64 Mbyte Write once CMOS Chip from Standard Fabs 173
brian wang writes "Matrix semiconductor has taped out 64 Mbyte write once chip. It is 8 layer memory that can be made at standard fabs. They will be made at Taiwan Semiconductor initially in a 0.25micron process.
It will be compatible with Flash.
Obviously when they move to 0.18 micron and 0.13 and 0.10 micron processes that already are producing chips the memory size will shoot up to rival CDRoms from single chips. Revolutionary impact for handhelds, PCs, ROMDrives etc..."
See, I knew it: Little is better.
Little Is Bettter.... (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Little Is Bettter.... (Score:1)
.
Re:Little Is Bettter.... (Score:1)
No more scratches (Score:1, Interesting)
What a shame.
On the serious side tho, it looks like a very viable technology for permanent information sharing between many devices...
OS BIOS (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:OS BIOS (Score:4, Informative)
The tiny bit of ram that the BIOS uses to store all your settings between boots is made of CMOS. The BIOS itself is stored in regular PROMs or in more recent years flash rom.
Re:OS BIOS (Score:1)
But you could use it to put an absolute SHITLOAD of setttings in the cmos
Re:OS BIOS (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:OS BIOS (Score:1)
Re:OS BIOS (Score:2)
current, since these CMOS chips are write once they
are more like the PROM's. So if the PROM started to
come as a Matrix chip you could replace them simply
with the Matrix chip with your favourite BIOS chip
and yes it could have everything on it. Then we could
see impressive boot times, can you imagine Linux
up and running within 30Secs (I don't know how fast
they are).
Re:OS BIOS (Score:3, Informative)
Hmm, I guess to you, POST only means a piece of wood stuck in the ground.
Restoring the system memory to a known state is NOT ENOUGH. The hardware has to be initialized to a known state as well. This can't be done by simply loading memory somewhere. Some devices require resetting (because they have write-only control registers and you can't know what state they are in by reading status), a sequence of commands/register writes with appropriate time delays and often a register needs to be programmed with several distinct commands, in the right order.
Simply having a RAM image just doesn't cut it, you need startup code as well. Also, the devices POSTs (Power-On Self Test) impose delays that the OS writer has no control over.
Colin
Re:OS BIOS (Score:1)
Moreover, if you want the whole system on the chip, as you suggest here, then you need to buy, burn, and install a new chip each time you upgrade any piece of the system.
For this reason, flash has many advantages in terms of convenience for BIOSes unless you really want to lock the system down and upgrade only rarely if at all.
ZAP! (Score:1, Insightful)
CDs don't get zapped with static.
How much will be "enough"? (Score:2, Troll)
Interesting stuff, but how much storage space will we ultimately need to carry with us?
With technology like this advancing along with moore's law I can see that it shouldn't be a few more years before it'll be commonplace to carry devices with GBs of data in your pocket.
It's a common point to note that famous phrase that "640Kb should be enough for anyone!", but I think that now we truely are starting to reach the limits of neccessity for normal portable memory.
How much do you really think YOU need to carry?
-- Pete.
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
some of us are not movie pirates but movie makers!!
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
In the area of high-quality video, more really is better. If you are using uncompressed video it can suck up the proverbial GB's and GB's of space rather quickly. Who wouldnt want hours of high quality video/audio all on there Palm/IPAQ/Handspring type device.
There would, however need to be a convenient (read wireless), fast way to dump such things back and forth to your home PC. This to me seems to be more of a potential bottleneck than disk space.
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:5, Interesting)
I once heard a story (may be an urban legend—anybody have good data?) that Bill Gates once visited Intel's offices and that while he and Andy Grove strolled about the facility, Grove mentioned that it was difficult to imagine a widespread consumer market for the blazingly fast CPUs on the far right of Intel's roadmap. According to the story, Gates replied with something like, "Don't worry; continue to develop and market faster chips, and we will continue to develop and market innovative and compelling software that will bring it to its knees." I'd wager that the same goes for memory technology.
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:5, Funny)
You can just walk up and touch the things you know...
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:2)
Yeah, I can't wait for environment-based RSD overlay [mvis.com] myself, but RAM doesn't need to be a major limitation; after all, in 10 years you should be able to wirelessly tap into such a database from anywhere, and you would only need buffer your immediate surroundings- more efficient than a static database of your entire city.
I can imagine a few killer apps:
--
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
Really? I seem to be able to access my CDRs randomly. I think you're confusing rewriteable volatile memory with random access media which can also only be written once sometimes... wait... let me re-read that. Heh, almost confused myself.
--
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
How much do you really think YOU need to carry?
Dunno. It would be nice to have three cards in my wallet, one with my Linux system on it, one with my OS X system on it, one with my Windows system on it, and be able to insert it into a driveless box anywhere I go.
More likely, it would be nice to be able to carry a lot of music, voice notes, etc. around in a card in my wallet.
The point is, you don't know what possibilities Moore's Law will open for the future, and you don't know what people will think they'll need in the future.
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
I don't care how much storage/memory someone wants to carry with them.
Just don't connect it to me! (think Johnny Mnemonic [dvdverdict.com] or )I don't cherish the thought of having to reboot my brain, or memory, whether for a hardware upgrade or software crash...
I am not opposed to use for artificial limbs, etc., as has been discussed before on (/. - Data Glove That Turns Gestures Into Commands [slashdot.org], just don't try to make my brain work faster...
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
Well I note that my kids commonly carry some gigabytes of memory around with them in the form of minidiscs, CDs and whatnot, so I don't see that having a ROM chip rivalling a CD in size is such a big stretch. It will almost certainly have its uses.
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:2, Interesting)
Or maybe different: forget PDAs, mp3 players and so on. Think about a key-ring device, like these USB storages, just with a couple of GBs on it, so you can carry _everything_ you need on it, like your home directory, which means you just plug it in any compatible computer (any unix, linux, MacOSX or whatever) and you feel at home: all your files, all your settings, your mp3s, your emacs and mutt configs (OK, I know _these_ would fit on a floppy
Surely, I would like a thing like that.
Then of course a question: what is the power consumption of such memory compared to hard drives? Would it increase or reduce battery lifetime in notebooks? Well, for sure it would be faster and not so noisy as HD.
Raf
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:2)
It's almost then now. Ever watched a DVD on your laptop while you're sitting on a plane?
How much do you really think YOU need to carry?
That question can't be answered unless we can also make assumptions about how much portable bandwidth is available to download data on demand from a (reliable, secure, vast) storage/distribution facility (whether that's an ASP or your always-connected desktop PC) and cache it. Then, the answer is, the optimal size of the cache.
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:2)
All of it. (grin)
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
Re:How much will be "enough"? (Score:1)
I don't buy it... (Score:1, Troll)
Re:I don't buy it... (Score:2, Funny)
Oh my God, now you've done it! Thanks to you Furbies will have a practically limitless repertoire! We'll never get a moment of quiet!
Give a man a fish and he eats for one day. Teach him how to fish, and though he'll eat for a lifetime, he'll call you a miser for not giving him your fish.
Re:I don't buy it... (Score:1)
Re:I don't buy it... (Score:2)
replace CD's with random access roms? they're 1" by 1" by 1/16" so I can carry 10 albums in my pocket, or 300 albums in my armrest in my car.
and this is using standard CD technology ideas. plug in, no spinup time, no track seek time no skips no worry about not playing when I'm flying through the air after rearending the car stopped on the highway for the squirrel. No skips at all.
I'd buy it, hell yeah.
Re:I don't buy it... (Score:1)
have you ever burned a dvd disc?
not exactly snappy
tried burning a CD in your digital camera?
my high speed CD drive is soo noisy and can oly get up to speed in burst mode, these won't have that problem
reading from them will require no moving parts so the drives will be cheaper & more reliable.
no more stupid cd roms / dvds for that gaming console.
and with a bit of tweaking no doubt software manufacturers can mae one that are incompatable which is a big draw for them. They want cheap mass produced readers which is why they used CD rom variants.
is that enough already?
64 M is small (Score:2, Troll)
That was a lot of capacity.
And for the fact you could never read it, bah, examine your computer, your diskets box, your cdrom collection... how many Gb did you not read in the last three years.
Re:64 M is small (Score:1)
Re:64 M is small (Score:1)
They were going to read a "crystal" in 3D and have very high storage capasity.
Any one know what the latest advances that have been made on those?
I would love to order 1 Tera Cube for my computer!
So WHAT capacities are possible? (Score:3, Informative)
So we could see a CDROM-capacity write-once "consumable memory" chip that was the same size as a 64MB chip now. Nice, but the article later says:
"The company said it sees no limit to the number of layers that could be added to a device."
How does that jive with the earlier stated scalability of 9-10x?
"'If they can really do this and produce working devices, it is very hot,' said Richard Wawrzyniak, an analyst at Semico Research (Phoenix)."
Oh, so heat is the limiting factor! <g> Seriously, though, I agree with his assessment—having the devices actually work would greatly contribute to their coolness factor.
Re:So WHAT capacities are possible? (Score:2)
Re:So WHAT capacities are possible? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm telling you... its not cheap. (Score:1)
Seriously, consider the potential for something like this with a storage capacity similar to that of a CD (or even bigger) with a cost comparable to a CD-R, but a footprint the size of a postage stamp. So, if you have a choice of spending $142 for 320 MB of reuseable CF, or getting 450+ GB of Write-Once CF-R for the same price, which one are you really likely to choose? (assume they can sell them for $1.99 each - be optimistic) And if you need more than a single piece of CF - because you have several devices that use it?
This could replace a lot of currently used media (CDs, DVDs, VHS tape, floppies, film, etc) and they could all use the same reader hardware.
Re:So WHAT capacities are possible? (Score:2, Insightful)
I buy write-once CDR's all the time and never even consider buying CDRW's. This is a direct result of the cost difference between the two, and the practical similarities in how they function for my purposes. For storing information that I don't expect to modify, why wouldn't I use write-only media, especially if there's a significant cost savings over an competing read-write medium? For photography there's already cameras out there that burn to a CDR as you take pictures, so there's definitely a market for folks who don't need to modify the information after its stored.
All things being equal, why wouldn't I use something that's write-only, more reliable and faster than CDR's since it isn't bogged down by moving parts, and of an expected comparable price to optical media? Yeah, its vaporware right now, but if they manage to make those criteria I think it would be unwise to say they wouldn't have a market.
I hope they do well, buuut.... (Score:2)
Now, the question is, will general consumers have any interest in these? I wouldn't want my motherboard's BIOS to be on one of these things. Even Intel and IBM make mistakes; if I had to buy a new chip with the new BIOS revision on it, I'd be irritated.
Likewise, for PDAs and the like, it's even more doubtful. Sure, if they're cheap, it might be useful for *some* things. But do you want your OS on there? Really? Understand that you can't upgrade it, you can't change anything that's on there
Re:I hope they do well, buuut.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, it depends. On a multisession CDROM you can add data until there's space on it. A translating layer in the middle could present the data in the new session as an overlay over the data in the previous sessions, thus giving you a "write few times - read many times" storage media, even if a given area can be written only once. This indeed is what is done at least for the table of contents of a multisession CDROM.
Since CDROMs have slow access time, this is pratical only for the TOC, which is read only few times, but for these chips that would be a non-issue, and assuming you don't have to write 64MB (or whatever size they'll be) at once on them, you could effectively "update" the data on them.
Incidentally, access to earlier versions of the data would be easy: one would just have to consider all the sessions but the last N ones...
Does it still sound weird to use them for storing firmware?
Re:I hope they do well, buuut.... (Score:2)
It's still Write Once - Read Many. Just like a CD-R, or an old WORM drive.
Regardless of how you are 'seeing' the filesystem on it.. you are still only ever writing to somewhere that has never been written before.
Also... what do you mean, 'practical only for the TOC'? A multisession CD, yes, writes new data (if required) and a new TOC.
How would this memory be any different?
Re:I hope they do well, buuut.... (Score:2)
Precisely. I just wanted to point out that writing it all at once isn't the only way it may be used, and with some little trickery it can be interesting for storing firmware that needs occasional updates.
How would this memory be any different?
Conceptually speaking, little if no difference.
Pratically speaking (of a filesystem): since with this memory there are smaller access times than the ones of a CD reader, it would actually make sense to store only the data blocks that changed (or even just a diff).
This isn't usually done with multisession CD, because it would obviously result in fragmented files, and CD readers have long seek times (thus long access times). I admit I was wrong in making an exception for the TOC, since the new ones contain also all the entries of the older ones (I thought they contained only the entries that changed).
That said it is reasonable (with a multisession CD-R) to sacrifice space and write on the new session the full content of a file that changed, even if the difference is only a couple of bytes or so. With 1KB files that makes no difference, but with little changes in files of a dozen of so of megabytes... it starts to be expensive.
BTW, iso9660 allows fragmented files only with iso9660 level 3 (and the last time I checked, Nero didn't support it, even if other less popular software did).
Re:I hope they do well, buuut.... (Score:2)
But what about, say, UDF?
Ever closer (Score:4, Funny)
Critical question for comparison with CDs (Score:2, Interesting)
Put another way, does write-once in this case mean it's like a CD (commit entire data payload in one chunk and seal it forever), or like a blank book (fill in pages as you go).
If it can be done incrementally, that represents a significant advantage over CDs, other factors being (for the sake of argument) equal.
Re:Critical question for comparison with CDs (Score:1)
Obviously the problem with this new media is that to be 100% compatible with flash the TOC area needs to be Rewritable. Otherwise each burn is going to require a new TOC is written, in a new spot, and the OS will need to support this.
It would be interesting if they could use burn-proof technology along with a hybrid cd-r/cd-rw disc where the TOC area was RW and the data area was cd-r. A disc that appeared to be a 'single' session even though you had written to it several times. Which only saves a few dozen MBs... oh well.
Re:Critical question for comparison with CDs (Score:1)
Re:Critical question for comparison with CDs (Score:1)
Wow... (Score:1)
no...
--junk
Misleading... (Score:3, Informative)
Perhaps in the future your processor will be the size and shape of a die or cube of cheese.
New Intel Marketing? (Score:4, Funny)
Behold, the power of Cheesium 886.
Re:Misleading... (Score:2)
Isn't [exposed] surface area somehow proportional to heat dissipation?
Someone explain why this is a good thing? (Score:3, Insightful)
- Write Once Memory: CD-ROM is 10x larger, and is very cheap. DVD-ROM will eventually be about 100x larger.
- Solid-state storage for Digital Cameras: Write-Many memory chips are readily available. They are expensive, but reusable. Will this write-once chip be cheap enough to make it worth while? Or are these chips much smaller, making this interesting to travelers?
- Computer Memory: Obviously not useful there (I don't see a market ofr single-use computers
Is there other info about this memory, showing why this is of any use?
Re:Someone explain why this is a good thing? (Score:2, Funny)
Both types of media are great for what they do, but imagine it being a little cartridge(think nintendo here) that you pop in the front and it works great. Yeah, I'm sure that 10 years after it's use you'll have to do your special voodoo to make it work, but that's the way my DVD player is getting.
On a side note, this looks VERY promising for console gaming. The speed of a cartride with the capacity of a CD.
Pat
Re:Someone explain why this is a good thing? (Score:2)
Cartridges have their own problems (size, weight, breakable connectors). Plus, Nintendo was the lone cartridge holdout with the N64. But now even they have gone to an optical disc medium. Why? Because capacity is vastly larger than cartridges and cost is much less.
How does this WO memory change that balance? Is the storage there? Is the cost low enough?
Re:Someone explain why this is a good thing? (Score:1)
Right now, Memory Sticks and flash memory aren't large enough to hold much more than medium sized picture catalogs or short MPG's, but if you can pack 4+ gigs on a chip the size of a stick of gum, you'll see a major shift in size and focus of all kinds of consumer electronics (which will, of course, be equipped with SSSCA anti-piracy voodoo chips).
Re:Someone explain why this is a good thing? (Score:1)
I had a game boy for a while and those things were so tiny that I lost a good dozen games before I learned how to take care of them
Pat
Re:Someone explain why this is a good thing? (Score:1)
I find the idea of getting large quanties of Flash-ROM that work transparently with CF really interesting. Hell, 64mb at a dime a piece, they cost as much as GOOD CDR blanks, and are rated for 10x the shelf life.
Re:Someone explain why this is a good thing? (Score:1)
Embed this device inside an earring with 20 hours of digital record capability powered by body heat.
The uses are myriad. As someone said, instant access large capacity cartridges on the cheap. 4 of these chips on a small card providing 1GB of storage with >100MB/s read bandwidths?
No, it isn't a solution to your RAM needs, or rewritable needs. But it is a solution to many other areas. If a 64MB chip costs $3 to buy with interface to hardware (e.g., USB plug) then that is a lot of high quality photos that won't get accidentally erased after your holiday.
Re:Someone explain why this is a good thing? (Score:1)
simple.
1) random access
2) they're going to be quite a bit cheaper than the write-many chips that mp3/digial cameras use.
Thus, people were talking about how things like palm still need new version, etc..
with that, the actual OS can go on a 64M chip ( pretty damn big for palm standards ) and when an upgrade comes out, you get palm to ship you a new chip for $5.
Also, they did mention that heat what was preventing them from adding more layers.
so when fab size goes down, more layers can be added.Not bad.
We shouldn't care... (Score:1)
With my 4Mpixel digital camera, I can fit about 80 pictures in high quality JPEG format. I can transfer them to my computer, then I can reuse it again. I can keep doing this over and over again. And after I use it 7 times, my 64MB SmartMedia card will break even with the $5 64MB MatrixSemi card. I don't know about you, but I like the fact that I can rewrite.
And guess what? If DRAM is any example, flash memory cards will keep decreasing in price. MatrixSemi is in a niche market and their product will probably never catch on unless they can make their anti-fuse technology rewritable.
Cutting record company costs of course. (Score:2)
It'll be the next big music format.
[1] After all, why should they pay for read/write media?
[2] And video companies once the chips are big enough.[3] WMA?
Sigh ... (Score:3, Funny)
Which girls have you been arguing this with, anyway?
AOL (Score:2, Funny)
More info at their website (Score:5, Informative)
Notables:
Re:More info at their website (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.sciam.com/2002/0102issue/0102lee.htm
cool.. write only memory at last ;-) (Score:1)
The yawn factor (Score:1)
Hmm. Fits this. Whee, a 64MB PROM. Big Flappin Deal.
So, just exactly how useful is this miracle device? About as useful as 1/10 of a CD-R. Probably less than that.
I'm trying to think of something to make this little gem exciting. I just can't. Er. Maybe we could have 512MBIT SNES cartridges now?
Really, I think I'll stick with my 64M compact flash card.
Maybe they'll find some cheap interactive toy to stuff this miracle invention in. I can't think of the use for it, when CD-Rs are so prevalent.
Price too high (Score:1)
The gap into storage... (Score:2)
Sounds like Stephen R. Donaldson had something going when he described datacores in the Gap series. [inet.tele.dk]
If you can jack one of these things up into giga, tera, or larger ranges, then you can start using it to provide write-once history logging. Big brother, black boxes, personal recorders...
Re:The gap into storage... (Score:1)
The ending of the series was cool. Say BYE-BYE to the later-day Bill Gates. (Hmmm, I wonder if Mr. Gates keeps _his_ mother's head alive in his basement.)
This is old technology (Score:1)
Re:This is old technology (Score:1)
universal-ness (Score:1)
I love expressions of human individuality.
See, I knew it: Little is better. (Score:2)
Re:See, I knew it: Little is better. (Score:1)
Different from SRAM + Battery? (Score:2)
Even those silly USB Keychains [slashdot.org] could use such a technique. 2x512MB DIMMs plus a lion or nimh battery to back it up (recharge off the USB bus) would be ~$100. Of course, I may be totally out to lunch here...
Done that (Score:1)
BTW, you do realize that srams take 6 transistors per cell whereas rom takes one.
Will music distribution be an eventual application (Score:1)
Great... (Score:1)
Great, so now our chips will have annoying animated ads in them too?
Sheesh.
Nice for memory, but not processors. (Score:2)
What they've done, according to the article, is deposit several layers of thin-film transistors on top of a more or less standard chip.
These transistors will be *slow*. That's fine for something you're using to replace flash, but not fine for a processor. The hard problem of building high-quality transistors in a multi-level structure has not been solved.
The other problem is heat. With a hierarchically-designed memory array, you can make a larger array without power per access going up very much (at the cost of a very small amount of extra delay). This means that packing ten times as much memory into the same chip area won't cause much of a heating problem.
The core of a microprocessor, on the other hand, is pretty much all active at once (or mostly active). You have calculation results flying to reservation stations everywhere, you have a lot of fully-associative arrays being indexed, and you have a lot of logic churning away. Packing this into a tenth the area would make the used area much, much hotter (remember Newton's law of heating and cooling - you need the same heat flow from a tenth the area, so ten times the heat difference between chip and environment).
The good news is that you might be able to put the L2 cache in higher layers with technology similar to this and save space that way, but this is a one-time saving, with a performance penalty (until the holy grail of stacked transistor technology is found).
Still an interesting accomplishment, of course.
These comments have missed the point... (Score:1)
Think about it...
Right now to affordably carry around a bunch of music, we're stuck with CDs and various magnetic media (zip disks, ls-120, etc.). Yes, you can buy the expensive flash based storage media, but it costs way too much to have a whole pile of them to throw in your pocket on your way out the door. And, of course, CDs and magnetic media all require mechanical devices to read them.
If this comes to fruition at the cheap prices they were implying, we could be buying solid state memory cards in large quantities the same way we used to go and buy floppies. This amount of convenience coupled with not having to worry about every bump jolting some disk reader is definitely a good thing.
64MB big? You can already buy 128MB and 256MB unit (Score:2)
2 gigabit flash stack (256 MB) from irvine sensors. [irvine-sensors.com]
True, these are packaging techniques for more density, and aren't as cool as putting more memory on one die, but don't overlook them: they offer about the same densities. Hopefully, we can eventually combine both techniques, for even greater densities.
Same old joke? (Score:1)
The WOM chip was up there with the BD-1 Battery Discharger IC and the Darkness Emitting Diode (DED) which was initialized by applying 110VAC across the anode and cathode.
A components engineer fabricated a spec sheet for the BD-1 and submitted it to the catalog department, and it actually got published. When customers started requesting samples, the supplier got wise and requested that customers return their databooks. True Story.
Made me look twice :)
Aah, a consumable! (Score:2)
Re:write once? umm... no thanks. (Score:4, Interesting)
what's the point if I can only write once?
Tell him what some uses are, Johnny!
unless they really make the modules so cheap they're practically giving them away
I believe that's what they're envisioning. From the article..."The company envisions its chips being cheap enough to be sold in multipacks at grocery checkout counters". Wow, an 8 pack of 64 meg memory modules for the same price as a pack of batteries? Even one for the same price as a pack of batteries would be worth the cost.
I formally declare this a good thing. But don't take my word for it, read the article yourself.
Re:write once? umm... no thanks. (Score:1)
The advantage of the digital camera is that you can take a crap load of pictures to get a few good ones. You delete the others. Why would I want to start paying per picture again? Yes I have to back things up but thats only pictures I choose to keep.
Same things can be said for most digital devices consumer devices.
Re:write once? umm... no thanks. (Score:1)
Kodak and others make a pretty nice chunk of change selling everyone and their mothers rolls of film, that you can only use once.
With digital cameras, you no longer have to buy film all the time, you just download it into your computer, clear the ram, and your set.
definately not in Kodak's best interest.
With a chip like this, they could begin to make something like "disposeable" digital cameras, and the like. get a cheap camera, use up the write-only chip, return it to a store for development, adn it gets recycled with a new chip.
With the amount of $ that is involved in the film market, its not a question of if we'll see something like this on the market...
jsut a matter of when.
no matter if it would be a technological and logical step backwards. (And if you need proof, just look at our favorite monopoly [microsoft.com]
Re:write once? umm... no thanks. (Score:2)
Re:write once? umm... no thanks. (Score:1)
Of course, you could use a DVD-R drive the same way and get 9.4GB of storage.