RE: windows xp embedded vs non-embedded ? regarding solid state / flas
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
microsoft.public.windowsxp.embedded only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

 Up
RE: windows xp embedded vs non-embedded ? regarding solid state / flas         

Group: microsoft.public.windowsxp.embedded · Group Profile
Author: Kevin Bulgrien
Date: Aug 12, 2008 09:59

> hi
>
> I am interested in windows xp embedded's advantages, in terms of the
> issue of reading/writing to a flash "disk" drive. (I happen to be
> referring to IDE flash drives, small ones like 2GB)
>
> I notice some of them have an endurance of 1,2,4 million r/w
> cycles. (or as some say, write/erase cycles). And the cheap ones only
> 10,000
>
> Regarding these ones with an endurance in the millions
>
> Would regular windows xp kill off one of these things if virtual
> memory was being used?
> Apparently one can run regular windows xp, without a page file.
> Is there then any advantage in running Windows XP Embedded?
>
> Is it the case that windows xp with no paging file, would still kill
> off a 10,000 endurance flash disk. And so windows xp embedded, which
> I hear can block all writes to the disk except when you deem then
> necessary.. Apparently that will let it run nicely on it.

http://www.storagesearch.com/ssdmyths-endurance.html seems to help cut
through the FUD.
no comments
diggit! del.icio.us! reddit!