We are covering the same ground again, I suggested something similar and got shot down earlier.

What I do is buy a new drive for my primary machine every now and then when I run out of space (or upgrade to a new machine). One of the externals is connected to my server as an 'online' backup and I rsync to it nightly. The other is stored offline in my fire safe. Every so often I swap those to keep the offline in sync.
This keeps a backup drive safe in the safe should the house burn down but also keeps a backup drive outside the safe for the daily changes.
I actually don't buy them all at once. I set a budget and buy one at a time and the newest goes in the primary machine and the one it it becomes a backup and the oldest backup goes into spares where it could be a OS drive for my server or the drive in one of the kids laptops.

Thats why i said I simplified my example before as my data and situation is complex. What I'm simply trying to point out is there are no absolutes, SSD's won't work for everyone or 100% of the time. And I said yes that can change when the cost per G of storage comes down enough that I don't have to choose between redundancy and speed. And I'm sure that as the price/G of SSD's comes down the price/G of HDD's will come down as well but the price/G of SSD for e just has to get down to where a drive bigger than my data (+ projected growth before next upgrade) fits within the budget.

Again I'm just saying there are no absolutes and one solution does not fit everyone. Don't let the close source world creep into the open source world, I'm seeing the same thing happen with software where everyone things everything must look the same.

Both, need I say more

The follow-up "Does Your Primary Linux Server Have An HDD or SSD?" poll has been posted.

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...sd-4175501744/

--jeremy

SSD is too expensive

hdd vs sdd
 

When I built my bare-bones box in 2010, I bought 2 750G Seagate hdd's for $45 each.... not a bad price. Why 2 hdd's and why 750G? Mostly for backup purposes and they were on sale. I like to play around with VirtualBox, and that takes up a lot of space.
When this uglybox ever dies, or if the 2 Seagate drives ever fail, maybe I'll go with ssd's. I can't afford to replace then just to have the latest toy..... but I can dream, can't I?

Why replace? Just add a SSD.

HDD for Linux
 

I voted for HDD even though my computer has an SSD. I have Windows on it and Linux on my HDD. This is mainly because Windows takes so long to boot. However I am considering changing things around because I hardly ever boot into Windows any more.

My primary linux installation runs off an HDD. Secondary linux installation runs on a pair of 8GB USB sticks. Primary desktop has HDDs.

OK, I'm looking into this again now. I'm going to separate my data and keep just the most recent/most used on my laptop and the rest on my server. I do things like an enterprise environment where I'll test on another system side by side. So I picked up a used cheap laptop, Dell Latitude D430. Remember one of my primary choices is small size so I won't use a larger laptop just to have another drive bay.
hdparm says I have a Toshiba MK8009GAH 1.8" ATA6 4200RPM 80G drive that I want to replace with an SSD.

This looks like its a spec match and they have even certified it in a similar laptop though its still a little bit $. This its a decent buy?

So long story short but I found AndrOpenOffice and started testing it on my phone. Its basically the killer app I'm looking for as I have all my projects in .odf. I realize I have to change with the industry as I can't even find netbooks anymore with storage like I used to and I can't have all the storage I want in a phone/tablet. So I've split my data into current and archive and am going to try and get used to not having it all available. I'm using Webdav (OwnCloud) to sync down to my phone,tablet and 'new' $100 laptop.

I don't actually have a "desktop" computer (my server is a Dell Dimenstion 2400, technically it could count, but it's a server now), but I have an old EEE PC that a friend gave me, and it has SSDs. It is my only Linux-only machine that qualifies as a "desktop" distro (Arch). I have a Dell Inspiron 14R that I dual-boot with Win7 and Lubuntu, but I mostly use Windows, because I mostly use it for our robotics club, and the compiler needs Windows. And lastly I have a Win8.1 (uncle gave it to me...it came with an i5, so I won't complain) laptop that I would like to dual-boot, but Dell still hasn't fixed all of the problems with it. Firs it was an HDD failure, then the sleep wouldn't work and it would only boot if the AC adapter was unplugged, and now the clock is acting up. Usually, it's just a day or two off, but it has tried to tell me (several times) that the year is 2024...and this will probably end up being the 3rd mobo replacement. :frustrated:

Note that there is a poll for Servers as well: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...sd-4175501744/

--jeremy

Both, carefully putting what is used most (like the postgresql database section) on the SSD.

Small (yes it is a relative value) SSD's are affordable but when you need 500Gb+ disks for dealing with daily data, SSD are way to expensive.

A likewise problem exists for external disks. USB2 replaced with eSATA replaced with USB3. Eagerly awaiting what Thunderbold-2 will bring

Does your Primary Linux Desktop Have An HDD or SSD
 

HDD in my Primary Desktop (Linux)

My machine is running kubuntu 14 and HD is the WDC WD3200AIS-65RYA0.