Archive for June, 2009

Weekly News Roundup (7 June 2009)

Sunday, June 7th, 2009

Another pretty quiet week. Well, not so quiet with the E3 going on, but the major stories out of that were gaming which I will cover later on in this WNR. I did manage to write a mid-week blog this week, so no Fallout 3 jokes this time. The blog was about solid state drives and about how awesome I think they are. It’s well worth a read because you will be using one sooner rather than later. If they do manage to replace HDDs, then that’s the second last major mechanical device out of your average PC. What’s the last mechanical device? That’s your optical drive, of course. No wonder Sony says that Blu-ray may be the last optical format around, not so much because it’s so good that you won’t need another one, but rather because once HDDs are gone, the optical drive is going to seem quite quaint as the last mechanical device sitting in your PC (fans and switches excepted, although with cooler components and alternative cooling methods, fans are on their way out as well).

Copyright

Starting with the copyright news, there isn’t much going on actually. I don’t know if this is good news or not.  The MPAA is pretty busy these days with their (and their affiliates’) lawsuits all around the world, so I guess it’s understandable that they don’t have as much time to come out with the usual propaganda.

In the RealDVD case, the MPAA has made a claim that will not surprise anyone, but does give insight into what they perceive to be fair use. They have made the case to the judge that even making one backup copy of a legally purchase DVD for personal use is illegal, as it circumvents the DMCA. There are fair use provisions in the DMCA in relation to archiving, but the MPAA lawyers claim that’s for actual archives (like the National Archive) and does not apply to mere mortals. They even got the Copyright Alliance to claim that if they wanted to give people their rights back, they would have charged more per DVD, and not the current amount, which is too low to allow them to be able to make backups and stuff. Basically they’ve admitted that DRM is used to provide price control on digital content that’s normally (in its DRM-free form) hard to control. So it’s not about piracy at all, and never has been.

Windows 7's codec support may bring more anti-trust lawsuits

Windows 7's codec support may bring more anti-trust lawsuits

While it’s not a copyright issue, but it is still a legal one and that’s the slightly controversial approach that Microsoft has taken with audio/video codec support in the new Windows 7 operating system, which will be released in October. What they have done is locked Windows Media Player so that it won’t work with third party codecs. And the Microsoft codecs will override your third party ones unless unlocked or using a player that will ignore the way Microsoft has done things like Media Player Classic. It’s good news for end users I suppose, in that Microsoft is providing a bunch of codecs with the default OS installation so that you don’t need to go codec hunting just to play a XviD file. What’s not so good is for codec publishers that will lose customers, despite offering a superior product to the one that comes with Windows. Sound familiar? Didn’t Microsoft try to do this when they integrated Internet Explorer into Windows, and had to pay out huge amounts in anti-trust cases brought against them. Microsoft argued then that it was good for their customers, but offering something that come as standard is one thing, but preventing competitors from offering alternatives is another. We’ll have to wait until the release version to see if installing and using third party codecs has been made intentionally hard, or it’s just something that can be bypassed easily.

High Definition

In HD news, it’s all pretty quiet on the Blu-ray front. Most HD news these days is about yet another HD streaming service, or another hardware platform that now streams an existing service.

One of Microsoft’s big E3 announcements (you’ll read more about them in the gaming section), is that 1080p HD video streaming is coming to the Xbox 360. Bandwidth issues mean that none of the 1080p streaming services will come close to matching Blu-ray’s quality, and you can’t argue with the convenience of not having to step outside you home to watch a movie from a catalogue of thousands, more than what your typical store will hold. The best news is that, unlike previous offerings, this one is worldwide. And not only that, the services that Xboxers in the lucky countries have been enjoying will now come to 10 more countries, including Australia. Last week it was the news about UK and Irish Xboxers getting Sky TV channels through the Xbox 360. So one of Microsoft’s major themes for this E3 has been trying to turn the Xbox 360 into a fully fledged media streamer. And unlike Sony, they don’t have to worry about streaming taking customers away from their disc format, because they don’t have a disc format to support (anymore).  

Gaming

And so onto gaming, and most of the news this week has been the various announcements from the gaming companies. Nintendo was relatively quiet this E3, and it’s all been about Sony and Microsoft catching up.

And the best way to do that of course would be to copy Nintendo’s lead and offer motion controlled gaming. But both have decided to go in a slightly different direction to what Nintendo is offering.

Full body motion controls comes to the Xbox 360 through Project Natal

Full body motion controls comes to the Xbox 360 through Project Natal

Microsoft was up first, and they demonstrated their Project Natal, a full body motion gaming system without the need for a controller (click on link to see video of Project Natal, as well as Milo). Well, you can’t accuse them for coming out with a Wii clone, that’s for sure. If the thing works, then it will open up a whole new level of gaming, because gamers don’t want an abstract representation of real world activities, as the gamepad provides. Even the Wii-mote is limited in providing a representation of real world activities, as it only works for one arm (and even with the Wii Fit board, it’s still limited – to go that one step further, then we’ll have to end up looking like the Borg just play Mario).  So a motion and depth sensing camera seems to be the way to go, and Microsoft has also added facial and voice recognition. The criticism of Natal is that without an actual controller with buttons, then the whole system may not work with proper games that require the gamer to do super-human things that only controllers and buttons can simulate. But what’s to say that Natal won’t have controller add-ons in the future? Another problem is accuracy, and I don’t know if the camera can pick up and interpret all the nuances that would be required to have a full gaming experience. But certainly this seems to be the next logical development in gaming, and it was what I thought the Wii-2 would be like. Microsoft also showed a demo featuring a virtual boy called Milo (see video from link above), which combined showed the future potential of Natal by allowing you to interact with your game console/virtual friend in unbelievable ways. 

PlayStation Motion Controller - like the Wii-mote, but in 3D and more accurate

PlayStation Motion Controller - like the Wii-mote, but in 3D and more accurate

Sony went with the more traditional approach, but added some innovation as well (click on link to see video). A controller wand very much like the Wii is present, but there is a big glowing light that, when combined with the PlayStation Eye, will allow depth to be tracked (based on how “big” the glowing balls are, as seen from the PS Eye) and will also improve accuracy. It’s basically motion capture technology used in 3D effects. And compared to the Wii, it basically means 3D motion controller that’s ultra accurate – and as many have said, basically what the Wii would look like if it was perfect. So it’s not as revolutionary as Natal, but it will be available for public consumption earlier by all estimates, and it is more “gaming”, compared to Microsoft’s more “virtual” approach. And there’s no reason why Sony can’t add some of Natal’s features through the use of the PlayStation Eye (some of which are already present). And yes, it looks like a dildo, but so what? And of course,  no price cut for the PS3.

So two companies and two different approaches. Which one will come out on top? Hard to say at the moment. If Natal works, then that’s the type of gaming I see myself playing in 5 years time. If the PlayStation Motion Controller works, then that’s the one I see myself playing next year instead of the Wii. And in the end, it’s all about the games that will support either system, and that will determine who wins. And don’t forget Nintendo, the masters of this type of thing, has yet to come out with the full response to these two interesting challenges.

On that positive note, here ends this week’s WNR. See you next week.

SSDs: The Next Big Thing?

Friday, June 5th, 2009
Good old magnetic HDDs may be on the way out ...

Good old magnetic HDDs may be on the way out ...

The good old hard disk drive has been around forever now. And you can tell they’ve been around a long time because in essence, they’re still largely mechanical devices. They run hot, they are noisy and they can break through prolonged usage. And they’re fragile too. Recent improvements in hard disk technology has meant quieter, more shock resistant drives, but you still can’t go past having platters, read heads, long seek times and the many limitations of a mechanical device.

So that’s the alternative? The good news is that the alternative is already here and available: SSDs. SSDs stand for Solid State Drives, and in modern usage, they basically refer to hard-drives that use flash memory chips as opposed to magnetic surfaces to store data. There are lots of technical stuff related to SSDs, such as the two main type of SSds (SLC and MLC – SLC stores bits in the familiar one bit per cell fashion, whereas MLC stores two bits per cell to double storage as the expense of write speed), but we won’t go into these technical details. Instead, this blog will examine whether SSDs can compete with the current range of cheap and TB sized HDDs (for the purpose of this blog, HDDs will refer to standard magnetic mechanical drives), listing the advantages and disadvantages of either format.

Form Factor:
SSDs now come in 2.5″ and 3.5″ varieties just like hard-drives, and they employ the familiar SATA interface. So fitting one into your PC won’t be a problem.

Read Speed:
SSDs employ parallel architecture to improve read speeds. Typical read speed (such as for the Intel X25-M drive) is around 200 MB/s, often going up to 250 MB/s. A typical hard-drive would be around 100 MB/s for sequential reads. HDDs will actually transfer files at slower speeds depending on where the files are located (for example, inner and outer edges of platters) and how they are fragmented. SSDs do not suffer from this problem, when it claims to have xxx MB/s, then that’s not dependent on file location and fragmentation.
Update: Having read a few more reviews, including some more recent ones with real world tests as opposed to numbers published in specifications, I have revised the read speed ratings below to better reflect real world stats. HDDs tend to have more stable read speeds between models as it is a more mature technology, whereas with SSDs, the range tend to differ more. But read speed is still heavily in favour of SSDs, even if you take the lower end MLC SSD read results. Note that the high end HDD results are for high performance drives such as the WD VelociRaptor range.
HDDs: 60 – 100 MB/s
SSDs: 90 – 180 MB/s (up to 250 MB/s for SLC drives)

Seek Times:
The lack of mechanical servos and reading arms means that seek times are much improved. A typical SSD has a random seek time of around 80 microseconds. A typical HDD will has a seek time of around 14 milliseconds. 1 millisecond equals 1000 microseconds, so seek times for SSDs are actually around 175 times faster. And again, because there are no physical and mechanical limitations, the seek time is not dependent on file location and fragmentation.
HDDs:
14 ms (14,000 microseconds)
SSDs: 80 microseconds

Write Speed:
As mentioned before, there are two types of SSDs: SLC and MLC. MLC has slower write speed, but by “slower” it is still about the same as your typical hard-drive. SLCs will write faster, at more than 160 MB/s, around double that of your typical hard-drive. Again with seek time and read speed, location and fragmentation aren’t issues.
Update: Similar to the read speed update above, write speeds for SSDs differ much more between models, and there are some very low results when compared to even the cheapest HDDs, as there are really high results compared to even the most expensive HDDs. Typically, SLC drives still easily destroys the performance of any HDDs, but they will also destroy your savings as well.
HDDs: 50 – 90 MB/s
SSDs: 45 – 120 MB/s (up to 160 MB/s for SLC drives)

Power Requirements:
Another advantage of non mechanical drives is the reduction in power requirements and heat. A typical hard-drive draws around 8W of power even when idle, whereas your typical SSD only uses less than a single watt even under heavy use. This makes SSDs perfect for portable computing needs, where both power and heat can be problems. Noise is all but eliminated as well.
HDDs:
8W when idle
SSDs: 1W under heavy use

Durability:
By taking the possibility of mechanical failure and losing magnetic cohesion from the equation, SSDs can be even more durable than standard HDDs. A typical HDD has a MTBF (mean time between failure) of about 136 years (plenty for mere mortals). A MLC type SSD has about the same MTBF, and the SLC type is even better at almost double this (around 228 years, for the Intel X25-M). SSDs are also better able to handle being physically abused as there are no delicate mechanical parts that are a drop away from being damaged permanently. And when SSDs do fail, it will be the write that fails first (read will still work)), so you can still retrieve your data while you seek a new drive, unlike HDDs that can fail and take away all your data almost instantly.

Capacity and Cost:
So far, SSDs are taking HDDs for a ride in every aspect. So why aren’t we using SSDs? The reason is the two C’s: capacity and cost. Do an online search for SSDs, and the sizes you are likely to see are still in the GBs, as opposed to TBs. 256 GB is considered large for commercial SSD drives, while HDDs are now considered small even at 4 times this. As for cost, you will be paying through the nose for SSDs, even at small sizes. A quick search over at Newegg.com reveals that a 256 GB SSD costs $619. That works out to be around $2.40 per GB. A Seagate 1.5 TB HDD, in comparison, costs only $129, or $0.09 per GB. This means that SSDs are currently28 times more expensive than HDDs, while offering much less space per drive. Even if you take even lower capacity SSDs (which are cheaper per GB), that cost is still around $2.00 per GB, or 20 times more expensive.
HDDs: 1 TB at under 10 cents per GB
SSDs: 128 GB at around $2.00 per GB

... while SSDs will almost certainly take over

... while SSDs will almost certainly take over

So there you have it. SSDs pretty much beat HDDs at everything, except capacity and cost. But the good news is that these two C’s are the areas that SSDs will improve at an exponential rate. Competition in this sector will be fierce due to a large number of companies being able to produce SSDs – RAM and flash drive producers will join existing HDD manufacturers in producing SSD drives. This should help ensure prices drop at an even faster rate. Note that you have to look carefully to buy the right SSD as not all SSDs are equal (see updated notes for read/write speed entries). This is another weak point of SSDs, in that the technology is still maturing. The Intel X-25E, being a SLC drive, is the top performer at the moment. But for better value, something like the OCZ 120 GB MLC SSD drive will offer superior read and write speeds to all HDDs, and costs much less than SLC drives. But it is still way too expensive compared to even the most expensive HDDs, even if you don’t take into account the capacity shortage.

So while it is a bit unrealistic to think people are able to replace HDDs with SSDs at this moment, there is no reason to think that SSDs won’t replace HDDs in the short the mid term. My prediction is that by this time next year, many mid and top end PCs will come with SSD storage, perhaps complimented by larger HDDs for media storage. Portable computers will quickly employ SSDs over the rest of this year, with perhaps cheaper netbooks coming with them as standard due to the benefits of battery times outweighing the extra cost. And in two year’s time, the humble magnetic HDD that has served us so well may very well be a memory of the past as SSDs take over the market completely. I, for one, can’t wait.