ARGH!!!! Roof racks!

On Sun, 22 May 2016 13:22:53 +0100, JNugent wrote:

On 22/05/2016 13:19, Bod wrote:
On 22/05/2016 12:49, JNugent wrote:
On 22/05/2016 12:47, Bod wrote:

A reminder to Mr Macaw of the description of an SSD drive:

www.storagereview.com/ssd_vs_hdd
Like a memory stick, there are no moving parts to an SSD. Rather,
information is stored in microchips. Conversely, a hard disk drive uses
a mechanical arm with a read/write head to move around and read
information from the right location on a storage platter. This
difference is what makes SSD so much faster.

Another educational fact for Mr Macaw:

"A system with no moving parts is described as "solid state"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_parts

How about vacuum tubes ("valves")?

Were they properly described as solid-state?


Not quite sure about those.

Here's the description from Wiki...

The moving parts of a machine are those parts of it that move.[citation
needed] Machines include both moving (or movable) and fixed parts. The
moving parts have controlled and constrained motions.[1][2]

Moving parts do not include any moving fluids, such as fuel, coolant or
hydraulic fluid.[citation needed] Moving parts also do not include any
mechanical locks, switches, nuts and bolts, screw caps for bottles etc.
A system with no moving parts is described as "solid state".

Hmmm...

The term "solid-state" came about in order to distinguish transistor
technology from vacuum tube technology.

"Solid-state", in every real-world application, refers to that distinction.

Perhaps it was a reference to the vacuum, which by definition cannot be
solid.

Correct, the electrons move around within solid substances.

I can remember radios that said "solid state" in large letters like this was something really fancy :-)

--
Nagry: the state of emotion a woman is in when yelling at her husband

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 15:01:30 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:
Correct, the electrons move around within solid substances.


Unless at the impossible absolute zero, ALL atoms are moving in everything all the time.

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 15:01:30 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can remember radios that said "solid state" in large letters like this was something really fancy :-)

That was when the transistor was in its infancy and radio/TV valves burning out and breaking was commonplace.

I actually remember valve radios in cars.

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 14:59:44 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:

3TB SSDs are prohibitively expensive.
The 256GB SSDs are for speed for the main stuff like the OS, and the programs I use every day.
The 3TB has big stuff like movies.

And the SSDs do fail as often as the hard disks.

I have a very rare 160GB i-pod with a hard drive.
That technology has gone backwards as people want music on their phones now and as such there is no way they can store as many tracks now.

On Sun, 22 May 2016 18:36:45 +0100, Alycidon wrote:

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 15:01:30 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:
Correct, the electrons move around within solid substances.

Unless at the impossible absolute zero, ALL atoms are moving in everything all the time.

Actually, at absolute zero, atoms still have a zero point quantum energy.

And who says it's impossible to get to absolute zero? It's just not possible by any means we know of (eg simple cooling by contact with a colder substance).

I shall adjust my sentence above: "Correct, the electrons move around (with a use required by the device's function) within solid substances."

--
Kakistocracy - Government by the least qualified or most unprincipled citizens.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/kakistocracy

On Sun, 22 May 2016 18:39:21 +0100, Alycidon wrote:

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 15:01:30 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:

I can remember radios that said "solid state" in large letters like this was something really fancy :-)

That was when the transistor was in its infancy and radio/TV valves burning out and breaking was commonplace.

I actually remember valve radios in cars.

I've seen a valve record player in operation (my friend at school acquired one from the skip and we made it work - there were no broken valves, it was something else wrong with it).

--
One workman asks another, "How long have you been working here?"
The other one replies, "Since they threatened to fire me."

On Sun, 22 May 2016 18:41:51 +0100, Alycidon wrote:

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 14:59:44 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:

3TB SSDs are prohibitively expensive.
The 256GB SSDs are for speed for the main stuff like the OS, and the programs I use every day.
The 3TB has big stuff like movies.

And the SSDs do fail as often as the hard disks.

I have a very rare 160GB i-pod with a hard drive.
That technology has gone backwards as people want music on their phones now and as such there is no way they can store as many tracks now.

What? I don't understand what you mean. A 160GB SSD is easy enough.

--
How come abbreviated is such a long word?

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 19:35:58 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2016 18:41:51 +0100, Alycidon wrote:

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 14:59:44 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:

3TB SSDs are prohibitively expensive.
The 256GB SSDs are for speed for the main stuff like the OS, and the programs I use every day.
The 3TB has big stuff like movies.

And the SSDs do fail as often as the hard disks.

I have a very rare 160GB i-pod with a hard drive.
That technology has gone backwards as people want music on their phones now and as such there is no way they can store as many tracks now.

What? I don't understand what you mean. A 160GB SSD is easy enough.

I meant a stand alone music player - I have a 2TB drive with 40000 tracks on it, but I can't use it when I mow the lawn.

On Sun, 22 May 2016 20:03:17 +0100, Alycidon wrote:

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 19:35:58 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2016 18:41:51 +0100, Alycidon wrote:

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 14:59:44 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:

3TB SSDs are prohibitively expensive.
The 256GB SSDs are for speed for the main stuff like the OS, and the programs I use every day.
The 3TB has big stuff like movies.

And the SSDs do fail as often as the hard disks.

I have a very rare 160GB i-pod with a hard drive.
That technology has gone backwards as people want music on their phones now and as such there is no way they can store as many tracks now.

What? I don't understand what you mean. A 160GB SSD is easy enough.

I meant a stand alone music player - I have a 2TB drive with 40000 tracks on it, but I can't use it when I mow the lawn.

Don't they make 160GB SSDs small enough for ipods?

Anyway, my entire music collection is 7GB, I guess you have more varied taste.

160GB would play continuously for 111 days!

--
The Artist Formerly Known As Prince has a new album out.
It's called "The Songs Formerly Known As Hits."

On Sun, 22 May 2016 20:03:17 +0100, Alycidon wrote:

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 19:35:58 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2016 18:41:51 +0100, Alycidon wrote:

On Sunday, 22 May 2016 14:59:44 UTC+1, Mr Macaw wrote:

3TB SSDs are prohibitively expensive.
The 256GB SSDs are for speed for the main stuff like the OS, and the programs I use every day.
The 3TB has big stuff like movies.

And the SSDs do fail as often as the hard disks.

I have a very rare 160GB i-pod with a hard drive.
That technology has gone backwards as people want music on their phones now and as such there is no way they can store as many tracks now.

What? I don't understand what you mean. A 160GB SSD is easy enough.

I meant a stand alone music player - I have a 2TB drive with 40000 tracks on it, but I can't use it when I mow the lawn.

Mowing the lawn with your ears covered my headphones is unsafe. You could mow over a small child. Turn yourself into the police immediately.

--
The Artist Formerly Known As Prince has a new album out.
It's called "The Songs Formerly Known As Hits."