Fundamental Qi question

[arne anka]

> more complicated and lure people into using NAND whereas SD is the
> future.
>
> In the GTA03 design, we would not have used NAND for anything but
> storing Qi and read-only factory data. Likewise, for gta02-core, I
> wouldn't consider using u-boot.


my experience is, that nand is far more reliable and robust than sd (which  
had recurring issues of data loss).
thus i have the crucial data in nand (ie minimal necessary system -- /bin,  
/sbin, ...).
additionally i lived under the impression that nand was faster.

of course, both date from a few months ago, when i decided to to not run  
my entire system from sd any longer.

with my holidays ahaed and thus some time to play around:

- what reasons make you say, sd is the future?
- what reasons, except the impossibility to replace the nand when it is  
worn out by to many write operations, led to the decision to use nand  
read-only?