Seagate is gonna give you 50TB/sq inch or 300TB on one drive.

[mentok1982]

That is a lot of storage. I heard of the news via this Joystiq post:
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/01/02/seagate-the-answer-to-digital-distribution/

And here is the article from Wired's website:
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,72387-0.html?tw=rss.index

[si0dine]

Wouldn't they be shooting themselves in the foot by doing this? Going from 750gb drives to 300tb drives in 3 years isn't going to give them a lot of room to progress, unless uber HD comes out and takes 10tb per movie.

[Shadowed_Stranger]

Wouldn't they be shooting themselves in the foot by doing this? Going from 750gb drives to 300tb drives in 3 years isn't going to give them a lot of room to progress, unless uber HD comes out and takes 10tb per movie.
possibly, but if the tech is cheap enough, seagate could get a virtual monopoly on hard drives. a prolbem, like you said, would be upgrading. once people get these there will be almost no upgrading. once you have this, there is no reason to ever upgrade or get another besides raid for performance or backup.

[Asian Dub Foundation]

the more the better i always say

[protias]

possibly, but if the tech is cheap enough, seagate could get a virtual monopoly on hard drives. a prolbem, like you said, would be upgrading. once people get these there will be almost no upgrading. once you have this, there is no reason to ever upgrade or get another besides raid for performance or backup.
Depends on the price of these drives too. I mean the 750GB drives are $340 (AS) and $450 (NS) which isn't that incredibly cheap, but not too expensive for how much storage that is. I wouldn't doubt each of these drives would be several thousand dollars. For most people, that's just too much money.

[[LYL]Homer]

We can all save more pr0...I mean data then.

[protias]

Homer']We can all save more pr0...I mean data then.
Yes, and you can lose all your pr0nz if the drive dies and go, "Oh noes, all my pronz is liek gone!" :D

[Ockie]

30 x 300tb drives.... hmmm :p


Drools, that would be a nice storage upgrade.


However, I think this is unrealisitic... kinda like the same as in the 50's how they said that in the 2000's we'd have flying cars and never use gasoline anymore.

[mdameron]

What's the next word after terabyte?

[SolidFeather]

What's the next word after terabyte?


Lotsabytes

[draksia]

Lotsabytes

Officially its peta.

[protias]

Officially its peta.
Just make sure you don't have peta-files in your computer :eek:

[Dew]

I would like to note that that is most likely 300 teraBIT per hdd. That would be ~35 Terabytes formatted. For reference, if my TV collection were entirely 1080i, it would be around 20TB instead of the 1.56TB it is now. For 1080p it would be almost double the size. So to those who say where would the market be, I say in your living room. In another 10 years we may have UHDV, that would consume a 35Terabyte drive with with just 70 hours of footage.

So no, storage is NEVER enough.

My prediction: In 10 years we will look at Terabytes as we look at Gigabytes today.

[StorageJoe]

For 1080p it would be almost double the size.

Foolish child..... 1080p requires no more storage space than 1080i material. The difference is that the program information in combined into one frame and slowed to 30 hz from 60 hz. The storage requirements are indentical.

[Dew]

Foolish child..... 1080p requires no more storage space than 1080i material. The difference is that the program information in combined into one frame and slowed to 30 hz from 60 hz. The storage requirements are indentical.

Whoops, you're right. My other statements still stand though.

[Shadowed_Stranger]

Depends on the price of these drives too. I mean the 750GB drives are $340 (AS) and $450 (NS) which isn't that incredibly cheap, but not too expensive for how much storage that is. I wouldn't doubt each of these drives would be several thousand dollars. For most people, that's just too much money.
very true, but to define cheap I meant by todays price standards. $150 or less and they seem like they would 'almost' be a monopoly. But it price per gb, you are probably spot-on in price ranges for todays standards. think what it costs to get 7.5tb storage today. Even if it costs them very little to manufacture these, its all about supply and demand. 300TB, they could charge whatever they wanted.

Another thing, that article was probably not talking mainstream drives, that was probably 'theorhetical' storage capacity. That is an exponential increase in hdd sizes, they will probably be releasing 1tb drives extremely cheap assuming the manufacturing process is similar enough to todays drives that they can easily manufacture many of them. I think they will not release uber-big drives until they start getting competition, otherwise they will incrementally release bigger drives to maximize their profit.

[[LYL]Homer]

mega
giga
tera
peta
exa
zetta
yotta

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

[protias]

very true, but to define cheap I meant by todays price standards. $150 or less and they seem like they would 'almost' be a monopoly. But it price per gb, you are probably spot-on in price ranges for todays standards. think what it costs to get 7.5tb storage today. Even if it costs them very little to manufacture these, its all about supply and demand. 300TB, they could charge whatever they wanted.

Another thing, that article was probably not talking mainstream drives, that was probably 'theorhetical' storage capacity. That is an exponential increase in hdd sizes, they will probably be releasing 1tb drives extremely cheap assuming the manufacturing process is similar enough to todays drives that they can easily manufacture many of them. I think they will not release uber-big drives until they start getting competition, otherwise they will incrementally release bigger drives to maximize their profit.

No competition? So I guess the 6 drive manufacturers out there are not competing. :rolleyes: WD is the biggest of the group for consumer grade hard drives. Seagate has grown pretty big and giving WD its run for the money. Seagate does have the bigger drives, but WD has large drives for a cheaper price (just compare prices between the WD320KS and Seagate 320NS, and yes, the 320AS is cheaper, but I do no believe it offers the ability to use it as a single drive or in a RAID format, once you get above that storage range, WD is much cheaper than Seagate). Recently, WD released a 3 platter 500GB drive (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822136073) and both manufactures plan to roll out a 640GB (WD) and 960GB (Seagate) models later this year. Competition between these two are vicious.

[Ockie]

No competition? So I guess the 6 drive manufacturers out there are not competing. :rolleyes: WD is the biggest of the group for consumer grade hard drives. Seagate has grown pretty big and giving WD its run for the money. Seagate does have the bigger drives, but WD has large drives for a cheaper price (just compare prices between the WD320KS and Seagate 320NS, and yes, the 320AS is cheaper, but I do no believe it offers the ability to use it as a single drive or in a RAID format, once you get above that storage range, WD is much cheaper than Seagate). Recently, WD released a 3 platter 500GB drive (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822136073) and both manufactures plan to roll out a 640GB (WD) and 960GB (Seagate) models later this year. Competition between these two are vicious.


I like to think that more of the competition is "rehearsed" rather than a race with cut throat pricing. Keep competition high in the consumers high and keep your pocket books filled, thats the trick.

[Dew]

the 320AS is cheaper, but I do no believe it offers the ability to use it as a single drive or in a RAID format

It does either just fine. I have 8x ST3320620AS in RAID-5.

[WhiteZero]

I think it's about time hard drive developers stop focusing on size and put their research more into speed.

[protias]

It does either just fine. I have 8x ST3320620AS in RAID-5.

Thanks for clearing that up. I wasn't sure what the difference was between the AS and the NS models. I just assumed the NS did a better job in being in a RAID than the AS.

[TheBuzzer]

yotta drives are going to be sweet :P

[Skud]

yotta drives are going to be sweet :P

Word has it that yotta-byte drives are going to employ Jedi mind tricks to keep that much data on them..

Lol..

Ahhhhh.... I'm great...

Riley

[AliP]

Segate may be a proper company but remember the guys promising the peta byte drives, still i hope this is true.

[Seated]

According to the article, they're going to be using HAMR technology to pull this off. I looked it up on Google and found out that Seagate was making annoucements about this technology back in August, 2002. They still don't have it.

Last summer Seagate and Hitachi announced 1 TB drives by the end of the year. Today Seagate said that they'll have it within the first half of 2007.

It certainly sounds as if there are issues that no one is talking about in getting to a 1 TB drive (and larger). My own personal opinion is that so much of this stuff is media hype, vaporware-ish. Other harddrive manufacturers are not announcing this vaporware, like WD.

Since good RAID controllers are not dropping in price, and the price per drive is relatively speaking high, I've been waiting for the 1 TB drives. I would happily buy at least 3 of them tomorrow if they existed (yes, I need the space).

[longblock454]

I think it's about time hard drive developers stop focusing on size and put their research more into speed.

Raptors are fast enough. I'd much rather have more capacity than speed. With 10M Pixel cameras dvds and hours of video, i'd take 5000rpm 1TB+ "slow" drives anyday!