PC Pals Forum

Technical Help & Discussion => General Tech Discussion, News & Q&A => Topic started by: Simon on January 08, 2011, 15:10

Title: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 08, 2011, 15:10
SanDisk has launched a new high-speed CompactFlash card that costs more than many of the digital cameras it's designed to sit within.

The SanDisk Extreme Pro CompactFlash offers 128GB of storage and offers industry-leading write speeds of 100MB/sec, according to the company. Such performance doesn't come cheap: the card costs a staggering $1,500 (that's £1,161 in proper money). For that sum, you could pick up a mid-range DSLR such as the Canon EOS 7D.

Read more: http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/364201/the-1-161-compactflash-card
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Clive on January 09, 2011, 08:19
That's inflation for you!   :D
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: sam on January 09, 2011, 10:52
nice! future tech here now... but still that's poor price. You could easily get the same in 16GB or 32GB separate sticks for cheaper, still its a start and bound to come down in price - fast.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 09, 2011, 12:57
I don't quite understand how they justify the price.  How is 'memory' valued, exactly?
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Rik on January 09, 2011, 18:16
R&D costs, that's why it starts expensive and falls fairly rapidly. I paid £70 for my first 1GB SD card.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 09, 2011, 19:06
R&D ?
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Rik on January 09, 2011, 19:10
Research & Development.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 09, 2011, 19:11
Oh, right. 
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Rik on January 09, 2011, 19:20
They seem to put all that cost on the first few hundred/thousand units, then prices start to drop. Yields probably increase with experience, which will help.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 09, 2011, 20:09
I wonder who would pay that for one though?
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: sam on January 09, 2011, 21:18
rich people who like to show off. Maybe professional photographers would be tempted but probably not yet.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: D-Dan on January 09, 2011, 22:28
And Rik:

I paid £70 for my first 1GB SD card.

Steve
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 09, 2011, 22:56
 ;D
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: daveeb on January 10, 2011, 10:38
R&D costs, that's why it starts expensive and falls fairly rapidly. I paid £70 for my first 1GB SD card.

i paid £70 for my first 128 MB compact flash card, i think they saw me coming  :blush:
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: D-Dan on January 10, 2011, 10:56
That's 896 x the cost of the card in my camera right now  :devil:

Steve
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Rik on January 10, 2011, 11:23
My first, 10MB HD cost me £300.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 10, 2011, 11:31
:horror:

Mind you, that's what my first CD player cost me. 
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Rik on January 10, 2011, 11:34
My second cost me £1,000.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Clive on January 10, 2011, 11:58
My first 42" telly cost me £2999 (in a sale!) and my first VHS recorder was £450 back in 1982.  I don't play in big boys games anymore.   :laugh:
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Rik on January 10, 2011, 12:03
 ;D
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 10, 2011, 12:31
I couldn't afford a VHS in the 80s, so I rented for years from Radio Rentals.   
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Rik on January 10, 2011, 12:53
Same here.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Clive on January 10, 2011, 13:23
My £450 bought me the most basic video recorder ever marketed!  It had record, playback and one-speed fast forward/reverse during which you could not see anything in the screen.  It had a one-event timer and that was about it.  The only good thing about it was that it was one of the very first front-loaders and was very attractive in appearance compared to most of its contemporaries. I believe it was a Sharp.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 10, 2011, 13:38
Mine was a Furguson. 
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Rik on January 10, 2011, 15:25
Which was a badged JVC.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 10, 2011, 16:28
Indeed.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: D-Dan on January 10, 2011, 17:20
We had a Grundig V2000 player - you could use both sides of the tape :)

Steve
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Rik on January 10, 2011, 17:32
Those were the days, Steve. How much better off, we the consumers would have been, had there not been so many format wars.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 10, 2011, 17:58
And they still continue. 
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Rik on January 10, 2011, 18:00
Always will, I guess.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Clive on January 10, 2011, 20:38
We had a Grundig V2000 player - you could use both sides of the tape :)

Steve

Yes, those V2000's were by far the best but they were mega expensive.  Once one of my work colleagues bought VHS we all followed suit because we could form film clubs and swap tapes.
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 10, 2011, 21:45
Yeah, I bet you did.   :leer:
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Clive on January 10, 2011, 22:50
So you won your bet.....   ;D
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Simon on January 10, 2011, 22:57
 :arf:  Isn't that what VCRs were made for?  ;D
Title: Re: The £1,161 CompactFlash card
Post by: Clive on January 10, 2011, 23:04
We certainly thought so at BP.   :devil: