1TB hard drive

[Bozo]

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6105515.html

Bozo :joker:

 

[Mercutio]

It's about damned time.

 

[LOST6200]

Too late for me. Now I have lost the interecst ion burying teh hard drives in tweh grounds for long term storage (anonymous security). I suppoes they 1TB woudl save some sapce but arenot nwo aviabale. Oh I lung for the older days.

 

[Brown_Sugar]

wow thats's great....but i personally don't need that much of storage. Even if i want 1000 gigabytes, i rather buy 2 of 500gb.
There is always shortcommings in new poroducts or new technology. we as the consumer always being the tester for the company. They will see how we react about the product.
Just like ipod first time it came, i didn't buy it right away untill the product get more mature - then i bought it.
I will wait untill the they come up with 1.25TB hard drive, then i will consider the 1TB.

 

[mubs]

Cautious fella. Like me.

 

[time]

The Samsung 250GB drive in the computer I'm typing this on is up to 116 remapped sectors ...

Yes, I'd be cautious.

 

[time]

Oops, I meant 216.

 

[Mercutio]

wow thats's great....but i personally don't need that much of storage. Even if i want 1000 gigabytes, i rather buy 2 of 500gb.

I'd perfectly happy to swap six piddly little 250GB drives for a 1TB unit. I'm having to hold off on consolidating my PCs at this point because the drives that I own are simply not dense enough. I'm having to keep extra drives powered on, generating heat that I have to get rid of, blocking airflow in my cases and having much greater risk of possibly failing and ruining an array. I'll take the single dense drive any day.

 

[Brown_Sugar]

I agree if you put it that way.

 

[iGary]

Actually, I wouldn't mind if one of our enterprising hard drive manufacturers released a cutting-edge-technology 3.5-inch "mother of all capacity" type of hard drive that spun at a silent and cool 5400 RPM, but provided 1.5 or 1.6 TB of storage capacity. STR would be achievable at 50 to 60 MB/s with a dense perpendicular 5400 RPM platter.

However, I suspect the 3.5-inch form factor 5400 RPM hard drive is already perceived as being archaic by the marketeers.

 

[ddrueding]

I suspect both the 3.5" and 5400RPM are independantly considered uncool these days. The only reason they all haven't gone to 2.5" is the race to 1TB; which would be a bit more difficult without the larger platters. I wouldn't mind an array of 9 2.5" 250GB SAS drives at 5400RPM. Are there any hot-swap multi-drive enclosures for 2.5" SATA/SAS drives?

 

[sechs]

I really do wonder why there's been no push to go with 2.5" desktop drives.

 

[P5-133XL]

I really do wonder why there's been no push to go with 2.5" desktop drives.

Because they are too slow. They need to perform at least the same or faster than the 3.5 drives. When that happens, I suspect, the switch will be very quick.

 

[Pradeep]

Actually, I wouldn't mind if one of our enterprising hard drive manufacturers released a cutting-edge-technology 3.5-inch "mother of all capacity" type of hard drive that spun at a silent and cool 5400 RPM, but provided 1.5 or 1.6 TB of storage capacity. STR would be achievable at 50 to 60 MB/s with a dense perpendicular 5400 RPM platter.

However, I suspect the 3.5-inch form factor 5400 RPM hard drive is already perceived as being archaic by the marketeers.

Ala Quantum "Bigfoot" style, hell make it 2TB and full height.

 

[sechs]

Because they are too slow.

Are they? I've always believed that they were simply limited by platter density and, therefore, size. We're past the point were upping density automatically adds performance.

 

[P5-133XL]

Are they? I've always believed that they were simply limited by platter density and, therefore, size. We're past the point were upping density automatically adds performance.

No, they are much slower both in seek speeds and STR. Seek speeds are undoubtably slower because of the notebook heritage. Notebooks, need low power usage, and to speed up seeking would make the drives use more energy.

For a given density and RPM, the smaller diameter will always have a slower STR. Theres just plain fewer magnetic domains traveling accross a given point on the inside of a disk than the outside. The solution is to speed up the RPM's for the smaller diameter disk, but again, the manufacturers are not doing that because the current market thay are seeking is notebook drives and that is a place where power matters.

At some point, the manufacturers will change their target market to high speed general use 2.5" drives. But it will require a mindset change and I've seen no such indication forthcoming. I see Holographic storage comming before that (It's definately on the horizon) and that may make all conventional hard drives moot.

 

[sechs]

The 7200RPM laptop drives are plenty snappy, and most folks cannot tell the differences on STR. If they went with the bigger height form facter, they could slip more platters in there. SCSI is already going that way (although, for different reasons).

 

[P5-133XL]

Seagate press release - achieved densities using perpedicular recording that would result in 2.5TB on a single standard 3.5" drive. I'm sure that it is a few years away from being mass marketted but it is impressive.

Now the race is on as to how fast can Holographic storage can ramp up its stoarge capacity. Supposedly Hitachi will be mass marketting the first Holographic drive at the end of 2006 (300GB) and slowly ramping up size over the next few years.

 

[LOST6200]

Now the race is on as to how fast can Holographic storage can ramp up its stoarge capacity. Supposedly Hitachi will be mass marketting the first Holographic drive at the end of 2006 (300GB) and slowly ramping up size over the next few years.

Well, well' see. somehow I boubt that the homograsphic storge will repalce t5he hardd rives in my limetimes.

 

[sechs]

Pornographic storage?

 

[P5-133XL]

Well, well' see. somehow I boubt that the homograsphic storge will repalce t5he hardd rives in my limetimes.

Theoretically, holographic storage has the capability to slaughter magnetic storage in speed, capacity, and durability. The question is how much will it cost and how long to market and those are Q's that I can't answer. Maybe it'll be like flash RAM and take 30+ years before signifigent products start appearing but it may be much closer to 3-5 years. I have faith that competition for your HD dollar is on the way.

 

[LOST6200]

Heh, Mercurio needs some on that kinda storage.

 

[Platform]

For what it's worth, holo-storage will indeed début *this* year, not the proverbial "sometime in a year or two" that me and countless others have been saying for the... ummm... past 6 or 7 years.

I've actually seen working prototype holo-storage reader/writers and media (at an IEEE conference), and that was back in the year 2000! The media I've seen have usually been the discs, but I've seen the card media once as well, and I've even seen holo-tape. All of this holo-storage was WORM-type storage, so, do not think of the holo-storage that will be coming out soon in terms of a hard drive replacement. Nonetheless, there are groups trying to perfect re-writable holo-storage, but do not expect to see re-writable holo-storage for a while. Just about all the manufacturers that are working with holo-storage now are trying to perfect high-density multi-layer WORM storage.

 

[sechs]

Whatever happened to the punchcard system that IBM was working on?

It seemed so promising for archival use....