Intel might be right about Floating Gate vs Charge Trap decisions, but the whole company doesn't like the memory business. Their main business was the memory business until Andy Grove steered them away and into the CPU business as their main bread and butter. They became so successful after that it almost became an icon of why Grove was such a great CEO.
The mentality continues with Pat as he recently stated his dislike about the memory business. This tells why they have become quiet about Optane and went away from eDRAM. Although for now they'll keep Optane going.
DRAM is an area where not only it's cutthroat but without having majority share like Samsung does your margins will be really low. NAND probably reached that point some time ago. Since they practically started the SSD era with X25-M in 2009 and is a necessary driver for computers, in the end they are winners either way.
It feels like typical price cutting tactics from the USB flash drive world being introduced to the world of internal SSDs. Because it's so easy to sell crap to unwitting consumers.
This is why I think it's very good to compare things in a normalized fashion. Things like "solid state is more reliable and faster" "mechanical is unreliable" is only true when the former is more pricier than the latter.
If/when some SSDs can reach price point of future HDDs, I pretty much guarantee you it'll be a toss up between HDDs and SSDs in terms of reliability and performance. Actually the way some SSDs are, some are less reliable than HDDs are. Their often abrupt nature of failing is worse than the way lots of HDDs fail which are far more graceful and allow you to recover data much easier.
You look at laptop repair videos and ton of them talk about data recovery and SSD failures. TBW is one metric, but you still have moisture/dust induced damage, component failures, PCB damage.
As an engineer you always get to choose your focus. If you want the lowest cost with in paper the most reliable technology, you won't get that.