Slashdot Mirror


One Terabyte On a 12-inch^H^H^H^Hcm Disk

News for nerds writes: "At InterOpto'02 - international optoelectronics exhibition hold in Chiba, Japan - OPTWARE Co.Ltd. made up of ex-Sony engineers, demoed(in Japanese) 1-terabyte super-high speed optical disk system "T-VRD." It uses hologram and stores 1 terabyte data in a 12-cm-CD-size disc, with 100Mbps - 1Gbps transfer rate. Available in 2003 as 19-inch rackmount, 2005 for PC." Update: 07/16 18:33 GMT by T : Sorry, that's centimeters, not inches, which is of course even better ;)

290 of 462 comments (clear)

  1. 12 cm or 12 inch? by spookymonster · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's a big difference there....

    --
    - Despite popular opinion, I am not perfect.
    1. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by Elledan · · Score: 1

      The article mentions 12 cm, and shows pictures of CD-sized disks, so I'm willing to bet that these disks are 12 cm :)

      --
      Site & blog: http://www.mayaposch.com
    2. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by ryanr · · Score: 2

      Surely, it must be 12cm, which is more CD-size. I get that impression from the pics.

    3. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by breon.halling · · Score: 4, Funny

      Please don't tell my girlfriend!

      --
      "Yeah, well, Dracula called and he's coming over tonight for you and I said okay."
    4. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by jdubois79 · · Score: 1, Troll

      According to the article, it's 12 cm.

      Ah, another wonderful example of americans not being able to tell the difference between CM and IN. ;)

      --
      --------
      Nothing can be done before the tremendous power!
      RabidComics
    5. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      "12 cm or 12 inch? There's a big difference there...."

      Most blondes don't know the difference.

    6. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by gerf · · Score: 1

      oh my god, i cracked up here at work when i read that... stoppit, or i'll get fired for reading /. all the time.

      seriously, this is awesome. maybe they'll replace DVDs, since we'll "all have HDTV's by then", (reminiscent of people in the 60s thinking we'd be flying to work by now... buy anywho), it could replace DVHS as a top-quality, insane movie experience.

      or maybe we'll buy one of those instead of 30 DVDs for the entire collection of LoTR!

    7. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The first time I saw a terabyte of storage, it did use 12-inch disks. This was at a trade show well over 10 years ago. It was a juke box type machine the size of a couple of old-fashioned telephone booths. It was filled with hundreds of 12-inch optical disks.

      At the time, they were touting the amazing density of optical technology. I guess they've made a little more progress since then.

    8. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by craw · · Score: 1

      12 cm must refer to the floppy disk version, while 12 inches is the hard disk.:-) Quite impressive. If they were marketing this product towards women they could nickname it Magic Johnson. Unfortunately, I believe that John Wayne Bobbitt already has dibs on this nick.

    9. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by NotoriousDAN · · Score: 1

      If you take into account the fact that "^H" represents "backspace", the title makes an awful lot more sense.

    10. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by Hammer · · Score: 1

      I do belive that our friend Timothy tried, in a subtle way, to show the 2.54^2*3.14 increase in data density. 12-inch^H^H^H^Hcm
      He should have known that it would wizz over the head of some...

    11. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by scott1853 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I don't know about blondes, but brunettes don't fall for the ol' "it's not the size the matters" line.

    12. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by Ioldanach · · Score: 3, Funny

      Its 12 cm, until you rub it. Then... ;>

    13. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by Ioldanach · · Score: 2
      If you take into account the fact that "^H" represents "backspace", the title makes an awful lot more sense.

      Yes, it does, now that its been changed. It only said inch before, like the editor's comment says...

    14. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by nachoman · · Score: 2, Informative

      12 cm is about 4.7 inches for you non-metric people...

      very nice.

    15. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by feed_me_cereal · · Score: 1

      yup. looks like someone forgot to stty erase ^h

      --
      "Question with boldness even the existence of a god." - Thomas Jefferson
    16. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by fatphil · · Score: 1

      Haha, why the heck have you included 3.14 in that ratio?
      Do metric circles have area r^2, and imperial circles have area pi.r^2?

      Funniest thing is that you've posted exactly the same flawed post /repeatedly/ in this thread. Next time do it in all caps and bold too!

      FP.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    17. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by Hammer · · Score: 1

      Let me guess...you flunked math...
      Area always is pi * r^2 regarless of the unit you use.
      2" circle is 2^2*3.14 = 6.28sqin
      5.08 cm circle is 5.08^2 * 3.14 = 81.03 cm2 (incidentally the same actual area....)

    18. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by nortcele · · Score: 1

      Or the same size as the bore on a M1 Abrams tank.

    19. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by saider · · Score: 1
      We know the difference is just that for most Americans there is a one-to-one conversion ratio. So what's the big deal?

      ;-)

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    20. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by johnnash · · Score: 1

      That would still equal 8 inches, wouldn't it?

    21. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by MSG · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but the difference of the area of two circles in relative terms is (r2 - r1)^2, not (r2 - r1)^2 * pi.

      I think I need a new sig:
      Don't be an elitist asshole. You're just going to look like an idiot.

    22. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by fatphil · · Score: 1

      No, let me guess you flunked English.
      Re-read your post. Reread my post. _Understand_ what I've written therein.

      Then come back here apologetically when you realise that you've not just
      made a minor cock-up, which was forgivable, but you've completely missed the
      point being made by the person who was pointing out your mistake, and
      thus made yourself look like a total fuckwit. Good darts. Double top, in fact.

      FP.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    23. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by edremy · · Score: 2
      Ooh, ohh, I get pedant points.

      12cm is the bore on an M1*A1* or *A2* tank. The M1 has a 105 mm rifled gun, the same as on the older M60 series.

      --
      "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
    24. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? by fatphil · · Score: 1

      Erk, semantic minefield.

      I'd say:

      Difference in area is (r2^2-r1^2).pi
      Ratio of areas is (r2/r1)^2
      Difference of areas as a ratio is (r2^2-r1^2)/r1^2

      On the whole anything that is a ratio won't have the pi term, and anything that's absolute area will have a pi term.

      Phil

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
  2. Great... by tiedyejeremy · · Score: 2

    Another opportunity for the RIAA to change formats and resell everything!

    --
    Anything you say will be held against you. ... "tits"
    1. Re:Great... by Cynikal · · Score: 1

      no, but can you imagine the blank media tax on your brand new 1TB mp3 player?

    2. Re:Great... by jlagrua · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except by then the recording industry will have been destroyed by everyone gathering every song ever recorded to burn on it. Feh! One disk... DONE!

      --
      - Que profuturus est maeror causa sententia Caelestis
    3. Re:Great... by aztec1430 · · Score: 1

      "...I'll probably have to buy "The White Album" again..."

  3. 12 cm, not 12 inches... by hyoo · · Score: 1, Redundant

    12 cm is much more impressive..

    1. Re:12 cm, not 12 inches... by SoCalChris · · Score: 1

      You don't have a wife or girlfriend, do you?

    2. Re:12 cm, not 12 inches... by Mrs.Trellis · · Score: 1

      "12 cm is much more impressive.. Windows users are always more impressed by less.

  4. I want one :) by billatq · · Score: 1

    Though I don't doubt that it will be very expensive upon release, that would be really nice for storing all of my mp3's and anime on one disc. I'm sure it would also be great for anyone doing video editing or any other space intensive task. I can't wait until it hits the consumer market and the prices begin to bottom out.

  5. Look Out by ShwAsasin · · Score: 1

    Look Out, the RIAA and MPAA are gonna have a field-day once they catch wind of this technology...in 2015.

  6. Re:NASA did it and now it's spreading to Slashdot! by joew · · Score: 1

    Must be using that nasa metric converter...

    Though personaly I prefer http://metricsucks.com/convert.html

  7. I wish it was 12 inches... by idfrsr · · Score: 1

    then I go around saying:

    " My 12 inches packs a Terabyte! Want an upload?"

    --
    "The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away" -Tom Waits
  8. Capacity or speed? by ZaneMcAuley · · Score: 1

    Solid state storage I want for speed, sure optical disc's are great for capacity at the expense of speed.

    Ok, I have a compromise, solid state optical storage.

    Shouldnt be too hard, I mean, Star Trek and co have been doing it for years.

    --
    ----- Whats wrong with this picture? http://www.revoh.org:1234/whatswrong
    1. Re:Capacity or speed? by randomErr · · Score: 2

      From the article: 12-cm-CD-size disc, with 100Mbps - 1Gbps transfer rate

      From the previous poster: Solid state storage I want for speed, sure optical disc's are great for capacity at the expense of speed.

      From me: My network at work can't do a sustained 100Mbp. What the heck do you mean optical can't do speed?

      --
      You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
    2. Re:Capacity or speed? by blamanj · · Score: 2

      From me: My network at work can't do a sustained 100Mbp. What the heck do you mean optical can't do speed?

      Two words: seek time

    3. Re:Capacity or speed? by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 2, Funny

      Optical Solid state storage?

      IT'S CALLED PAPER.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  9. Re:Change the headline!!! by f8xmulder · · Score: 1, Redundant
    12 cm is much more impressive than 12 inch.

    Only in certain instances...

  10. Re:point? by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is your real name Bill Gates by chance?

    --
    Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
  11. Re:point? by (startx) · · Score: 2, Funny

    and there's a world market for maybe 6 computers total....and 256KB should be enought memory for anybody....and I thought I'd never find a use for my 250MB HDD.... as long as they keep building more storage and faster CPU, we will find ways to write in enough code bloat to use it.

  12. Holographic storage? by Bonker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Babelfish's rather loose translation:

    From the past it is researched, applying the " hologram system ", the system which was developed. With hologram system of conventional type there was a problem in compatibility and the like of the existing media such as miniaturization and cost and DVD. With the technology which this time is announced, you say these weak points were overcome by using the same company individual " polarized light Cori near hologram technology " and so on.

    Hologram technology until recently, using two object glasses, had the necessity to irradiate separate " reference beam " and " signal light ". You say with polarized light Cori near hologram technology these from one object glass the economical space, cost decrease is actualized by the fact that it makes lighting possible. In addition, we have assumed it can maintain also the compatibility of the DVD and the CD media.


    I'm not sure if the translation is making it accurate or not, but it looks like this is indeed using holographic storage and not just holographic printing.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
  13. size doesn't count by voisine · · Score: 1

    Timmothy is exagerating his size again.

    l8r
    Aaron

  14. Re:point? by SirSlud · · Score: 5, Funny

    > Computer technology has pretty much advanced about as far as is necessary.

    Its almost grammarically incorrect to say something like that without punctuating it by sticking your foot in your mouth in 3 years.

    --
    "Old man yells at systemd"
  15. Just imagine a RAID-0 of these guys by roachmotel3 · · Score: 1

    MMMm.... First off, I wonder what interface format they will use between the disk and the motherboard? SCSI? IDE? Something completely different? Anyway, whatever they use, I'd love to see a level-0 stripe right across 4 or so of these babies ;) Speed and storage!

    1. Re:Just imagine a RAID-0 of these guys by randomErr · · Score: 2

      Did they ever say if these lil' guy were re-writable yet?

      --
      You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
    2. Re:Just imagine a RAID-0 of these guys by andyring · · Score: 1

      I'd love to see it in a pure FireWire I/O. I think (could be wrong, though) that we have yet to see a genuine FireWire hard disk. The ones out there now are simply IDE disks with an adapter converting to FireWire, significantly hindering the speed. If we could get a pure FireWire drive, oh baby, the speed would be awesome.

  16. 4.8 inches? by Zabu · · Score: 1

    12 cm = 4.72 inches

    That is impressive.
    I will ask santa for one next christmas.

    --
    It's all good.
  17. 640k is more than enough for anyone... by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2, Redundant

    'nuff said...

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  18. cm to in. by bravehamster · · Score: 5, Funny
    NASA Scientist: 12 cm, 12 inches, whats the difference?

    (cut to shot of rocket blasting off, lifting 5 feet off the ground, then falling back to earth in a huge fireball)

    NASA Scientist: Oops.

    --
    ---- El diablo esta en mis pantalones! Mire, mire!
    1. Re:cm to in. by the+way,+what're+you · · Score: 5, Funny

      NASA Scientist: 12 cm, 12 inches, whats the difference?

      NASA Scientist's Wife: Ahem.

      --
      example.org - powered by Linux!
    2. Re:cm to in. by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 2


      What, was it supposed to lift 12.7 feet off the ground before falling back to earth in a huge fireball?

    3. Re:cm to in. by *xpenguin* · · Score: 1

      This is funny. Why was it marked offtopic?

    4. Re:cm to in. by Iamthefallen · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      This is slashdot, you are only allowed to rehash the text that is in the story, do not discuss outside the text, draw conclusions, make jokes or otherwise stray from the immediate specific article, or we (the insane offtopic-moderators union) will have to take action, thank you.

      One of my colleagues will be by shortly to moderate both you and me offtopic for daring to use slashdot to comment comments and moderations, I think we all learned something from this.

      --
      Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
    5. Re:cm to in. by Iamthefallen · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Yes, but sometimes moderations are so off that it's worth paying attention to them, the -1 offtopic moderations being such a plague, it's used randomly for trolls, flamebaits, funny comments or other things that are on a slight tangent off the topic

      --
      Wax-Museum Fire Results In Hundreds Of New Danny DeVito Statues
    6. Re:cm to in. by CoreDump01 · · Score: 1

      Did you know that the very first Ariane 5 Rocket did a selfdestruction a few seconds after liftoffbecause the flightprogram was written using "cm", but the software on board the Ariane was an old version (from Ariane 4) which used Inch?

      Big "Ooops", indeed :)

    7. Re:cm to in. by pfavr · · Score: 1
      Did you know that the very first Ariane 5 Rocket did a selfdestruction...

      No I didn't know that. Maybe that is because it is not true! AFAIK it had something to do with a buffer overflow. BTW no sane engineer would use anything else but the metric system.

  19. Re:point? by Cynikal · · Score: 1

    are you on crack??

    2 months ago i thought 80gigs would be all i needed, right now i'm scoping out an extra 120g to add to my system... you can never have too much storage, or speed...

  20. Great stuff! by Nogami_Saeko · · Score: 1

    Now I can finally back up my system! Been waiting years to do that ;P

    And of course, the obligatory RIAA/MPAA annoyance note...

    "WOW, I could store like 100,000 MP3s, or around 200 DVD-style movies on ONE disc! Hope I can hook it up to my TV so I can RECORD LOTS of shows on it! Maybe even some new HIGH-DEFINITION signals!" :)

    Technology marches on...

    --
    "Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
  21. Re:point? by rgoldste · · Score: 1

    "No one will ever need more than 640K of RAM"

    A decade ago, no one forsaw a need for Ghz processors, GB of RAM, Gigabit ethernet, etc. I think your comment is shortsighted.

  22. Re:point? by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No one needs a terabyte disk. No one needs a 50" monitor. No one needs 10GB RAM. No one needs a 10GHz CPU.

    Can I put that in my quotes file, right next to "640K should be enough for anybody"?

    If you have a terabyte of storage, you can keep EVERYTHING you ever look at, plus about 3x the space for various indices in case you want to find it again.

    Now, if they were talking about a petabyte, you might have a point.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  23. back to caddies? by lingqi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    i wonder how scratch-resistant this is;

    i mean -- one little scratch will now render hundreds of megabytes unreadable...

    makes no difference to me if in the end half the storage space is dedicated to data-redundancy.

    i want those little data-cubes you keep seeing in Sci-Fi movies. those are neater than the disk format.

    --

    My life in the land of the rising sun.

    1. Re:back to caddies? by benzapp · · Score: 1

      I am sure it will be in some type of protected cartridge, such as with a jaz disk, or syquest disk.

      --
      I don't read or respond to AC posts
    2. Re:back to caddies? by imta11 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A local lab brought a prototype cube to my school a few years ago. You don't really need to worry about scratches as much as small vibrations causing dispersion of the bean as it travels through the 3-d space. Remember NextSetp on the discovery channel? They had a demo around 1996. It might be the same technology, just in disk form.

    3. Re:back to caddies? by Grape+Shasta · · Score: 2
      dispersion of the bean as it travels through the 3-d space

      Who would've thought, the future of data storage technology was with us the whole time: The simple, humble bean! Well, I'll be on eTrade if you need me.

      --

      "I am a cipher, a cipher, wrapped in an enigma, smothered in secret sauce" -Jimmy James
    4. Re:back to caddies? by Jherico · · Score: 2

      If its really holographic storage, depending on how its implemented, it will be much more resitant to scratches than typical CD's or DVD's. Every part of a hologram contains a bit of the whole. If you shatter a hologram of a rose, you don't get lots of little parts of the rose. You get lots of little holograms of the whole original picture, each less distinct and clear than the original. Combined with digital error recovery this could make the media very resiliant.

      --

      Jherico

      What can the average user can do to ensure his security? "Nothing, you're screwed"

    5. Re:back to caddies? by imta11 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I've been programming EJB's for a while now. Freudian slip.

    6. Re:back to caddies? by mr_zorg · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but if you shatter the disc, how the heck do you get the drive to spin it? :-)

    7. Re:back to caddies? by swb · · Score: 2

      I hate caddies, but I do like something other than bare optical storage. I understand that the original CD spec included the box/caddy as part of the medium (ala Minidisc or DVD-RAM carts).

      They'd be bulkier, but ultimately simpler to use/store.

    8. Re:back to caddies? by Hard_Code · · Score: 3, Funny

      *busily scratching hard drive platter* What was that you said?

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    9. Re:back to caddies? by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 1

      Did you feed a postcard of a white light reflection hologram of a rose into a garbage disposal unit late at night during a brown-out so it's rotating jaws were sluggish, but still the unit emited a thin scream as it's steel teeth slashed laminated plastic and the rose into a thousand fragments?

    10. Re:back to caddies? by trenton · · Score: 2

      RAID. That's what it's for.

      --
      Too big to fail? Does that make me to small to succeed?
    11. Re:back to caddies? by SpaceJunkie · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... I do like the link in your sig... Perhaps I need to seed some Chaos around merry london....

      Like theres not enough of it already though- tube strikes tomorrow..yay- and I still gotta go to work... Yay...

      Holomemory is the future.. I really think that motorised heads are so backwards. Maybe we should also be moving towards using linear motors for those which still retain mechanical heads.

      Considering the number of problems I have trying to balance various systems accessing the same CD/DVD drive and heads and streaming from them in the project I am working on - I have learned to hate the fact you have to move the heads..And no- I dont have any room to increase the buffer sizes - they are maxed out already...Multiple audio streams, multiple texture streams and a couple of mpeg and vertex streams thrown in for extra fun.. Yuck..

      --
      OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol
  24. Re:point? by fo0bar · · Score: 2, Funny
    I said the same thing about 10 years ago, give or take...

    Salesman: "For only $150 more, you could get a 1.2GB hard drive instead of this 850MB."

    Me: "What would I need all that space for?"

    Trust me, Windows 2012 Supa Dupa edition will find a way to take up a 1TB disk during initial install.

  25. Re:point? by crow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When technology exceeds what is needed for current tasks, new tasks will arise. We can't necessarily say what those tasks will be (if we could, we would start up companies to develop those products), but we can see some recent examples. When hard drive capacities shot up in the past few years, first MP3 collections took off, then TiVo and ReplayTV arose.

    (I guess I've been trolled. Oh well.)

  26. Babelfish says 12 cm by Vamphyri · · Score: 1, Redundant

    The corporation optical wear the 1TB (the tera- byte) announced the optical disk technology " tera- byte optical disk system " whose it is possible to write capacity, to the disk of 12cm CD size in the comprehensive exhibition " InterOpto'02 " of optical industrial technology.


    From this Babelfish Translation
  27. Re:12 cm or 12 in? by denisbergeron · · Score: 1

    Since the only country in this world whom use Imperial system it's the USA, I bet for the 12cm disk !
    Anyways since the end of the Vinyl Era nobody will make an 12 inch disk

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une Signature !
  28. Re:point? by Mr+Krinkle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hmmm
    No future sight there.
    What was the quote from the CEO at IBM, something like,
    "I believe worldwide there is a market for 25 computers." That was said in the 60's. And it did not sound ridiculous. As for the 50 inch monitor, for my desk NO, but damn would that be nice for a monitoring system on a wall. As for 10 GB RAM welcome to the minimum system specs for Windows (Insert random suffix here) in 10 years.
    Computers get more powerful. We force them to do more and more and expect them to be able to do more and more.
    Don't ever say technology has hit it's peak we will always advance.

    --
    I am 31337 or something.
  29. 12 inches? Yes! by sitcoman · · Score: 1

    Now I can finally get those jewel cases for my record collection!

    --

    -=20
    me doesn't live for do [DEPRECATED]

  30. "T-VRD." by verloren · · Score: 1

    Dude, did he just say turd?

    {smirk}

  31. Tools by EhobaX · · Score: 1

    If you tools would click on the link, you'd see it's the size of a CD.

  32. Re:point? by azadrozny · · Score: 1

    You are absolutly right. I still use my Tandy 8086! Who could possibly need more than 640K? ;)

  33. Why does this post remind me of the joke about by Rooked_One · · Score: 1

    the man who wished for a 12 inch pianist? =)

    In all seriousness, it was just a matter of time before this happened. Seems like if you want to do anything these days you have to totally rethink it and build it from the ground up. Holograms huh? Whoduthunkit?

  34. ITS CM by paradesign · · Score: 2
    its says so in the first line of the article, and its not in kanji.

    bla bla bla InterOpto'02 bla bla bla 12cm CDbla bla bla

    RTFA!

    --
    I want 2D games back.
    1. Re:ITS CM by PunchMonkey · · Score: 4, Funny

      its says so in the first line of the article, and its not in kanji.

      bla bla bla InterOpto'02 bla bla bla 12cm CDbla bla bla

      RTFA!


      Well, I don't know kanji!!!! For all I know "cm" is the kanji characters for "inches"...

      --
      I'll have something intelligent to add one of these days...
    2. Re:ITS CM by Nevermine · · Score: 1

      For all I know the letters C and M combined into CM is an SI-Unit and does not differ from language to language..

  35. Anyone read Japanese? by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    For all we know, the page could be saying, "look at all those Slashdot fools who thing that this page actually contains information, HA HA HA!!!"

    It would be very impressive if this is for real... Question is how much will it cost, will it be recordable, etc?

    i.e. does it have any showstoppers that will prevent it from making Philips' blue laser disc technology stillborn?

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  36. Whats someone gonna do with all that? by Dunkalis · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you had a terabyte of MP3s, you would have approximately 250,000 songs, if you assume an average song is 4MB. If there are approximately 12 songs on a CD, you would have to own 20,833 CDs.

    If you had 1MB of video per minute, you could hold one million minutes of video. That comes out to 16666 hours of video. It would take you 694 days to watch every minute of that, or a little under 2 years!

    Now, who has that much content? Hmm? Correct my math, if I messed up. I'm not feeling too good today...

    --
    Slashdot is a waste of time. I enjoy wasting time.
    1. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by Hitokage_Nishino · · Score: 1

      Watch an uncompressed video signal suck it all up in no time at all.

      Fullcolor 1024x768 at 24fps = 25.3GB per minute

    2. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by hagbard5235 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Let's do you video calculation again. If memory serves compressed HDTV is about 19MB/second. Let's call it 20MB/second to make the calculations easier. So 1 terabyte gives us about 50,000 seconds. This is about 13-14 hours. So we are looking at about 13 hours of HDTV.

    3. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 2

      Sounds like you could fit all of the contect that was available on Napster onto one disk. Now we can just mail it to each other!

      Time to start downloading some more...

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    4. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by Tralfamadorian · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but that's when you start increasing the quality of what is stored.

      No longer do you have 1MB per minute of video, but much greater, and then you also have 5.1 audio for that video.

      Hell, they could even fit the next Mandrake release on one of these suckers (currently impossible with DVD technology :))

    5. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by Dunkalis · · Score: 1

      OK, I exaggerated the 1MB a minute. So sue me. I haven't looked at video compression lately. And read that 'IF.' Lets try this again, though. I found a movie on a CD around here, so here it goes:

      The Divx on the CD is 150 minutes. It is 600MB. That comes out to 4MB a minute. Therefore, you could hold a quarter-million minutes of video COMPRESSED at a somewhat respectable quality. 4,166 hours of video, and 173 days ov Divx video. Better now? I know that uncompressed video is massive, I've worked with it before. I'm expecting some more flames, now...

      --
      Slashdot is a waste of time. I enjoy wasting time.
    6. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by Russ+Steffen · · Score: 2

      Well, if I had that much storage space, to hell with MP3 - I'd store everything as 16/44.1 stereo WAV files. And, you're off by quite a bit on the video estimate. DVD-quality video averages closer to 30 MB/min. So you're really only going to get about 550 hours of video, and far less if you want HDTV-quality.

    7. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by Mt._Honkey · · Score: 1

      4MB might be accurate for a 128 kbps MP3, but if I had that much stoarage I'd sure as hell have a lot better quality than that. Hell, I'd probably use CD format (or better).

      And 1MB of video/min??? I'd use HD res, and that is sure as hell a lot more than that. The LotR divx rips I see are ~ 1.4 GB. They look good enough, but if you really let it loose I would perfer a 50 GB version. That's only 20 3 hour movies. See, not that much. Hell, we may even start storing movies as holograms, and then you have to store phase and polarization date along with frequency! Or if you want true 3d, you would need depth info for each pixel. Whoa...

      And they would be good for transfering around scientific data. As we speak, I am working with 330 GB of data from FermiLab. And that's only one type of particle, and only since this Janurary. It took 4 days to transfer from there to here (~150 miles away). If they could burn it on one of these disks, then drive it down, that would be a hell of a lot better.

      --

      Don't Bogart the fish sticks
    8. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by mh_tang · · Score: 3, Funny

      All these numbers are very confusing to me. Can someone please break it down into meaningful numbers, such as how many Library of Congress's can be put on each disc??

    9. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by dolanh · · Score: 2

      A friend working at the "Death Star" (big black Sony bldg in San Jose) showed me a Sony product called a PetaSite that they used for storing broadcast-quality video during editing. Apparently the product is marketed as the PetaFile in Japan..

    10. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by SpookyFish · · Score: 1

      Video takes just a *little* more than 1MB/minute!

      For decent quality MPEG2, SD (Standard Definition) is ~4 Mb/s

      ATSC 1080i HD is 19.4 Mb/s

      So, around 25 MB/Minute for SD and 145 MB/Minute for HD.

      Sure, MPEG4 (or MPEG7 in the future) will help some, but still -- ~700 hours of SD or ~115 hours of HD.. suddenly doesn't seem like so much.

      Goes to show why we'll need this kind of storage in the future.

    11. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by pdp8 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think US broadcast HDTV tops out at ~20 megabits/sec (not megabytes), so 1 Terabyte works out to ~100 hrs of HDTV (in practice much more because most HDTV content will probably be done at a lower bit rate...). Still wanting to put 4 years of your favorite show on to one disk is not an unreasonable thing to want to do (100 hrs is much less than one pro-football season worth of games....)

    12. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by bafreer · · Score: 1

      Perhaps people aren't keeping this in perspective. Yes, it is a lot of space, but... If you get two large HDs per ide chain, you could fit a good 300+ gig per chain. Thats 600+ gig that you could fit on even the wekest motherboard. If you add in an additional ide controller, you can get .9 or even 1.2 terabytes. Granted, this system would be nothing but HDs, which is why the holo-drive is so cool. It lets you have a lot (not an obsene amount) of space while not needing wa whole other computer. -"homer, that's not G-d, its just a pancake that got stuck to the ceiling!" homer: "hmmm, sacrilitious"

    13. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by Kredal · · Score: 2

      You could hold 500 bazillion 1:1 scale maps of Texas on a single disk.

      Or something.

      --
      Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
    14. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by hagbard5235 · · Score: 2

      You are correct... mia culpa... I always forget
      the bytes to bits thing :)

    15. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by kuiken · · Score: 1

      and watch the recording industry go postal on US mail

      --

      42
    16. Re:Whats someone gonna do with all that? by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      You could hold 500 bazillion 1:1 scale maps of Texas on a single disk.


      1:1 what?

      You couldn't store a /true/ 1:1 map of a human hair on a mere Terrabyte disc, Texas is way out of the question.

  37. OK, how many LOC*s is that? by DeafDumbBlind · · Score: 2

    * LOC= Library of Congress.

    --


    Jesus used to be my co-pilot, but we crashed in the mountains and I had to eat him.
    1. Re:OK, how many LOC*s is that? by zhar · · Score: 1

      Aproxamatly 1/10 of all the books in the Library of Congress would fit on one of these discs. Total size of the Library of Congress is estimated to be about 10.5 Terabytes

      --


      DRINK DUFF (responsibly) DRINK DUFF (responsibly) DRINK DUFF
    2. Re:OK, how many LOC*s is that? by WEFUNK · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not including pictures, the answer is about .05 LOC per disk, or about 20 of these 1TB disks for the entire text of the collection.

      For added perspective, the Internet Archive lists a number of other comparisons to their over 100 Terabytes of web pages dating from 1996.

      Finally, in 2000 the "How Much Information?" project attempted to estimate the total amount of information produced in all major mediums: from books to TV to the Internet to photos to x-rays and more. Based on their data (from a few years ago), every American musical recording produced each year could fit on a couple of these new 1TB disks (compressed) and every new DVD could probably fit on about a dozen. The Internet is harder to estimate, due to hidden content (databases, dynamic pages) but they estimated the "surface" web to be 25-50 Terabytes and total "web-connected documents" to be as high as 7,500 Terabytes!

      --
      My next sig will be ready soon, but friends can beat the rush!
  38. Re:first post by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 1

    NOT!!!!

    --
    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
    Ben
  39. IBM Must be Seeing Red? by IronTek · · Score: 2

    This makes IBM look bad (well, even worse)...haven't they been working on holographic storage for years and years and years?!

  40. Re:point? This guy's a comedian! by spookymonster · · Score: 1

    In 25 years, we will all be using the same PCs we are today. They'll be smaller, and software will be better, but we really won't need any more power than we have now.

    Isn't that the same thing IBM said, oh, 25 years ago?

    --
    - Despite popular opinion, I am not perfect.
  41. Just think... by awyeah · · Score: 1

    ... of how much porn you could fit on one of these. :)

    --
    Why, no, I haven't meta-moderated lately. Thanks for asking!
  42. In related news. by aengblom · · Score: 5, Funny

    In related news. Sony announces it will immediatley begin selling these disks to consumers.

    Optware Spokesman:
    "We were thinking it would take 10 years the technology to be needed, but bad jokes about our hardware's "12 inch vs. 12 cm" capabilities, beowulf of them, and how much prOn one could store on it completly overwhelmed previous storage technologies" ;-)

    --


    So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
  43. 120 mm ! : go see the optware site guys... by pruneau · · Score: 5, Informative
    HERE they will explain you what their technology is. Go to the technology section, all you will need is a flash plugin ;-)

    And of course, it's 120 mm = 12cm != 12 inches ~= 36 cm...

    Because CD-media size is a must !

    Basically, they:

    • "split" the beam of light in differents rays, each carrying data, as opposed to CD/DVD where the beam carries one bit at a time.
    • They work into the "bulk" of the recording media, instead in a 2-D way for CD/DVD
    --
    [Pruneau /\o^O/\ warranty void if this .sig is removed]
    1. Re:120 mm ! : go see the optware site guys... by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      1 inch = 2.54 cm
      Saying that 12 inches ~= 36 cm is really stretching the meaning of the "~=" symbol.

    2. Re:120 mm ! : go see the optware site guys... by SpaceJunkie · · Score: 1

      Sorry - us Europeans really dont understand imperial - they stopped teaching it in schools about 15 years ago. We are lucky if we understand 12 inches = 1 foot. I have absolutely no idea how imperial weights work.

      But then as posted above, who in their right mind would use a non-SI unit for scientific purposes anyway?

      --
      OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol
  44. Re:point? by Albanach · · Score: 1
    Indeed - storing video will easily present a domestic use for a terabyte of data.

    Where you have a domestic use for the technology we can be pretty sure we'll both see it, and see it at a reasonable price.

  45. Re:point? by dirvish · · Score: 2

    Can you say V C D? A movie is ~1.3 GB. If I wanted a decent collection I would need a lot of storage space.

  46. I'm still waiting for Holographic storage by qurob · · Score: 1


    IBM said we'll have it in 5 years...oh wait...

  47. Wow...think of the uses! by Nobody's+Hero · · Score: 1

    That's alot of space.

    That can hold one heck of alot of spyware!

    --
    The Only Person Willing to be Me is ME!
  48. Does this mean DVD's with 120 movies by f00zbll · · Score: 1

    probably not going to happen, but it would allow studios to put what is currently 2 DVD's onto 1. Or it would be nice to get a DVD of every Kubrick film on one CD. The only downside of this is when toddlers take out the disk and start using it as a toy. There goes 200.00 of movies in 5 seconds.

    1. Re:Does this mean DVD's with 120 movies by randomErr · · Score: 2

      Well that isn't a new DVD standard for HDTV yet so your idea may not be that far off. About a new movie media, and the kid.

      It would be a killer to the new dVHS as well.

      --
      You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
  49. Yay!!! by jerkychew · · Score: 1

    Now I'll have enough room for all of my porn!! (If I get 2 discs)

  50. resell everything by oliverthered · · Score: 3, Insightful

    on one disk!

    --
    thank God the internet isn't a human right.
  51. aren't our HDD's the bottleneck now? by Rooked_One · · Score: 1

    Seems to me they are.... It used to be the FSB limited at 100mhz, but now we have 533mhz bus speeds, and our hard drives are laggin behind badly.

    Anyone that has used a hard drive with a 8 meg buffer will say they can feel the difference. My guess is that these things will support Serial ATA before conventional hard drives do. (j/k)

  52. Media size does matter. by DaedalusLogic · · Score: 2

    I think that most people would side with the fact that as a whole consumers have picked what size disc they want. We want media with the same diameter as a CD/DVD from here on out whenever possible. Why? They're easy to keep track of... unlike the little Dataplay cartridges that we've all seen stories about. I personally wonder why would you want something that small when you could have something of a more manageable size that uses the same technology... Discs maintaining the same size also ensures future drives will play old media. My DVD deck will play CDs etc... Which a very good point was made that record labels don't mind a format change to provide extra income once in a while. Collectively they've just got to learn to get over it and produce more new product worth buying... you know... good music. On the other hand you could also look at it this way. This data storage format will initially not be needed by your average consumer. Producing a propreitary system would cut initial costs to bring the technology to market. Then money could be made of the product and directed to adapting the technology to a consumer audience. It might cost much more for them to cram all the work into a 5.25 drive... or it might not be possible. Speaking of which... that is the weirdest drive enclosure I think I've ever seen... looks like a PS2 on crack.

    1. Re:Media size does matter. by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 2
      We want media with the same diameter as a CD/DVD from here on out whenever possible. Why? They're easy to keep track of...

      Speak for yourself, bub. CD's have a really crappy form factor. They're too big to fit inside a pocket, need specially designed carrying cases, and have crappy latency characteristics. Give me a non-rotating piece of storage the size of a credit card. These would fit in standard-sized pockets, we already have specialized carrying cases for them (called wallets), and they wouldn't have the rotational latency issues. Now all we need is the density...

      --
      That is all.
    2. Re:Media size does matter. by Ioldanach · · Score: 2
      We want media with the same diameter as a CD/DVD from here on out whenever possible. Why? They're easy to keep track of...

      Speak for yourself, bub. CD's have a really crappy form factor. They're too big to fit inside a pocket, need specially designed carrying cases, and have crappy latency characteristics. Give me a non-rotating piece of storage the size of a credit card. These would fit in standard-sized pockets, we already have specialized carrying cases for them (called wallets), and they wouldn't have the rotational latency issues. Now all we need is the density...

      What about business card sized? Do the same form factor with this optical technology as is already done with cd, and assuming the same 50:670 data capacity ratio you'll get 76GB of storage space on a business card sized disk. Would that take care of your needs? That'd be about 116 raw cd's, or 600 high quality encoded cd's.

    3. Re:Media size does matter. by captredballs · · Score: 1

      I used to think this way, till I realized that CD/DVD style media is laking in durability. I don't understand why they didn't make cd's similar to minidisc's, where there is a protective case surrounding the media. Perhaps it was limiting to speed, or a danger to the media in and of itself.

      Regardless, I'm tired to renting skippy-dvd's and I'm tired of having un-rippable cd's from one fragile drop-to-the-top. Optical media would at least solve this problem, since it removes the need for media to be spun.

      How many hundreds of cd's will I own before something better comes out (quality and durability)? If it wasn't for ripping onto my pjb for work and mobile listening, I would probably be back to vinyl.

      --

      I suppose I'm not too threatening, presently, but wait till I start Nautilus
    4. Re:Media size does matter. by Animats · · Score: 2
      The CD form factor was defined to fit the size of the standard hole for auto radios. Really.

      Personally, I'd rather have a more protected medium. CD carriers have gone out of fashion, partly because they were unstandardized and overpriced. But some protection for a 1TB recording surface seems indicated.

    5. Re:Media size does matter. by SpaceJunkie · · Score: 1

      It would sit nicely next to a PS2 TOOL then- the PS2 on steroids....

      I thought it looked more like a PS2 on acid..

      I would like CD backwards compatibility etc.. but to be honest the fact that it is spun, takes more than my pockets worth of space, is easily scratched kinda positions me all for some kind of smartcard sized technology. How long before we get multi-gb smart cards?Or better still multi terra-byte. Nice...

      And I dont neccesarily stipulate what technology will be behind these - just that I hope we get there.

      --
      OrionRobots.co.uk - Robots From sol
  53. Re:point? by Jorrit · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A terabyte is really not THAT much in some applications. For example at my work they have very large medical images (electronic X-ray images and so on). These have to be very detailed so they are big. Since this is also the biggest hospital of Europe there are lots of images coming in every day (several hundreds a day, I don't have exact figures) so this grows quickly indeed.

    Keep in mind that a terabyte is only 1000 gigabyte. I have a digital video camera which I plan to connect to my future computer to work on video's. If you like to store huge movies on disk then this huge capacitity will get small very quickly indeed.

    Greetings,

    --
    Project Manager of Crystal Space (http://www.crystalspace3d.org). Support CS at http://tinyurl.com/cb3x4
  54. This is a step in the WRONG direction by Ark42 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well sorta ...

    at 100mbit/sec, we can say about 12.5 mbyte/sec transfer rates. That is really slow now-a-days for a hard drive. 1gbit/sec (125mbyte/sec) is decent, but with UDMA100/UDMA133 standard right now, this technology seems to be behind times in speed when it finally gets released for PCs a year or two from now.

    Remember, the hard drive is probably the bottleneck in almost every PC and server, particularly with huge databases. I would really like to see hard drives get faster and faster instead of bigger and bigger.

    1. Re:This is a step in the WRONG direction by zrodney · · Score: 1

      I would really like to see hard drives get faster and faster instead of bigger and bigger.

      That's a place where you could use hardware raid
      controllers and have 2x or more throughput on
      regular ide drives used together in parallel.

      but I agree it would be great to have a single
      drive that was ten times the bandwidth for the
      same price.

      size and speed are both increasing, but not at the same rate.

    2. Re:This is a step in the WRONG direction by pmz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, aside from the fact that 12.5MB/sec is probably what people actually get from UDMA133, such a terabyte disk could be a very good application for WORM drives in systems that need permanant on-line storage of everything. Isn't this a feature of Plan 9?

    3. Re:This is a step in the WRONG direction by lewiscr · · Score: 1

      Depends if those specs are for the individual Drive or the Bus.

      My 5400 RPM IDE drive pushes about 12 Megs/sec on UDMA66. Sure, the Bus supports 66 Megs/sec, but the drive sure doesn't.

      The volumes at work have 3 10k RPM SCSI drives on Fiber Channel. That bus is 1Gbps (125 Megs/sec), but the drives will only push ~25Meg/sec. With the RAID0 I can substain around 75 Meg/sec Read/Write. Since we mirror acrossed controllers, I can do 150 Meg/sec Read, 75 Meg/sec write. 'Course, these are all magic benchmark numbers.

      Now, if the inidivudual Drives will are 1Gbps, that would be sweet. It would take me 5 10k RPM SCSI drives to do that. If I grab 5 of those new 180G drives, I can get a RAID0 900 Gbps at 1Gbps for somewhere in the neighborhood of $20k. But since 5 drives are less reliable that 1 drive, I really need to buy 10 drives and RAID 0+1. More hardware... yada yada, probably talking about $50k for 900 Gig @ 1Gbps.

      So I'll keep my eye on these, and try to find some specs I can read. Might be useful, might be useless.

    4. Re:This is a step in the WRONG direction by ottffssent · · Score: 2

      ...this technology seems to be behind times in speed when it finally gets released for PCs a year or two from now.

      By 2005, hard drives will probably be in the vicinity of 100M/sec STR (double today's value) so the gigabit high-end quoted in the article will be quite acceptable. Where these discs will really have problems though is in access time. Modern CD and DVD drives have access times of about 85-125ms, 8-30 times slower than modern hard drives. Fortunately, discs are used primarily for STR-bound tasks such as playing audio or video, backing up data, and the like. What is important, I think, is the expense of making drives and even more so of making the discs themselves. Then there's the issue of need. CDs are starting to show their age. DVDs haven't matured yet to take their place, but are begining to feel the pinch as well. Only backup applications would need a terabyte of space and until there is a mass-market need for the technology, it will be expensive and relegated to the market currently occupied by tape drives today.

      Remember, the hard drive is probably the bottleneck in almost every PC and server, particularly with huge databases. I would really like to see hard drives get faster and faster instead of bigger and bigger.

      I disagree. Granted, faster is better, but it really isn't a problem. Hard drives are a mass storage device, and should not be used for a computer's working data set. This is why 32-bit addressing is such a problem - 4G isn't much data at all for a large DB. I don't know much about databases, but it seems to me many DB operations are limited by access time, not STR. And access time is limited by the moving parts inside hard drives - you can only flick a read head back and forth so fast before things start to break (and melt too). On the other hand, data storage needs increase year by year and for 99% of them, the speed of access isn't very important.

      Personally, I'd rather see RAM get cheaper (and faster) than hard disks get faster. 50M/sec and 100-400 IO/sec is more than I need from a single drive. Besides, both those figures can be increased dramatically with RAID if needed. OTOH, modern CPUs are all starved for data in nearly all operations. I suspect in the future we will see more 3-level caches with the third level consisting of a fairly large amount (128M-1GB) of very fast DDR DRAM and main memory consisting of many RAM banks such as are found in modern servers. Apple's got a L3 DDR cache that delivers ~2-3G/sec, but many main memory systems can deliver that bandwidth. GFX cards on the other hand are in the 10-20G/sec range and would, I suspect, dramatically benefit high-end CPUs. See, for example, HP and IBM's MCM technology with large shared caches. Another approach may be to design an ISA with very many registers replacing the common L1 cache for efficiency, leaving only L2 and L3 caches buffering memory accesses.

    5. Re:This is a step in the WRONG direction by Mattsson · · Score: 1

      But on the other hand, a thing that large would probably be used mostly as bulk-storage.
      And if you need to get to the data more often, you could put a fast raidset in a server with lots and lots of ram to work as a cache for your set of 12TB storageunits. ;-)

      --
      /.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
  55. Re:point? by AJWM · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No one needs a terabyte disk.

    Talk to the computer vision people. MPEG and JPEG compession work in part by throwing out a lot of information that the human vision system won't miss. Applying current machine vision algorithms to such data doesn't work at all well due to compression artifacts.

    Consider the latest digitally-produced Star Wars episode. If that were stored in uncompressed form, it'd take about three terabytes. (Assuming 2k by 3k frames, 24 fps, and two hour running time.)

    Nice troll, though ;)

    --
    -- Alastair
  56. Rough Translation by kawaichan · · Score: 5, Informative

    The corporation optical wear the 1TB (the tera- byte) announced the optical disk technology " tera- byte optical disk system " whose it is possible to write capacity, to the disk of 12cm CD size in the comprehensive exhibition " InterOpto'02 " of optical industrial technology.

    From the past it is researched, applying the " hologram system ", the system which was developed. With hologram system of conventional type there was a problem in compatibility and the like of the existing media such as miniaturization and cost and DVD. With the technology which this time is announced, you say these weak points were overcome by using the same company individual " polarized light Cori near hologram technology " and so on.

    Hologram technology until recently, using two object glasses, had the necessity to irradiate separate " reference beam " and " signal light ". You say with polarized light Cori near hologram technology these from one object glass the economical space, cost decrease is actualized by the fact that it makes lighting possible. In addition, we have assumed it can maintain also the compatibility of the DVD and the CD media.
    Difference of data record method such as CD drive Device of record to tera- byte disk

    Those where the reflecting horizon where structure of the tera- byte disk media puts the cubic measure hologram record material with the disk baseplate of the glass make, the pre- format is done is pasted in the one side. It is not the glass in the future, you call the schedule where the disk baseplate of the plastic make is used. In addition, at the beginning the media of the is offered, but you say relying tub Lu it will be able to offer also the media in the future.

    At the time of data record, signal light and reference beam are irradiated vis-a-vis this reflecting horizon, reference beam and the information light which are reflected to interfere inside the cubic measure hologram material, the data is recorded to the interference fringes which occur.

    When grasping the device which grasps the hologram which irradiates only reference beam, is recorded to the cubic measure record material.

    With the former DVD and CD drive, using single laser light, it does reading and writing, but with hologram technology, the bundle of the light whose large number is thin is used. In addition, the data was recorded until recently level at the bit unit, but with hologram record, it is possible to record to three-dimensional cubic measure hologram layer as a page data.

    Because of that, with the disk media which uses hologram, it is possible to write the data of 3 ten thousand bit inside hologram of diameter 500 mu m. While the respective hologram to be piled up, because it is existence possible, we have assumed it is suitable for large increasing capacity. In addition, only the 1bit data transfer could do with the pickup of former DVD/CD drive, at one time, but because with hologram system the data of 3 ten thousand bit can be read and written at one time, also data rate improves substantially, you say data transfer with the 100Mbps - the 1gbps becomes possible.

    Appraisal device " T-VRD " of the tera- byte optical disk system was displayed in the InterOpt meeting place, demonstration was done. At the same company, at the beginning we have assumed, introduction in TV station and the Government agency is anticipated, we have assumed on end of 2003 offer of 19 inch rack-mounted type system, furthermore it miniaturizes drive itself in 2005, it develops in for the foam/home server and the PC market as a consumer product.
    The drive part of T-VRD When drive was opened. As for the media being stored by the cartridge, it is The corresponding disk was displayed from each company

    Actually hologram it was recorded the media As for this way unused media. The record aspect has like the mirror high reflectance

    Yoshio Chairman and CEO Aoki Chief Executive Officer

    At the announcement meeting place, Yoshio the Aoki of Chairman and the CEO Chief Executive Officer greets, " presently in communication industry, per second also the 1TB thing data has become transmission possible. This the movie of 2 hours is something which is made transfeable in 0.1 seconds. Is, but when it reaches the point where it can exchange the large capacity data instantaneously, even on the storage side which retains that data large capacity and high speed the media which had transfer speed becomes necessary ", necessity of the tera- byte optical disk system was expressed.

    " With the former CD and DVD drive, NA value of the object glass was increased, precision of recording density was increased by the fact that wave length of the laser is reduced. Is, but with this method already the limit has been visible ", also you talked, the disk system which uses hologram emphasized that it is the system which system differs until recently completely.

    Home page of optical wear
    (As of July 16th, the information regarding this product is not published)
    Http: //www.optware.co.jp/ja/main.html

    --

    kawai
  57. Contest by dr_dank · · Score: 1

    The first person to "imagine a Beowulf cluster of these" will receive an atomic bitchslap, furnished by the National Commission on Horribly Played-out Jokes.

    The runner up will receive a matchbook with which to burn their karma.

    --
    Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    1. Re:Contest by doofusclam · · Score: 1

      Well said! Same for the previous comments about windoze users. I suspect some users here sit waiting for a new headling so they can stick some pap in containing the words beowulf/windoze/boxen.

      seany

  58. Obligatory "Imagine a beowulf cluster..." by devnullforU · · Score: 1

    uh ! nevermind
    this is a media storage device not a computer
    okay...back to smoking crack again.

  59. Re:point? by Loligo · · Score: 1

    >"640K should be enough for anybody"?

    Sure. Who you gonna attribute this to?

    Hint: It's not Bill. He never actually said it.

    If you claim otherwise, provide documentation. At least a date. Preferably video or audio.

    -l

  60. DVDs. Nuff sed. by freeweed · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A terabyte is roughly what, 100 dvd's? Hell, I own more movies than that, and I'm not even 30 yet. I'd love to not have to swap them just to watch.

    Of course, by your line of thinking, a Commodore 64 suits everyone's needs: it has color, you can do programming, word processing, can get online, and even save your games on disks! Why would anyone need anything more?

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  61. News blast from the future. by supabeast! · · Score: 5, Funny

    Headlines from 2003/2005

    Software pirates in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Asia immediately began selling copies of NBC's entire 2006 TV lineup, Warcraft IV-10, Photoshop 2008, and MS Office Xtra-Ultra-Uber-Nextgen on the new disks for a street price of $5, all on one disk.

    RIAA and MPAA lawyers assaulted Sony with lawsuits today, claiming that the disk assited in storage and dissemination of intellectual property and violating copyright control schemes.

    Immediately after, Canadian and European lawyers under the control of movie and recording lobbyists added a hefty tax to the sale of each disk, with collected fees sent to movie and music companies.

    Australians quickly installed $1 per/disc copy machines in Lucky Dragon stores across the continents.

    Citizens of the USA tried to read reports about the new discs, but because a Microsoft lead consortium refused to provide digital certificates to news releases, Americans cannot view the files on their computers.

    1. Re:News blast from the future. by KoopaTroopa · · Score: 1

      I think 2005 is quite a bit early to start expecting Warcraft IV :)

      --
      Sharpies don't just sniff themselves.
    2. Re:News blast from the future. by Fugly · · Score: 1

      Well, seeing as Sony is part of the RIAA, I don't think news flash 2 will come to pass. Kinda sucks suing yourself. I'd predict something more like:

      "Sony releases new holo-disc technology capable of storing 250,000 mp3's on a single disc"

      "RIAA lobby pushes through legislature requring a tax on all blank holo-disc media sold due to rampant piracy. All proceeds will go to RIAA member labels to be 'distributed to artists.'"

    3. Re:News blast from the future. by glwtta · · Score: 2

      hmm, is Sony only a member of RIAA, or is it both RIAA and MPAA? though I'm sure suing yourself will get some interesting tax loopholes.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    4. Re:News blast from the future. by supabeast! · · Score: 1

      Sony was part of the RIAA when it pushed CD-R taxes through in Canada and some European nations, and is also a manufacturer of CD recorders. Never underestimate greed-borne stupidity.

  62. Re:point? by Sesq · · Score: 1

    PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!

  63. Library of Congress Disks by RobPiano · · Score: 1

    How much do you think the complete library of congress disk is going to run? :)
    Rob

    1. Re:Library of Congress Disks by Jedi+Holocron · · Score: 1

      1 tera-cent? Perhaps...

  64. 12in now 12cm? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1, Redundant

    I thought size didn't matter but how you used it?

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  65. Size Matters?! by Chicane-UK · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Sorry, that's centimeters, not inches, which is of course even better ;)

    I am sure that plenty of women might argue with you there :)

    --
    "Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
  66. Re:point? by cosmosis · · Score: 5, Interesting
    You're right about a Terabyte being just in time to hold ALL of our music, videos, and digital photo's, as well as everything else.

    Here is what I can see for future increases in storage:

    Petabyte: Store your entire DVD collection, CD collection, MP3 collection, all of your digital photo's from a lifetime, books, documents, etc.

    Exabyte (1 million Terabytes): This amount of storage will be useful if you want to record in hig-quality digital video all of yor life from your wearable computer that you take everywhere. You will be abel to access every moment of your life, every conversation and play it back at anytime. The type of memory would also come in handy for storing large, highly detailed Virtual Worlds of your own creation. This is exactly where I see 100GHz machines coming in handy - the ability to render realistic virtual worlds on the fly.

  67. Q: Who Needs 1 TB? A: Video by 4of12 · · Score: 2

    I've got a couple of TiVo's, one with 200 GB of IDE disk in it and I'm running out of space. It's a nicer quality archive format than VHS, but limited in quantity.

    I can foresee cheap wireless video cameras being used around the house for security monitoring being recorded to disk. That kind of application will eat up disk space in a hurry.

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
  68. Sure there's a need by Agent_Eight · · Score: 1

    Digital content creation has a need for such a storage device, providing it becomes cost effective. Personally, I do quite a bit of animation work that requires rather large amounts of storage space.

    Granted, this would only make sense if it became cost comparitive with traditional high speed hard drive arrays.

  69. centimetres or inches? by DrVxD · · Score: 2

    > Sorry, that's centimeters, not inches, which is of course even better ;)
    Scarcely matters if it's in a 19 inch rackmount, does it? I mean the technology is neat but a 19inch rack is a 19inch rack - doesn't matter how small the contents are (unless they don't fit in a 19inch rack at all...)

    --
    Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
    1. Re:centimetres or inches? by Diellan · · Score: 1

      > I mean the technology is neat but a 19inch rack is a 19inch rack *blink* And what's wrong with a 19 inch rack? The bigger the rack, the better.

    2. Re:centimetres or inches? by DrVxD · · Score: 1

      > And what's wrong with a 19 inch rack?
      Nothing. You wouldn't ask me that if you'd seen my spare bedroom :-)
      My point was that as long as the widget fits in a 19" rack, it doesn't matter if the widget is 12cm or 12".
      > The bigger the rack, the better.
      Only up to a point, but as a general rule, yes!

      --
      Not everything that can be measured matters; Not everything that matters can be measured.
  70. You are oh so mistaken by FreeUser · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Eh, what's the point of having that much storage space? Computer technology has pretty much advanced about as far as is necessary.

    Nice to see you joining us on slashdot, Bill.

    I still remember when you told us all we'd never need more than 640k of RAM. Still trying to live that one down, aren't you? :-)

    On a more serious note, until I can render my entire featurelength movie with full 3d animation effects in realtime I won't be satisfied.

    Indeed, that is only equivelent to a 1x CD-RW or DVD-RW, so even real time won't be acceptable.

    Which means, until I can render my entire featurlength movie in 1 second and ship it out to all my friends and relatives in another second, I won't be satisfied.

    But wait! I want to do that featurelength movie in HDTV 1080p format. Actually, since most of my friends have 1200p capability, I'd like to be able to render in 1920x1200 30 fps, 48bit color in under a second.

    Well, movie making was fun, but now I prefer fully immersive virtual reality, at resolutions sufficient that the human eye can't tell the images aren't real. While realtime was initially fast enough for this rendering (no matter how fast I turn my head!), I find I want to render my worlds much more quickly than that to support multiple presences, so I can meet friends in my virtual world. So, until I can render all 3-d objects down to the molecular level in my entire, vast virtual world, in under a second, I won't be satisfied.

    But wait! I'd like to ...

    1 Terabyte sounds like a lot now, but I suspect we will find it to be very limited a few short years after it comes out. Human creativity is an amazing thing, and tends to push the boundries of whatever technical limits are placed upon it. I see no sign of this changing anytime soon, or of human creativity having come close to reaching some ephemeral "limit."

    We won't be using the same computers in 20 years that we are today. Well, maybe some of the less flexible of us will be, but our children certainly won't be, and those of us more willing to keep up with a changing world likely won't be either.

    Unless, of course, Hollywood is given veto power over all new technologies, in which case our children will be using computers more akin to the old IBM PC/XT my parents used back in the 80's, rather than what we're using today, but that is a tangent for another day.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    1. Re:You are oh so mistaken by isorox · · Score: 2

      On a more serious note, until I can render my entire featurelength movie with full 3d animation effects in realtime I won't be satisfied.

      If its in real time, it doesnt really matter how long the movie is does it?

    2. Re:You are oh so mistaken by Palarran · · Score: 1

      Burst, versus sustained.

  71. Yeah except... by sterno · · Score: 2

    That example is irrelevant because the broadcasters will never let us record anything :).

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    1. Re:Yeah except... by Zathrus · · Score: 2

      Nah, you just have to record the raw video streaming out of the DVI port.

      Which means that 1 TB gets you about 10 seconds of video.

    2. Re:Yeah except... by ShavenYak · · Score: 2

      At 1920x1080x24bit, a frame of HDTV is just under 6MB. 1TB should hold about 176000 frames. At 30fps that's about 98 minutes. That doesn't include audio, but 10 tracks of 24 bit 96kHz digital audio for 98 minutes will fit in about 16GB - less than 2% of the disk. Figure 95 minutes of audio/video, almost enough for an average length movie.

      Of course, there's nothing stopping you from compressing the A/V between the DVI port and the disk. Even with lossless compression, you would be able to fit just about any movie on the disc.

      --

      Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
  72. This idea is old news.... anybody remember FD-ROM? by BenJeremy · · Score: 1

    Flourescing(sp?) media uses 3D storage (holograms) to pack more data into a standard form-factor 120cm disc - albiet not as compact as 1cm, but they certainly could achieve that with.

    These guys are still at it.. though when they wil release somethign to the market is anybody's guess. I was in brief contact with them over a particular application of their card technology.

    Of course, they are attempting to develop for the commercial market, and include write-once and rewritable options. IMO, this is bigger 'news' though the trail seems to have gone stale on FD.

    I want my terabytes on the desktop today, not a decade from now.

  73. So much data to lose by Tenebrious1 · · Score: 2

    One TB on a single disc. Man, I hope the plastic coating is much more sturdy than on current CDs and DVDs, it's a lot of data to lose because you didn't set the disc properly and the drawer scratched the disc as it closed.

    And titanium alloy jewel cases that aren't going to shatter and splinter when sent through the USPS or sat on by your kid/dog.

    --
    -- If god wanted me to have a sig, he'd have given me a sense of humor.
    1. Re:So much data to lose by glwtta · · Score: 2

      sat on? I have never shattered or splintered a CD or DVD without delibrate intent (and much effort); in fact, I can't recall a single one becoming unusable (or at least un-rescuable), CDs and DVDs are very durable media (at least in comparison with hard-drives)

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
  74. Re:crappy sig by idfrsr · · Score: 2

    complain to Terry Pratchett, unfortunately I can't fit his name in too....

    --
    "The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away" -Tom Waits
  75. Re:point? by wowbagger · · Score: 1

    Even a petabyte...

    dd if=/dev/brain of=/mnt/cdrom/wowbagger.backup

  76. Re:point? by Trinn · · Score: 3, Informative

    As for the 100GHz machines, unless clustering has induced much more delay than I am used to expecting, you would still need many of those to render realistic virtual worlds on the fly, given the time it took to render scenes on render farms for films like Monsters, INC., toy story, FF:TSW, and others. a 10THz machine, with well optimized code, however, should be able to pull it off. Your 100GHz machine though would almost certainly be able to throw a primitive polygon-based version in realtime. Anyway, just my $0.02.

  77. 2003? 2005? by qurob · · Score: 1


    "Available in 2003 as 19-inch rackmount, 2005 for PC."

    So...in about 2006 I'll have one in my car? Schweet! 1TB of Music!

  78. It wasn't NASA by tg_schlacht · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It was Lockheed Martin that was using Imperial units.

    NASA however apparently failed to read Lockheed Martins' code.

  79. just a thought by headwick · · Score: 1

    set erase = ^h

    --
    ~ fact is not dependant upon your belief therein. ~ ~ Have I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?
  80. Re:point? by anonymous_wombat · · Score: 2
    Now, if they were talking about a petabyte, you might have a point.

    If they were talking about a petabyte, then you could keep all of the scientific satellite data being sent down (terabytes daily) for awhile on one disk. Even a petabyte isn't enough for some purposes.

  81. Year 1981 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Computing_timeline

    Check it out

    1. Re:Year 1981 by Loligo · · Score: 1

      >http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Computing_timeli ne

      But no date. No place. No context. That's what I'm looking for.

      Something besides some random attribution on some random website.

      Show me someone that HEARD him say it. Someone that can say where he was. When it was. Who he was addressing. ANY details. NOBODY can ever provide anything except "1981".

      While we're at it, let's find the part where Al Gore claims to have invented the internet.

      -l

    2. Re:Year 1981 by fatphil · · Score: 1

      And because it's on wiki it must be true, right? Now _that_'s naivete.

      "Anonymous Cowards stick their heads up the goatse man's arse", Josef Stalin

      How convincing was that? Exactly. Sheesh.

      Anyway, about 12 years ago, I remember the purported quote being about
      "256K", not 640K. 256K being the actual ammount of memory the top of the
      range systems were being shipped with at the time.

      FP

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
  82. Best troll ever. by phriedom · · Score: 1

    I can just hear him now: "Lets screw up the units in the most obvious way possible and see how many people post about it. 10...20...30..."

    --
    Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
  83. Hrmph by spottedkangaroo · · Score: 2, Funny
    There seems to be some confusion about this ... lemme see if I can help.

    bash$ stty erase ^H

    That should take care of the problem.

    --
    Imagine if you weren't allowed to use roads because a bus company complained about your driving 3 times. --skunkpussy
    1. Re:Hrmph by captredballs · · Score: 1

      Har har har!

      When I was first learning vi (I used emacs first - and still do for everything but admin work) I would have files full of ':wq!:q!:' all at the bottom.

      I always imagine Timothy, Taco and the rest writing replies to grammatical nazis and "posted already" folks, abandoning halfway through with a series of spit, curses and vi context mistakes. If anybody ever hacks into their laptops, dead.letter is the first thing to read ;-)

      --

      I suppose I'm not too threatening, presently, but wait till I start Nautilus
  84. Re:point? by tg_schlacht · · Score: 1

    I have no idea who on Earth would need more than 640K but I do know that NASA needs 8086 chips. Plus if you have an 8-inch floppy drives they'd like those too.

  85. It all deopends... by DiS[EnDeR] · · Score: 1
    Update: 07/16 18:33 GMT by T: Sorry, that's centimeters, not inches, which is of course even better ;)
    I once made that same mistake at a bar once, had 4 girls hanging all over me for four hours before I realised I had said 12 inches and not 12 centimetres.

    They didnt believe me when I said its not the size of the wave.. you get the rest..
    --

    Harder.. Better.. Faster.. Stronger
  86. 100Mbps = 1GBps!?! by unixfan · · Score: 1

    You are missing one order of magnitude. Which one is it?

  87. Who cares? by md17 · · Score: 2, Funny

    '640 Kb should be enough for anyone.' - Bill Gates

  88. Re:point? by beanyk · · Score: 1

    When technology exceeds what is needed for current tasks, new tasks will arise.

    That sounds a lot like Parkinson's Law. It used to be that necessity was the mother of invention. Now smaller, apparently useless inventions are the mothers of inventions. Unless someone designed this to store all the spam e-mail they get?

  89. Re:It is a great thing though.... by Kredal · · Score: 1

    too many exlamation points to be informative... and your karma is so low, you're posting at 0, which is below the default threshold.. sorry, Gabe, you're toast.

    --
    Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
  90. The size of a CD by Strange+Ranger · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can see it now..
    "Free with a purchase of a new Dell!: Sony's all-in-one 40x/12x/32x/CDRW//20x/8x/4x/DVDRW//2x/1x/T-VRDRW.. con't. on p.44"

    All Your media are belong.. oh screw it

    --

    Operator, give me the number for 911!
  91. New use for this by brsmith4 · · Score: 1

    It seems that games these days have awesome graphics but lack really good game play like the games of yesteryears. This is probably because game companies are focused on bedazzling all of these gamers with the fancy gfx, fog, lighting, yadda yadda yadda. Games can benefit from this new optical technology by keeping graphics the same (or better) as they are now and focusing more on game play by increasing level sizes and adding more content to make the game feel dynamic instead of for instance, every time you go through a level, its the same dudes in the same places waiting to be shot at. I mean, it would be great if there was a fps that one would want to play over and over just because the plot and storyline were quasi-dynamic. That would be cool. Ait, i'm done.

  92. In the next chicktechno movie by gelfling · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah in the next Angelina Jolie movie some government agency will accidently lose the entire genetic code of every living thing on earth on one of these disks and there will be massive quantities of Chick-Fu to retreive it.

    1. Re:In the next chicktechno movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yeah in the next Angelina Jolie movie some government agency will accidently lose the entire genetic code of every living thing on earth on one of these disks and there will be massive quantities of Chick-Fu to retreive it.

      If they are looking to retreive my genetic material, Angelina Jolie is just the girl to send.

  93. Re:Well, all those development are great by Kredal · · Score: 2

    Offtopic I know, but I've got "excellent" karma to burn...

    why say Y2K+2 requiring 5 key presses, and 3 shift key presses, when it only required 4 keypresses total to type 2002?

    I've seen this year written as 2K2 which is kinda cool, but adding in more stuff just takes more time to type. So why do it? So you look like a 1337 h4x0r?

    --
    Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
  94. porn by logitek · · Score: 1

    please refer to subject

  95. T-VRD! by nortcele · · Score: 1

    At first glance I thought it was named T-URD... gotta start using a better font.

  96. Re:point? by nirvdrum · · Score: 1

    Do you get by without that now? Then why do you "need" it?

    Take for granted you may need it in the future (though screens aren't something that typicall grow in size), but this person is clearly using the present tense.

    --
    If there was a "-1 Not Funny", that'd be my most used mod.
  97. Re:point? by ajs · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In email from Bill Gates he denies the quote, but instead of offering up context for its origin or any explanation of why the quote originated, he waxes on about memory limitations. He even claims credit ("I and many others have said") for "Moore's Law", though he uses a mildly modified form of the assertion (1 extra bit every 2 years).

    As rebuttals go, it's pretty weak. I'd love to hear from the original citer on when/where it was quoted from.

  98. Re:point? by Loligo · · Score: 1

    >I'd love to hear from the original citer on
    >when/where it was quoted from.

    So would Bill, among others.

    Go do a google search for "bill gates 640k". You'll find a couple of articles with Bill denying having said it, and a thousand sites with the quote itself, some with "1981" added on, but nobody ANYWHERE can say where he was or who he said it to.

    As mentioned in a previous post, can we add this to the list of "handy quotes that were never said", right up there with Al Gore "inventing the internet"?

    -l

  99. Wow.. The Trans-Capacitor sucks compared to this.. by TheNarrator · · Score: 1

    Remember the "Trans-Cap" The so called storage technology recovered from the Roswell aliens that stored 90gb!! It's already out of date... Damn those aliens have some catching up to do.

    http://accpc.com/tcaps

  100. Johnny Mnemonic could only hold 160 GB by John+Jorsett · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was amused by the Johnny Mnemonic movie, in which Keanu Reeve's head would explode if he didn't get the 320GB of data out of it (Johhy's capacity was only 160GB, or 'leakage' would occur). Given how far into the future it was supposed to take place, that amount seemed pretty small. Johnny's 'futuristic' capacity looks ever more ludicrous with each new jump in real-world capacity.

    1. Re:Johnny Mnemonic could only hold 160 GB by ErikZ · · Score: 2

      Hey, it was in his HEAD.

      How much functional hardware can YOU stick in your head? None? Well then 160GB is pretty damn impressive.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    2. Re:Johnny Mnemonic could only hold 160 GB by MrScience · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind, though, that he had a neural implant. So the technology was interfacing with the neural grey matter which stored the data. The brain, as far as I know, hasn't been following moore's law. :)

      --

      You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco

    3. Re:Johnny Mnemonic could only hold 160 GB by Derleth · · Score: 1

      How much functional hardware can YOU stick in your head? None? Well then 160GB is pretty damn impressive.

      Well, I still have more than 160 gigs worth of Star Trek trivia and pr0n in my skull. Johnny was a wussy!

      --
      How can you use my intestines as a gift? -Actual Hong Kong subtitle.
    4. Re:Johnny Mnemonic could only hold 160 GB by MonkeyBoy · · Score: 1

      Wow, really?

      If you get into the habit of repeating a monotoned "Whoa" every fifteen or twenty minutes you could land the title role in Johnny Mnemonic 2: Pr0n Boogaloo.

      --

      Moof!

  101. Re:point? by fatphil · · Score: 1

    "
    A decade ago, no one forsaw a need for Ghz processors, GB of RAM, Gigabit
    ethernet, etc.
    "

    So for example in october 1988, when Arjen Lenstra and Manasse factored
    the first 'hard' 100-digit number using the Multiple Polynimial Quadratic
    Sieve, by spreadding the work over ~400 computers around the world, they
    weren't thinking "I wish computers were ~400 times more powerful"?

    I perform hard computations for a hobby - my electricity bill for my home
    network is $400/year. No future processor is too powerful for me to be able
    to make use of it.

    FP.

    --
    Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
  102. We Need More... Lots More by RhettLivingston · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Its remarkable to me how unimaginative this community is at times. Terabytes are nothing to use even with today's technology.

    This is barely enough to start cracking the doors to the real future of computers. With this, you may be able to store a few seconds of fully immersive video. I'm talking the kind of stuff that gives you limit of human sight resolution for anything beyond arm's length no matter what direction you look in. Add this storage to flight simulator technology that notes your head position and dynamically reproduces the right resolutions across your field of vision using 210 degree goggles, and you've got an experience in the making.

    Another technology that would soak it up in seconds would be life recording. I've got a fairly poor memory and generally forget completely almost anything beyond three years ago. I'd LOVE to be able to wear a device that records my every moment in 360 degrees with fully directional audio. But, really, the recording technologies, including storage, won't be the most difficult part of the development. The really tough part will be the technology to search the database. It will need to be able to interpret everything seen and heard in order to be able to replay what I'd like without my having to remember times and places. Furthermore, it would need to do so in near real time as the only time that it might have to "catch up" would be when I slept...actually, I'd probably won't much of that time recorded too. Expand that to recording not only my personal experience but anything occurring anywhere on any property that I own in full 3D realistic resolution and bringing things to my attention that I've told it too and the task is at least 30 years of technology away (2^^30 * current storage capacities + 2^^24 * current processing capacities). Add recording of other aspects of the environment like smell, temperature, RF, etc and you could soak up technology forever. People will want these things.

    The day will come, probably within this century, when petabytes and petaips are to us what bits are today.

  103. Re:12 cm or 12 in? by fatphil · · Score: 1

    It you are going to try and look clever, you'll probably want to avoid using
    'whom' in utterly the wrong way.

    HTH

    FP.

    --
    Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
  104. DVD Blue? by cez · · Score: 1

    Anyone remember people working on a DVD Blue technology which increased data capacity using a blue laser instead of a red laser?

    --
    Walk with Music;
  105. You really want terabyte-level storage by MtViewGuy · · Score: 2

    I think the need for terabyte-level storage is a lot larger than people think.

    This is especially true for the entertainment industry. People forget that a digital copy of Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones used for DLP theatrical digital projectors need something like 300 gigabytes of storage capacity. What will be needed in the future when digital projectors go to higher resolutions and 96 fields per second display to improve picture quality? In that case, easy-to-transport terabyte-level storage becomes very necessary.

  106. The price for Re:The size of a CD by denisbergeron · · Score: 1

    The drive will be sell for 300$ and each disk for 600$ :-)

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une Signature !
  107. tera, peta, whata? by caveat · · Score: 1

    7,500 terabytes...7.5 petabytes?

    --

    Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
    1. Re:tera, peta, whata? by Fweeky · · Score: 2

      Yup.

      Look at http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?prefi x. And memorize it this time ;)

  108. 19" rack mount! by parp · · Score: 1
    12", or 12cm, They both seem stupid to me if it goes in a 19" rack mount!

    Now how about a nice array of 20 in a 19" rackmouth with raid 1, then we'd be styl'n!

  109. A readable translation... by torokun · · Score: 1
    Argh... I can't stand reading those automatic translations. It scrambles my brain. Here's a more readable gloss by my brain...

    Optowear creates "Terabyte optical disk system" capable of storing up to 1TB of data"

    Optowear, at the optical industry technology conference "InterOpto '02", introduced the "Terabyte optical disk system", a technology capable of storing one terabyte on a 12cm CD-sized disk.

    This is a system developed by applying the research done up to now on 'hologram systems'. In previous holographic systems, miniaturization, cost, and incompatibility with DVDs and existing media were problematic. In this newly released technology, the company's proprietary "Polarized colinear hologram technology" allowed them to overcome these weaknesses.

    Until now hologram technology has had to use 2 lenses to illuminate the object with the separate 'reference beam' and 'signal beam'. With polarized colinear hologram technology, only one lens is needed, allowing space and cost savings. DVD and CD compatability can be maintained as well.

    They use a disk where the holographic media is sandwitched between glass plates, and where one side has a preformatted reflective layer stuck onto it. In the future, they plan to use plastic rather than glass. Also, at first they will only offer 'write once' disks, but later plan to offer rewritable ones as well.

    When data is recorded, the reference beam and signal beam are shined on the reflective layer, and the reflected reference and information beams interfere in the holographic material, storing data in the interference pattern.

    At reading time, only the reference beam is shone, allowing the recorded hologram to be read.

    Existing DVD and CD drives use a single laser beam to read and write data, but holographic technology uses many tiny bundles of light. Also, previous systems stored data by the bit on the surface of the disks, whereas holographic recording can store whole pages of data at once in the holographic medium.

    Because of this, holographic disk media, in a 500um diameter holograph, can store 30,000 bits of data. And because these holograms can be stacked on top of each other, this method is suitable for storing huge volumes of data. Also, current DVD/CD drives only transfer 1 bit at a time, whereas holographic drives transfer 30,000 bits at a time, so transfer rates are much higher, allowing rates of 100Mbps-1Gbps.

    In the InterOpt conference display, an evaluation model of this system, the T-VRD, was demoed. The company believes that television studios or government bodies would be the first to bring in this technology, and will offer a 19in rack mounted version in 2003, and a miniturized consumer version for home servers and PCs in 2005.

    At the conference center, CEO and Aoki Yoshio introduced himself -- "In the current communications industry, 1TB/s data rates are becoming possible. This is like sending a 2hr movie in 0.1 seconds. But, if we become able to send and recieve huge volumes of data in an instant, we need something with huge volume and speed to store that data." -- so underlining the need for the terabyte optical disk system.

    "By raising the NA value of the objective lens, and shortening the laser wavelength, existing CD and DVD drives have been increasing their storage density. But this method is already seeing its limitations", he also said, emphasizing the fact that holographic drives are a totally different technology than other optical drives up to now.

  110. MS Office 2005.... by feldkamp · · Score: 1

    Will be at least 2TB. (1TB min install) :)

  111. Actually by RobinH · · Score: 2

    Actually, these non-metric people would say 12 cm is about 4 11/16 inches. ;-)

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
  112. Re:point? by Hoeken · · Score: 1

    Your 100GHz machine though would almost certainly be able to throw a primitive polygon-based version in realtime. have you ever played any FPS? hmm, they're realtime and a *little* bit more advanced than primitive polygons.

    --
    Educate > Enlighten > Evolve http://www.neuroatomik.com
  113. Re:Why did the blonde go to church? by CyberDruid · · Score: 3, Funny

    Because she heard they had a guy hung like _this_ *stretches arms*.

    --

    Opinions stated are mine and do not reflect those of the Illuminati

  114. Re:point? by cosmosis · · Score: 2

    We could use this argument to say that cave man got by without any technology at all other than the use of fire and chiseled bone and rock.

  115. 1TB won't be anything ten years from now by xRizen · · Score: 1

    It wasn't more than 10 years ago that I had my DOS 5 install on an 80MB HD. Back then, the thought of a HD actually being multiple GB was just insane. Now I sit here with my 110GB of HD, and terabyte storage doesn't seem so insane, in light of the past.

    1. Re:1TB won't be anything ten years from now by Temsi · · Score: 1

      Heck, 1TB barely anything today... I have 460 GB in my main PC. 40+40+60+120+100+100.
      1 TB can just barely hold a full length feature film in High Definition 24p (1920x1080 24fps is 7MB/frame ; 168MB/sec ; 10GB/min, so 90 mins = 900GB).
      So.. I'll be happy when I can get a TB device or even a PB or beyond. The bigger the better!
      100Ghz? Bring it on! 100GB RAM? Where do I sign up?
      Of course... I'm a gadget junkie... so I'm not really the best example, but still.

      --
      -- This sig for rent.
    2. Re:1TB won't be anything ten years from now by Temsi · · Score: 1

      A $25.000 Mac with a CineWave-RT HD card running Final Cut Pro supports uncompressed HD. So does the $200.000 HD Avid similar to the one used to cut SW-EP2. A few other high end editing packages work in uncompressed HD. How else are you gonna do an online HD edit? You may use compressed while you're editing the offline (online=the final master made to conform the offline; offline=where you do the creative part of editing, so lower quality is ok), but you need uncompressed to finalize the master. There's even an uncompressed HD professional system which costs as much as a big house in a good area which does pretty much anything you want in realtime.
      Check out ProMax for basic Final Cut Pro based systems that handle uncompressed HD. These systems use Medéa SCSI-3 RAID towers for the hard drive space, which can pump out the necessary 200+ mb/s needed for uncompressed HD (168mb/s for 24p).
      I'm working on visual effects for a movie shot on 24p HD right now, and it's being done in uncompressed HD, so I know a tiny bit about this stuff.

      --
      -- This sig for rent.
  116. Ob MS Bashing by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 2

    1TB disk... should just barely be enough for the installation disk of Microsoft Windows XXXXP 2005!

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
  117. Re:point? by Hercynium · · Score: 3, Funny

    One word for you: Holodeck!

    --
    I'm done with sigs. Sigs are lame.
  118. Oh fun. Piracy leaps to unexplored levels. by Thedalek · · Score: 1

    You relize that when this thing eventually finds its way onto the market, someone somewhere will likely compile a "Complete Game Collection," a massive archive of every videogame to date. Ever. And it'll only take up 2 or 3 discs. Heck, the biggest part will be the PSX games, and that might not be that big, after all.

    Now, once emulation reaches perfection on all the known systems... that's when the real fun begins.

    --
    Happiness is relative, Based upon the way we live.
  119. Re:point? by ba_hiker · · Score: 1

    There are many apps that are still memory and compute bound. Voice recognition could easly use 4x more memory and more compute power, other apps (decode hd tv, monitoring video, home security) can all take big bits. Heck even the fridg that reads bar codes needs a place to store the UPC and usage data, and you probably want a file server, rather than the hard disk in the fridg.

  120. Since you asked... by R2.0 · · Score: 1

    "While we're at it, let's find the part where Al Gore claims to have invented the internet."

    "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet," in an interview with CNN.

    "Invented the Internet"? No.
    Self aggrandizement? Yes.
    Relevance? not a lot.

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    1. Re:Since you asked... by Loligo · · Score: 1

      >"During my service in the United States
      >Congress, I took the initiative in creating the
      >Internet," in an interview with CNN.

      And he DID have a role in the early development of what we know as today's internet (http://www.salon.com/tech/col/rose/2000/10/05/gor e_internet/ )

      The point was that it's another one of those things where someone (in this case, GW Bush's campaign) cooks something he said into something he didn't, which spreads via modern folklore until he's remembered as the guy that claimed to have invented the internet.

      Rather like Bill Gates is popularly credited with saying "640k ought to be enough for anyone", when he never said it.

      -l

    2. Re:Since you asked... by Hellasboy · · Score: 1

      So you're saying you could have won? No? DAMN! you must be one hell of a loser!!! =/

      --

      "Tread softly because you tread on my dreams"
  121. Re:I think you missed the point by CyberDruid · · Score: 2

    Since he had to pass through customs (or something like that), he could not keep the data on regular media. Bear in mind that the actual data that he downloads is originally on a tiny CD-like thing. He had to use "natural" media (the brain) so that they wouldn't suspect him of being the courier.
    Thus it is really the brain that is supposed to have 160 GB of free space, that can be utilized before it starts to write over personal stuff. You can hardly expect the brains storage capacity to follow the same exponential laws as hardware, now can you? ;)

    --

    Opinions stated are mine and do not reflect those of the Illuminati

  122. Why do you think they sold their HD business? by jonr · · Score: 3, Funny

    Of course IBM has something up the sleeve. Good bye, rotating media!

  123. Re:point? by Space+Coyote · · Score: 2

    MP3 collection? With that much space, who needs lossy compression at all? :)

    --
    ___
    Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.
  124. Obligatory Simpsons Reference by PowerBook2k · · Score: 1

    Abe "Grandpa" Simpson: "The metric system is the tool of the devil! My car gets forty rods to the hogshead and that's the way I likes saying it!"

  125. Re:point? by RumorControl · · Score: 1
    You will be abel to access every moment of your life, every conversation and play it back at anytime.

    in my case you could simply make a symlink to the common points and store only the changes. So that drive to and from work could be the same file for every day...hell..just about everyhting else too. Maybe I could fit my life on a CD.

  126. A Couple of Thoughts... by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

    A terabyte on a single disk is sweet, but I've got a couple of thoughts...

    1. Demoed and "We've got readers and writers going on sale next year" are two extremes. Just because you can demo a technology doesn't mean it's mass productable or stable enough.

    2. how delicate is the media going to be. I noticed on their website they show the disk in a cd caddy. the last thing I want is a scratch taking 100gigs worth of data with it.

    3. 100Mbit/s sucks. I probably did the math wrong but that's like 12.5 Megabytes per second. Just to read a gigabyte is going to take 80 seconds. To read a 50gigabyte file is going to take 67 hours.

    Just a few things that I see offhand. Other than that, I think the technology is sweet. I will be much happier when they come out with a solid state terabyte device the size of a postage stamp, but beggers can't be choosers.

    --
    Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    1. Re:A Couple of Thoughts... by Dynedain · · Score: 2

      ummm.....i think your math is off.....

      if you can read a gigabyte in 80 seconds, then a 50 gigabyte file should only take you 50 x 80s / 60 s/m = 67 minutes

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
  127. One word... by MrScience · · Score: 1

    Backups.

    Tape is just not cutting it. Seems like it's cheaper buying a newer drive as a backup than the whole tape subsystem.

    --

    You quitting proves that the karma kap worked. The most annoying of the whores shut up. --CmdrTaco

  128. for the "who needs this much space?" people by glwtta · · Score: 2
    this is actually pretty old

    In IT terms, the human genome is a text of seven billion characters, and together with its associated annotations, Celera already maintains a 70-terabyte database, after only a year and a half of operation. That database is growing rapidly - by 15 to 20 gigabytes a day, or eight terabytes a year - as is the number of people accessing it.

    I don't know when this article is from, but they are already over 100TB.

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
    1. Re:for the "who needs this much space?" people by h4mmer5tein · · Score: 1

      On a more mundane level. One of my projects this year is to come up with a storage solution for approx 25 TB worth of image data, generated by scanning in our collection of historic maps ( approx 100,000 of them ).
      The brief is to have every single map scanned and stored in a way that allows it to be retrived and printed within 15 mins of the request being made. These discs sound like just the job :)
      Now if they come up with a jukebox system for them as well :)

  129. Backup by AeiwiMaster · · Score: 1

    Great, I need to make a backup of the internet.

  130. "...copy machines in Lucky Dragon stores..." by tlambert · · Score: 2

    Oh!

    Most Excellent subtle reference to William Gibson's "Idoru"!

    Extra points awarded for the Australians doing the installing...

    -- Terry

    1. Re:"...copy machines in Lucky Dragon stores..." by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 1

      Did you see the Fragments of a Hologram Rose reference in the discussion about the return of caddies?

    2. Re:"...copy machines in Lucky Dragon stores..." by supabeast! · · Score: 1

      If you enjoyed those lucky dragons, check out the ones in his last book,"All Tomorrow's Parties".

    3. Re:"...copy machines in Lucky Dragon stores..." by tlambert · · Score: 2

      Sorry; didn't read that discussion.

      -- Terry

  131. I agree by uberdave · · Score: 1
    The problem with transfer rate and seek times are always going to be a bottleneck until you lose the MECHANICAL bits. Why not make these things rectangular, and have an array of laser/sensors that sense the bits directly.

    "Perfect speed, my son, is being there." - Chiang Seagull.

  132. what does ^H^H^H^H mean? by marcushnk · · Score: 1

    no.. really, what the hell is ^H^H^H^H ????

    --
    "Consider how lucky you are that life has been good to you so far. Alternatively, if life hasn't been good to you so far
    1. Re:what does ^H^H^H^H mean? by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      it's the representation of backspace.

  133. Re:LOL! I got a -1 OffTopic! by NanoGator · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Um right.

    Moderation is an expression of how one person interprets a post. By commenting on the moderation, you are seeking clarification. There is no difference between saying "Why was I modded down?" and "What did you mean by that?"

    The explanation you gave me is a cop-out for people with moderation points to burn. You're playing games with semantics. Duh.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  134. Re:12 cm or 12 inch? Tape by billstewart · · Score: 2
    The first terabyte system *I* saw was a 12" reel of inch-wide digital write-once paper tape, from Creo. The drive was about the size of a conventional tape-drive (i.e. refrigerator-sized, in those days). The drive cost about $250K, and each tape reel was about $10K (as opposed to typical magtape at $25/reel.)

    Somebody else at the same trade show had a video-cassette-based jukebox that could be expanded to about 6 TB if you used enough bays and enough tapes. Times change :-)

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  135. Re:point? by fonetik · · Score: 1

    Funniest. Comment. Ever.

  136. Re:point? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 2

    If only it was 2k by 3k then I'd be all for digital. It was only 1k by 2k and that's why it sucks compared to film. When digital reaches about 3k by 6k it will have equaled films potential. In reality the optical soundtrack reduces the potential space for visuals, damn it. Why stop at 24fps anyway? I'm looking forward to 3k by 6k at 70fps. That will be enough so I can't see jerkyness at all. *cues quake players to bitch 70fps is too slow*

  137. Re:Timber! by jx100 · · Score: 1

    Isn't that just a botched vasectomy?

  138. Re:point? by fonetik · · Score: 1

    From data storage to Snow Crash in just a couple comments. Think this will facilitate the Uncle Enzo's pizza Delivery service too?

  139. Re:point? by cosmosis · · Score: 2

    Advanced in optronics alone will give us computers operating in the Thz range, and when we start seeing the fruits of nanotech, and nanotube circuitry, we will easily be getting into $1000 machines millions of times faster than what is available today.

  140. 1.44 TB by user32.ExitWindowsEx · · Score: 1

    I wonder how far off the 1.44 TB rewritable version is.
    That would be the 'floppy disk' of the future.

    my $0.02

    --
    "Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
  141. Re:point? by haydon4 · · Score: 1

    No one needs a terabyte disk. No one needs a 50" monitor. No one needs 10GB RAM. No one needs a 10GHz CPU.

    Not yet anyway... :D~

  142. Re:exsqueeze me? by duren686 · · Score: 1

    12 inches would be 12''..

    Do you mean that, or are you asking whether they said "12 cm" or "12 superinches?"

    --
    Y2K Compliant since the late 1890s
  143. Write-Only Filesystem by jelle · · Score: 2

    Such technology asks for whole new filesystems.

    Instant-snapshot logging filesystem

    Nothing ever gets deleted and any file ever written can always be retrieved.

    Put a new medium in the drive once a month and you've got full backups too.

    Who needs a versioning system then?

    --
    --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
  144. Re:point? by duren686 · · Score: 1

    I can't wait for the Yattabyte to come into common usage..

    Just think of all the stuff I could put on one of those discs!

    --
    Y2K Compliant since the late 1890s
  145. Re:point? by Saeger · · Score: 2
    I'm looking forward to 3k by 6k at 70fps.

    And I'm looking forward to that kind of quality being beamed into each of my eyes, for a full FOV, stereoscopic experience... vs. the boring 2D screen.

    I'd easily pay over 10 grand to be an early adopter of this tech. Too bad Microvision's current stuff pretty much sucks - so it'll be a while yet.

    --

    --
    Power to the Peaceful
  146. Re:point? by Saeger · · Score: 1

    Well, crap, I replied to the wrong person. How'd that happen? :)

    --
    Power to the Peaceful
  147. Re:point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Exabyte (1 million Terabytes): This amount of storage will be useful if you want to record in hig-quality digital video all of yor life from your wearable computer that you take everywhere. You will be abel to access every moment of your life, every conversation and play it back at anytime.

    Yeah - and I thought my girlfriend bringing up crap from three years ago was bad enough.

  148. s/s/c/ by BlowCat · · Score: 2, Funny
    12 cm must refer to the floppy disk version, while 12 inches is the hard disk.:-)
    12 cm must refer to the floppy dick version, while 12 inches is the hard dick.:-)
  149. Re:point? by Saeger · · Score: 1
    Quite right - now that I've got 240GB to play with, I'm actually encoding to lossless Monkey's Audio instead of high VBR mp3.

    Yeah, Monkey's Audio is slightly less Free than FLAC, but not by much, and it does a better squeeze job.

    --

    --
    Power to the Peaceful
  150. Re:point? by jrivar59 · · Score: 1

    Can't you get arrested for being a petabyte?

  151. um. guys. by VoiceOfRaisin · · Score: 1

    ive read tons of the supposed bill gates "640k" quotes in this thread over and over.
    people. he never said that.
    go look it up, its an urban legend.

  152. Re:point? by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

    correction: 1024GB = 1TB (remember.....as far as storage capacities are concerned, it's a power of 2...usually a multiple of 1024bytes [1K])

    man....1TB...it's about time...I can finally backup my harddrives (I have about a TB of storage.....backing it up on CDRs is not every economical or logical....let alone using floppies....)

  153. ENLARGE YOUR DATA DENSITY 100% NATURAL by Rui+del-Negro · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Sorry, that's centimeters, not inches, which is of course even better.

    Depends what you're measuring.

    RMN
    ~~~

  154. Re:point? by John+Ineson · · Score: 1

    "This is exactly where I see 100GHz machines coming in handy - the ability to render realistic virtual worlds on the fly."

    That, and keeping small towns warm in the winter.

  155. Lets also notforget the infamous IBM one by THX1138 · · Score: 1

    "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." - Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943

    --
    Don't take life too seriously. It is only a temporary situation. Usual disclaimers apply.
  156. That's just plain wrong... by schmaltz · · Score: 2

    12 inches == 30.48 cm.

    1 inch == 2.54 cm !~= 3.0 cm...

    --
    Big Daddy, Johnny, Burp, Aunt Zelda, Scott, Slurp, Big Momma ... where's Siggy?
  157. I think I learned... by s.fontinalis · · Score: 1

    That yet another portion of life is just like high school - dominated by narrowminded twits in the pursuit of some higher goal. Yay!

  158. Re:point? by bay43270 · · Score: 2

    An Exabyte might be more useful for recording all video from the 23 cameras in your small store. You will want to keep high resolution copies of all of the video for each camera for years. This way a cheap e-machine (300Ghz AMD Superion) can analyze changes in customer blood pressure, eye contact and body language as they look through your merchandise. This data can be used for future direct marketing product customization and of course for resale to other institutions.

  159. Re:point? by mixmasta · · Score: 1

    it may have been shown at the theater in this resolution, but I'm sure it was not scanned/rendered/composited at 1k. Prolly 2 or 3 minimum, sometimes space scenes are done at 4k+ because the stars get lost otherwise.

    I seem to remember a 3k frame with 48 bit color uncompressed coming out to about 47MB a piece in an uncompressed cineon file. To lazy to check calculations....

    --
    #6495ED - cornflower blue
  160. So if the 19-inch Rackmount is first by 2 years... by mal0rd · · Score: 1

    ...then I expect that alot of people are going to start using rackmounts. I know I would, as long as it was afforable.

  161. only for low resolution images and videos by slaida1 · · Score: 1
    Digital cameras now record about 4M pixels but there's really no upper limit on how much is needed since somebody somewhere will want to enlarge their pics and zoom into details.. remember Blade Runner?

    Also, when we get wall-sized TV-screens we'll want video feed at 40K x 30K rez at 100 full refreshes/sec. Then you can think again how much that kind of material can 1 exabyte store.

    --
    Preserve old classics: copy your collection onto all hard drives.
  162. Re:point? by wallsg · · Score: 1

    Did you choose the Red Pill or the Blue Pill?

  163. Transfer speed SUX by mattr · · Score: 2

    Okay. A terabyte disk, right on schedule.

    Maybe it's fast enough to serve a few channels of TV simultaneously, but it takes what, an hour and a half just to make a copy? Doesn't sound like something you are going to be able to stamp out for 10 cents each.

  164. From their website...'without consciousness' by vortexau · · Score: 1

    "and we expect that internet will have further development and readiness of use for people, and everyone will be able to use necessary information at any time any place without consciousness."

    Wow! The end development they expect is the delivery of information 'without consciousness'; which must mean while in an unconscious state!

    That must mean ......... 'sleep learning' through your net connection!?
    .

    --
    (David Bowman, EVA near HUGE Monolithic Win-PC in orbit around Jupiter) "My God - its full of Malware!"
  165. Re:point? by nirvdrum · · Score: 1

    Ummm . . . I guess you're missing the point between "want" and "need". Cave man, I'm sure, wanted a slightly better lifestlye, so he made changes to achieve that goal. He did not necessarily need one (though it would increase his longevity). But being able to store all your DVDs on a single disk is a desire and not a necessity.

    So, please spare me your ill-conceived logic. Your analogy really has no bearing to this, and falls flat when challenged.

    --
    If there was a "-1 Not Funny", that'd be my most used mod.
  166. Re:point? by Quixadhal · · Score: 2

    "No one needs a terabyte disk..."

    Yeah, you say that now, wait until Windows FP (Fat Porker) edition is released, THEN you'll wish you had that terabyte disk for your swap file!

  167. Re:point? by ajs · · Score: 2

    As mentioned in a previous post, can we add this to the list of "handy quotes that were never said", right up there with Al Gore "inventing the internet"?

    Al Gore never said he invented the Internet. He DID however, claim responsibility for it, which is partially true. He was one of the senators who lobbied for the funding that DARPA needed for many projects which included the creation of a research network (ARPANet) which would eventually evolve into the Internet.

    What upset me about the statement was the fact that he was tacitly taking credit for the foresight to fund the creation of the Internet, when he almost certainly had no clue what rammifications ARPANet would have.

  168. What happens when you die? by pornaholic · · Score: 1

    How long will my life's work be accessible? Will I lose the ability to read my disc/chip before I turn 30? I know this is a bit redundant with other frequent /. topics, but I feel a little helpless. What will my grandchildren do with my outdated chip, just throw it away because it costs to much to get it read?

    What we need is a group to take charge of compatibility issues. This group would devise transitional technologies for all types of hardware/software/communications. With such a body, the history of change can be documented as well as the history of us, making any public form of storage accessible.

    This sounds eerily similar to the way libraries archive books. Perhaps the perfect place for updating of information is at the library. Imagine stopping by the library to get your pile of cd's thrown onto a DVD through their updating kiosk. I know there are some hurdles to overcome on the copyright front, but if the ..PA's realize that they are just a succeptible to data loss internally, perhaps they will lossen their grip for the sake of preservation.

    We're brought into this world alone, and leave alone. Somewhere in between, we get the idea that we're not alone. We are wrong.

  169. Re:"check out `All Tommorrow's Parties'" by tlambert · · Score: 2

    I've already read all of William Gibson's writing that has ever been published. 8-).

    -- Terry

  170. Re:This idea is old news.... anybody remember FD-R by oooga · · Score: 1

    I check in to their website every couple of months. They never seem to make any progress...

    --
    -- Nerds on toast in the new millenium
  171. Re:your .sig by NanoGator · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Heh. My coworker had me type 'make love'. The response was like "unable to make love". heh. That was a while ago, I don't think it works today, but it was funny. :)

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  172. Re:Exabyte by jthill · · Score: 1
    Exabyte (1 million Terabytes): This amount of storage will be useful if you want to record in hig-quality digital video all of yor life
    No more having to rely on others to videotape your beating!
    --
    As always, all IMO. Insert "I think" everywhere grammatically possible.
  173. Peta! Peta! by fm6 · · Score: 2
    Now, if they were talking about a petabyte, you might have a point.
    Well maybe. Isn't that about the maximum size of an NTFS partition? Maybe I'm thinking of an exabyte.

    I'm reminded of my boyhood back in the cybernetic Jurassic. We thought it was a big thing when the university mainframe went from 512K to 1 meg RAM. An expensive proposition, since this model, like most computers of the time, didn't use IC RAM. It used clay-ferrite "cores" (hence "core memory"), with all the logic wiring hand-weaved. The punchline: it took the MIS people precisely a week to write a COBOL program that wouldn't fit in that humungous address space!

    The moral being: people use the resources available. That's what they "need".