds-thinnest-256gb-ssd-still-too-thick/</guid><description><![CDATA[RE: The article<br><br>I think the use of this device would be geared toward customized small size devices. Military certainly can afford such prices.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Metal]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Apr 5th 2008 9:26PM</pubDate></item></channel></rss>