Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Jolly Roger Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system Subject: Re: How does OS-X behave with a dead SSD ? Date: 28 Nov 2016 20:39:17 GMT Organization: People for the Ethical Treatment of Pirates Lines: 17 Message-ID: References: <583b3a29$0$1567$c3e8da3$12bcf670@news.astraweb.com> <583b85ff$0$10986$c3e8da3$f017e9df@news.astraweb.com> <271120162032497326%nospam@nospam.invalid> <583b8e6a$0$1431$b1db1813$79461190@news.astraweb.com> <583bb468$0$2214$b1db1813$7968482@news.astraweb.com> <281120160731570932%nospam@nospam.invalid> <583c7a52$0$12022$c3e8da3$3a1a2348@news.astraweb.com> X-Trace: individual.net ymFjKl0gE/53BOYccsHp4wMfomREfsw2bEw+UV2GwKXaoDP4Rk Cancel-Lock: sha1:lcz2eynMOItZNR/Cvr4gGJbIAL4= Mail-Copies-To: nobody User-Agent: slrn/1.0.1 (Darwin) Xref: csiph.com comp.sys.mac.system:97413 On 2016-11-28, JF Mezei wrote: > On 2016-11-28 07:31, nospam wrote: > >> it didn't warn with bad blocks on a hard drive, so why should it warn >> with an ssd, which is significantly more reliable? > > It is exactlty because they are een as more reliable that an OS should > check for signs of "wear" Pure idiocy. You should worry more when you actually have less to worry about, because DUH. -- E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter. I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead. JR