August 14, 2006 4:15 PM PDT
Terabyte drive to debut later this year
- Related Stories
-
Seagate boosts drives to 750GB
April 25, 2006 -
Seagate ups capacity with new hard drives
June 8, 2005 -
Hitachi to crank up efforts in consumer drives
February 28, 2005
It's not that big of a stretch for some hard drive makers. Hitachi already sells a 500GB drive, while rival Seagate Technology started shipping a 750GB drive to desktop makers in April. Seagate also sells a home storage device with two 500GB drives to make up 1 terabyte. Drive density effectively doubles every two years and increases steadily over the two-year period; hence, a terabyte drive is on the horizon, Healy said.
Granted, few people really need 1 terabyte of storage. But it sounds cool--sort of like you could be running a ballistic missile tracking site in your den. Besides, humans continue to show that they can come up with ways to gobble up hard drive space. High-definition video is expected to greatly expand the need for storage.
These large drives also will get incorporated into televisions and personal video recorders. Hitachi, among others, already sells TVs with integrated hard drives in Japan and other markets.
While large drives start out expensive, the price drops relatively quickly. Computer makers pay something in the 30-cent range for a gigabyte when buying hard drives, Healy said. The price at retail is around 50 cents or less.
Happy birthday, hard drive
On Sept. 13, the hard drive will turn 50. Hitachi and others will be on hand to celebrate the achievement at the Computer History Museum.
It has been a wild half century. The first magnetic drive, the RAMAC created by IBM, weighed a ton and could hold 5MB of data on 50 24-inch circumference platters. Now people can get a one-inch drive that can be held in your hand that holds more than that.
"Twenty years from now, we could (potentially) squeeze a terabyte onto a one-inch drive," Healy said.
See more CNET content tagged:
terabyte, Hitachi Ltd., Seagate Technology, hard drive, TV
53 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment
I guess a 931GB drive doesn't sound as attractive as 1000GB, so why not build a 1070GB (or whatever) from the start and label it as a 1TB drive.
__________________________
R.K.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.Remove-All-Spyware.com" target="_newWindow">http://www.Remove-All-Spyware.com</a>
Tootles
- Toby
There is a standard now for new prefixes when dealing with binary math prefixes.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte" target="_newWindow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte</a>
1 byte = 8 bits (this hasn't changed)
1 kibibyte = 1024 bytes
1 mebibyte = 1024 kibibytes
1 gibibyte = 1024 mebibytes
No one uses these terms that I've ever met.
There's my 2ยข
(This is no different than a pound of gold does not have the same mass as a pound of feathers. Just different accepted uses for the same word.)
Additionally, to clear this up the international standards organizations have adopted a different terminology for the 1,024 factor systems as mentioned elsewhere in this forum. Virtually no one uses it, but it is the official standard.
Complaining about a 1 TB driving having just 10^12 bytes (raw, unformatted) on it is either just silly ranting or just stupid. Take your pick.
Or.. you take the word of a couple of dust covered geeks in their natural basement subterranean room who decided that because binary makes it easier to express things in terms of powers of two that kilo may as well refer to '1024' because it's 'close enough'.
Meanwhile the war rages on, with computer people enraged that advertisers would be so 'roman'tic in their definition of their storage space, and the continuing press to deleting the ancient and cultural roots has the Greeks and Romans turning in their proverbial graves. I suppose I'd rule in favour in the modern, after thinking about it, simply because:
A) Computer people tend to live in their own little world, so should have the right to define it however they like.
B) Computer people are often a mysterious and primal people, unspoiled in their natural habitat by things like the culture of other civilizations.
and finally:
C) Comparing the two, using Roman kilobytes vs
using modern kilobytes would mean overall that
computer systems would have far less room for
MP3s, which likely was the leading factor to the
overall decline and fall of their great empire.
Marketing departments should learn from the mistakes of the past, and not doom us all.
Take music, for example: I probably wouldn't be that incorrect when I say that most people encode their music in a lossy format, such as MP3, WMA, OGG, etc. Encoding in lossy formats of course results in a loss of quality as compared to the original source, and the quality lowers even further when the file is reencoded or converted to another lossy format.
Now why would anyone want to use lossy formats then? Because that person has a lot of music, and only on average 100GBs or less of space on their hard drive, and even less on their MP3 player!
My history teacher from eleventh grade filled a 400GB hard drive in a matter of months; the only data on that drive other than the OS and a few programs were videos, less than a hundred of them. Why did so few videos take up so much space? Because she needed to encode them losslessly since she did a lot of editing with them and didn't want to lose any of the video quality.
As you can see, if the average computer carried an 80GB drive instead of an 80GB drive, the MP3, as well as almost all forms of lossy formats, would be dead. It would no longer be necessary to shrink a song from a CD from 1411kbps to 192kbps because the difference between, say, 70MB and 7MB would no longer be that great. Man, wouldn't that be a dream come true for audiophiles everywhere.
In conclusion, sure, one terabyte is a milestone, however if computer hard drives aren't the only ones that need to evolve. MP3 players now need to hold a lot more than a pathetic 60GB so that everyone, everywhere, can finally enjoy their music collection anywhere the way it was intended: in full, completely lossless quality. Internet connections also have to jump on the train, because with the need to hole more more data, comes the need to download (and upload!) more data at speeds MUCH faster than 9mbps.
"As you can see, if the average computer carried an 80 TERABYTE drive instead of an 80 GIGABYTE drive".
format to halve the space taken up by uncompressed audio whilst
still enjoying true CD quality sound. Of course, to play ALL your
music on the road like this, an iPod will still need to have capacities
of more than 60GB, but it would stop that terabyte drive filling up
quite so quickly if you want audiophile-quality audio.
Actually, I could use one as a shadow drive or Leopard "Time Machine" drive.
Wonder how many days to zero-out or 7-writes format?
double height drives with two sets of heads per trach, and smart raid would make a lot of sense.
and for $50 make it network attached.
absolutely beautiful. Software can scale to small images, which makes sense. But a full definition 1080I PBS program was 50 Gegabytes.
The movie industry will gobble up the biggest boxes it can find, since movies today are 4K X 2K pixels = 8 MEGAPIXELS PER FRAME times 24 frames per second. (or 60 per second for the dougless trumballs and zekes of the world)
and there can be 20 or thirty versions of various scenes, as each department puts in their layer. the $129 SONY VEGAS software lets users plug in their HDV cams and transfer 25 Mbps data streams. Hard drives will always get fuller and fuller.
That should be called FULLERS LAW.
I realize the current generation is picking up its bad rhetorical habits from the type of riffraff who run the country and the media right now, but exercising some verbal self control gives your ideas more power through their dignified gravity...
view on a drollworthy amount of HD space.
why dont you go check your myspace
for my family , to me it just seems like the best way to preserve
good memories.
However, when it comes to hard drives, they ARE measured by the base 10 system. When you look at a 1 Terabyte drive and it says it only has 895 Megabytes, keep in mind that the computer is thinking multiples of 1024 instead of 1000. You're not being ripped off, what you see is the difference in how the computer wishes to see it versus our base 10 measurements.
Cheaper to buy a new cheap external 250 gig drive and copy it.
Remember - Backup, Backup, Backup.
That's the only solution whether it's a 250GB or 1000GB.
circumference would be > 75-inch.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://colossalstorage.net" target="_newWindow">http://colossalstorage.net</a>
Just like speed of CPUs...you hear that they have reached speeds of 10Ghz but it won't come out yet because they could sell computers with 4GHz, 4.5 GHz, 5 GHz, 5.33GHz...etc..
If they sold computers at that speed, everyone would get it and there would no other computers to sell since it may take a long time to make a faster computer...
Talking about petabyte drives is a waste of time at this point, but later, in the next 10 or 20 years, we will see them. In our PC's, and in the next generation ipods, too!