PDA

View Full Version : Hitachi Breakthrough Could Mean 4TB Disks By 2011




Blue Velvet
Oct 15, 2007, 03:37 AM
By developing new reading heads:

Hitachi Global Storage Technologies plans to announce Monday it has developed technology that will quadruple the storage capacity of desktop hard drives within the next two years.

The new reading-head technology will allow the company to cram more data on hard drives. Desktop computers could attain a capacity of 4TB of storage while laptop storage could reach 1TB, according to Hitachi.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,138434-c,harddrives/article.html


Meanwhile CNet is reporting that date to be 2011...

Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, the hard drive arm of the Japanese conglomerate, has made what it says is the world's smallest read head for hard drives.

And, if it comes out in 2011 or so as expected, the head will allow Hitachi to continue to increase the density of drives, said John Best, Hitachi's CTO. Current top-of-the-line desktop drives hold a terabyte.

With the new, elegantly named current perpendicular-to-the-plane giant magneto-resistive heads (CPP-GMR heads to you laypeople), drive makers will be able to come out with 4 terabyte drives in 2011 and/or 1 terabyte notebook drives.

http://www.news.com/To-advance-drives,-Hitachi-changes-the-head/2100-1041_3-6213386.html



dukebound85
Oct 15, 2007, 03:39 AM
wow thats alot of stuff. i think we need blu ray or hd dvds so we can sort of back up to that media if we choose to. dvds are just too small these days

xUKHCx
Oct 15, 2007, 03:43 AM
1Tb in a laptop, that would be amazing look at the measly 80GB we get as standard in the MB

twoodcc
Oct 15, 2007, 06:10 AM
now this would be awesome! hopefully they come in 2009...the sooner the better.

John Jacob
Oct 15, 2007, 06:12 AM
Naaah, not good enough. I want 4TB LAPTOP drives in 2009.

No, that's still not good enough. I want 4TB FLASH laptop drives in 2009.

Now, aint I a whiney brat? :D

EDIT: I didn't notice that we could have 1TB laptop drives as well. That's really quite cool.

psychofreak
Oct 15, 2007, 06:15 AM
I should be getting a new laptop around mid-2009, and 500GB would be great to have at a reasonable price for it...if 1TB is the max, 500GB shouldn't be that expensive...

edesignuk
Oct 15, 2007, 06:33 AM
Meanwhile CNet is reporting that date to be 2011...Engadget also report 2011 (http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/15/hitachi-breakthrough-4tb-disks-by-2011/), which I think is a lot more doable. There's no way they're going to cram 4 times the current limit in a drive in the next year or two*.

*prepares to eat foot in year or two :o

MacRumors
Oct 15, 2007, 10:15 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

Hitachi claims to have made a breakthrough in increasing hard drive capacities. By successfully shrinking the read head using nanotechnology, Hitachi claims that they expect to quadruple the current capacity of hard disks by 2011.

Researchers at Hitachi have successfully reduced existing recording heads by more than a factor of two to achieve new heads in the 30-50 nanometer (nm) range, which is up to 2,000 times smaller than the width of an average human hair (approx. 70-100 microns). Called current perpendicular-to-the-plane giant magneto-resistive*1 (CPP-GMR) heads, Hitachi's new technology is expected to be implemented in shipping products in 2009 and reach its full potential in 2011.

In essence, 4 Terabyte (TB) desktop (3.5") drives and 1 TB laptop (2.5") drives can be expected.

While not specifically mentioned in the release, Hitachi also produces 1.8" drives currently found in Apple's iPod Classic, and we expect similar gains to be expected in those form factors as well. Recent advancements were also announced by Toshiba (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/09/10/toshiba-prototypes-120-gb-1-8-single-platter-drive/) that can be expected by 2009.

Raw Data: Press Release (http://www.hitachi.com/New/cnews/071015a.html)

Article Link (http://www.macrumors.com/2007/10/15/hitachi-breakthrough-could-mean-4tb-disks-by-2011/)

kwood
Oct 15, 2007, 10:19 AM
Wow... I can't imagine 1TB in my MacBook. But I am sure willing to try. :D

miketcool
Oct 15, 2007, 10:20 AM
1 TB laptops. If they can crank the speed up to a ridiculous rate, you'd have a built in gyro to stabilize the super thin assembly!

syklee26
Oct 15, 2007, 10:24 AM
that will give y'all enough space to do nothing but DL'ing and watching pr0n for rest of your life.

Darkroom
Oct 15, 2007, 10:24 AM
that's kinda scary...

Yvan256
Oct 15, 2007, 10:24 AM
The older you get, the less impressive it all gets on the hardware side.

My first PC had an 80MB hard drive. And on my desk right now are 512MB CompactFlash and 1GB SD cards, along with 256MB and 1GB USB sticks, not to mention the 1GB of RAM in my Mac mini G4.

What does impress me is software innovation, because better and faster technology is useless without good software. That's why I switched to Mac two years ago.

It's good news to hear about possible 1TB drives in laptops by 2011, but frankly, it's four years away and I'll be dissapointed if the drives aren't bigger by then. We already have 1TB 3.5" drives in 2007, so... good news, but I'm expecting it, and more. :D

~Shard~
Oct 15, 2007, 10:26 AM
Technology just keeps progressing, it's fun! :D

I remember when a 400 MB HDD was huge - what would you need that much space for? ;)

I think I'll just hold out for a 1 zettabyte hard drive... :p :cool:

twoodcc
Oct 15, 2007, 10:26 AM
2011 is kinda far away. hopefully we'll see more storage sooner.

Str8edgepunker
Oct 15, 2007, 10:27 AM
Sheesh, one terabyte in a laptop. I remember the good old days when you could fit an operating system on a floppy drive and in those days they were floppy!

Just kidding, bring it on! :D

flopticalcube
Oct 15, 2007, 10:28 AM
The older you get, the less impressive it all gets on the hardware side.

My first PC had an 80MB hard drive. And on my desk right now are 512MB CompactFlash and 1GB SD cards, along with 256MB and 1GB USB sticks, not to mention the 1GB of RAM in my Mac mini G4.

What does impress me is software innovation, because better and faster technology is useless without good software. That's why I switched to Mac two years ago.

It's good news to hear about possible 1TB drives in laptops by 2011, but frankly, it's four years away and I'll be dissapointed if the drives aren't bigger by then. We already have 1TB 3.5" drives in 2007, so... good news, but I'm expecting it, and more. :D
I agree. 4X250GB=1TB in 4 years. Big whoop. 4 years ago the biggest laptop drive was 60-80GB so a 4 times increase is to be expected. Still nice to have.

Yateball
Oct 15, 2007, 10:28 AM
WOW... although totally un-necessary that would be awesome!

I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.

Of course thats what used to be said about 4gb drives too

Telp
Oct 15, 2007, 10:29 AM
thats amazing.

Eidorian
Oct 15, 2007, 10:32 AM
Great more tightly packed data. :rolleyes:

Genghis Khan
Oct 15, 2007, 10:34 AM
*waits for mac pro of 2011*

DDR4 RAM
crappy graphics
16 cores @ 3.0GHz
16TB of storage


omg...omg...omg...omg blu-ray editing extreme

davak
Oct 15, 2007, 10:37 AM
Although I agree these massive amounts of hard drive space will be nice...

I can't wait until the cheap little usb drives get around the 10-20 Gig size that'll fit on your keychain. That's enough room to carry an OS and several apps around.

That'll really start changing things again.

bigwig
Oct 15, 2007, 10:38 AM
How does this affect Apple's Flash strategy? I don't see Flash achieving that kind of density increase with current technology.

4God
Oct 15, 2007, 10:39 AM
I dunno, I was actually hoping for less fanfare and efforts into the hard disk drive arena and more development and excitement in the solid state disk arena.
I thought that standard hard drives would be declining in technological development over the next 4-8 years with an increase in technological upgrades in flash and other drives.
Looking forward to the day when my OS and storage drives are NOT the weakest link in my machine.

keysersoze
Oct 15, 2007, 10:42 AM
Geez. I can't even fill up a 200GB hard drive.
:(

I guess I'm not trying hard enough. <selects Safari Private Browsing...> :D

edesignuk
Oct 15, 2007, 10:43 AM
I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.When you're ripping all your DVD-A/SACD in lossless and copying your blu-ray/HD-DVD uncompressed to your hard drive it'll vanish before you know it.

4God
Oct 15, 2007, 10:44 AM
Geez. I can't even fill up a 200GB hard drive.
:(

I guess I'm not trying hard enough. <selects Safari Safe Browsing...> :D

Yeah, my point though is not the size of the disk as much as it is the speed of read/write.

JGowan
Oct 15, 2007, 10:44 AM
This is great but at what cost? Will these drives be as reliable? It seems you can only make things so small before the drives would fail, dooming to lose a gargantuan amount of files.

BPG074
Oct 15, 2007, 10:44 AM
I'll be more impressed when they will give us 4TB formatted space rather than calling it a 4TB disk drive and having it be far less than they advertise. I'd love to see the industry own up to their deceit of consumers. If a car manufacturer claimed that a car got 45 miles per gallon and the actual driver couldn't get better than 30, there'd be a class action lawsuit on their hands. We just bend over and take it from the companies.

Perhaps they could make it even more fun and call it a 5TB drive. Why not a 6TB? If they can lie about the current disks being nowhere near what they label them as, you know it's only going to get worse. I could care less about their theories about size. I think it ought to be labeled ACTUAL USABLE SPACE AVAILABLE.

SciTeach
Oct 15, 2007, 10:45 AM
I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.


How about every frickin' movie ever made?!:eek:
Put THAT on an :apple:TV!:cool:

I'd really like to see an upgrade in active memory vs. storage. A TB of RAM would be....wow, I can't think of the right word....:D

guzhogi
Oct 15, 2007, 10:47 AM
I can't wait until the cheap little usb drives get around the 10-20 Gig size that'll fit on your keychain. That's enough room to carry an OS and several apps around.

Those already exist. Go to www.dealram.com and under the flash drive menu, go to USB pen drives. There's 16 GB one for $135. There's also a 64 GB, but it's more than $5,000 so I think I'll pass on that for a while.

doemel
Oct 15, 2007, 10:47 AM
wow thats alot of stuff. i think we need blu ray or hd dvds so we can sort of back up to that media if we choose to. dvds are just too small these days

Ever heard of external hard drives? All Blu Ray & Co. do is prolong your optical media backup misery for another year or two. Otherwise they're just there to force yet another pointless DRM system down our throats.

~J~
Oct 15, 2007, 10:48 AM
WOW... although totally un-necessary that would be awesome!

I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.

Of course thats what used to be said about 4gb drives too

Theres a difference between FILLING a 4TB drive and USING all of a 4TB drive. Some large video projects can already use in excess of 1TB while rendering and encoding. Im working on a project right now that is 9.75 hours of video in 13 segments, and am routinely using up a 500GB drive doing 45min - 1.5hr segments.

And to all those who are unimpressed by this... you shouldnt be impressed so much as look forward to it. It is hardware innovation. Dont be ignorant... the more complex software becomes, the more storage space we are going to need. Its the natural procession of technology... so bring on the 1TB (7200rpm please!) laptop drives!!

lofight
Oct 15, 2007, 10:49 AM
wow, that's really alot, but i would prefer too see a flash drive of 120 GB in 2011!

lazyrighteye
Oct 15, 2007, 10:52 AM
I remember the 100MB Zip Drive Iomega put out in '94.
At the time, it seemed the end all, be all.
Ha... Zip... good one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_drive

Littleodie914
Oct 15, 2007, 10:52 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU like Mac OS X; en) AppleWebKit/420.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.0 Mobile/3A110a Safari/419.3)

Wow, does this mean we'll see .5TB iPods sometime in the next couple years? :D

guzhogi
Oct 15, 2007, 10:54 AM
I'll be more impressed when they will give us 4TB formatted space rather than calling it a 4TB disk drive and having it be far less than they advertise. I'd love to see the industry own up to their deceit of consumers. If a car manufacturer claimed that a car got 45 miles per gallon and the actual driver couldn't get better than 30, there'd be a class action lawsuit on their hands. We just bend over and take it from the companies.

Perhaps they could make it even more fun and call it a 5TB drive. Why not a 6TB? If they can lie about the current disks being nowhere near what they label them as, you know it's only going to get worse. I could care less about their theories about size. I think it ought to be labeled ACTUAL USABLE SPACE AVAILABLE.

One reason why they do that is way back in the day when a kilobyte was still huge, the scientists thoght "Oh, 1024 bytes? That's close enough to 1000. No biggie." But that by now w/ terabyte drives, that's a big difference. Plus, people use base ten, computers use base 2. 1,000,000,000,000 bytes (1 terabyte) is easier to read for us than 1,125,899,906,900 bytes (a true terabyte, also known as a tebibyte or TiB).

lazyrighteye
Oct 15, 2007, 10:55 AM
And then it hits me - Wouldn't Time Machining 4TB of data take ~month? :rolleyes:

doemel
Oct 15, 2007, 10:56 AM
I remember the 100MB Zip Drive Iomega put out in '94.
At the time, it seemed the end all, be all.
Ha... Zip... good one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_drive

I loved those 100MB disks when they came out. They beat the living dung out of SyQuest's crappy 44/88MB drives and were a fraction of the cost of MO-drives. But soon I grew tired of Iomega to the point that now, in retrospect, I can safely say good riddance. Wait... they still exist? :D

~Shard~
Oct 15, 2007, 11:00 AM
With drives of this size, backing up via Time machine or whatever method is going to become even more paramount.

Losing several GBs of priceless data sucks as it is, but can you imagine havign an almost-full 4 TB hard drive fail on you? :eek:

benguin
Oct 15, 2007, 11:00 AM
Geez. I can't even fill up a 200GB hard drive.
:(

I guess I'm not trying hard enough. <selects Safari Private Browsing...> :D

Size isn't the point; hard drives are currently the weakest link in most computers because they're slow. But they're still used because they're big, and Flash memory is really expensive for the same amount of space.

EDIT: Oops, I guess that ways already said...

Windowlicker
Oct 15, 2007, 11:00 AM
We're living the year 2007. It's still four years to go to reach those sizes. 4Tb seems big indeed, but it won't be that huge after four years.

Remember when 1GHz processors came out? It's not that long time ago and now it's nothing.

~J~
Oct 15, 2007, 11:01 AM
And then it hits me - Wouldn't Time Machining 4TB of data take ~month? :rolleyes:

You are assuming we havent had any new interface technologies come to light at that point... I would certainly hope (and forsee) that we would have faster internal and external speeds in the next couple years for home computers... as fiberchannel drives / interfaces are quite fast... but very expensive for a home user!

Genghis Khan
Oct 15, 2007, 11:02 AM
Yeah, my point though is not the size of the disk as much as it is the speed of read/write

i think you've hit upon the big problem with this

before this announcement we were all dreaming of a flash based laptop because of the speed of the storage with HDD's is stupifyingly slow.

now you're offered larger HDD's which will take the same speed to move files around...which means it'd take days to back up a 4TB HDD

i'll give you a choice

in 2011
- 1TB HDD laptop
- 64GB (perhaps 128GB even) Flash Memory laptop

samh004
Oct 15, 2007, 11:05 AM
Sounds promising, but it's four years away and it wont actually be 1TB will it... it'll be 9XX MB :(

Orng
Oct 15, 2007, 11:06 AM
Theres a difference between FILLING a 4TB drive and USING all of a 4TB drive. Some large video projects can already use in excess of 1TB while rendering and encoding. Im working on a project right now that is 9.75 hours of video in 13 segments, and am routinely using up a 500GB drive doing 45min - 1.5hr segments.


No kidding, I plugged in a 1TB external drive about three months ago, it's already 3/4 full of video projects.

But the fact of the matter is, I could go through and clean up those projects and get it down to 1/4 TB, but just the reality of having a whole TB to breathe in is making me lazy. Like a prairie city that just spreads outwards like pee on a plate, cause we've got all the space in the world.

I know I have to get in there and clean up, because what will inevitably happen is a big rush job where I need a 1/2 TB right now, and I'll delete something important. Wouldn't be the first time.

SciTeach
Oct 15, 2007, 11:06 AM
With drives of this size, backing up via Time machine or whatever method is going to become even more paramount.

Losing several GBs of priceless data sucks as it is, but can you imagine havign an almost-full 4 TB hard drive fail on you? :eek:

Oh No! I lost my Encyclopedia Galactica!:(

~J~
Oct 15, 2007, 11:12 AM
Oh No! I lost my Encyclopedia Galactica!:(

Umm... the library of congress is 20TB... 4TB is the size of their DUI files and criminal records... oh, and how many times they have all been denied for a $2000 credit card...

Your encyclopedia galactica has got to be at least 1EB... but thats only theoretical... we'll never really need that much space... :eek:

Orng
Oct 15, 2007, 11:12 AM
Oh No! I lost my Encyclopedia Galactica!:(

you can use mine (http://wikipedia.org/) :)

weckart
Oct 15, 2007, 11:14 AM
Is this any relation to the Hitachi that was rumoured to be wanting to get out of the hard drive business because of mounting losses?

Genghis Khan
Oct 15, 2007, 11:15 AM
can't use yours as a source for a uni essay though:p

well officially at least *sneaks off*

~Shard~
Oct 15, 2007, 11:23 AM
Is this any relation to the Hitachi that was rumoured to be wanting to get out of the hard drive business because of mounting losses?

Heh heh... hard drive... mounting... good one... :D :cool:

williedigital
Oct 15, 2007, 11:25 AM
I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.


I have over 4gb of backed up dvds currently... spread across 9 drives.

santaliqueur
Oct 15, 2007, 11:27 AM
WOW... although totally un-necessary that would be awesome!

I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.

Of course thats what used to be said about 4gb drives tooThis is easy. I rip all my DVDs to my Mac Pro, for use with Apple TV. My iTunes library is about 4 TB right now. I could probably fill 8 TB worth of space with everything. People will fill whatever space is available, within reason.

Digital Skunk
Oct 15, 2007, 11:37 AM
Forget about more capacity... I want faster drives and faster machines. If that 1TB drive spins at 5400 or 4200 rpm than what is it good for? By the time that drives intros it better be spinning at 7200 rpm, and that should be the slower model. I want to see 10,000 rpm and 15,000 rpm SAS laptop drives that can make my computer scream. And I want a new type of battery that can power two of those fast drives and my quad core Intel Core 3 Duo Baltimore chip that runs inside of my 17" Mac Book Pro Extreme with SLI ver. 3

I don't want current technology that's larger or has more space, I want better new technology that takes us to the next step of computing.

Antares
Oct 15, 2007, 11:40 AM
Get me a 1TB iPod and I will be happy... :)

iMacBook
Oct 15, 2007, 11:45 AM
Sure, you'll get a 1TB or 4TB capacity, but actual space will be like 968GB for the 1TB and 3.5TB for the 4TB disk.

Lame.

SciTeach
Oct 15, 2007, 11:48 AM
Umm... the library of congress is 20TB... 4TB is the size of their DUI files and criminal records... oh, and how many times they have all been denied for a $2000 credit card...

Your encyclopedia galactica has got to be at least 1EB... but thats only theoretical... we'll never really need that much space... :eek:

It was compressed:p

you can use mine (http://wikipedia.org/) :)

Nah...I like using real sources for information.;)

bdkennedy1
Oct 15, 2007, 11:51 AM
Based on previous hard drive capacity introductions, we should be at 2tb next year at this time and 4tb in 2009.

Marx55
Oct 15, 2007, 11:56 AM
For a given fixed density, what are the ratios of maximum capacity for the different hard disk form factors?

---------------
3.5-inch
2.5-inch
1.8-inch
1.0-inch
0.85-inch
----------------

Something like this?

0.85-inch --x2--> 1-inch --x8--> 1.8-inch --x4--> 2.5-inch --x4--> 3.5-inch

Any web site data out there about that? Thanks.

GoodWatch
Oct 15, 2007, 11:59 AM
Technology just keeps progressing, it's fun! :D

I remember when a 400 MB HDD was huge - what would you need that much space for? ;)

I think I'll just hold out for a 1 zettabyte hard drive... :p :cool:

Reading your reply gave me something of an ‘aha’ experience. ‘T was somewhere in 1993 or so, and I was very proud of my 40 MB harddrive. I even ‘doubled’ the capacity with a program called Stacker. Perhaps the really old among you still remember. The fact that I do says enough. :rolleyes:

Anyhoo, a friend of mine, also a PC owner, called me on the phone one evening and was very exited. “I have the chance to buy a 400 MB harddrive” he yelled in my ear. “400!!!!”. I think it was 1100 guilders back then, a king’s ransom. That capacity was mind boggling then, there was no content to fill it with.

A few years later I was able to scrape enough money together to buy a 120 MB Kalok harddrive in another city. It lasted one week, after which it stopped working because of the dreaded ‘click of death’. Its replacement lasted for a month and I received my money back.

And now what can we do with 400 MB?

santaliqueur
Oct 15, 2007, 11:59 AM
Sure, you'll get a 1TB or 4TB capacityNo you won't, you'll get 1E40 (1 trillion) bytes for the "1TB", and 4E40 bytes for the "4TB". The capacity of the drive is always the same, formatted or not. It's the fine print that confuses most consumers.
but actual space will be like 968GB for the 1TB and 3.5TB for the 4TB disk.The "1TB" drive will be 909.495 GB, and the "4TB" drive will be 3.63798 GB. Lame indeed, but we ALL accept it (or are ignorant to it) when we buy hard drives, this is nothing new.

alljunks
Oct 15, 2007, 12:02 PM
if only Hitachi HDD still around at 2011

frank781
Oct 15, 2007, 12:15 PM
I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.


Very easy. I've currently Handbroken about 200 movies to Apple TV resolution and already filled up my 500GB HDD. And I still have 800 movies. And this doesn't include the HD pr0n either!

SciTeach
Oct 15, 2007, 12:15 PM
if only Hitachi HDD still around at 2011

All kidding aside...how many different "main" manufactures of hard drives are out there? There seems to be several dozen, but they are probably using someone else's technology. Anyone know this?

Clive At Five
Oct 15, 2007, 12:17 PM
All in all, this isn't really surprizing. In fact, it's a little but behind schedule. We had 1TB drives June of '07, so there are approximately 4 years between 1TB drives and 4TB drives. That's more than two iterations of Moore's Law, hence, at least 4TB.

*yawn*

I'll be more impressed when they will give us 4TB formatted space rather than calling it a 4TB disk drive and having it be far less than they advertise. I'd love to see the industry own up to their deceit of consumers. If a car manufacturer claimed that a car got 45 miles per gallon and the actual driver couldn't get better than 30, there'd be a class action lawsuit on their hands. We just bend over and take it from the companies.

Different formatting techniques lock up different amounts of space, but a 4TB drive formatted will still be about 3.7TB of space. Big whoop.

-Clive

frank781
Oct 15, 2007, 12:21 PM
While increasing 4 fold in 4 years is what everyone should be expecting. What's big in this news is that a mechanical device is achieving these feats when we are talking about nanometer sizes.

It ha been a big worry for the HDD makers that Flash and other electronics storage media would eventually catch up to mechanical devices and make them obsolete. With this breakthrough they can still maintain a good storage/price lead on Flash for the foreseeable future.

While flash only laptops are tempting, a nice 1 TB laptop would be awfully hard to resist.

:)

iMacBook
Oct 15, 2007, 12:22 PM
No you won't, you'll get 1E40 (1 trillion) bytes for the "1TB", and 4E40 bytes for the "4TB". The capacity of the drive is always the same, formatted or not. It's the fine print that confuses most consumers.
The "1TB" drive will be 909.495 GB, and the "4TB" drive will be 3.63798 GB. Lame indeed, but we ALL accept it (or are ignorant to it) when we buy hard drives, this is nothing new.

My point is, haven't we advanced in technology to get rid of that, all that extra crap and is stored on our hard drives?

Clive At Five
Oct 15, 2007, 12:30 PM
While flash only laptops are tempting, a nice 1 TB laptop would be awfully hard to resist.

Once SSD is cheaper, you'll be able to load an OS and them some onto it. In the meantime, small, reliable HDDs will have time to gain credibility. This being the case, I see no reason not to have one of each. 16GB SSD for OS and high-priority software, ~500GB 1.8" HDD for storage. Hopefully they'll improve on those little guys so they don't fail so much. Then again, simply not using them for an OS will give them a much longer lifetime.

-Clive

guzhogi
Oct 15, 2007, 12:32 PM
For a given fixed density, what are the ratios of maximum capacity for the different hard disk form factors?

---------------
3.5-inch
2.5-inch
1.8-inch
1.0-inch
0.85-inch
----------------

Something like this?

0.85-inch --x2--> 1-inch --x8--> 1.8-inch --x4--> 2.5-inch --x4--> 3.5-inch

Any web site data out there about that? Thanks.

Depending on how many platters it is, you can just use the formula of finding the area of a circle (Pi * radius^2) - (Pi * radius of middle section^2). The middle section is where all the platters connect and and turn. That times the * platters * 2 is the surface area of each hard drive. Divide a bigger sized hard drive by a smaller one gets you how much bigger the big one is.

anubis
Oct 15, 2007, 12:34 PM
I rated this one a negative. If they put the 1TB hard drive in an iPod, it would still be too small for me. I mean, 1TB, that means that you'd only be able to put 250,000 songs on there! If I listened to every song continuously, I would run out of songs in a measily two years!!!! That's just unacceptable. I'm going to wait until 2014 to buy a 1 petabyte iPod. Then I'll FINALLY be able to carry all 250 million songs that I have and want to listen to. At least then I'll be able to go 20 years of 24/7 listening before I run out of songs.

lofight
Oct 15, 2007, 12:38 PM
I rated this one a negative. If they put the 1TB hard drive in an iPod, it would still be too small for me. I mean, 1TB, that means that you'd only be able to put 250,000 songs on there! If I listened to every song continuously, I would run out of songs in a measily two years!!!! That's just unacceptable. I'm going to wait until 2014 to buy a 1 petabyte iPod. Then I'll FINALLY be able to carry all 250 million songs that I have and want to listen to. At least then I'll be able to go 20 years of 24/7 listening before I run out of songs.

:p, lol, you're joking aren't you ? :p

quinney
Oct 15, 2007, 12:56 PM
I rated this one a negative. If they put the 1TB hard drive in an iPod, it would still be too small for me. I mean, 1TB, that means that you'd only be able to put 250,000 songs on there! If I listened to every song continuously, I would run out of songs in a measily two years!!!! That's just unacceptable. I'm going to wait until 2014 to buy a 1 petabyte iPod. Then I'll FINALLY be able to carry all 250 million songs that I have and want to listen to. At least then I'll be able to go 20 years of 24/7 listening before I run out of songs.

People who love music have large collections and would like to have them
on their portable player in uncompressed format. I hope a 1TB iPod is
produced, before it is too small to hold all my music. If you want to
have the small number of tunes you like compressed down to a state
where you can barely hear them, buy a shuffle.

rhpenguin
Oct 15, 2007, 01:02 PM
WOW... although totally un-necessary that would be awesome!

I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.

Of course thats what used to be said about 4gb drives too

I have a 4TB RAID in my MythTV machine. Its near full.

Diatribe
Oct 15, 2007, 01:07 PM
This is the first step to HD content in the iTS. By 2010 bandwidth and space will be enough for Apple to offer HD, before I kind of doubt it. Anyway, cool beans. :)
When my notebook can hold all my songs in Lossless that will be the day that I celebrate. Until then I'll live with my measly 200GB.

Cloudsurfer
Oct 15, 2007, 01:21 PM
WOW... although totally un-necessary that would be awesome!

I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.

Of course thats what used to be said about 4gb drives too

The bigger your drive is, the more you'll find to fill it up.

80 gigs used to be enough, now 500 gig just won't cut it.

Consultant
Oct 15, 2007, 01:32 PM
Sounds promising, but it's four years away and it wont actually be 1TB will it... it'll be 9XX MB :(

LOL... 1TB formatted turned into 9xx MB, that's probably after install of the windoze Bloattiwa.

I'll stick with OSX and have it formatted to be 9xx GB. =p

FF_productions
Oct 15, 2007, 01:33 PM
WOW... although totally un-necessary that would be awesome!

I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.

Of course thats what used to be said about 4gb drives too

HD videos can probably fill up a 4 TB drive.

DV, your looking at almost 500-600 hours of video (guesstimate).


It's very cool to see that hard disk technology is still advancing.

Hitachi is doing a great job.

anubis
Oct 15, 2007, 01:40 PM
People who love music have large collections and would like to have them
on their portable player in uncompressed format. I hope a 1TB iPod is
produced, before it is too small to hold all my music. If you want to
have the small number of tunes you like compressed down to a state
where you can barely hear them, buy a shuffle.

Oh, wow! You are absolutely right. Uncompressed music has a bitrate of about 10 megabytes/sec. At those bitrates, you'd only be able to hold 25,000 songs on a 1TB iPod. That would be absolutely paltry and an insult to my character. Also, in order to tell the difference between 128kbit AAC and uncompressed music with headphones, they need to include $400 headphones with the 1 TB iPod as well. I'm going to rate this story a double negative!

fabianjj
Oct 15, 2007, 02:18 PM
Am I the only one who's still using an 80Gb IDE drive for my pc? I know I should've upgraded a long time ago, but 80 is about all I need(although many others definately need more than that).

But on the other hand I have to burn dozens of DVDs every month

MacsAttack
Oct 15, 2007, 02:23 PM
WOW... although totally un-necessary that would be awesome!

I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.

Of course thats what used to be said about 4gb drives too

I could use 4 of these right now. OK - two of them would be mirrored as my Time Machine backup volume, but that still gives me my system and scratch disks...

The natural state of any hard disk is full.

MaskedPhantom
Oct 15, 2007, 02:24 PM
The ultimate iPod.

:apple:

Diatribe
Oct 15, 2007, 02:33 PM
The natural state of any hard disk is full.

So true!

I wouldn't mind a bigger full disk though. :D

SiliconAddict
Oct 15, 2007, 02:34 PM
Yes and Apple will be up to a staggering 18GB of flash in their iPod Touch Advanced. :rolleyes: Can someone PLEASE slap some sense into these people and have them put REAL storage into their touch along with a larger cache? Please?

Data
Oct 15, 2007, 02:38 PM
Like sombody possted before, flash for the OS and main software, and hdd for the rest in a lap top would be the way to go i think, and i even tought there were plans oin that direction by Apple.

Diatribe
Oct 15, 2007, 02:45 PM
Yes and Apple will be up to a staggering 18GB of flash in their iPod Touch Advanced. :rolleyes:

Well the days of regular HDs in iPods are gone anyway, this is only interesting for laptops and desktops.
Hopefully they'll be at 64GB end of next year.

Dagless
Oct 15, 2007, 02:52 PM
Dammit, first Flash comes along with it's less delicate hardware, then in the other corner disk drives leap up this much.

I see the rift won't be vanishing any time soon?

santaliqueur
Oct 15, 2007, 03:09 PM
My point is, haven't we advanced in technology to get rid of that, all that extra crap and is stored on our hard drives?
I'm not sure if you understand. All the 'extra crap' on your hard drive is independent of its size. If you are complaining about how a hard drive's advertised size is more than what you actually get, this is nothing new. There is no "technology" that we can advance in order to correct this. Manufacturers use decimal units to advertise hard drive space, but computers use hard drive space in binary units. This leads to them exaggerating the size of a hard drive. They claim 1 GB = 1 billion bytes, but it's a little more than that. They put it all in the fine print, and it's a tricky practice.

MacinDoc
Oct 15, 2007, 03:10 PM
To me, the storage size isn't even the most important advancement we will see as a result of this discovery. If data is compressed to take only 25% of the space on a platter, that means that reading and writing of contiguous data from/to the platter will be 4 times the current speed, even at the same drive speed in RPM. This could significantly improve one of the largest current bottlenecks in computer speed: HD read/write. Laptop drives based on this technology could significantly outperform the best current desktop drives, with no need for increased power utilization. The only problem is that current data transfer speeds could be too slow, and new interfaces might need to be developed (although I don't know if SATA II has a high enough data transfer rate).

SactoGuy18
Oct 15, 2007, 03:26 PM
While breaking 1024 GB hard disk capacity barrier is great, the big problem is the system BIOS for current computers might not be able to find more than 1024 GB of hard disk storage capacity. That's actually not an issue for MacOS X and Windows XP/Vista, both of which are capable of handling multi-terabyte hard drives.

sachamun
Oct 15, 2007, 03:52 PM
I know I post this all the time, but it's relevant, and it's a must see...
http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/research/recording_head/pr/PerpendicularAnimation.html

Diatribe
Oct 15, 2007, 04:00 PM
I know I post this all the time, but it's relevant, and it's a must see...
http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/research/recording_head/pr/PerpendicularAnimation.html

Hehe I love this video. Pure genius. Thanks for posting it again.

Digital Skunk
Oct 15, 2007, 04:10 PM
All kidding aside...how many different "main" manufactures of hard drives are out there? There seems to be several dozen, but they are probably using someone else's technology. Anyone know this?

Actual HDD manufacturers... I think there is about fiver:
(1) Western Digital
(2) Samsung
(3) Hitachi (which bought IBMs division)
(4) Seagate
(5) Maxtor (I think... I could be wrong on this one. If isn't the top four I don't really trust them)

I don't know if there are any other actual hard disk drive manufacturers out there.

kebuttke
Oct 15, 2007, 04:55 PM
i think the reason why they havent put more emphasis on the flash memory is that the HDD companies want to exhaust all the loot from the HDD's as they can, then move on to the next thing. if they make flash cheap, it wipes out any r&d return they would get. i gaurantee they can make flash cheap, just too greedy, but i guess that capitalism for ya. again, thats just my theory.

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 04:57 PM
that will give y'all enough space to do nothing but DL'ing and watching pr0n for rest of your life.

Yes, but HD 1080P is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Just think with all that space in the next few years, and if the pr0n producers upgrade to 4K digital cinema (4096x2048), we'll have SUPER HI-DF pr0n! Gives a new meaning to "in your face". You'll actually be able to SEE the gonorrhea! WOW!

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 05:04 PM
WOW... although totally un-necessary that would be awesome!

I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.

Of course thats what used to be said about 4gb drives too

1) Lossless Music
2) Lossless 5.1 channel surround Music (live concerts, etc)
3) 1000's of pics.. everyone will have 20 Mpixel cameras that also do HD video recording
4) whole seasons of HD 720P/1080P episodes ripped from OTA broadcast TV.
5) 1080P/7.1 channel Lossless HD movies (bluray, HDDVD or otherwise)

eventually 4K digital cinema (4096x2048 or 4x the size of 1080P) will be the norm in theaters and then they'll have new 4K HDTVs and 4K "ultra-violet-ray players"

I still remember buying $100-$150 256MB cards for mp3 players. Now you can buy a 16GB SD card for the same price and 32GB/64GB is right around the corner.

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 05:10 PM
I dunno, I was actually hoping for less fanfare and efforts into the hard disk drive arena and more development and excitement in the solid state disk arena.
I thought that standard hard drives would be declining in technological development over the next 4-8 years with an increase in technological upgrades in flash and other drives.


Standard HDD marketshare/development probably will be declining in the next 4-8 years. But to say you were hoping for "more excitement in solid state tech"?
I think theres A TON of excitement in that arena. Cost aside, they have nearly CAUGHT UP to HDD! You can already buy a 128GB 2.5" drive and 256GB are just around the corner. Whats the latest 2.5" HDD you can buy? 250GB? just wait till the price per GB ratio falls to 1/5 and we'll be there!

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 05:16 PM
I'll be more impressed when they will give us 4TB formatted space rather than calling it a 4TB disk drive and having it be far less than they advertise. I'd love to see the industry own up to their deceit of consumers. If a car manufacturer claimed that a car got 45 miles per gallon and the actual driver couldn't get better than 30, there'd be a class action lawsuit on their hands. We just bend over and take it from the companies.

Perhaps they could make it even more fun and call it a 5TB drive. Why not a 6TB? If they can lie about the current disks being nowhere near what they label them as, you know it's only going to get worse. I could care less about their theories about size. I think it ought to be labeled ACTUAL USABLE SPACE AVAILABLE.

Its not deception when they list it in the fine-print :) But seriously they advertise the size as unformatted Gigabytes where people just assume that a REAL gigabyte (1000^3 bytes) is the same as a gibibyte (1024^3).
So you actually get about 7.5GB less per 100GB of the drive when you take the Gigabyte vs Gibibyte thing into account, plus the space you lose to the formatting/file system overhead)

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 05:18 PM
This is great but at what cost? Will these drives be as reliable? It seems you can only make things so small before the drives would fail...

"It seems you can only make things so small before the drives would fail" ?
thats a bit of a generalization, although yes you run into new problems when going down into the low double digit nanometers... I'm sure just as they come up with new breakthroughs in R&D to boost capacity, they'll keep finding ways to make them more reliable..

sushi
Oct 15, 2007, 05:18 PM
wow thats alot of stuff. i think we need blu ray or hd dvds so we can sort of back up to that media if we choose to. dvds are just too small these days
Current HD-DVD stores about 30GBs.

So it would take about 130 of them to back up a 4T HD. Not a good solution.

Looks like external HDs are the way to go. And you would need to use FW800 or SATA2. I would hate to use USB 2. That would take forever!

With drives of this size, backing up via Time machine or whatever method is going to become even more paramount.

Losing several GBs of priceless data sucks as it is, but can you imagine havign an almost-full 4 TB hard drive fail on you? :eek:
Good point.

How many don't back up now because it is inconvenient. As the drives get bigger, it will only become more inconvenient due to the time it takes.

Reading your reply gave me something of an ‘aha’ experience. ‘T was somewhere in 1993 or so, and I was very proud of my 40 MB harddrive. I even ‘doubled’ the capacity with a program called Stacker. Perhaps the really old among you still remember. The fact that I do says enough.
I remember the pre-HD days where everything ran from floppy discs. :)

A 40MB HD was a luxury item back then.

The bigger your drive is, the more you'll find to fill it up.

80 gigs used to be enough, now 500 gig just won't cut it.
Yep, the goldfish theory where one expands to their surroundings.

I know I post this all the time, but it's relevant, and it's a must see...
http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/research/recording_head/pr/PerpendicularAnimation.html
Always fun to watch again. Good little flick. :)

lukechip
Oct 15, 2007, 05:36 PM
WOW... although totally un-necessary that would be awesome!

I DARE someone to fill up a 4TB drive.

Of course thats what used to be said about 4gb drives too

From what I understand of Time Machine, that might be quite possible. Since it is taking hourly, daily and weekly snapshots of any files that are altered on your system, I can see scenarios where this could result in massive storage requirements. In particular

-iMovie / iDVD. Large video files that are being cropped / edited, or iDVD projects which are being worked on, could result in GB of backup every hour
-VMWare Fusion Virtual Machines. I'm likely to have around 10 of them running on my Mac at any time (dev studio, SQL box, web/application server, domain controllers, clients) and each is a 10 GB machine. They are constantly changing, so every hour Time Machine would want to take a 100 GB backup. That is 2.4 TB over 24 hours !!

Of course, I'll have to tell Time Machine to skip my VMs for now, since my 500 GB external backup drive would last all of 12 hours....

Not so sure about iMovie / iDVD projects ?

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 05:37 PM
wow, that's really alot, but i would prefer too see a flash drive of 120 GB in 2011!

LOL. You can already buy a 128GB one NOW in 2007 with a 256GB just around the corner. Just gotta fork out some cash. I think a better idea is to get one of those cheaper 64GB SSDs from DELL and add it along with a 250GB 2.5" HDD and you'd have a quick a$$ laptop. Just put your OS and all your apps on the SSD.

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 05:39 PM
I loved those 100MB disks when they came out. They beat the living dung out of SyQuest's crappy 44/88MB drives and were a fraction of the cost of MO-drives. But soon I grew tired of Iomega to the point that now, in retrospect, I can safely say good riddance. Wait... they still exist? :D

Remember the Iomega Jazz drive? wasn't it a 1GB or 2GB disk? Those were great! and the zip 250! oh the days... kids in school now put at least twice that on their keyring to carry around documents... No more "let me pull out my Iomega BRICK to get that excel file" lol

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 05:44 PM
You are assuming we havent had any new interface technologies come to light at that point... I would certainly hope (and forsee) that we would have faster internal and external speeds in the next couple years for home computers... as fiberchannel drives / interfaces are quite fast... but very expensive for a home user!

It's not the interface, its the drives for now. But in 4 years with 4TB drives @ 10K RPM that may change. I mean we already have SATA and eSata at 300MB/s and soon SATA/600MB. Its going to take some time before single or dual RAID drives can saturate a SATA 600 link, and by then Im sure they'll move to SATA 1200 or some future interface. I think Fiber Channel will still be relegated to big corporate SANs, etc.

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 05:48 PM
i think you've hit upon the big problem with this

before this announcement we were all dreaming of a flash based laptop because of the speed of the storage with HDD's is stupifyingly slow.

now you're offered larger HDD's which will take the same speed to move files around...which means it'd take days to back up a 4TB HDD

i'll give you a choice

in 2011
- 1TB HDD laptop
- 64GB (perhaps 128GB even) Flash Memory laptop

64GB SSD laptop in 2011?? A 64GB SSD from dell is already somewhat affordable and I'd imagine the 128GB drives will be in the premium gamer laptops in the next 7-9 months.

I'd hope in 2011 that at least 256GB drives will be commonplace in premium laptops.

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 06:05 PM
My point is, haven't we advanced in technology to get rid of that, all that extra crap and is stored on our hard drives?

For the last time people the HDD capacity listed on the harddrive box is measured in TRUE gigabytes, not Gibibytes.
a GIGABYTE (1000^3) IS NOT A GIBIBYTE (1024^3).
They advertise the drive in Gigabytes in base 10, but your computer runs in base 2 so your computer actually works with Gibibytes (2^30). It is sort of misleading, but only because of the colloquial mainstream use of "gigabytes".
You only have to learn this fact ONCE and then you won't be all pissy each time you buy a new HDD.

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 06:09 PM
This is the first step to HD content in the iTS. By 2010 bandwidth and space will be enough for Apple to offer HD, before I kind of doubt it. Anyway, cool beans. :)
When my notebook can hold all my songs in Lossless that will be the day that I celebrate. Until then I'll live with my measly 200GB.

what? 2010? Bandwidth and space at their present levels is easily enough for compressed H264 720P content. Why do you think there are already a few services offering said content. Where I live currently, I had to scale back to a 1.5 megabit wireless ISP connection, and even I can easily download TV episodes in 720P in a reasonable amount of time. Is it enough for a low-compression 1080P stream with Lossless 7.1 Audio? Probably not.. but 720P with dolby 5.1 would work just fine right now with Itunes. I'd even bet Apple will roll it out in spring 08 or sooner.

killerrobot
Oct 15, 2007, 06:12 PM
I dunno, I was actually hoping for less fanfare and efforts into the hard disk drive arena and more development and excitement in the solid state disk arena.
I thought that standard hard drives would be declining in technological development over the next 4-8 years with an increase in technological upgrades in flash and other drives.
Looking forward to the day when my OS and storage drives are NOT the weakest link in my machine.

I completely agree. I´d much rather have a 200 gb flash drive that´s not going to go bust on me and make me loose 4TB of data.
I wonder how many busted HDs are filling up landfills as we speak.:eek:

Diatribe
Oct 15, 2007, 06:18 PM
what? 2010? Bandwidth and space at their present levels is easily enough for compressed H264 720P content. Why do you think there are already a few services offering said content. Where I live currently, I had to scale back to a 1.5 megabit wireless ISP connection, and even I can easily download TV episodes in 720P in a reasonable amount of time. Is it enough for a low-compression 1080P stream with Lossless 7.1 Audio? Probably not.. but 720P with dolby 5.1 would work just fine right now with Itunes. I'd even bet Apple will roll it out in spring 08 or sooner.

Well, considering that a 90 min. movie would be around 4GB I don't know what you consider a reasonable amount of time. And storing 4-5GB movies with the current 120GB standard HDs would leave most people with 10 movies at the most before their HDs are full.

I don't consider that being ready. And besides offering everything in HD would quadruple Apple's server needs.

As I said I see this coming in 2010. If we're really lucky in 2009.

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 06:19 PM
Oh, wow! You are absolutely right. Uncompressed music has a bitrate of about 10 megabytes/sec. At those bitrates, you'd only be able to hold 25,000 songs on a 1TB iPod. That would be absolutely paltry and an insult to my character. Also, in order to tell the difference between 128kbit AAC and uncompressed music with headphones, they need to include $400 headphones with the 1 TB iPod as well. I'm going to rate this story a double negative!

First of all, many people use their Ipod as a portable CD collection in their homes, in their cars, etc, where lossless vs 192kbps compressed is EASILY distinguished. Not everyone is on the schoolbus with headphones.
Add to this SACD/DVD-Audio and other 5.1 surround audio (live concerts, etc) in lossless.

Secondly, you are ignoring all the other capabilities of the ipod. Do you like to carry around 100 DVDs in your pocket when you travel? A large capacity ipod makes an excellent DVD player with Full DVD quality movies with their original 5.1 audio.

I haven't even mentioned HD material. Have you seen the capacity requirements for a season of a HD 720P TV show? Easily 10GB or more.
2 hour 1080P movie with 5.1 lossless surround? 25+ GB.

See my point?

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 06:20 PM
Am I the only one who's still using an 80Gb IDE drive for my pc? I know I should've upgraded a long time ago, but 80 is about all I need(although many others definately need more than that).

But on the other hand I have to burn dozens of DVDs every month

no response necessary... see emphasis above ...

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 06:30 PM
i think the reason why they havent put more emphasis on the flash memory is that the HDD companies want to exhaust all the loot from the HDD's as they can, then move on to the next thing. if they make flash cheap, it wipes out any r&d return they would get. i gaurantee they can make flash cheap, just too greedy, but i guess that capitalism for ya. again, thats just my theory.

Hard disk manufacturers and Flash manufacturers ARE NOT THE SAME COMPANIES. The technology is totally different, and the patents are held by different companies. It's not a conspiracy to keep flash from succeeding, it's just supply and demand.
They are competing with each other, and the free market dictates where the R&D goes. As long as HDD manufacturers can keep the schism in capacity and $/MB with regards to flash memory, they will keep making the tech and doing new R&D. If flash comes within a certain capacity and price/capacity-unit threshold, then alot of the market will shift to flash SSD and the HDD will start to be phased out as the money will dry up. Same as every other industry.

SiliconAddict
Oct 15, 2007, 06:30 PM
Well the days of regular HDs in iPods are gone anyway, this is only interesting for laptops and desktops.
Hopefully they'll be at 64GB end of next year.

At which point I crack Fairplay and drop the iPod. the simple fact is music + movies == a crap load of space. If Apple can't realize that fact then they will loose out in the long run.

CaptainCaveMann
Oct 15, 2007, 06:31 PM
I really can't imagine needing 1TB in an iPod. :eek:

Diatribe
Oct 15, 2007, 06:34 PM
At which point I crack Fairplay and drop the iPod. the simple fact is music + movies == a crap load of space. If Apple can't realize that fact then they will loose out in the long run.

I agree with you, the problem isn't only Apple though. The problem is battery technology. With current technology the iPod touch or the iPhone wouldn't last 3 hours with real HDs. I'd love more space as much as the next guy but the batteries aren't up for it currently.

Diatribe
Oct 15, 2007, 06:41 PM
I really can't imagine needing 1TB in an iPod. :eek:

You're getting old... :p

MacsAttack
Oct 15, 2007, 06:56 PM
Actual HDD manufacturers... I think there is about fiver:
(1) Western Digital
(2) Samsung
(3) Hitachi (which bought IBMs division)
(4) Seagate
(5) Maxtor (I think... I could be wrong on this one. If isn't the top four I don't really trust them)

I don't know if there are any other actual hard disk drive manufacturers out there.

Segate bouth Maxtor. Now I'm just waiting for someone (Hitachi?) to scoop up WD. Fijitsu is still out there making laptop drives and stuff, and Samsung are entering the market with their SSD offerings. SSD is about to take off big time - some of the traditional HD manufacturers are looking at getting into the market. Samsung have an edge right now - for obvious reasons.

Once they get a 128MB SSD drive that works in my Mac Book down to £250 - I'm buying it... My Mac Pro will just have to make do with 3GB internal storeage and another 2GB external backup on old spinny disks.

cwryn
Oct 15, 2007, 07:05 PM
I'd love the space. Then I could actually keep HD movies on my pc and lossless music.

That and I could get rid of the external 500 gb hd I have wedged between my blacbook and my old hp.

winterspan
Oct 15, 2007, 08:00 PM
Segate bouth Maxtor. Now I'm just waiting for someone (Hitachi?) to scoop up WD. Fijitsu is still out there making laptop drives and stuff, and Samsung are entering the market with their SSD offerings. SSD is about to take off big time - some of the traditional HD manufacturers are looking at getting into the market. Samsung have an edge right now - for obvious reasons.

Once they get a 128MB SSD drive that works in my Mac Book down to £250 - I'm buying it... My Mac Pro will just have to make do with 3GB internal storeage and another 2GB external backup on old spinny disks.

I'll even knock £50 off it! I will sell you a 128MB SSD drive that is HFS+ formatted for your mac book for only £200! And while I'm at it, Ill also sell you an upgrade for that Mac Pro to DOUBLE your internal storage to 6GB for another £100! contact me and I'll set something up on ebay! :)

SactoGuy18
Oct 15, 2007, 10:50 PM
I really can't imagine needing 1TB in an iPod. :eek:

I think given the form factor of the iPod classic 160 GB and iPod Touch, the maximum you'll expect for a hard disk-based iPod will be around 250 GB maximum. By 2010, expect video-capable iPods to have as much as 160 GB of flash memory.

queshy
Oct 15, 2007, 11:06 PM
You would have to steal a LOT of music to get 1 TB! lol jks

jellomizer
Oct 16, 2007, 01:56 PM
Well lets look at some historical Data....
When I got my MB Pro last year the high end option was 200GB Drive.
5 years before that I got My PowerBook it was 40GB (5 times Less)
5 years before that High End Laptops could be up to 6 GB (5 times less)
So 4 years from now using the same trends we should be at 1 TB. No Big deal.

psychofreak
Oct 16, 2007, 01:59 PM
I think given the form factor of the iPod classic 160 GB and iPod Touch, the maximum you'll expect for a hard disk-based iPod will be around 250 GB maximum. By 2010, expect video-capable iPods to have as much as 160 GB of flash memory.

That would be awesome, but still not enough...

~Shard~
Oct 16, 2007, 02:14 PM
I realize flash is now becoming a viable storage alternative to hard drives, but when will we see further technological advancements to take us to that next level, in terms of holographic storage and the like? Or more accurately, when will these new technologies be feasible?

What I'm getting at is that perhaps 10 years from now we will indeed have 500TB storage devices, however I have my doubts whether they will be hard drive based...

weckart
Oct 16, 2007, 05:52 PM
Actual HDD manufacturers... I think there is about fiver:
(1) Western Digital
(2) Samsung
(3) Hitachi (which bought IBMs division)
(4) Seagate
(5) Maxtor (I think... I could be wrong on this one. If isn't the top four I don't really trust them)

I don't know if there are any other actual hard disk drive manufacturers out there.

Fujitsu was mentioned. You can also add Toshiba to the list. That is about it. Maxtor will soon go the way of Connor and Quantum after being subsumed within Seagate, and Hitachi is thinking of throwing in the towel.

Of course, once capacities for flash memory ramp up, the names will change again.

weckart
Oct 16, 2007, 05:56 PM
Actual HDD manufacturers... I think there is about fiver:
(1) Western Digital
(2) Samsung
(3) Hitachi (which bought IBMs division)
(4) Seagate
(5) Maxtor (I think... I could be wrong on this one. If isn't the top four I don't really trust them)

I don't know if there are any other actual hard disk drive manufacturers out there.

Fujitsu was mentioned. You can also add Toshiba to the list. That is about it, unless you want to include ExcelStor, who make some of Hitachi's disks under licence. Maxtor will soon go the way of Connor (now ExcelStor) and Quantum (now Maxtor) after being subsumed within Seagate, and Hitach is reportedly thinking of throwing in the towel.

Of course, once capacities for flash memory ramp up, the names will change again.

weckart
Oct 16, 2007, 05:58 PM
[Deleted]

Butthead
Oct 16, 2007, 06:21 PM
Fujitsu was mentioned. You can also add Toshiba to the list. That is about it, unless you want to include ExcelStor, who make some of Hitachi's disks under licence. Maxtor will soon go the way of Connor (now ExcelStor) and Quantum (now Maxtor) after being subsumed within Seagate, and Hitachi is reportedly thinking of throwing in the towel.

Of course, once capacities for flash memory ramp up, the names will change again.

This is SOOOO, not worthy of front page news. Post something like that when it's acutally closer to reality, right now its just very experimental..."could", yeah so what. "could" be halographic storage by 2010, or 2012, or whatever the company hyping their supposed next technology wants to excite you about. Any of them have anything close to a shipping product? No way, dumb story.

Last year at this time (September) Samsung annouced a breakthrough in flash memory, saying that their new type of flash Charge Trap, was already in prototype form in 64GB 40nm process, which could lead to more reliable and less expensive flash ram (not to mention higher performance speed wise). With 128GB flash ram a possibility by the end of the next year...which is right now. Where is this 40nm Charge Trap flash memory??? They just started *shipping* the prior generation of older tech 50nm process 64GB flash memory.

Wake me up in 2015 when Hitachi or whoever puts out these drives. Seagate and Fujitsu have also previously announced, R&D tech, that could also get same amount of storage on the venerable HD. YAWN, it's it going to be on my next Apple computer next year or the year after that??? No?, then it's not even worthy of mention on front page news...not yet even close to production.

But by 2011-12, Samsung and others fully expect to have replaced the majority of HD's in laptops with SSD's, I suspect by then cost will be close to parity btw 500GB HD for laptops and 1.8in 256GB SSD's...probably be users choice as to which they order for their laptops. Say OSX 10.6 due out in 2011-12 (they way Apple is going, what new insanely great functions can then add before then?), and will take upwards of 100GB for everything on a full install, still leaves 100+ GB free space. Unless you'r working with massively large databases, scientific data, or 2K res HD video, want 10k iTunes songs on your laptop, lol, you don't need a 500GB laptop HD.

Someone post a rumor about 64GB SSD's for the next round of Apple laptops (Samsung, Alienware, Dell already have them in their laptops), that would be worthy front page news. 128GB SSD's with even higher performance, instant on/startup, even better...though I wouldn't expect to see those until at least the end of '08...someone post a rumor about those later this year ;).

Might as well start posting every single 5yrs out storage solution on front page news then...useless info if you ask me.

weckart
Oct 16, 2007, 06:39 PM
This is SOOOO, not worthy of front page news. Post something like that when it's acutally closer to reality, right now its just very experimental..."could", yeah so what. "could" be halographic storage by 2010, or 2012, or whatever the company hyping their supposed next technology wants to excite you about. Any of them have anything close to a shipping product? No way, dumb story.

Last year at this time (September) Samsung annouced a breakthrough in flash memory, saying that their new type of flash Charge Trap, was already in prototype form in 64GB 40nm process, which could lead to more reliable and less expensive flash ram (not to mention higher performance speed wise). With 128GB flash ram a possibility by the end of the next year...which is right now. Where is this 40nm Charge Trap flash memory??? They just started *shipping* the prior generation of older tech 50nm process 64GB flash memory.


You want capacity now? Open your frickin wallet and get one of these (http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/storage/640gb-flash-hard-drive-for-a-paltry-19000-308398.php). If you ask nicely, I'm sure they will put one in a 2.5" 9.5mm notebook HD casing just ready for your Macbook.

bobsbarricades
Oct 17, 2007, 06:52 AM
*waits for mac pro of 2011*

DDR4 RAM
crappy graphics
16 cores @ 3.0GHz
16TB of storage


omg...omg...omg...omg blu-ray editing extreme

that made me chuckle pleasantly :)

xUKHCx
Oct 17, 2007, 06:57 AM
You want capacity now? Open your frickin wallet and get one of these (http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/storage/640gb-flash-hard-drive-for-a-paltry-19000-308398.php). If you ask nicely, I'm sure they will put one in a 2.5" 9.5mm notebook HD casing just ready for your Macbook.

That looks truely amazing, hopes the rumored new mabooks comes with an 80GB version (price increase by $2400 though)

killerrobot
Oct 17, 2007, 09:30 AM
You want capacity now? Open your frickin wallet and get one of these (http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/storage/640gb-flash-hard-drive-for-a-paltry-19000-308398.php). If you ask nicely, I'm sure they will put one in a 2.5" 9.5mm notebook HD casing just ready for your Macbook.

I don't see how they'll fit the girl into the 2.5" casing.;)