This new copier line is one of the first to introduce a SSD 256 GB HDD as a standard feature.
To date, I think all copier vendors have been using a 2.5" platter based HDD designed for laptop computers.
I am wondering out loud the pros and cons of this choice.
1). In all RFPs that I have seen the buyer is requesting a HDD and never a SSD. Konica Minolta is going to have to be constantly requesting amendments to RFPs.
Maybe in the Konica Minolta new design there is the option to switch in a HDD?
2). SSD's are thought to be more reliable than HDDs because there are no moving parts. HDDs however have become more reliable over time with few failures.
3). SSDs are considered to have a higher cost per GB than a HDD. In the copier business there is always a spec race to the biggest spec with even low end Lexmark A4 desktop MFPS now providing a 500 GB HDD. Buyers usually try and interpret copier specs as bigger and faster is better.
4). SSDs are more compact in size than a HDD but in A3 copiers that small difference in form factor is not much of an issue.
5). SSDs use less electricity than a HDD to conserve battery life but in A3 copiers the small benefit is a non issue.
6). SSDs have a faster data retrieval rate than HDDs. This might be great for massive Data Storage centers but I cannot see how a few milliseconds will make much difference on a copier.
7). SSD vs HDD will buyers really care about the difference between the two storage technologies? In my mind, the copier talk track is now more about scanning and storage to the Cloud like OneDrive for Business.
8). To me, SSD vs HDD is a marketing effort by Konica Minolta not based upon any request by the customer. I could be wrong and this may be the start of a new trend in copiers.