Aren't we the assertive one. If you really keep abreast of the field you might have heard about this little poll (
SSD infant mortality II | ZDNet) from last fall. I agree that the poll was unscientific, in the same way that Consumer Reports reliability numbers are unscientific, because people volunteer information rather than being asked, and unhappy people are more likely to respond. Nonetheless, the proportion of failures noted is off the charts compared to expectations. I also worked in an environment where every notebook drive was replaced with an SSD, and the failure rates were higher as measured by the din of my colleagues complaining as they were having their notebooks "rebuilt". I'd still rather have an SSD in my notebook, but I do raise an eyebrow at it now and again when my system's performance is inconsistent.
As for your comment about USB negating the advantages of SSDs, that is not completely correct. Yes, USB can demonstrate latencies of ~10ms, but USB latency is additive to device latency, and since the random seek times of most HDDs is still in the 10ms range we're talking about ~50% of the total latency. That hardly seems irrelevant, though by my own experimentation the difference does seem unimportant for home content storage use.
Finally, FWIW, I also think saying there's misinformation in a thread and not responding to it directly is bad form.
