• Lath@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        55
        ·
        1 year ago

        Unregulated capitalism some would say, I say cheap production costs with little to no consequence whatsoever for them doing this kind of thing.

        • fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          29
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Exactly, if forced scarcity was regulated, we’d be in an entirely different situation. For instance diamonds would be practically worthless.

        • fugacity@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Unless this is a matter of price collusion (which I doubt as it appears more as a supply demand issue) I don’t think this unregulated capitalism is bad. Last I checked making any kind of products involving semiconductors isn’t cheap or easy. Maybe it is once you figure out how to, but the R&D costs involved are insane.

          We as consumers want prices as low as possible. Suppliers want prices as high as possible. Samsung (and the like) clearly aren’t willing to make more of a product at the price that it is currently at (which is a mistake to begin with). There are plentu of other players making ssds, and the prices are all very similar. Something tells me that they’re not gonna price things for cheaper because they can’t survive that way.

        • mihnt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Moore’s law is the observation that the number of transistors in an integrated circuit doubles about every two years. Moore’s law is an observation and projection of a historical trend.

          It is.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s about the shrinking in integrated circuit feature size, hence increase in IC element densities, so it applies to memories which are integrated circuits such as flash memory and the various kinds of RAM, but not to magnetic storage such as in HDDs as they’re something else altogether.

          That said, I believe (but am not absolutelly sure) that IC feature size has been shrinking slower than Moore’s Law predicts for maybe a decade as the size of the features becomes so small that quantum-level effects start becoming a problem (think stuff like signal leaks due to quantum tunnelling).

      • fugacity@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Moore’s law makes no comments about the cost of each transistor in an advanced process. And believe me, they ain’t cheap. It’s not a coincidence we’re up to PLC flash… why go for 32 levels when TLC is likely already a pain?

      • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        As tech shrinks it’s only getting more and more expensive per mm. Unless we get some major improvement we’re kinda at the limit for the moment.

      • NoRodent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Right? SATA III SSDs currently cost the same as HDDs of the same capacity, at least where I live. If it stays like that, it will no longer make any sense to buy HDDs. Finally.

        I still remember buying my first SSD some 10 years ago which at the time cost 20 times more per GB of what it costs now.