| Finnbar said: NO moveing parts! I often wondered why movies ans such already didnt do this? just cuz it was to slow to transfer the data? or discs are just really really cheap in compaison? |
Part of it is cost, as disc are much older tech than flash memory, but part of it is also people sticking with what they have already got! Disc work just fine, currently, so why go mess with a good thing...unless you have something much better to lower cost. Cheaper packaging is such a cost driver, and as noteed in this article flash prices are tumbling fast:
http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2008/11/05/dropping-flash-memory-prices-may-help-apple-bottom-line
I'm waiting for apple to stop shafting people and see them launch a 64gb ipod touch, to replace my 160gb ipod, so as more and more devices rely on flash, the prices will tumble, so that by 2010, 32gb of flash will be dirt cheap, and that would be sufficient to hold most games. also...if your game needs more space, you just put it on a bigger drive, no added equipment cost. no moving parts, less energy, less heat, etc etc...flash is the way to go.
"...You can't kill ideas with a sword, and you can't sink belief structures with a broadside. You defeat them by making them change..."
- From By Schism Rent Asunder
