Re: n800, SD, SDHC, and storage
 

Bad analogy, but that depends on how the file manager is written.

Yes, the big cards will be less responsive if the file system is being searched or indexed, but there shouldn't be too much of a performance hit just reading the card... you see lag in digital cameras and digital camera software when you have lots of pictures on big cards because the software is usually doing some sort of thumbnail caching, which can be time consuming.

Fat 32 is not a high performance file system, like xfs or ext3. The file system itself does no optimization when writing files, so your memory card is liable to suffer from fragmentation. If you do lots of small-file writing, or often delete/replace large files, the file system's responsiveness will deteriorate, although not to the extent it would on a mechanical platter-style hard drive.

If you use a windows box, just connect your n800 to it every once in a while and run the defrag utility on the flash card.

Re: n800, SD, SDHC, and storage
 

THank you for this lesson. I don't know much about computer science, and I m sorry if my analogy was bad. I guess my question originated from my own (wrong?) belief that the power of the processor and the operating memory are quite limited on this beautiful device.

Re: n800, SD, SDHC, and storage
 

The 128MB vs. 128GB issue _is_ actually an issue.. or would be, if the flash is as slow as a disk or the computer is as fast as a desktop computer. Linux drags all data from disk (and back again) "through" memory, whatever memory it has available, and any following access of data on the same page on the disk will get it from memory if it's there. So the more memory you have, the faster your system will be. To have lots of memory on your system can result in quite a dramatic difference.
However, the N800 I/O speed is limited anyway, so it may not make that much of a difference in practice although I think it would be measurable.

Re: n800, SD, SDHC, and storage
 

Not a bad summary attempt, but check your facts, please:

There are no 16GB SDHC cards currently available. Vendors such as Panasonic and Toshiba have projected launches sometime in 2007, but there have been no actual product announcements.

The Samsung 64GB prototype was Compact Flash, not SDHC. In fact, the SD 2.0 spec defines a capacity limit of 32GB, suggesting that higher densities must either be noncompliant (again) or await further spec revisions.

Re: n800, SD, SDHC, and storage
 

http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/RIDATA-...-PMA-Show.html

I'm hoping to pick up one of these this weekend. Picking nits, I suppose, but you're right, I'll update the top post.

Re: n800, SD, SDHC, and storage
 

Thanks for this -> I ought to have checked that source. Yes, this is correct, the 64GB prototype was CF, not SDHC.

From what I've read, the upper theoretical limit on SD is 128GB, so I would imagine that there will be an SD 2.1 spec that ups the capacity limit past 32 GB, but you're correct, the 2.0 spec caps out at 32GB.

Updated the top post.

Re: n800, SD, SDHC, and storage
 

Read that link more carefully. Advanced Media is launching their RITECH branded SDHC line, SSD cards, and two port USB Hub drive. The 16GB and 32GB capacity points refer only to the SSD (solid state disk) cards, not SDHC. Nothing earth shattering there, and considering the relative densities of the two form factors (the SSDs are sized like 1.8" and 2.5" hard drives), I'd be surprised if their biggest SDHC even matched the 8GB capacity leaders, let alone surpassed it.

I do expect we'll see 16GB (possibly even 32GB) SDHC production sometime this year, but we're not quite there yet.

Re: n800, SD, SDHC, and storage
 

You are kidding, right? Because you DO know that flash memory has a limited number of read/write cycles, right? And you DO know that "defragmentation" is a very read/write intensive process, right?

You are also aware that in Flash cards are MEMORY and hence there is no SEEK TIME involved because it takes the same time to get data from memory position #1 as it does from memory position #3276864738, yes?

In short: running a "defrag" on a flash device is not only pointless, it will also reduce the life of your memory card. Brilliant!.

Re: n800, SD, SDHC, and storage
 

Updating my previous comments: Patriot Memory might be first to market with 16GB SDHC, at a speedy Class 6 rating. Their March 8 press release claimed the product will be "available for purchase next month," which sounds like April to me. I emailed the marketing manager for confirmation but have received no response.

http://www.patriotmemory.com/company....jsp?source=67

I'm currently using a Patriot 8GB Class 4 SDHC (PSF8GSDHC4) with the N800 patched kernel, and its speed is far more impressive than I expected. Much faster transfers than the Transcend 150X 4GB SD (non-HC). I'll try to run some comparative benchmarks when I find the time.

I purchased my 8GB CL4 card from newegg.com last month for $61.99 minus a $10 rebate. Since then the price has risen to $77.99, which would still tempt me to pick up a second card if the 16GB wasn't so close to the horizon.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820220217

Eagerly awaiting further 16GB SDHC news ...

Re: n800, SD, SDHC, and storage
 

Just to second the posting up there.. don't defrag a flash card. Not a good idea.