Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

1.5GB HDs On a 1" Platter

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the pr0n-on-the-road dept.

darthv506 was among several to point out a Cnet story describing a new "1.5GB HD on a 1" Platter. Samsung is releasing a sub 600 buck video camera that is "Smaller than a pack of cigarettes" featuring the drive. The drive is actually in production, and apparently goes for $65 in volume.

8 of 239 comments (clear)

  1. Radio-TiVo? by sweeney37 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This seem to be the perfect size (capacity and physical) for a Radio Tivo project...

    Mike

  2. Oh you knew this was coming, but RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Really. Price Currently these cost $65 with a target price of $50. Flash drives cost $200 or more. These drives also have less moving parts, and save space by removing un-needed stuff (Like drive rails; these drives are surface mounted).

  3. Re:ahem... by PerlGuru · · Score: 5, Informative

    The main thing here is that this is normal hard-drive type technology just with higher density, probably lower power consumption as well (still reading article). This makes it much more economical then a Flash drive of equivelent size. Note that in the write-up a cost of $65 in quantity is much cheaper then flash drives.

  4. Re:ahem... by Nathan+Ramella · · Score: 5, Funny

    These ones go to eleven.

    -n

    --
    http://www.remix.net/
  5. Re:RTFA by joe630 · · Score: 5, Informative

    "A reduction in components cuts costs. The 1.5-inch 5GB drive, which has been in volume manufacturing since mid-April, sells for $65 in quantities of 10,000. The company is aiming for $50, Magenis said. By contrast, existing standard 1-inch Microdrives from IBM sell for $219 at retail or more, while 1GB flash cards go for around $200."

  6. Re:Gigs ang gigs.. by MarcQuadra · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Remember the BigFoot series of hard drive? They were 5.25" drives by Quantum (now Maxtor) for desktop use. The problem is that when you make the disc wider, you have to slow down the rotation to keep the platters from breaking or 'stretching'. You'd have to run the things at 5400 RPM _AND_ a 'front to back' head seek would take forever. These would be GREAT as backup-only drives, but companies that buy backupd drives now are willing to pay $BIG_MONEY for backup drives (the bank I work at uses 36GB 10K U160-SCSI for server archives). There's really no market for cheap slow drives that hold oodles of data, they exist and don't sell well. Also, they'd end up in low-end PCs for sure, your uncle's eMachine would CRAWL with one of these.

    --
    "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  7. Re:Data Transfer will be the bottleneck by altman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Erm, no.

    USB2.0 or Firewire both have plenty enough bandwidth to saturate the drive. Cornice drives manage well excess of 3MBytes/sec in my experience (I work for Rio), which is faster than I've ever seen from my 1GB microdrive plugged into a PCMCIA-CF adaptor.

    Remember USB2.0/Firewire can support up to in excess of 30MBytes/sec. This is faster than a CF interface can manage - CF doesn't have DMA capability.

    Hugo

  8. Well... by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The gb/volume ratio wouldn't be much better

    You'd need to create 5 1/4" platters for a *very* small market.

    You can change a failed disk in an array much easier than a failed platter inside a hermetically sealed HDD.

    Size = IDE (RAID)
    Speed = SCSI (RAID)
    Really fucking huge? Not sure. Big array? Tape robot? Fibre SCSI?

    However, considering you can fit 1TB (4x250gb WD drives) in a desktop now, I don't see that many needing it...

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings