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

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

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

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

the more the better i always say

Originally Posted by Shadowed_Stranger

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.

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

Originally Posted by [LYL]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!"

30 x 300tb drives.... hmmm


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.

What's the next word after terabyte?

Originally Posted by mdameron

What's the next word after terabyte?

Lotsabytes

Originally Posted by SolidFeather

Lotsabytes

Officially its peta.

Originally Posted by draksia

Officially its peta.

Just make sure you don't have peta-files in your computer

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.

Originally Posted by Dew

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.

Originally Posted by StorageJoe

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.

Originally Posted by protias

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.

mega
giga
tera
peta
exa
zetta
yotta

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

Originally Posted by Shadowed_Stranger

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. 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 and both manufactures plan to roll out a 640GB (WD) and 960GB (Seagate) models later this year. Competition between these two are vicious.

Originally Posted by protias

No competition? So I guess the 6 drive manufacturers out there are not competing. 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 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.

Originally Posted by protias

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.