[MW Forums]

Trans Intl. is offering a new external triple-interface portable drive in capacities up to 160GB. more

[Nobody]

It is amazing how expensive these 2.5-inch drives are. You can get a faster 3.5-inch 400GB hard disk for just $200 insted!

[d00d]

2.5" drives have always been significantly more expensive. This is really surprising to you?

[Nobody]

Yes: larger drives means more material, more travel cost and now these things are made by robots, so the manufacturing cost should be lower for smaller ones. Besides, 2.5 vs 3.5 is not that much difference in size... And, as said, 3.5-inch drives are more robust and faster.

[macnuke]

and many more 3.5's.
lower demand = higher manufacturing cost.
but i really like that it's FW800 as well. nice to see it being supported.
btw,,, that adds to cost also. 400 is cheaper to make.

[d00d]

Quote:

---

Yes: larger drives means more material, more travel cost and now these things are made by robots, so the manufacturing cost should be lower for smaller ones. Besides, 2.5 vs 3.5 is not that much difference in size... And, as said, 3.5-inch drives are more robust and faster.

---

The materials costs is negligible, to the point of complete non-point. The robot argument works for both products, so that's not the differential ether. It's not just 2.5 vs. 3.5, there's also the height of the drive.
2.5" drives have smaller components which have a higher manufacturing failure rate. They need higher density platters (one because of the decreased diameter and two because it can't use as many platters). Finally, they need to be ruggedized in ways that 3.5" drives don't have to be, adding yet more cost.
Add to that increased demand and it's not the least bit surprising or hard to understand why they cost more. Reducing cost through manufacturing techniques is a red herring, particularly when comparing to the price of other products.