Slashdot Mirror
87GB On DVD-Sized Media
BostonMACOSX points to this report in the Detroit News that says, in part, "Boston College researchers have found a way to store about 19 times more data on a disk than a common DVD can hold, using optical media made with common products, the December issue of Nature Materials reports." And it's a mix of high and low tech: the disk is formed of "an epoxy glue sold at hardware stores and a glass-like substance," but written with a currently expensive laser.
Only if the speed of the backup is worthy of replacing tapes. I mean Afterall you can get a Tapedrive that will do 400 Meg/Sec backup these days and that is still too slow.
Gato
I think they are increasing the layers of data, not the density, so the impact of dust would be the same.
The article doesn't really confirm either way, however.
Robots are everywhere, and they eat old people's medicine for fuel.
The FIRST version of FMD from c-3d would have been 100G...they were thinking 20 layers (200Gig+...I think I read somewhere they were hoping for a terabyte) would easily be possible..and they had tested throughput at rates high enough for 1080i HDTV (full-resolution) reads.
_ 00 /News/c3d.htm
y s. htm
I think the company (which I once owned stock in) is now dead. Their site is not working. Here's a a couple interesting links to info...
http://www.filmandvideomagazine.com/Htm/2000/10
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~roidy23/technolog
If they couldn't make it with this killer technology (TONS of storage) how does this other company expect to fare any better with technology that is only 1/10th the product.
C-3D was doing pretty well with agreements for disc makers, agreements with WAMO (who pushed DVD), etc.
Sucks ass when something this promising doesn't ever come to fruition. I remember last year this time they had working RW drives.
Damn it, I want FMD...not this wussy 80GB crap.
I've been seeing reports of stuff like this for at least two years. Wasn't there someone just a few months ago, probably reported here... hang on a sec...
yea here it is.
Anyway, I've been seeing reports like this forever, but zero consumer products. When something hits the market, I'll be interested. Until then I don't care.
Why do you think it has little chance of adoption? Many media types have given greater MB/$ ratios, but people seem to LIKE the size and shape of CD's, which is one reason why DVD was adopted. If you can fit more information into a smaller space it ALWAYS has at least one useful application, even if it is just consolidating all your porn.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
This seems pretty similar to the 'Scotch Tape Drive' where they were getting 10 gigabytes of data onto a roll of adhesive tape using a laser in much the same way.
Jack William Bell
- -
Are you an SF Fan? Are you a Tru-Fan?
I hear ya. I have exactly half of the data you have, and having 20 spindles of 50-paks laying around isn't that hot.
Buying hard drives to hold it all isn't feasible, since it's a huge investment, and sizes keep going up and prices go down. (Not to mention you'd still want backups of that on....cdr!?)
And DVD-R will only help by 7X.
If blue-laser discs were out right now at the pace DVDR is, then that would be be a different story. That would be the perfect size to convert to right now to make it worth it.
Not exactly. There are some weird people who have this idea that a single piece of data is a datum, and data is the plural of datum. Using that warped philosophy, it would be correct.
I've got a mind like a steel trap - it's got an animal's foot stuck in it.
What is happening with Blu-Ray, the DVD format that nine members of the DVD forum supported earlier this year? Blu-Ray uses a 405nm blue-violet laser, and can hold up to 27GB on a single-sided single-layer disc. While the capacity is not as great, the commercial support is.
I think I'll wait on this format (that has the backing of Hitachi, Sony, Pioneer, Philips etc etc) before going out on a limb with any epoxy solution.
Ladies, form queue here -->
There is no such thing as "non-fast-forwardable" material on a DVD. Try watching it with mplayer on Linux. You don't even have to see the stupid title screen, just jump right to the movie. You can even skip the credits if you want. It is a random-access medium, after all.
Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
i think he meant 13 cd cases, each with 200 disc capacity. thats 2600 discs.
it had me confused for a minute too though.
Uh, I'm not sure where you got this, but as far as I know, it was invented prior to 1939 by I.G. Farben Industrie of Germany. At least, that's when they filed the patent. Maybe Shell invented a type of epoxy?
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
Yes, you can press DVD's on both sides, with 2 layers on each side. You have to do this professionally though, and it's a "press" not a "burn".
But when it comes to burning a DVD (with a DVD-burner that you can buy) , you can only burn one layer.
That's why you only get 4.7 GB on one side.
RAID is not a full replacement for backups. It can protect you against single disk failure, but can't help you retrieve that file you accidently deleted last week, or recover your system if it gets trashed by filesystem corruption or malicious hackers.
"I believe that the cult of the particular brings only death - for it bases order on likeness." St.-Exupery
Their zipped version is 1,220,608 bytes.
Sex - Find It