I was watching the Mark Russinovich Win2K8 Deep Dive video on my way to work this morning, and he's talking about future directions for Windows and changes in hardware that drive those directions, and one of the things he mentions is Flash memory and SSDs and the issues with those.

There's been quite a lot of discussion about this lately, what with the Asus Eee PC and other SSD-based devices, and one of the things which keeps coming up is the limited number of writes you can do and how that relates to temporary folders/files. And I thought about my new PC and the 8GB of RAM it's got, which only cost £160(!), and how it could probably manage fairly well without writing temporary files to disk.

And then I thought, if those 4 2GB PC6400 DDR2 modules only cost £160, then older, slower volatile memory could probably be manufactured stupidly cheaply. At the moment it costs more because very few people want it, but if it became ubiquitous again, surely it would be cheap as chips. Embarassed

I appear to be banging on quite a lot. What I'm basically getting at is, you could have volatile SSDs for temporary file storage, or build some onto the motherboard, with HD-style interfaces to get round the addressing limit, that would be seen from inside Windows (or whatever) as a disk, but could be used for temp files. Performance would be awesome and the limited number of writes to the Flash memory in the SSD would be preserved.