Yet Another Flash Format -- CUD

[Janak Parekh]

<div class='os_post_top_link'><a href='http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/Article.asp?datePublish=2003/04/09&pages=07&seq=40' target='_blank'>http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/A...pages=07&seq=40</a><br /><br /></div>Will this ever end?<br /><br />"Taiwan-based Atech Totalsolution on Tuesday introduced a memory card called Compact USB Disk (CUD), featuring a built-in USB interface and compatibility with CompactFlash (CF) cards, the company announced in a seminar on small-sized memory cards. Only one-third the size of a CF card, the CUD card can replace a CF card in portable devices such as digital still cameras (DSC) by using a specially-designed cartridge. In addition, the CUD card can be connected directly to other digital devices such as PCs, PDAs and handsets via a USB cable or CUD adapter, while other memory cards need a card reader. According to Atech, the production cost for a CUD card is about US$25, compared to US$38 for a CF card."<br /><br />If you check <a href="http://www.8tec.com/products.html">Atech's site</a>, they claim that it's "smaller than SD, and faster than CF". They also feature the fact that it fits inline with the CF card. Argh. :evil: Yet another format, not too long after xD was unleashed. A CF adapter isn't enough -- it's not going to help me with my SD-enabled Pocket PC any more useful, will it? And SD is a perfectly workable standard, for which memory should get faster anyway. And just how much smaller a form factor do we want than SD cards? Quite honestly, SD and CF and MS are more than enough for me. I don't want to ever have a "20-in-1 reader". About the only good thing going for this format, according to the Digitech article, is its theoretical speed and its "open" licensing policy, but I don't see it hitting any level of market popularity at this point.<br /><br />Enough of my rant -- what do you think? (Even if you don't care for the rant, check out the article - it has a <i>very</i> interesting comparison table of all the prevalent memory standards.)

[Fishie]

I dunno but this animation looks WRONG http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/2003040907040_files/image001.gif

[Macguy59]

I'm sure you could probably find similar rants about SD/MMC when it first appeared to and look where it is now :wink:

[Janak Parekh]

I'm sure you could probably find similar rants about SD/MMC when it first appeared to and look where it is now :wink:
Well, my thinking is that you want about one standard per general form factor size. SD/MMC, Memory Stick, MS Duo, and xD all fit in this category already, and to me that's too much. Maybe it's just me? ;)

--janak

[kfluet]

I'm sure you could probably find similar rants about SD/MMC when it first appeared to and look where it is now :wink:
Well, my thinking is that you want about one standard per general form factor size. SD/MMC, Memory Stick, MS Duo, and xD all fit in this category already, and to me that's too much. Maybe it's just me? ;)


Definitely not just you.

Try buying a digital camera these days. For me, it ended up being, "OK, which ones use SD or CF so I can use my iPAQ's memory card collection in the camera, too". Of course, that eliminates a pile if very nice cameras. It's very frustrating to shop with memory card format being my first consideration. If there were only CF and SD on the market, I wouldn't have to worry about it.

If people don't like SD due to licensing, I wish they would pick ONE open standard rather than everyone inventing their own proprietary formats.

[MooseMaster]

This CUD standard sounds VERY good compared to SD and CF. Faster than CF but smaller than SD. But, because I live on a farm, the name doesn't sound too appealing :?

[ctmagnus]

USB 2.0/ CF Card/ Portaritory Serial & Parallel Mode

Portaritory? I hope that isn't supposed to mean proprietary.

[Shadowcat]

I agree, there is already a dizzying array of flash memory formats available today. I also made my purchases with memory cards as my first consideration. I now have 3 devices that use CF. The other reason I've stayed away from SD is because it's still too expensive.

All the formats are proprietary except for CF and CUD. So aren't you saying that if people don't like SD due to licensing, you wish they will adopt CUD?

I think SD is already small enough and we don't really need anything smaller (i.e., XD, mini-SD, MS Duo). However I think I may be tempted to buy CUD instead of SD if they are cheaper since I can just buy an adaptor and plug it into my existing hardware. If CUD cards will cost even less than CF (as is implied in the article) and manufacturers don't have to pay licensing fees then perhaps CUD will gain more traction than SD? Ok, that's probably wishful thinking, since device manufacturers like HP must embrace this standard too. I just don't see Toshiba ditching its SD format or Sony ditching its MS format. :(

Thus I think the biggest draw towards CUD may be its cost and its licensing policy but I think it will probably fail because its survival is largely dependant on having a majority of manufacturers embracing it and incorporation it into their devices, which is unlikely to happen.

My thoughts on other smaller (physical size) formats:
I just don't see XD taking off because I don't see it being used outside of digital cameras (perhaps I'm wrong?). I think CUD may kill mini-SD because of licensing issues but I'm probably wrong. However MS-Duo will definately survive simply because it's backed by Sony. :?

[TawnerX]

Anybody notices this thing has 68 pins?? 8O

but from all standard I have to admit this one looks the most appealing. compatible with USB and CF, has plenty of pins , open, and pretty darned small.

I am ready to declare the end of SD.

It only need cheap memory, WiFi, and GPS to win against SD already.

[Macguy59]

I'm sure you could probably find similar rants about SD/MMC when it first appeared to and look where it is now :wink:
Well, my thinking is that you want about one standard per general form factor size. SD/MMC, Memory Stick, MS Duo, and xD all fit in this category already, and to me that's too much. Maybe it's just me? ;)

--janak

I didn't neccesarily disagree with you. I personally think the SD form factor is small enough. Good grief if they get much smaller I will be in constant fear of losing them :mrgreen: Like was mentioned earlier, I base my buying decisions on what storage medium is used. Doesn't any vendor remember what backwards compatibility was about?

[pro_worm]

I think the reason for all these memory card standards is fairly clear - it's all about money. Consider this: if CF was the universal standard, the consumer would purchase two or three cards and, relishing in euphoric, universal compatibility, never purchase another memory card again. Or perhaps they would buy a single, say, 1 gig card and use it in all their devices. That consumer is then fully and completely free from needing to purchase a separate card for his digital camera, or PDA, or MP3 Player, etc. Sandisk's long term growth drops to zero.

All these standards make NO SENSE whatsoever, otherwise. Why, back in the olden days my Nomand II came with a Smartmedia card - it was some two years before SD cards, and only about 50% larger. Why didn't it adapt? See above. By constantly switching from format G to H to I to J, companies are making oodles of cash.

[Janak Parekh]

All the formats are proprietary except for CF and CUD. So aren't you saying that if people don't like SD due to licensing, you wish they will adopt CUD?
The problem is that SD is already too widespread, I think. I do like the openness of CUD, but I also agree it might be too late.

I think the reason for all these memory card standards is fairly clear - it's all about money.
Well, isn't everything about money? ;) The manufacturers are being shortsighted, though. While they might lose licensing fees by embracing standards, they'll encourage mass adoption. Could you imagine how the market would be if every PC, laptop and handheld came with an SD slot today? That is the reason floppies still exist -- we can't seem to standardize on one kind of flash technology.

--janak

[aquanaut]

Some of you are correct, money is part of this issue.

1. Licensing Cost
OEM's bidding on and producing PPC's get the squeeze from either the SD alliance (Matsu****a/Toshiba) or Sony. Memory Stick adapters cost more than SD adapters, why? Licensing cost. You wonder why compaq hasn't embraced Sony's memory stick?

2.Compatibility
I have an 8mb and a 128mb Memory Stick for my DV camera. My PPC recognizes only the 8mb, not the 128mb. Drivers!

3. Performance-to-Price:
My PocketPC has built-in slots for both CF and SD. At first I thought I'd use the SD for everything... then after comparing CF to SD read/write speeds, I can say SD lags way behind CF in both read/write speed. Is it the standard 1-bit bus?.

File transfers from notebook to CF card are much faster than to SD. And look at the today's Amazon pricing: 1Gb CF for $185!!! $335 for 512mb SD, $250 for 512mb MS -- no wonder the CF memory standard leads all others combined (Performance/Price). The alliances logic is simple -- slower speed = higher pricing.

If an innovative company like aTech can further improve the Performance to Price ratio AND maintain backward compatibility (using an inexpensive CF Type-2 Adapter), then what's to complain about? Good riddance MMS, SD, xD, MS, MMC, MS-Duo, and any other proprietary standard hoops the alliances throw at consumers to jump through!

Janak, you have every right to vent your justified frustrations at the memory card standard mess, but consider directing this at those companies trying to pass off poor performance/price and supporting only their own 'proprietary' formats... :wink:

[ctmagnus]

You wonder why compaq hasn't embraced Sony's memory stick?

I love iPaqs. Especially the ones that will take expansion packs. I will never own any other Pocket PC (at least that exist currently). But if HP started adding memory stick slots to them, I would immediately switch. To Palm :pukeface: if necessary. And I really, really hate Palms. :really mad: :bad-words: :razz: (with the possible exception of the forthcoming Tungsten W)

[Kirkaiya]

The problem is that SD is already too widespread, I think. I do like the openness of CUD, but I also agree it might be too late.
... &lt;snip> ...
That is the reason floppies still exist -- we can't seem to standardize on one kind of flash technology.

--janak

Exactly true - but just barely. I think even a year or 18 months ago, this format (CUD) would have stood a much better chance, since SD cards were still expensive, SDIO devices were not even demo'd yet, and a lot of PDAs & cameras had not gone to SD-slots yet.

Now - I think SD/SDIO has gained enough traction as a form-factor that it's not going to go the way of the 8-track (ie., a standard that never quite caught on). The other thing about SD is that, while not perfect (licensing issues, speed issues), it is, in general, good enough. That is, good enough for most people for most things they use it for.

And the speed issue can be addressed with future iterations of SD (maybe they'll start issuing 4x SD cards, or whatever). As for licnesing costs - if another format poses a threat, I have to think that the licensing fees for SD will drop to compete.

Finally - I've been WAITING for something to take the place of the dreaded floppy. For awhile, I thought the Imation Superdisk would do it (backwards compatible with standard HD/2DD 3.5" floppies, but it held 120 MB). Now - I think USB-connected flash may FINALLY take the place of the floppy, since the new versions of BIOS will allow "boot from USB storage device" as an option. I think Dell's upcoming versions of their "Legacy Free" desktops, sans floppy, will have this feature (so that, in a pinch, you will be able to boot from a USB-attached Flash-card).

I didn't even buy a floppy for mynew (well, last august it was new) laptop, despite the USB versions at CompUSA for $19.99 that i saw yesterday.

So anywaze - I think it's down to CF, SD, and the ever-niche Memory-Stick.

[eternalblue]

I dunno but this animation looks WRONG http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/2003040907040_files/image001.gif

ahahahaha wrong, so very wrong.

[kzemach]

I resisted SD cards for a long time, up until I got the Panasonic SD to CF Type I adapter, so that I can use SD cards in my CF digicam (The adapter look IDENTICAL in set-up to the CUD-to_CF adapter). Now all I buy is SD, since I can use them in both slots. Couple of thoughts/points:

-CUD might stand a chance in professional digital photography, since transfer speed is pretty important to those guys. However, they all have thousands of dollars invested in high speed high capacity CF cards, so switching to a new format would be an uphill battle. The high-end cameras COULD add two slots, which some of them already have anyway. BUT, just as they need high speed, they also need high capacity, so if the CUDs aren't coming out with at least 1GB sizes, they're dead in the water. The pros are looking at and using some of the 2 and 4GB cards already.

-Are the CF transfer speeds quoted on that page for the fastest Lexar 30x cards, or not? If not, then what's the real speed advantage?

-So it's fast. Great. How fast is it in the CF adapter? Is it slower than the high-speed CF cards? Is it slower than a REGULAR CF card???? That's pretty important guys.

-Lastly, I take issue with their statement "In addition, the CUD card can be connected directly to other digital devices such as PCs, PDAs and handsets via a USB cable or CUD adapter, while other memory cards need a card reader." Huh? My PDA doesn't need a card reader. In my PDA, my cards can be connected directly to the device, while the stupid CUD cards are the ones that will need an adapter or USB cable!!! I mean, come on, that's some pretty moronic marketing. And my CF cards can be dropped into my laptop with a PC card adapter (and the SD cards with the SD-toCF-to_PC card set-up), while the CUD would need the CUD to CF to PC card adapter. I'm NOT going to carry around another cable. So, besides speed, what's the advantage? And wait, what's the speed advantage of CUD if I stick it in a CF adapter and then a PC card adapter?

-I totally agree with the previous poster who noted that SD (and other current formats) are "good enough." The mass consumers don't care about all the techie hoo-ha.

Other than that, I think it's a great idea.

[jlp]

I think the reason for all these memory card standards is fairly clear - it's all about money. Consider this: if CF was the universal standard, the consumer would purchase two or three cards and, relishing in euphoric, universal compatibility, never purchase another memory card again. Or perhaps they would buy a single, say, 1 gig card and use it in all their devices. That consumer is then fully and completely free from needing to purchase a separate card for his digital camera, or PDA, or MP3 Player, etc. Sandisk's long term growth drops to zero.

Allow me to disagree. I was never content with the 16 MB card that came with my digicam and that I used with my PsPC at the time. I then bought a 48 MB, then a 64, later a 128MB and I've been waiting for 1 GB cards to go down in price; which is about now.

But when I'll find cheap enough 20 GB flash cards I'll get them. I'll put all my personal pics, all my ebooks, fav music, fav movies and what not.

Look at HDDs, people are still buying new HDDs because they want to put what I want to put on my new flash card. And most everybody will want to do the same with a flash card as they do with their HDDs.

Price is the keyword and Taiwanese firms patented it :D.

All these standards make NO SENSE whatsoever, otherwise. Why, back in the olden days my Nomand II came with a Smartmedia card - it was some two years before SD cards, and only about 50% larger. Why didn't it adapt? See above. By constantly switching from format G to H to I to J, companies are making oodles of cash.

STUPIDMedia didn't adapt because 128MB is the design limit, just like MemorySINK. On both products, the driving electronics are in the device not the card, like PC Card, CF, and SD. Sony had to get the help of SanDisk and forsake compatibility with most of their products to release MemorySICK Pro!!

[jlp]

Now back on the subject: At first I said to myself: "oh no another format!!!".

Then I started to pause and think.

Then I saw what everyone has overlooked until now: the keyword is "Taiwan". These guys make more than half the PPCs out there. Granted they are mostly OEM products, so they can't impose what features their product will include.

But these guys are smart and hardworking.

They could well include another slot besides the one(s) wanted by the buying company; because it quite small, they could squeeze a CUD slot besides an SD and/or CF one.

They have the manufacturing power at low price and if they do it correctly they could win against SD and xD.

Not that it will be instantaneous.

For example you see more and more electronic, non computer based devices, that include memory card slots. Panasonic has an HDD/DVD recorder that has a PC Card slot. Samsung has a MemorySTINKS slot in one of their portable DVD player.

OK, these are not really mainstream devices nor do they belong to the Jow User category.

But now imagine Taiwanese companies releasing a deluge of electronic devices using this standard: MP3 players, picture frames, cheap digicams, portable video games (à la GBA), ebook readers, PDAs, multimedia players, portable HDD with card readers, etc.

With these undeniable advantages, plus with solidarity (if all Taiwanese companies adopt it), speed, price, quantity, open/non proprietary standard, diversity and connectivity (68 pins, like PC Card I think) advantages they might have a chance to carve a pretty good niche (à la Sony) or even take the place of SD cards, but this last one in the long run only.

[jlp]

I dunno but this animation looks WRONG http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/2003040907040_files/image001.gif

ahahahaha wrong, so very wrong.

And what's wrong with it??

Now that I think of it, imagine a BT, Wi-Fi, digicam, GPS, GPRS, etc CF cards with a CUD slot in it. :clap:

Now that would be so much smarter than those Sandisk Wi-Fi CF cards with a fixed and therefore very limited (128 MB) amount of memory embeded in them!! :razzing:

[kzemach]

Now that I think of it, imagine a BT, Wi-Fi, digicam, GPS, GPRS, etc CF cards with a CUD slot in it.


Now that brings up an interesting thought. Turn the above around... And someone error check me on this; perhaps I'm not reading the release correctly.

If these cards are really "USB cards," then the slots that accept them must have USB host capabilities, right? So, if that's the case, it should be possible to make a "dummy" CUD card that slips into the slot and provides a standard USB connection on the outside, kinda like the way a CF modem card works by having an external phone cord plug. Then, assuming the drivers are out there, which they probably would be with this to support it, you could plug in any USB device, again assuming the slot is also USB compatible in terms of power delivery (500mW).

Again, wouldn't this mean that all compatible CUD devices are also USB hosts? Am I missing something here?

[daveshih]

-CUD might stand a chance in professional digital photography, since transfer speed is pretty important to those guys. However, they all have thousands of dollars invested in high speed high capacity CF cards, so switching to a new format would be an uphill battle. The high-end cameras COULD add two slots, which some of them already have anyway. BUT, just as they need high speed, they also need high capacity, so if the CUDs aren't coming out with at least 1GB sizes, they're dead in the water. The pros are looking at and using some of the 2 and 4GB cards already.


It did mention that the "theoretical" size limit is much larger, so size may be a nonissue in time.


-Are the CF transfer speeds quoted on that page for the fastest Lexar 30x cards, or not? If not, then what's the real speed advantage?

-So it's fast. Great. How fast is it in the CF adapter? Is it slower than the high-speed CF cards? Is it slower than a REGULAR CF card???? That's pretty important guys.


I don't know what factors determine CF's speed, but I imagine it must have something to do with the interface on the receiving end. So you may be right, that when connected to a old CF slot, the speed may be just like a regular CF card.
I could be wrong, though, in that CF's speed is wholy determined by the CF card itself. And in that case, then a CUD in a CF adapter will then be much, much faster.


-Lastly, I take issue with their statement "In addition, the CUD card can be connected directly to other digital devices such as PCs, PDAs and handsets via a USB cable or CUD adapter, while other memory cards need a card reader." Huh? My PDA doesn't need a card reader. In my PDA, my cards can be connected directly to the device, while the stupid CUD cards are the ones that will need an adapter or USB cable!!! I mean, come on, that's some pretty moronic marketing. And my CF cards can be dropped into my laptop with a PC card adapter (and the SD cards with the SD-toCF-to_PC card set-up), while the CUD would need the CUD to CF to PC card adapter. I'm NOT going to carry around another cable. So, besides speed, what's the advantage? And wait, what's the speed advantage of CUD if I stick it in a CF adapter and then a PC card adapter?

Give these guys a break. Their native language is not English, so mistakes do happen. What they meant was that instead of a CUD-to-whatever adaptor, one can just use a regular (probably mini-usb) USB cable to connect to anything that has a USB port. I think that's pretty important in terms of portability and compatibility. Besides, it's USB 2.0 speed.
Also, I think they will do a CUD to PCMCIA card adaptor, since the demand will be there. And the speed of that thing will then be the limit of the PCMCIA card speed (couple giga bps, I think).


-I totally agree with the previous poster who noted that SD (and other current formats) are "good enough." The mass consumers don't care about all the techie hoo-ha.

Other than that, I think it's a great idea.
True, but I also welcome new technologies that utilize recognized industry standards like USB 2.0, especially when it's built-in, not via a adaptor.

Dave

[jlp]

Now that I think of it, imagine a BT, Wi-Fi, digicam, GPS, GPRS, etc CF cards with a CUD slot in it.


Now that brings up an interesting thought. Turn the above around... And someone error check me on this; perhaps I'm not reading the release correctly.

If these cards are really "USB cards," then the slots that accept them must have USB host capabilities, right?

That's quite possible, at least it's logical to think this way.

But I've found yet another flash card format with a real advantage:
Tho it's approximately as small as an SD card, you can plug it directly into a PC/notebook USB connector without an adapter. For durability you can plug it into an adapter as well.

That's what I understand of it. It's not very clear but it looks like the connector is the barebone inside part of a USB plug, i.e. without the rectangular piece of metal. In this way, they make the whole device smaller. As I said you can plug this card into an adapter (with a ragular USB male plug) if you fear it could break the plastic connector.

They have designed a slot for this card to be implemented into all the relevant electronic devices, in essence it would be a USB connector (the female part as found on your desktop/notebook) and an enclosure to slide the card into. All this woud be integrated in PDAs, digicams, etc. just like a regular CF or SD, etc. slot.

Really pretty clever!!! (http://www.pqi1st.com/news/istick.htm)

Here, for sure, it would mean that a USB cable with a plug that fits these upcoming slots (or a dummy card) would allow you to drive (USB host) any USB device from suchly (new word!!) equipped PDAs, etc.

[PPCRules]

Maybe I'm slow, but I don't spot what's wrong with the animation, either.

[PPCRules]

... via a USB cable or CUD adapter, while other memory cards need a card reader.

In practical terms, what's the difference between needing a "USB cable" or needing a "card reader". Either way, if you don't have one with you, you don't connect.

Secondly, it was only a year ago the outspoken seemed to all be saying "it's a brick, and I don't need a CF slot anyway!" about the Dell (the only one with a CF slot) as the new models were being revealed. I say, let them go stick a CUD or a memory stick in their SD slot now.

Lastly, no mention is made as to when the "CUD I/O" standard will be finalized.

[jlp]

... via a USB cable or CUD adapter, while other memory cards need a card reader.

In practical terms, what's the difference between needing a "USB cable" or needing a "card reader". Either way, if you don't have one with you, you don't connect.

That's why the new card I just talked about above is much better: as its connector is a (barebone) USB plug, you don't need either a cable nor an adapter (tho they have plans to offer an adapter to ease card handling as it's small).

Secondly, it was only a year ago the outspoken seemed to all be saying "it's a brick, and I don't need a CF slot anyway!" about the Dell (the only one with a CF slot) as the new models were being revealed. I say, let them go stick a CUD or a memory stick in their SD slot now.

There are lots of PPCs with a CF card slot:
- the new Toshiba e750 (and current e740)
- the new iPaq h2200
- the new Asus MyPal 710
- plus all the many current devices still being sold (FSC Pocket LOOX, Casio E-200, HP Jornada 56x, etc.)
- The Japanese only Casio E-3000