PDA

View Full Version : So sad...


musicpyrite
Apr 25, 2004, 07:21 PM
So sad, had to happen one day...
*sob*
The article says it all.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/ptech/04/22/computer.speedlimit.ap/index.html

wdlove
Apr 25, 2004, 07:30 PM
All good things come to an end at some point. Even that speed limit may be raised in the future, maybe they will change media! :eek:

MongoTheGeek
Apr 25, 2004, 07:38 PM
Thats the limit on how fast you can change the polarity of media. There is nothing that says you can't write multiple bits at once.

Sparky's
Apr 25, 2004, 07:52 PM
Well at least Einstein won't be around to see his theory tested. When CPUs are developed that contain bimolecular construction I think even this speed limit may be surpassed :cool:

musicpyrite
Apr 25, 2004, 08:17 PM
When CPUs are developed that contain bimolecular construction I think even this speed limit may be surpassed :cool:

w...t...f...

I read some physics books like The Elegant Universe, by Brian Green, but I have no idea in he** what you just said.

ltgator333
Apr 25, 2004, 11:57 PM
yeah.. like what if you had a two platter (or more) drive that each platter had an independent read/write head and the thing worked like a RAID 0 with multiple disks but just on one disk between the different platters.. and have it set up where the two platters addressing interleaves so to speak.. from the outside the first block and the second block are just back to back on the same platter but in reality the first block is on platter 0 and the second is on platter 1 and so on..... you could have a bit of a monster there..

PlaceofDis
Apr 26, 2004, 12:22 AM
its not like we are using drives this fast everyday yet, we have time to come up with the "faster better" drives....

baby duck monge
Apr 26, 2004, 12:42 AM
i want a couple drives that work 1,000 times faster than what i have now. and processors that can take advantage of them. i could move some mp3s (or AACs) from my computer to my external really fast... :rolleyes:

i am having a hard time picturing drives that are 100 times faster than current ones, let alone 1,000, but i guess that's how it usually goes. i guess there's no harm in planning ahead to see just how far you could theoretically take today's method of storage. :)

rueyeet
Apr 26, 2004, 03:47 PM
What usually seems to happen with this kind of thing is that when the limit of one technology is reached, new technologies evolve to either expand or replace it. I wouldn't worry about it much. :)

Sparky's
Apr 26, 2004, 06:44 PM
w...t...f...

I read some physics books like The Elegant Universe, by Brian Green, but I have no idea in he** what you just said.

I can't recall the exact time, but a show on PBS covered the development of biological based CPU chips that would contain transistors that were actually live molecules. The research had enough positive results to have merit, and the scientist were continuing work on them, but with current technology it's not happening anytime in the near future.

bennetsaysargh
Apr 26, 2004, 07:58 PM
well, i don't think we'll have to worry about reaching this limit. it seems fast enough to me, you can only make those 1's and 0's so fast...

musicpyrite
Apr 26, 2004, 09:12 PM
well, i don't think we'll have to worry about reaching this limit. it seems fast enough to me, you can only make those 1's and 0's so fast...

Well, if we listen to you like most people want to lisetn to Billy Gates back in 81, all of our computers would have 640 K of memory :eek:

bousozoku
Apr 26, 2004, 11:16 PM
What usually seems to happen with this kind of thing is that when the limit of one technology is reached, new technologies evolve to either expand or replace it. I wouldn't worry about it much. :)

That's right. It's not as if we still use magnetic core memory for RAM anymore. Magnetic read/write drives will go away and other media will take their place. We've already seen USB keychain drives used in place of floppies and Zip drives, so it's likely they'll have some non-moving storage device which will give more consistent times, since there won't be a head moving across a platter.

Mr. Anderson
Apr 27, 2004, 06:58 AM
By the time we're able to reach that limit, there will be better forms of data storage available. Disk drives are ancient technology as far as the computing industry is concerned. Solid state memory has much more potential and its just a matter of time before we start seeing it more.

D

bennetsaysargh
Apr 27, 2004, 11:17 AM
Well, if we listen to you like most people want to lisetn to Billy Gates back in 81, all of our computers would have 640 K of memory :eek:

true i guess. i stand very corrected then :)

stoid
Apr 27, 2004, 11:34 AM
I'm not familiar with how solid sate memory works, but it would seem like there is a roof to it's speed as well, all be it much higher I'd imagine. How much faster than current magnetic storage is solid state at this point? I know that computer RAM is really fast, but if it's based on the same technology as the compact flash card in my Canon digital camera, why is the CF card so slow?

musicpyrite
Apr 27, 2004, 02:04 PM
Since we are talking about solid state HDs, I found some that I would like to have (http://pcmag.shopping.com/xPF-Sandisk_FlashDrive_2_GB_SD25B_2048_100)

Also, if you go to geek.com, you can find a computer that has 12 Quantum Rushmore Ultra 5320 3.2Gig solid state drives, at a total cost of 336,000 USD!!! Here's the link:http://www.geek.com/htbc/glanin.htm

Edit: did I mention, that that computer system has a 50" plasma screen TV as a monitor!

G4scott
Apr 27, 2004, 03:03 PM
The thing about those solid state drives is that they go bad really quickly. I'm pretty sure the military uses them in fighter jets, because normal HD's would be more likely fail under the enormous G's felt by the aircraft, but eventually, after so much read/write activity, the memory goes bad, and gets to a point where it can't be used.

Makosuke
Apr 27, 2004, 04:50 PM
Yeah... while it's interesting in a theoretical sense, I don't think HDs, at least not using current technology, will ever get anywhere near that kind of theoretical speed.

And although it's generally true that once one line of technology tops out, it's replaced by another, there are physical limits that those pesky natural laws impose (such as this speed limit). Although you could, in some cases, push them a bit, it's usually not worth the vast expense to do so.

Hence passenger planes haven't gotten significantly faster in three decades and the only one that was is now mothballed. Cars can go a bit faster, but a high-end racecar of 40 years ago isn't that much slower than one now. We're still in the infancy of computer tech, but it's much more mature now than it was in the past.

Note, for example, that the rate at which the density and speed of ATA hard drives increases has fallen off considerablly in the past couple of years, and SCSI has been relatively stable in terms of density and speed for going on two years now, with no technologies anywhere near the point at which they might take the place of current platter-based rotating magnetic storage. Even Hitachi's 400GB monster just uses 5 platters with the same tech as the 83GB/platter 250GB drives.

Not to say that advances aren't being made, but Moore's law and its kin aren't some set-in-stone law of nature, it was just a worthwhile observation about the advances in an industry in its infancy that held true for a while. Every tech advances rapidly in its infancy, after all.