Slashdot Mirror


Toshiba Develops 0.85'' Hard Disk

onebuttonmouse writes "Toshiba have set a new record for the world's smallest hard disk at a tiny 0.85". Surely this will have some great applications in mobile devices, although the article does not mention power consumption. It'd be great if this made it into the iPod like the 1.5" Toshiba drive that resides in the current models."

283 comments

  1. pfft... by focitrixilous+P · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's not how big it is, it's how you use it...

    --
    SAILING MISHAP
    1. Re:pfft... by IthnkImParanoid · · Score: 4, Funny

      An especially ironic statement, considering how much of it we use for porn :)

      --
      It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
    2. Re:pfft... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How much of" what are you refering to? The hard disk or the hard ...?

    3. Re:pfft... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      you're rich aren't you? its the only reason why she would still be with you.

    4. Re:pfft... by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "It's not how big it is, it's how you use it..."

      Whoopee, so you can paralell park. I can hit the maximum clearance sign. =)

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    5. Re:pfft... by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 3, Funny

      Is .85" how big it is when it's hard or when it's floppy?

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    6. Re:pfft... by Luigi30 · · Score: 1

      I don't know, but I hear that you can put patches on the drive to make it bigger...

      --
      503 Sig Unavailable

      The Signature could not be accessed. Please try again later or contact the administrator
    7. Re:pfft... by innerlimit · · Score: 3, Funny

      Great, now i'll be getting emails saying

      'Inkreez ur HD size'

    8. Re:pfft... by NeoPotato · · Score: 1

      We the citizens of Los Angeles believe that you should not be using the terms "hard" and "floppy" when referring to disks, as it is politically incorrect and possibly offensive to males. We would like everybody to adopt the new, politically correct "erect" and "sorry, it's cold outside" as the new, correct terms for disks.

    9. Re:pfft... by zeroprime · · Score: 1

      and the girls will be amazed at how much you can cram into such a small place

      --
      Hey! come on! try dividing it by anything!
    10. Re:pfft... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      i always thought /. needed more small dick jokes.
      hilarious.

    11. Re:pfft... by Kingpin · · Score: 2, Funny


      That's what all the guys with little harddisks say..

      --
      Unable to read configuration file '/bigassraid/htdig//conf/14229.conf'
      Geocrawler error message.
    12. Re:pfft... by kj0rn · · Score: 0

      it's not the size of the waves that matter, its the motion of the ocean

    13. Re:pfft... by bertybassett · · Score: 0

      small craft advisory??

      --
      Wibble-Wobble, Wibble-Wobble, jelly on a plate
    14. Re:pfft... by focitrixilous+P · · Score: 1

      pfft x2, good sir. It was clearly a referance to the size of the hard drive. You have a sick mind, AC.

      --
      SAILING MISHAP
    15. Re:pfft... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if I capsize on your thighs high tide B-5 you sunk my battleship
      Please turn me on I'm Mister Coffee with an automatic drip
      So show me yours I'll show you mine "Tool Time" you'll Lovett just like Lyle
      And then we'll do it doggy style so we can both watch "X-Files"

  2. Why the iPod? Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It could benefit all hard drive based music players, not just the iPod.

    1. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by trentblase · · Score: 1

      Indeed, it could benefit all music players. How about a micro-drive in an SD form factor?

    2. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by grub · · Score: 5, Insightful


      2-3GB on a 0.85" drive isn't much compared to the 30GB+ on a 1.5" drive. That said I wish they'd put more money into developing high density solid state storage devices. 0.85" is cool but it's still a mechanical device with all the inherent problems.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    3. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by kommakazi · · Score: 1

      No it couldn't! That's blasphemous!

      Though in reality, it was probably just an example, no reason to get all up in arms.

    4. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      iPod is a generic term, like "kleenex" or "PC". Heck, I call my Dell DJ a "dell-POD".


      I sold my old iPod on eBay to buy a dellPod because I got sick of my iPod konking out on cross-country flights.

    5. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by Torham · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Are there other portable players that can use the 1.5" drive like the iPod? Preferrably one that can play Ogg and I can buy without the hard drive. I got a bunch of these laying around doing nothing.

    6. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by BitchKapoor · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Rio Karma plays MP3, WMA, Ogg and FLAC, but it includes a 20GB hard drive. It also has an ethernet port in its docking station.

    7. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      Buy a cheap PDA with a PCMCIA drive. What would be the cheapest and best for this would be an iPAQ 31xx along with the PCMCIA sleeve. Pop in the 1.5" drive and there you go. I highly reccomend getting the iPAQ 31xx over a color 36xx- battery life will be *tons* better, though you will have the screen off a lot of the times if you were listening to music. They'd be a lot cheaper too. You could get a setup like this for under $150 very easily, perhaps under $100. You can get the iPAQ 3135/3150 itself for $30-50 on eBay, not sure about the PCMCIA sleeve, but still pretty cheap. It'll be a brick, but cheap and very functional.

      You have a bunch of them lying around? Are you sure you don't have a bunch of 2.5" drives? 1.5" is a PCMCIA-sized drive, usually in a PCMCIA card form factor; 2.5" is the size of drive in a laptop.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    8. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by Zeinfeld · · Score: 3, Insightful
      2-3GB on a 0.85" drive isn't much compared to the 30GB+ on a 1.5" drive.

      Try building an IPOD into a pair of headphones. The advantage of compact flash is you can now store enough data for almost any conceivable portable use. Like when did you last listen to 30Gb worth of MP3 without recharging your batteries?

      The role of an iPod formfactor device is to provide a portable repository from which to fill up the wearable media. No an ipod is too heavy to count as wearable.

      The big problem with these disk ideas is that they end up costing a lot - $500 to $200, there is no low end version like there is for flash rom. I typically buy whatever memory is $60 at costco these days, but then again for photography that is easily sufficient, I do not fill up 256K chips before I can reach my laptop.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    9. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by l0tu53at3r · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but where am I supposed to hack the planet at? sharp? pound? number? hash? i always thought they did it at the train station.

      --
      ---Excuse the bad English, I'm American---
    10. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by Malor · · Score: 1

      That would be exceptionally difficult, because the SD format is so thin. Hard drive heads need to float over their platters, and that takes a certain amount of thickness. They also Do Not Like being bent or squeezed, and the SD format just doesn't have a lot of structural strength.

      A format the same height and width might work, but it would probably need to be thicker.

    11. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Because Apple are the only ones with half a clue on how to make a good MP3 player.

    12. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by zeroprime · · Score: 1

      a RAID of these could fit in a camcorder tape

      a bit bigger than an SD card sure, but with the new portable video players it could be sure to minimize skipping and benefit playback and recording speed in a size thats not much different than current tech

      --
      Hey! come on! try dividing it by anything!
    13. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by MonkeyBoy · · Score: 1

      True. But given it's size, it's probably based on a 2.5" laptop HD. The iPod is based on a 1.5" HD and is substantially smaller as a result. It should, hopefully, be cheaper than the iPod, because 20GB 2.5" mechanisms are substantially cheaper.

      Some people like the iPod's form factor, and you just can't do that with a 2.5" mechanism. Personally, I think the iPod has gotten TOO small - I'd lose it in the clutter on my desk.

      --

      Moof!

    14. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by trentblase · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you could have the thicker part dangling out. Like they do with SDIO wifi cards. It would be worth it to get 3gb storage on my smartphone. IIRC, the microdrives dangled out of the CF slot too.

    15. Re:Why the iPod? Seriously by ngoy · · Score: 1

      I do not understand this obsession with tiny form factors. CF is about the minimum easily handled size storage medium. Memory stick is so-so, but feel quite breakable. SD (24mmx32mm)and XD engineers should have gotten a clue. SD cards are barely finger manageable, and xd is so freaking stupidly small that they should have fired all the idiot marketing and engineering geniuses who came up with it. It is barely larger than a US penny. With "potential" to go up to 8GB. Well, my wife has potential to go to a bra size of 50G but you don't see me paying for that do you?

      --
      --ngoy
  3. A drop on the factual side by NeoThermic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For those in the UK; 0.85 Inches is a nice small 2.159cm. Although I wonder at the capacity and the sheilding from magnetic interference its going to need to keep away from even small magnetic currents erasing the data...

    NeoThermic

    --
    Use my link above, or to view my server, NeoThermic.com
    1. Re:A drop on the factual side by Ingolfke · · Score: 2, Informative

      As the article stated:

      Despite the smaller size, Toshiba's HDD has a storage capacity of 2-3GB

    2. Re:A drop on the factual side by NeoThermic · · Score: 1

      Hmm... eye sight is failing me more than expected :|

      NeoThermic

      --
      Use my link above, or to view my server, NeoThermic.com
    3. Re:A drop on the factual side by blueberrry · · Score: 1, Informative

      In case you ever leave America one day, you'll notice that almost all countries in the world except USA use the metric system

    4. Re:A drop on the factual side by NeoThermic · · Score: 1

      Hopefully that was not stab at me. I pefer my units as a repersentation of SI units. Not to say that I should of expressed the drive size in meters however. :D

      If it was a stab at me... then I laugh, because I'm living in the UK currently :D

      NeoThermic

      --
      Use my link above, or to view my server, NeoThermic.com
    5. Re:A drop on the factual side by SkArcher · · Score: 1
      Toshiba's HDD has a storage capacity of 2-3GB, equal to 2,000 floppy disks.
      Am I the only one who finds it depressing that there are people in this world who still think of disk size relative to Floppys?
      --

      An infinite number of monkeys will eventually come up with the complete works of /.
    6. Re:A drop on the factual side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For those in the UK; 0.85 Inches is a nice small 2.159cm.

      How big is that in Canada?

    7. Re:A drop on the factual side by NeoThermic · · Score: 1

      Well...
      What do you want it as?

      CD's? Assuming 700mb on CD and 2000MB on 2GB HD, its all of 2.86 times as much as a CD.

      DVD's? Assuming a 4.7GB DVD, its all of 0.43 times larger.

      Your average 40GB HD? 0.05 Times as large...

      So why choose floppy's as a comparason? Because its a nice large number... thats all.

      NeoThermic

      --
      Use my link above, or to view my server, NeoThermic.com
    8. Re:A drop on the factual side by IM6100 · · Score: 1

      Not just you. You and Steve Jobs.

      --
      A Good Intro to NetBS
    9. Re:A drop on the factual side by karit · · Score: 1

      Then might as well state it in terms of 5.25" 720kB disks then get a number 2x as big.

      --
      http://blog.karit.geek.nz/
    10. Re:A drop on the factual side by Gil-galad55 · · Score: 1

      I can't imagine why this HDD would be any different from other hard drives in terms of sensitivty to B fields just because of its size. All drives are, of course, sensitive in some degree to EM fields as they can cause the bits of material in the drive to flip spin, effectively garbling the data. But the big factor in sensitivy is areal density, I imagine, and judging by the capacity, the areal density of this drive can't be too high. That having been said, I haven't RTFA.

      --

      To follow knowledge like a sinking star, / Beyond the utmost bound of human thought. ("Ulysses", Tennyson)

    11. Re:A drop on the factual side by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The average length of an erect Canadian penis.

    12. Re:A drop on the factual side by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      I would prefer my measurements in multiples of audio cassette tape storage, thank you.

    13. Re:A drop on the factual side by calyphus · · Score: 1

      I suspect the drive is actually 2cm, and the .85 inch dimension is diseminated for my fellow backward americans.

      --


      The potato it is uninformed.
    14. Re:A drop on the factual side by ngoy · · Score: 1

      I don't think I ever had 720Kb 5.25's. I had 1.2MB and 360KB drives. Before that on my trusty Radio Shack Trash-80, I had a cassette tape drive and a stringy floppy. How many of you have heard of a stringy floppy before? It was a business card sized tape that was endless loop IIRC. About 1/8" thick, the tape was 1/16" thick. See TechWeb for definition, the cool manual here, an old Creative Computing article, and great scans of an old review here.

      I was so l337 with my trs-80, expansion board, and stringy floppy. I was so sad when my space invaders game (galactic something?) got eaten by that damn drive.

      --
      --ngoy
    15. Re:A drop on the factual side by mazor · · Score: 1

      "Am I the only one who finds it depressing that there are people in this world who still think of disk size relative to Floppys?"

      That depends. What's a floppy? ;>

  4. 1 gigabyte flash by morcheeba · · Score: 4, Informative

    I wonder how this will compete with Samsung's new one gigabyte (8 GBit) flash. With a storage capacity of only 2-3 GB, this drive is only 2 or 3 of these flash chips, so competing on size would be hard. Hopefully it's much cheaper.

    1. Re:1 gigabyte flash by HiThere · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ability to do rewrites to a sector could be significantly different, however. There are recommendations to not format flash to ext3 because of frequent rewrites to the same sectors, which could cause the flash cells to end-of-life pretty quickly, but hard disks don't generally have that problem. (OTOH, neither do vfat systems...not sure about ext2.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    2. Re:1 gigabyte flash by randyest · · Score: 3, Informative

      The company expects each drive to cost around 30,000 yen initially, but projects that mass production will push down the price to less than 10,000 yen within a few years.

      Yen30,000 is about 278.497 USD, Yen10,000 is about 92.8326 USD

      How much is that 1GB flash?

      --
      everything in moderation
    3. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yen30,000 is about 278.497 USD, Yen10,000 is about 92.8326 USD
      How much is that 1GB flash?


      Damn, I'm short the change... can you spot me 0.0026 USD?

    4. Re:1 gigabyte flash by pbox · · Score: 3, Insightful

      300 USD might buy you 3GB flash after some rebate crap. By the time this product comes out in 1-2 years, the final price will likely to be less and just below equivalent flash capacity. See what happened to IBM Microdrives vs. CompactFlash... It is not earth shattering invention, just normal evolution. Now 30 GB in that size, that would be somethin'.

      --
      Code poet, espresso fiend, starter upper.
    5. Re:1 gigabyte flash by BitchKapoor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Most CompactFlash cards have built-in write conditioning in their controls, which is why it's not much of a problem to write whatever filesystem, including FAT, to them. SmartMedia (really StupidMedia), on the other hand, requires the host to do it.

    6. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Ion+Berkley · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It is a concern. NAND flash which is generally the technology that leads the density curve needs special algorithms called 'wear leveling' in the device driver/file system to try to prevent 'hot spots' that cause bits to fail prematurely. the lower density NOR flash devices don't have the problem and tend to be used in application where this is expected to be a problem. That being said NAND flash has been used for many years in this type of application so I would describe it as an already solved problem. Given that there is no order of magnitude storage advantage for these miniturized HDD's over flash I can't imagine that flash would not still dominate in both the existing and new applciations it is touted for.
      I know I would think twice about have an HDD in a camera etc, I always treat my IPOD with extra care knowing what mechanical magic lurks within....

    7. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think concerns about flash memory wearing out are usually overblown. I see flash cards advertised as having a minimum lifetime of 1,000,000 rewrite cycles. Suppose you formatted the card as ext3. Even if you wrote to the card once every minute around the clock, and it wrote to the same sectors each time, it would take more than two years to get up to a million writes. And who writes to their flash card every minute? Maybe you wouldn't want to use it as your permanent home directory for a knoppix install you used every day, but for any other use, I'd say that it's unlikely you'll get up to 1,000,000 writes anytime soon.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    8. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 1

      Oops. Did I say "more than two years"? I meant "almost two years". 22.8159105 months to be exact.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    9. Re:1 gigabyte flash by nathanh · · Score: 2, Interesting
      There are recommendations to not format flash to ext3 because of frequent rewrites to the same sectors, which could cause the flash cells to end-of-life pretty quickly, but hard disks don't generally have that problem. (OTOH, neither do vfat systems...not sure about ext2.)

      Your comment about ext3 (and ext2) is correct but VFAT is not immune to the frequent-rewrites problem. The FAT itself (basically a linked list stored as an array) will have frequent rewrites and there is no feature in VFAT to use alternate locations for the FAT. Also directory entries in VFAT will get frequent rewrites (especially the date fields). A flash-friendly filesystem needs to write to all "sectors" with equal frequency. VFAT does not do this.

      Not that I think any of this matters. USB keys become obsolete faster than you can wear them out. 16MB keys are already useless and 32MB ones are quickly going that way. I've never seen either size (16MB or 32MB) wear out before being junked. People are buying 512MB keys now for only a few $100. By the time the 512MB keys wear out I fully expect to be buying 10GB keys. I think the "only 10,000 writes" problem is theoretical; it's not a problem in practise.

      Though I suspect many USB keys rearrange their writes internally to prevent premature death. This probably means it doesn't matter what filesystem you use.

    10. Re:1 gigabyte flash by C10H14N2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It won't. Current pricing of compact flash memory in the 1GB range is about $300. At 10Y:1$, getting twice the space but on rapidly spinning disks on a handheld device prone to frequent bumps and drops is not going to be very attractive--especially as if you need that extra space, you can buy whatever sized CF Card suits you, so if you really only need 64MB, it'll cost you thirty bucks instead of three-hundred. In my digital photography experience, I found it MUCH more convenient to buy a couple 256 and 512MB CF cards and dump them to a 6GB hand-held drive when necessary, considering it would have cost about $4000 to get the necessary space in flash cards. That camera would accept the 1GB MicroDrive, but the power consumption was ridiculous and you had to be insanely careful handling it as an accidental pinch or abrupt bump would nuke it completely. I'd much rather see them throw a large-capacity CF card in the phones, since I could just pop it out of the phone and into any other device, or my pocket. Better yet, they could do like the higher quality cameras and PDAs and let you use CF/SM/SD media interchangeably.

      Regardless, with 100G hard drives going for roughly $100, this works out to over 30 times the price and on size, it's actually seven times larger physical displacement for equal capacity. Maybe when they get it to 4X the price for 1/4 the size at the same capacity, but not now. Really, would you pay $3,333 for 100G of space? Ok, maybe if it was Raid-5 Ultra-320 SCSI, but still.

      Perhaps this is just a vast conspiracy to get out of consumers in storage media the lost revenues on CD sales.

    11. Re:1 gigabyte flash by rgmoore · · Score: 1
      There are recommendations to not format flash to ext3 because of frequent rewrites to the same sectors, which could cause the flash cells to end-of-life pretty quickly, but hard disks don't generally have that problem. (OTOH, neither do vfat systems...not sure about ext2.)

      And Linux has a solution specifically designed to deal with this problem. There's a JFFS (journaling flash file system) that's designed specifically for use on flash memory devices. I'm not 100% certain, but I'm pretty sure that the designers took the problem of flash wearing out with frequent re-writes into account when designing the filesystem.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    12. Re:1 gigabyte flash by rgmoore · · Score: 1

      Actually, IBM (now Toshiba) microdrives are distinctly cheaper than solid-state media of the same storage capacity- at least in the 2 and 4 GB sizes that they're selling these days. A quick check at Pricewatch shows 2 GB microdrives (in Compact Flash packaging) selling for as little as $195, while the cheapest solid state 2 GB CF is $430. 4 GB sizes are not listed at Pricewatch, but the price advantage for Microdrives is likely to be even greater there. When I checked at Ritz Camera, the 4 GB microdrive was only about 50% more than the 2GB, while the 4 GB solid state CF was more than double the price of 2 GB.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    13. Re:1 gigabyte flash by HermanZA · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm just wondering what your sig will print and I'm too lazy to compile it...

    14. Re:1 gigabyte flash by edwdig · · Score: 1

      Where are you seeing these 1,000,000 write cycle flash cards? 100,000 seems to be the norm from what I see.

    15. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Cecil · · Score: 2, Informative

      For ext2, what you are saying is true. ext2 is a plain, boring, vanilla filesystem. ext3 is journalled. Which is why it is ext3 that is a concern.

      With default settings, ext3 syncs the journal every 5 seconds. Automatically, without stopping. The journal being located in the same place on the card, of course.

      For 1 million rewrites, this would kill your card in no less than 138.8 days. So, 4 months. I don't think that lifetime is still looking so great.

    16. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The solution seems easy enough. Don't use ext3.

      Different filesystems work better in different situations.

    17. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what about reads? just curious, cuz i don't know.

    18. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      What occurs to me, when I read stuff like this, is that we still don't have a lot of diversity in filesystems. Ext3, Reiserfs, XFS, JFS.. all written for tradeoffs of reliability vs various different types of performance. But when was the last time you heard of a filesystem that was designed to not write to the same sector over and over?

      Me neither.

      There's still a frontier out there, and room to innovate and make one's mark.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    19. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I almost want to make such a filesystem. In fact the ideas are already out there, and hell, maybe if you look hard enough, it has already been done.
      But then I wonder, what if MRAM comes out within a year or two? That stuff will pretty much obsolete flash memory and my efforts would be wasted.

    20. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently they're called log filesystems. If there's a name for them, that probably means they've been implemented before, but I can't name any specific filesystems.

    21. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think this looks better:

      for(int r=-1,c=0;r!=32;c++){if(c>r){r++;printf("\n"); for(c=38;c!=r;c--)printf(" ");c=0;}printf(~r&c?" `":" #");}

    22. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 1
      It prints a Sierpinski triangle in ASCII. Compiling it is rediculously easy, especially if you're running Linux. Try this: copy and paste the following into a terminal window:
      printf '#include <iostream>\nusing namespace std;\nint main(){for(int r=-1,c=0;r<40;c++){if(c>r){r++; cout<<endl;for(c=40;c>r;c--)cout<<" ";c=0;}cout<<(~r&c?" `":" #");}}\n' > foo.cpp && g++ foo.cpp && ./a.out
      That monster command will make a file named foo.cpp containing the code, compile it, and run the result. (actually the core code there is the C++ version which is shorter by several characters but involves too many < signs to fit in the Slashdot sig box)
      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    23. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 1

      Just because ext3 is journaled doesn't make it a bad choice for flash cards. If it really writes something to the filesystem every five seconds regardless of whether anything has actually changed, then that is cause for concern, but that is not because it is a journaled filesystem per se, that's just because it's badly designed.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    24. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 1

      Well, that was the number I saw during my google search for flash cards. You can certainly buy ones rated at 1,000,000 cycles.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    25. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just because you haven't heard of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There are several linux filesystems suitable for embedded work, and they are designed for flash-card environments. There's cramfs which is a read-only compressed filesystem so you can cram as much stuff as possible into limited Flash space (to upgrade you just re-flash the entire filesystem with a new cramfs disk image, good for simple devices that can be upgraded with new ROMs). There's ramdisks or RAMFS to complement cramfs and make a usable Linux system where nothing at all is ever written to Flash. There's also JFFS which is a journaled filesystem made explicitly for Flash devices, which does try to adapt to Flash's weaknesses. It is used on iPAQs and other handhelds as the main filesystem.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    26. Re:1 gigabyte flash by fireboy1919 · · Score: 1

      1,000,000 rewrite cycles? I think they're lying, or being very gentle during the writes. That sounds more like the number of writes available to hard drives (no they don't have infinite rewritability).

      You might get 500,000 writes of all zeros followed by 500,000 writes of all ones, but I doubt you'll go over 100,000 intermittently switching between them (and probably not over 10,000) without a few of those bits getting stuck. There's just not a standard that says what a write is.

      A gaussian distributed changing of bits? A complete toggle of all bits? A change of a fixed percentage and random location of bits? Also, they don't really say how it stands up to heat, which shortens the lifespan of flash chips and is an issue in many places.

      Flash chips haven't changed much materials-wise since they came out, so why would they get more writes all of a sudden?

      --
      Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
    27. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends how big your terminal window is I suppose. I chose 38 to fill a standard 80-character wide terminal side-to-side.

    28. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 1

      I've never heard of a read limit on Flash memory. I assume you can just read from it as many times as you want and it won't wear out.

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    29. Re:1 gigabyte flash by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      Because the only way to not write repeatedly to a sector is to have a counter somewhere and increment it, and that means 'writing to a single area over and over'. I guess another would be to have offset 'heat' counters spread through the filesystem, but that's way to complex, especially considering that most flash is in embedded systems that benefit from simplicity.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    30. Re:1 gigabyte flash by Sloppy · · Score: 1
      Because the only way to not write repeatedly to a sector is..
      Aha! See? You're already thinking about how to do it. This is fun. :-)

      One thing I was thinking of, if speed isn't very important and reads don't reduce the lifetime of the media, is to have a whole bunch of copies of the filesystem's root data structure, each copy timestamped (or with a counter, as you mentioned -- same thing). To find which one is the latest, "correct" one? Read them all! When you need to update, overwrite the oldest copy, and give it a newest counter value. You still write to some areas a lot, but the number of writes is divided by the number of redundant copies.

      There are some variations on that theme. You can sacrifice even some more speed, and some capacity at the beginning of every sector (ouch!), and then any sector on the media might contain the root structure. And when you mount, the only way to figure out which one it is, is to read every sector of the media. ;-) But you can really spread the writes out evenly over the whole medium, if you entertain such wacky ideas and are willing to make the performance sacrifices.

      but that's way to complex, especially considering that most flash is in embedded systems that benefit from simplicity.
      For some systems, you're right. For others, you're not. Consider the Zaurus, practically a desktop PC -- when you look at the software that's already on those things (e.g. the Linux kernel), it's apparent that nothing would be "too complex."
      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    31. Re:1 gigabyte flash by mazor · · Score: 1

      I've been using the same 1GB Microdrive for the past three years in nearly daily use. I've dropped it, sat on it, run with it in a thigh pocket, and done just about every abuse an outdoor photographer subjects his camera equipment to except get it wet. It's worked flawlessly in subfreezing temperatures in Alaska and Antarctica as well as summer heat in Death Valley. Battery temperature and LCD use have more effect on battery life than Microdrive power consumption, at least in the Canon G1 and Nikon D100 cameras I'm familiar with.

      It's interesting that the tales of Microdrive failures are told primarily by those who don't use Microdrives.

      --mazor

    32. Re:1 gigabyte flash by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      I claim the name "Random Allocated File System"!

      But really, what we need is a new generation of solid-state but small-as-hell storage, maybe based on current RAM modules (SRAMS are speedy and use VERY little juice). Maybe a CompactFlash form-factor stack of SRAM with a lithium battery to 'maintain' data when not plugged into a larger device. When the battery starts to go after X amount of time unplugged the host device warns you that your data's at risk. SRAMS don't suffer from 'burn in' either, that's the key advantage.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    33. Re:1 gigabyte flash by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

      It's interesting that you assume I have not simply because I stated a series of facts reported in the owner's manual. Operation in Death Valley in high summer is an activity repeatedly advised against, so given out-of-spec operation, one might think your experience is more an example of good luck than good engineering.

      Personally, the 20% additional power suck and resultant additional heat generated (and lack of internal ventilation) within my E10 was enough for me to opt for a larger, hand-held drive that would rip directly from CF and SM cards. Admittedly, that was over two years ago, but by design the issues are still there and other storage options are still more attractive to some people.

  5. So much porn... by scosol · · Score: 5, Funny

    in such a small place...

    God bless technology!

    --
    I browse at +5 Flamebait- moderation for all or moderation for none.
    1. Re:So much porn... by Kenja · · Score: 1
      "in such a small place..."

      But... but... she said it was a good size!

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    2. Re:So much porn... by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 2, Funny


      I Like my women Like I like my hard drives, small and asian.

      --
      Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
  6. Microdrive by momerath2003 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If any of you were wondering about "The 1-inch HDD developed by the US affiliate of Hitachi Ltd," that is the same as (what was) the IBM MicroDrive. IBM's hard drive section was purchased by Hitachi.

    Also, it says that the Hitachi 1" hard drive was "released in November," but I know that the IBM MicroDrives have been around a lot longer than that. Maybe it's just that they shrunk a little and grew in capacity.

    --
    I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
    1. Re:Microdrive by phr1 · · Score: 1

      The Microdrive "1 inch" drive actually uses 1.3 inch platters, IIRC. It's a bit to large to want to put into a tiny mobile phone. This 0.8" thing should fit more easily.

    2. Re:Microdrive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, IBM could have used technology from other entities, if you look at the big scheme of things. I know, it's hard to decide what's IBM and what's Hitachi. Sort of like how much of USAF is Mitsubishi.

  7. The thing I find interesting about this... by foxtrot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...is that a Microdrive, which I believe is what they're referring to by "1 inch" hard disk drive is too large for cellphones, according to the article, but somehow, this .85 inch one isn't. That's not a huge difference in platter size. Is the associated electronic equipment in this one notably smaller? The article doesn't say, but that's the only thing I can think of-- .15 of an inch (that's shy of four millimeters for y'all metric folks) doesn't seem like it would be a deal-breaker.

    Not that it really matters to me. As long as my phone has a vibrate mode, I don't think I want a hard disk in it...

    1. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by grub · · Score: 4, Interesting


      which I believe is what they're referring to by "1 inch" hard disk drive is too large for cellphones

      Whenever I read about hard disks in a cell phone I always wonder about the gyroscope effect making the phone hard to manage. Power up a standard hard drive and try turning it perpindicular to the spindle and see what I mean.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    2. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Well, given that the platters in these things are significantly smaller, I suspect the effect isn't nearly as noticeable.

    3. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by DrInequality · · Score: 3, Informative
      You can be certain that this tiny little drive will have negligable gyroscopic effects.

      The angular momentum is (for a point)
      L = M x R^2 x omega

      So scales as the square of the disk radius. The radius of a standard 3.5" disk is probably about 1.7", the radius of this new disk is 0.425". The small disk will therefore have about 5% of the momentum of the larger disk (assuming all else is equal).

      Also, all else is not equal: the minature disk will spin slower for sure. 5400RPM or less.

    4. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by cperciva · · Score: 2, Informative

      Whenever I read about hard disks in a cell phone I always wonder about the gyroscope effect making the phone hard to manage.

      I imagine that, for power saving purposes, the hard drive would spin slowly, and be spun down most of the time anyway.

      This raises another question, however: When the mobile phone starts its hard drive, would the phone start to spin?

    5. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by dhovis · · Score: 4, Informative
      Well,

      Remember that area goes as the square of the diamater, so this new hard drive is only 72% of the area of a 1 inch drive. They don't mention the thickness, but if it is thinner than the 1 inch drives, then there is better than 30% savings on volume. That is nothing to sneeze at.

      As long as my phone has a vibrate mode, I don't think I want a hard disk in it...
      One thing to remember is that the smaller the radius of the hard disk platter, the less sensitive it will be to vibrations anyway. That is why iPods are relatively robust (that and good caching, so the hard drive is rarely moving anyway).
      --

      --
      The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.

    6. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by furiousgeorge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >>Whenever I read about hard disks in a cell
      >>phone I always wonder about the gyroscope
      >>effect making the phone hard to manage.

      What....? Those millions of peoples with iPods seem to be able to power them up and turn them without falling over.

      Current implementations demonstrate the gyroscopic effects aren't a concern (except possible for the engineers designing them). Smaller disks will make it even less so.

    7. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by momerath2003 · · Score: 1

      Only in a vaccum (or other frictionless environment) according to

      I[phone] * omega[phone]=I[platter] * omega[platter]

      With friction, the angular acceleration of the phone would be zero thanks to static friction.

      --
      I had but a simple dream, to destroy all humans.
    8. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by loose+electron · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Sorry - disk drives don't work in a vacuum, the heads require air to lift them off the platter.

      BTW - IBM developed a few years back (1994-96)a disk drive with platters the size of a quarter. (about the same size as a 1 Euro coin for you on the other side of the pond.) Consequently this is very old news.

      --
      www.effectiveelectrons.com "chips that work" Analog, RF, Mixed Signal
    9. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the so-called "1inch" Microdrives were actually 1.3 inches, which means (0.85 / 1.3)^2 = 43% less area.

    10. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by onomatomania · · Score: 1

      Right, and these miniscule hard drives don't spin at anywhere close to the 7200 RPM you probably have in your desktop. Sure, if you pick one of those up you're in for a shock at how much gyroscopic reaction there is, but that's because of multiple platters, much larger radius, and faster angular velocity (rpm).

    11. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you even want HD's in phones anyway? The p900, which is the standard for smart phones, only comes with 32 meg flash.

    12. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm glad someone here had the sense to make this observation. However, form factor 'size' actually refers approximately to the size of the disk (measure a desktop drive sometime). Another thing to note is that the inertia of smaller diameter disks is lower, so the 0.85" disk would consume less power. This is why platters on 15k rpm drives are actually smaller than on 7.2k/10k rpm ones.

      One has to wonder what the interface for this 0.85" FF looks like. Microdrive is just big enough for CFII. There wasn't much useful information in the press release.

      By the way, the Toshiba HDD being used in the iPod is a 1.8" form factor, not 1.5". Hitachi GST also has an offering in 1.8" FF (Travelstar C4K40). Also, the IBM Microdrive was released in 1999. The 4 GB version was announced recently, which is what the article was referring to.

      ::G
      (Incidentally, an HGST employee; the views expressed herein are my own. But check the facts and you'll find out I'm right ;)

    13. Re:The thing I find interesting about this... by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      Um, my TiBook has a nice 'big' 2.5" drive and I can twirl it around as much as I want, that's about the same ratio of 'spinning platter : rest of device' that you'd have in a cell phone with a .85" drive in it.

      By the way, what you suggest doing is a GREAT way to fsck-up a drive.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
  8. 0.85 by rkz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is great for seek times, high speed applications like watching hi-res movies from a hard drive this small could mean smooth tracking through the film without losing audio sync, a problem which affects larger drives (3.5").
    Forget the iPod, this sort of drive would do nicely in a handheld/pocket divx player.

    1. Re:0.85 by randyest · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Hmm, isn't 0.85" the drive thickness? As in, the height of the platter stack? If so, I don't think this height reduction would affect the seek time at all. The diameter and spin rate (RPM) of each platter would be the factos that affect seek rate. I'm not sure if this drive is any smaller in the other dimensions, but if it is, I'd guess it'd be not much smaller, and therefore not seek that much faster.

      --
      everything in moderation
    2. Re:0.85 by imsabbel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ????
      Could you explain wtf this has to do with access time?
      If you can track to a film with audio sync or not is purely dependent on the container and the audio codec. Ogg or avi mit vbr mp3 can create problems, seek times dont (your blockindey is already in hd-cache, and if you dont jump into an i frame, decoding a lot of b/p frames (up to 11 in mpeg2 up to 100s in mpeg4) will take a lot longer than seek time.

      But even if seek time would be important for that stuff: Your 0.85" hd will have a lot worse seek time than any normal 3.5" drive. Because of the simple fact that you cant fit very powerfull magnets / coils in such a small package.
      If your reasoning would be true, we would have servers running of microdrive raids for years...

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    3. Re:0.85 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about using it as a movie cache drive on a pc?

    4. Re:0.85 by cperciva · · Score: 1

      Hmm, isn't 0.85" the drive thickness? As in, the height of the platter stack?

      No. 0.85" is the platter diameter.

    5. Re:0.85 by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      I used to use a little 2 GB PCMCIA hard drive- like in the iPod- in my PDA, a Jornada 720. It was awesome- 2 GB of storage for a piddly $70- next to nothing compared to the price of similar storage in CF or SD cards. I wish my newer PDA, a Sigmarion III, had PCMCIA for this puppy- with a faster CPU and a bigger and better screen (5" 800x480 rather than 640x240 [compared to 320x240 for PocketPCs) it would be great for watching DivXs. It seems to decode them well enough with my experiements. A shame no media player (that I know of, at least) uses the built-in MPEG4 decoder on the GPU in the Sig3- an ATI Imageon 3200.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    6. Re:0.85 by phorm · · Score: 1

      Can you please explain the sig? Anti-SCO magic eye illusion. Only pops up in firebird, not CURL nor IE... and links to a nasty goatse...

      As for being on topic: DivX player will somewhat depend on the reading speed of the drive. You'd improve performance by low-distance needed for the needle to travel, but lose some with micro-sized parts I'd imagine?

    7. Re:0.85 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *** WARNING: Sig link is to GOATSE!!! ***

    8. Re:0.85 by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      Fuck you and fuck your sig, goatse boy.

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    9. Re:0.85 by jemecki · · Score: 1

      Reducing the size of the platter reduces the seek time. A question like this was actually asked on the final in my Machine Structures class at Berkeley.

      Here's the posted solution to the question on my final(the question was what happens when to the average latency and transfer rate as the diameter of a hard disk is increased):

      "Increasing the size of the platter means that the longest seek time (the time it takes to move the head assembly to the desired track), and therefore the average seek time, increases. Seek time is the largest component of latency, even if you include the transfer itself. So a bigger disk will INCREASE the average latency.
      Since the rotational speed of the disk (in RPM) is, of course, constant over the entire disk, the outer tracks are covering a greater distance during each rotation than the inner tracks. If the bit density is constant, there are more bits on the outer tracks, and so the transfer rate (bits per second) INCREASES as the diameter of the disk increases. "

    10. Re:0.85 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you idiot trolls have anything better to do than scream "GOATSE!!!!! GOATSE!!!!!!!" at every link you see?

    11. Re:0.85 by loose+electron · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Sorry - Rotational latency dominates the access time for a disk drive. If a disk has been defragmented, everything is in a neat order, so the seek time doesn't matter. Just reading the FAT then getting to the first data cluster in the chain matters. Developed the silly things for 15 year, so been there done that... Berkley..... Oh well..

      --
      www.effectiveelectrons.com "chips that work" Analog, RF, Mixed Signal
    12. Re:0.85 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i dunno, in a couple o year 1 gig flash will be cheap as chips - with the current compression you could store high-quality divX on that! and, its totally portable!

    13. Re:0.85 by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Do you read?
      Yes, smaller platters reduce seek time.
      Yes, even the newer 3.5" cheetas only use 2.7" or so platters.
      But they keep a high internal radius. And they keep the same big case which leaves enough space for the big actuator magnets whichout them affecting the disc.

      In ultrasmall drives, you get a smaller platter size. But the internal regiens have VERY litte data per track, meaning a random search is much likly to cower grater parts of the platter than with "larger" discs.
      You just get less data per "head moving distance"
      Also, the low rpm create a lot of latency that is intependent of platter size: 5000rmp mean 6ms rotation latency PLUS the seek latency. Thats more than a 15rpm cheeta has in total.
      You cant easily spin the small drives higher because
      a) it hard to fit such a high speed motor in the few mm^3 available.
      b) power consumption
      c) heat (you get very little surface on the package and usually NO airflow.

      Combine that with the slower actuators, you get seek times slightly worse than a normal hd, rotation latencies that are a lot higher and of course less performance...

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    14. Re:0.85 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're ignoring that most seeks will happen to close proximity radially of where you're currently at. Random seeks aren't a very good example to test seek efficiency with. The larger the platters, the faster they will rotate (at the same spindle speeds on average they'll move faster as you move closer to the edge), the faster data will pass under the head once it's at the right radial distance.

    15. Re:0.85 by Crazy+Eight · · Score: 1
      Here's the posted solution to the question on my final...

      Thanks bro, I've wanted to skip that class more often.

  9. Re:Waiting. by Bahumat · · Score: 3, Funny

    Heh. Don't suppose there's a +1: Ironic, modifier there?

    --
    "To pass through the jungle; silence, courtesy, ferocity, as the occasion demands." -- Kamau, "Proper Passage"
  10. Usage by CrystalChronicles · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'd love to see this used on a digital camera. Imagine 2 gig of sapce to space your 5 megapixel shots. mmmm Price might be prohibitive at first but what new technology isnt?

    1. Re:Usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sorry, that should read: Imagine 2 gig of space to store your 5 megapixel shots

    2. Re:Usage by B3AND1P · · Score: 1

      You can already get 4gb in your digital camera: http://shop.store.yahoo.com/simplycheap/lexacf4gb- 40-380.html

    3. Re:Usage by rgmoore · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's already available, at least for more expensive cameras. You can get an IBM microdrive in a Compact Flash Type II form factor, which is a bit thicker but otherwise dimensionally compatible with the regular Compact Flash cards. Less expensive cameras aren't designed to accept both Type I and Type II, but many of the high-end ones- including all of the Digital SLRs, AFAIK- are. The extra capacity is obviously really useful when dealing with a 6+ megapixel camera that may want to save pictures in raw (i.e. not compressed) format. The availablility of hard drive storage is one of the key things that keeps Compact Flash relevant; it's bigger and clunkier than other card types, but at the very high end it can hold way more than any of the others.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    4. Re:Usage by Sylver+Dragon · · Score: 1

      You can already get something like that. Hitachi sells Microdrives which can be used in some cameras. Check the compatability matrix for drives and cameras.

      --
      Necessity is the mother of invention.
      Laziness is the father.
    5. Re:Usage by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ack! no thanks....

      I'll take my pocket full of 256 meg CF cards.

      If I lose,smash,wash one, I lose 256Meg of storage and not much money or photos lost.

      The last thing I want is to spend my weekend in disneyworld taking photos of my kids pissing on mickey, screaming anti-disney slogans and getting dragged off by the goofy police and lose every one of them due to media failure.

      for holding divx files for me to watch on my Zaurus? yes! important things like digital photos? nope.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    6. Re:Usage by aengblom · · Score: 1

      Just go buy a 2 or 4 gig Compact Flash card.

      They read/write significantly faster and have no moving parts. They're also removable etc. etc

      Ok, so the 4 Gigger is a bit pricey ;-).

      --


      So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
    7. Re:Usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Don't you love "Gay Days" at Disneyland? Bring your kids! Bring your parish priest!

      -- K.Y. Gay

    8. Re:Usage by rgmoore · · Score: 1

      There is the tiny problem of the price. The 2 GB is going for $700 and the 4 GB for $1600. The equivalent microdrives are $350 and $500. I don't know about you, but I can think of plenty of things to do with the $350 to $1100 I'd save by going with the hard drive over flash memory.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    9. Re:Usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why yes! last time we brought 22 rifles and shot at least 30 queers before we were told to stop because we exceeded our limit....

      In fact, I remember you, you were that girly faggot wearing a pink thong and tank top I almost capped...

      Gawd a 350 pound ugly faggot wearing that crap... how can you live with yourself?

    10. Re:Usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would be a shame to have to do that all over again, wouldn't it?

    11. Re:Usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ah but is that mor important than when the Goofy police come for the video you recorded on the cam attached to your Zaurus? I hate to have anything happen to my Zaurus.

    12. Re:Usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how can you live with yourself?

      By looking at you.

      Thanks for the laughs.

    13. Re:Usage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ack! no thanks...
      I'll take my briefcase full of floppies. If I lose, smash, wash one, I lose ONE photo.

  11. drive's capacity by asquared256 · · Score: 1

    is only 2-3 gigabytes... the ones in ipods are at least 10, right? it sounds like they just reduced the size of the platters, and they didn't significantly increase the storage density.

    1. Re:drive's capacity by atommoore · · Score: 1

      Well, remember when the ipod came out, it was a 5 gb harddrive in a slighty larger case. As time went on, it grew to 10, then 20, and now 40.

      Now here we are about to see the slow expansion of the smaller form factor harddrives. In 6 months you might see a 5 gb. In 5 years some will be posting the .2 inch hardrive that can 'only' hold 5 gbs.

      --
      You are not your blog
  12. Size Matters? by fmlug.org · · Score: 5, Funny

    Great so I can loose this sucker just like I keep loosing that tiny cell phone I had to buy. Or better yet they will prob combine the two and make the worlds smallest cell with a HD. So then I can loose both at the same time. How small do we need things, really. I thought women always say "size matters!" if so the geeks are going in the wrong direction.

    1. Re:Size Matters? by mcpkaaos · · Score: 1

      If you make everything you can as small as you can, it makes the things you can't look bigger.

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    2. Re:Size Matters? by fmlug.org · · Score: 1

      Yes but then all your doing is fooling yourself, and that does no one any good. It may make you feel better but others will still know.

    3. Re:Size Matters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  13. Smart Memory sizes... by TWX · · Score: 1

    It would be kind of cool to see this sort of thing in a smartmedia, multimedia, or securedigital form factor, especially if the interfaces of the memoryslot based MP3 players improve. It would be cool to have 6GB of mp3s along and still have $200 in cash more than the ipod freaks...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Smart Memory sizes... by CrazyTrashCanHead · · Score: 1

      Yup. Cuz the .85in hard-disk-in-a-CF-card is free, afterall...

    2. Re:Smart Memory sizes... by TWX · · Score: 1

      If the mp3 player is less than $100, the $200 cost of the smart media hard disk isn't terribly hard to swallow, especially if it works in multiple devices.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:Smart Memory sizes... by CrazyTrashCanHead · · Score: 1

      True, but the hard disk itself is $300us, and it probably isn't 6gb (the article was careful to avoid the actual disc size). Then we need to worry about the enclosure, etc. The fact that the 10gb iPod is 299us all said and done kinda throws a loop into the original argument...

    4. Re:Smart Memory sizes... by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      Mr. Trash Can Head is quite right. Back when I bought my 2 GB PCMCIA HD (same kind as in the iPod) most of the larger sizes- 5, 10 and 15 GB at the time- it cost more or the same to buy just the PCMCIA HD than it did to buy open an iPod, rip out the drive, and be on my merry way. In the end, I didn't have the money for much more than the 2 GB, which was a piddly $70.

      By the way, IIRC, the size of the disk they're talking about is 2-3 GB.

      A SD or SmartMedia disk of 2-3 GB? That would be far more than an iPod, far more than the 30 GB iPod. Though if you already had a means to play MP3s- in my case, my PDA- I'd rather have the CF or SD card, provided it was super damned expensive, which it would be and will be for a number of years.

      That said, unlike most PDAs, I have the option of using USB devices to hook up to it. Maybe I'll just buy an iPod and use it for MP3ing and data storage. :)

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  14. Re:Waiting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't moderate and post in the same story. (well you can if you moderate first then post but all your mods will be erased.

  15. Wait, wait, wait... by BAM0027 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There have been a few press releases about significant reductions in form factor, but the storage capacity is also much less. Just hang out until they get as fast, as capacious, and as cheap.

    Of course, when they do,...

  16. Yen? by ascalon · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Just to let you know, 30,000 yen is around $278 american. If this pushes down to 10,000 yen that will be around $93 dollars.

  17. Even if low power consumption.... by Androgynous+Coward · · Score: 1

    ...it will be a bit before the price comes down enough to permit it to be used in an MP3 player.

  18. Bah. by SuperMo0 · · Score: 1

    That's not impressive, really. You'd still need a helluva lot of them to get a decent amount of storage space. If they because USB compatible, though, then it might help speed up the development of USB drives.

  19. Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    100 of these crammed together. They could hold about 200G and only be about 5 times the size of a normal drive!

    1. Re:Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. 100 Toshiba 0.85" hard disks in RAID5
      2. 10 Gbit ethernet (4Gbit fibre channel would limit peak transfer rates)
      3. 150 W PSU for the drives
      4. Quad Opteron to calculate the parity bits
      5. ???
      6. profit

    2. Re:Imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A hard-drive like that would have some pull in tech circles (or anywhere in general, for that matter!).

  20. Ideal for.... by Guillermito · · Score: 1
  21. Price in USD by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

    Article stated: The company expects each drive to cost around 30,000 yen ($278.46) initially, but projects that mass production will push down the price to less than 10,000 yen ($92.83) within a few years.

    Of course, exchange rates may change significantly before the price drops to 10,000 yen.

  22. Re:Toshiba rocks, by davidstrauss · · Score: 1
    They make some amazing laptops. Not only do they make 90% of the parts they remind me of Apple on the eligance of their laptops.. The new 359 series laptops are slick 15.4 inch wide screen monsters, for a grand it gives you a 1.4ghz centrino (1mb cache) geforce fx 5200, 40gb hd, 15.4 wide screen, 512mb ddr, and all inside a incredible 5lbs machine!

    That sounds exactly like my ThinkPad, but does yours have gigabit ethernet, integrated bluetooth, integrated 802.11b and 802.11a, a 7200RPM 60GB HDD, a modular bay (normally DVD/CD-RW), trackpoint and touchpad, an integrated encryption/security chip, and a keyboard light, all in a 1"-thick case? My laptop may be ugly, but it's what's inside that counts.

    On-topic part: the HDD actually uses a glass-based compound to achieve its small size and speed, rather than the metallic platters in most units.

  23. 0.85" = 21.6 mm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Inches are totaly inappropriate for small measurements, or for any technical stuff for that matter. Use millimetres or centimetres instead!

  24. Re:Waiting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No wonder why I see my mods (karma) go up and down sometimes.

  25. 4GB MIcrodrive by G4from128k · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When I RTFA, I noted a related story on the new Compact Flash 4GB Microdrive and found a randomly chosen supplier with more specs and claims that these are in stock now. Just think, a DVD worth of data on a single CF card. Now I can start taking all my digital pictures in RAW format.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:4GB MIcrodrive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      single layer dvd: 4.5 gigs Double layer: 9 gigs Most movies take up more than 4.5 gig so you would have to downsample the video or the sound to get it to fit.

    2. Re:4GB MIcrodrive by Tumbleweed · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most movies take up that much space only when you add in all the alternate language tracks & video extras that are on the disc. You'd be suprised how small some of those movies can get when you just want one language track, and no extras. And then if you encode it in something like DivX or xvid, you can get them _really_ small.

    3. Re:4GB MIcrodrive by bonehead · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. Especially when you factor in the fact that the original video is of quite a bit better higher than a lot of the televisions still in use are capable of displaying, anyway.

      I've squeezed full length DVD movies down to well under a 700 MB or so with stereo audio and did not see a visible reduction in picture quality.

      Now, if I had a monster HDTV in my living room, I'm sure there would have been a noticeable difference, but on my 36" tube (standard def) there wasn't.

      Any practical application for storing video on these drives would not likely have a large enough display to necessitate the same quality level as you find on a DVD. Come on, if you're displaying on a 54" screen, why not just pop the original disc into the DVD player and be done with it?

  26. Re:Waiting. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    /Waiting for AC to get the joke...../

  27. Think iPod lite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apple wants to bring $100 iPod to the market. They can't push the price of current models, but they can bring a new, cheaper and smaller (maybe Flash drive) version to go with that Pepsi promotion.

  28. 0.85inch drives in iPods? by joekra · · Score: 3, Informative
    These drives are not to be introduced until 2005... so will not find their way into iPods anytime soon...

    that being said, there are circulating rumors of Smaller/Cheaper iPods.

  29. Imagine.... by Ibanez · · Score: 3, Funny

    a REALLY small beowulf cluster of...oh nevermind....

  30. RAID 5 em by DigiShaman · · Score: 2, Funny

    You know, I think it would be kinda nifty to set up five or six of these micro drives in RAID 5 configuration. I mean, talk about a solid mini-application server for household use.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:RAID 5 em by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      Would you call it your Mama-SAN?

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
  31. Low power consumption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It should have quite low power consumption.

    All else being equal, the power consumption of similar hard disks should be approximately proportional to the square of their radii.

    Of course, friction is a funny thing, and the engineering may need to be different for a small device, so YMMV. In general, smaller disks will use less power.

  32. Damn Sig! by roye · · Score: 1

    Damn Sig!

  33. Ooooh . . . GPS application by StefanJ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Imagine a handheld GPS locator with every city map!

    Or that you can set to record a timespace waypoint every five minutes.

    You could tie one of these to your outdoor cat and see how many owners he has . . .

    Stefan

    1. Re:Ooooh . . . GPS application by meowsqueak · · Score: 1

      It worries me that you had to qualify the cat as being 'outdoor'.

    2. Re:Ooooh . . . GPS application by rkz · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I think cat is a euphaism for his girlfriend and 'outdoor' is a euphamism for prostitute.

    3. Re:Ooooh . . . GPS application by Matey-O · · Score: 1
      Or that you can set to record a timespace waypoint every five minutes.
      Screw that, I want datapoints for every foot travelled. How else am I going to see if that last session tuneing the Vette improved anything?

      (Yeah, yeah, I've already done the math, you need some pretty expensive equipment to get GPS to the resolution needed to measure 0-60mph times.)
      --
      "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
    4. Re:Ooooh . . . GPS application by StefanJ · · Score: 1

      Why?

      I actually don't have a cat. But I know people who have indoor only cats and far-ranging outdoor beasts. The former don't get beat up as much, but miss out on a lot of visceral carnivore thrills.

      Stefan

  34. Re:2-3gb by Ingolfke · · Score: 3, Funny

    Yeah, or maybe they'll finally realize that everyone wants RAID in their IPods! With smaller drives they can make it happen. How are you supposed to run a serious production IPod w/o some form of disk redundancy! I mean seriously now Apple, let's get w/ the program.

  35. Poor man's computer by King+Bo+Bo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is BIG news. It looks like cell phones will become the poor man's computer. How many billions of people live in China and India again? Over two billion.

    1. Re:Poor man's computer by RevAaron · · Score: 3, Informative

      Heh. haha. and heh again!

      I think you're confusing China and India with more affluent Asian nations. Yes, darn near everyone in Japan has a cell phone. But in China or India? What the hell are you thinking, man! Plenty of those people don't have electricity at all, let alone a really expensive cell-phone with a really expensive tiny hard drive.

      How cheap do you think these tiny drives will be? The same HD space in a bigger drive (esp if second hand) is a fraction of the cost. Seems to me that older technology would be for the "poor man's computer," rather than the newest and most expensive stuff.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    2. Re:Poor man's computer by phatsharpie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      China, despite having the world's largest mobile phone market (~250 million users), the growth is now mainly in the lower end of the market, so innovations like these will take a long time to penetrate.

      http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-11/10/c on tent_280187.htm

      However, I remember reading that most people in Japan have already using their mobiles to access the Internet by default. A lot of Japanese don't even have home Internet access, if I recall correctly, because mobile access has been so good.

      -B

    3. Re:Poor man's computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      250 million chinese have mobiles phones at present and this is expected to grow to 500M by 2007.

      Mobile phone penetration is much higher in the US. at 50% but whats 50% of 300M?

      hi-tech phones the chinese may not have but they do have mobiles.

    4. Re:Poor man's computer by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      Indeed. A bit higher than I had thought, though not a surprise. Definately not expensive, super-duper-smartphones. No, the US doesn't have too many mobiles, but what do you expect when landlines are so cheap and mobiles aren't worth it yet for everyone? I don't have a mobile, and won't until I can get one for cheaper than my landline and with as much convenience.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    5. Re:Poor man's computer by bonehead · · Score: 1

      I don't have a mobile, and won't until I can get one for cheaper than my landline and with as much convenience.


      Odd, that's exactly why I have a mobile and no land line. The mobile is both cheaper and more convenient.

      Of course, this will vary by person. It happens to be cheaper for me because a significant portion of my calling is long distance, which I don't have to pay extra for with the cell.

      As for convenience, I can take it and use it anywhere I want, not just within the vicinity of my house. If I don't want to take it, I can leave it at home. In my mind, having that choice is more convenient than not having the choice.

      I'll consider switching back to a landline when they stop charging for long distance, and the average cordless phone has, say, a 50 mile range.

    6. Re:Poor man's computer by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      Yes, depending on your location or calling habits and the like, a mobile may be cheaper than a landline. A mobile is cheaper for most Europeans than a landline, and it's no wonder they're so popular there.

      Yeah, I make very few LD calls. If I made more, if a substantial part of my phone bill were made of them, I may end up with a cell phone. I rarely travel, and even when I do. would prefer to be out of contact. :)

      I have two roomates. and we'd have to have three cell phones and some whacky calling plan. A hassle, and more than our landline.

      However, I would like cell network service. And I may end up with that for my PDA, the t-mobile $30/mo for unlimited data. tastie!

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    7. Re:Poor man's computer by bonehead · · Score: 1

      I have two roomates. and we'd have to have three cell phones and some whacky calling plan. A hassle, and more than our landline.

      See, there's the rub. Ever since I bought a house, my roomate days are behind me, so this is now just a one man show.

      A land line would cost me around $35 a month just for the basic service, plus around $75 more in LD calls. My $50 cellular plan covers this all nicely, especially since a lot of that LD calling is done on weekends, which are free, plus I get the added portability on the occasions when it comes in handy. For example, I invite some friends to come boating with me, they can just call me up when they get there, I buzz back to the dock and pick them up. MUCH more convenient than having to arrange and stick to an iron clad schedule.

      But, in your case, I can see how your arrangement makes sense.

      This is why absolute statements are almost always wrong.

    8. Re:Poor man's computer by Silvers · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you saw Shanghai these days you might be suprised.

    9. Re:Poor man's computer by RevAaron · · Score: 1

      I wasn't thinking of the cities so much as the quite populated rural areas. I've no doubts that everyone and his mom has a mobile in the big cities.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  36. If I read correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The article says 2-3 GB....With no mention of future increases.....This is more than likely to compete with CF not hard drives in ipods and such.

  37. The iPod drive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...is 1.8 inch not 1.5

    1. Re:The iPod drive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .3" must seem quite large to you.

    2. Re:The iPod drive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well, in terms of capacity you'll store 27Gig instead of 40Gig if you reduce the diameter by .3"

  38. Amen by 4of12 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    high density solid state storage devices

    Having seen 2 GB USB memory keys starting to become available, I have to wonder what the great advantage is of the microdrive.

    I've heard the memory keys are limited by the number of erase/write cycles (to ~10,000) before they wear out, and also limited to data transfer speeds of about 1 MB/s (although I think USB 2.0 is supposed to be better).

    Unforunately, I didn't see any specifications about the read/write speed for this drive, but if it's going to plug into a USB port then it has no practical advantage over the solid state memory device.

    Is there any other reason you'd want a mechanical device like this over solid state memory?

    --
    "Provided by the management for your protection."
    1. Re:Amen by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 2, Interesting

      why not use magnetic memory? thy have prototypes for magnetic storage in memory modules for computers, why not use MDRAM for memory sticks? it is not limited by read/writes, and it has no moving parts.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    2. Re:Amen by RevAaron · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The IBM Microdrive hasn't had any advantages for a while. That is, as long as that's what you are talking about, rather than meaning the 1.5" PCMCIA drives, as found in the iPod. The PCMCIA drives still have plenty of advantages, price and size being among them- I bought a 2 GB PCMCIA Toshiba HD for $70 over a year ago; how much is that 2 GB key drive? That said, that is $35 per GB, whereas with the Microdrive it's hundreds. And you'd need two of them, which is about the size of the single PCMCIA card. :P

      Yes, there's a reason you'd want a mechanical device like this over solid state. Price. That's about it. Depending on the application there may be other factors- if you're doing *tons* of writes then a flash-based solution will pitter out after some time. Any flash will, but usually it's not a big deal, consider how most people use it. But if you were using the flash as swap (as some folks do with their Zauruses), or certain embedded applications, your flash chips could die right quick.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    3. Re:Amen by rgmoore · · Score: 2, Informative
      Having seen 2 GB USB memory keys starting to become available, I have to wonder what the great advantage is of the microdrive.

      Price. Pricewatch lists the cheapest 2GB USB memory key as going for $514 and the cheapest 2GB microdrive as going for $195. In 4 GB sizes I'd expect the microdrive to have an even bigger advantage, but there's no listing for 4 GB USB memory keys, probably because they're too expensive for anyone to think about them.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    4. Re:Amen by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      I am very dubious about the reliability of USB flash keys - we use 256MB ones where I work and have had a very large number of failures after very short times (i.e. I would say over 50% of the keys we have bought have failed within 5 - 10 writes). I could understand if it was a single manufacturer, but we have bought a variety of different makes and have had the same problem with all of them.

    5. Re:Amen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think many people feel flash memory is the future due to its numerous limitations.

      I was impressed by this Carnegie Mellon project though: http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~mems/

      Which aims to place drives on a grid, overcoming all the problems of a revolving drive and dramatically improving seek time.

  39. Next step. by i_am_syco · · Score: 1, Funny

    Now they need to make 'em edible, so that I can easily and REALLY securely get rid of all that kiddy pr0-err, MP3s that I have on my computer...:::looks around hastily, then runs away:::

    1. Re:Next step. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Is there anything I can do for you while your gone?"
      "As a matter of fact there is. In my shop, next to the replicator, if you examine the bulkhead you will find a false panel. Behind that panel is an isolinear rod. If I'm not back within 76 hours I want you take that rod and eat it."
      "Eat it! You must be joking."
      "Yes Doctor, I am."
      "Very funny."
      "Well I thought so."

  40. Re:Toshiba rocks, by dcstimm · · Score: 1

    yes to 802.11b, next model up has gigabit ethernet, same with bt, and it has a 5400rpm harddrive, I havent even seen a 7200rpm harddrive for a laptop that didnt suck power, oh and this machine is WAY less than an inch thick...

  41. some day by khuber · · Score: 5, Funny

    computers may be small enough to fit in a single room.

    1. Re:some day by freeweed · · Score: 2, Funny

      I know you're trying to be funny, but consider this:

      You're posting to a place where a sizable chunk of the readership probably has more than a roomfull of computers :)

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    2. Re:some day by SB5 · · Score: 1

      And some of them are beowulf clusters, so THEY are one computer.

      --
      If what you are reading sounds funny, or sarcastic, lame, or stupid
      it is because it is supposed to be. just laugh
    3. Re:some day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And others just have really tiny appartments, so a full sized tower-case just barly fits :)

  42. Re:Toshiba rocks, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    did you miss the point where he said it was $1000? we know apple has great shit, not everyone can afford apple.

  43. Re:Toshiba rocks, by Aliencow · · Score: 1

    That's got to be a Troll but I'll bite...

    Nobody except maybe no-names make laptops cheaper than Toshiba.. they feel cheap, look cheap, twist and crack, break...crappy stuff.

  44. I would so lost that by Unregistered · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If the iPod gets an smaller, it ould be too easy to lost, imo. Unless they leave the device the same size and put the extra space to use for the battery. That would be pretty sweet

    1. Re:I would so lost that by Blondie-Wan · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Additionally, the iPod is already at a pretty sweet spot for portability and usability; making one substantially smaller would probably mean rethinking its much-lauded UI. I don't think I want them making the screen or controls smaller. If they can make the inner workings smaller, great; just keep it in the same size case, and use the internal space savings for a bigger battery.

  45. Creative, Rio, RCA Already Using 1" 1.5GB Drives by meehawl · · Score: 3, Informative

    Why wait for Apple? Creative, Rio, and RCA are already using 1" 1.5GB Cornice drives in some tiny mp3 players that make the iPod seem oversized. Cornice says they will have a 5GB model around the middle of 2004...

    --

    Da Blog
  46. MEMS technology? by Smidge204 · · Score: 1

    Smaller, faster, better! This is cool stuff. Soon they're going to be pushing the physical limits of manufacturing!

    Does anyone know if there's a company working on applying MEMS fabrication to similar devices?
    =Smidge=

    1. Re:MEMS technology? by uradu · · Score: 1

      That's exactly what I thought. With MEMS you could be storing bits as some tiny rods, and then you can literally talk about pushing bits around. Of course by that time flash will probably be equally dense and cheap (or expensive), so there you go.

  47. Power Consumption... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Most of the power used by a hard drive I would presume is used to spin the platters. With a mass and diameter this low, spun at the same rpm as standard drives the power used would be:

    a) huge
    b) average
    c) miniscule
    d) I can't think for myself and must be explicitly told.

    Come on, at a tiny 0.85" it has to have really really low power consumption.

    1. Re:Power Consumption... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on the power comment is from timothy. Who the hell goes by the name timothy anyway?

      Someone who wants to be a geek "superstar" but realy is just a poser, that's who.

      I think I'll go see what progress Jonathan Carmack has made on his rocket.

  48. Limited utility by marcus · · Score: 0, Redundant

    2 to 3 G is a drop in the bucket.

    Already 1 to 2G flash cards/USB keys/etc are available with no moving parts, no shock sensitivity, instant "start up", lower power consumption... that is, all the usual solid state advantages over non-solid state devices.

    In the past solid state also meant more expensive. Today, the solid state parts will even be competitve in price.

    --
    Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgement.
    - W. Wriston, former Citibank CEO
    1. Re:Limited utility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      um, read the parent post again...he was talking about GB (gigabytes) instead of G (gravity)

  49. Obviously used with those T-Cubes... by billstewart · · Score: 1

    OK, so the T-Cube story on Slashdot is from 6 hours ago, so this is _way_ out of date, and the things run TRON rather than Linux, so you'd need to do a bit of work to port Beowulf to them. At least they've got network interfaces...

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  50. One-dimensional storage?! by mriker · · Score: 2, Funny
    "Toshiba have set a new record for the world's smallest hard disk at a tiny 0.85".

    Wowsers, just 0.85"! One-dimensional storage is teh FUTARE!!!1

    1. Re:One-dimensional storage?! by Shymon · · Score: 1

      since it's a disk we can get a full two dimensions from that messure. still a 2d storage device would be something to see...

    2. Re:One-dimensional storage?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ever written anything on a flat surface? The surface is 2 dimentional, and is storing your data.

      How some people miss the evolutionary ladder is beyond me sometimes ;P

  51. Is it enough for Video cameras? by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Sure, on still pictures, this is plenty of space. But a DVD is ~4.7GB - is 2-3GB enough for good video recording, or will you also have to haul around an iPod to upload your pictures to?

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
    1. Re:Is it enough for Video cameras? by martinX · · Score: 1

      Standard DV quality is about 13 GB for an hour but some cameras are coming out that record as MPEG2 or MPEG4 on to solid state devices. The quality isn't as good, and editing might be trickier, but it looks like a nifty gadget.

      --
      When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
  52. Instead of smaller... by AvantLegion · · Score: 3, Insightful
    ... how about making them shock-proof?

    No matter how many people say they jog/run with their iPod fine, there's no denying that the sucker locks up for a whole lot of people.

    1. Re:Instead of smaller... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you say. Most people run/jog with an ipod just fine.

    2. Re:Instead of smaller... by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
      There are enough complaints to make it very clear that there can be problems.

      Myself, I've never had mine lock up, but I highly doubt all of those with problems are bold-faced liars.

    3. Re:Instead of smaller... by ItMustBeEsoteric · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The iPod only locks up on you if you jog for more than, say, 20 minutes. That is how long the buffer on it lasts. If you happen to be unlucky enough to be running while it starts to spin up, there's a good chance it's going to lock on you. I used to run long distance (just don't have the time anymore), and I've had an iPod lock. Now, my Archos AV120 has never locked on me. Sure, it's been moved while spinning, has actually skipped once. But not locked. I don't mind as skip once every 20 minutes so much as I mind a no-music-until-I-reset-the-iPod-at-home every 20 minutes.

    4. Re:Instead of smaller... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm curious, does the menu+play reset not work when it locks during jogging? Why do you need to go back home to reset it?

  53. Hardware mfrs engaging in willy-waving contest... by adrianbaugh · · Score: 1

    "Mine's smaller than yours!"

    "No, mine's smaller"

    "No, mine... oh, wait, what am I saying!"

    --
    "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
    - JRR Tolkien.
  54. Picture here by News+for+nerds · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's the picture and report(Japanese).
    The small picture posted in the article will be more real-size for most people.

    1. Re:Picture here by otprof · · Score: 1
      Here's the picture...

      Oh, sure... but how in Sam Hill am I supposed to know how big that coin is? It might even be a golden-colored manhole.

      That thing could be HUGE!

      Bryan

  55. It is a strange fate... by PollGuy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ...that we should post so much troll and doubt over so small a thing....

    Such a little thing...

  56. Re:2-3gb by useosx · · Score: 2, Funny

    Not to mention wireless offsite backup and hourly automated optical backups in case of viruses, user error, or environmental disasters. Apple is really lagging, they're almost dead, flapping around like a salmon that missed the waterfall and ended up on dry land.

  57. Frontier Labs Nex IA - CF Slot MP3 Audio Handheld by meehawl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you want something like this then check out the Frontier Labs Nex IA. It's got that iPod white goods plastic look and takes Type I & II Compact Flash memory cards or MicroDrives (I think these go to 4GB now with the latest models). Built-in FM tuner and voice/FM recording. You can swap in and out media cards with music or data on them. All the no-skip benefit of static devices with some expandability. Runs on AA. Nice.

    1GB, $250
    512MB, $250
    256MB, $150
    Yes, I know the 1GB/512MB pricing is screwed. Go figure.

    --

    Da Blog
  58. Re:Toshiba rocks, by TheShadow · · Score: 1

    Right... because Apple makes ThinkPads.

    --

    --
    "What do you want me to do? Whack a guy? Off a guy? Whack off a guy? Cause I'm married."
  59. i bet apple sponsors michaels' whoring around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    michael agrees:

    jobs by name, jobs by occupation

  60. Re:Toshiba rocks, by davidstrauss · · Score: 1
    I havent even seen a 7200rpm harddrive for a laptop that didnt suck power

    I don't care how much power it takes if I get 5-6 hours of use on a charge.

  61. 1 GB CF is sooo last year. by ProfessionalCookie · · Score: 1

    How come no one ever mentions 4GB compact flash cards. It's sad to see so many "Slashdotters" who think it's still 2002.

    1. Re:1 GB CF is sooo last year. by morcheeba · · Score: 1

      The highest density chip samsung is shipping is 4 Gbit (512MB), so the 4GB card probably has eight chips in it. While I didn't do a complete search, Samsung has been on the high end of flash density of a couple of years now. I'm guessing that the new 8Gbit chip will allow for 8GB compact flash cards. I was just comparing leading edge technologies at a low level.

      I finally made the digital camera plunge last week (yep, I'm the one who hacked the dakota, and that's a lot of fun, but I wanted something a bit nicer.), and I'm still using the 16MB "starter" card nikon provided... I'm just starting to scope out the compact flash market and will be getting a larger card soon (in time for the holidays)

  62. Asian English font on site by Atario · · Score: 1

    What is with that font? Tons of Far-East sources use that same strange font in all English-language printing. I first encountered it as a kid, on the back of some Chinese sandpaper. Does anyone else notice these things? Or am I nuts?

    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
    1. Re:Asian English font on site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've noticed. On Japanese websites, also.

      What sucks is that often their font for english looks better than what we're using! Heh.

    2. Re:Asian English font on site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has to be monospace (like Courier or Monaco or the like) to fit with the character spacing of Chinese/Japanese/Korean letters/glyphs/symbols/shapes/etc.

  63. Re:Whatever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe a troll, maybe flamebait. In my opinion, insightful. Offtopic? what are you mods smoking?

  64. Dimensions by JewFish · · Score: 3, Funny

    Just telling me one dimension, 0.85", is useless. We live in a n-dimensional world. I forget what that n is, but last time I heard a nuclear physicist speak it was over 7. So tell me its the Length, Width, Height, Diameter, Radius or something useful.

    I had to RTFA to find out it was diameter, what kind of /.'er does that make me? having to RTFA uck.

  65. Too much precision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually 0.85 inches is 2.16 cm. The extra digit is not meaningful given the precision of the source.

    (Sorry, but this sort of thing drives me crazy. If I read one more newspaper article that transforms "100 meters" into "328.08 feet," I think I'll scream.)

    1. Re:Too much precision by smclean · · Score: 1
      If something is said to be exactly 100 meters, the precision of the source is infinite, or if you prefer, 100.000000000000000000000... 328.08 feet would be if anything rounded off for the ease of the readers.

      Sean

      --

      "'Yrch!' said Legolas, falling into his own tongue."

    2. Re:Too much precision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Conversion factors have an unlimited number of significan figures.

      Due to that, it is unnecessary to round 328.08 to 328.1.

      Although to be scientifically precise you should have all of the significant figures produced by the conversion. Ex:

      100 meters = 328.08398950131233595800524934383... feet

    3. Re:Too much precision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No.


      100 has three significant figures, so the result of the conversion can't have any more than three significant figures.

  66. Wishful thinking.... by tickleboy2 · · Score: 1

    from the smaller-is-better dept.

    Doing some wishful thinking... eh Timothy? :D

    --
    The only thing that will stop you from fulfilling your dreams is you. - Tom Bradley
  67. Didn't anyone ever tell you.. by thumbtack · · Score: 1

    It's not the size, but how you use it?

    I didn't believe it either....

  68. Is that a toshiba hdd in your pocket..... by reality-bytes · · Score: 4, Funny


    ....or are you cold?

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
  69. Great if your favortie song is by rjamestaylor · · Score: 1
    Skip to the Loo, M'Darling...

    I'll take solid-state solution, thankyouverymuchsir

    --
    -- @rjamestaylor on Ello
  70. Where are the pretty pictures? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are there now mexican standoff's with quaters and postage stamps of this drive?

  71. iPods have Toshiba HD's in them? by Easy2RememberNick · · Score: 1

    I don't believe it! I didn't know a Toshiba hard drive was in the iPod. I was thinking of buying an iPod but after being suckered into thinking the Toshiba e740 PDA was worth buying I'll have to seriously think about that iPod now. I have never in my life come across such a piece of crap, as the e740, and such poor service from a company!

    1. Re:iPods have Toshiba HD's in them? by bonehead · · Score: 1

      Yep, they're the Toshiba drives. Stands to reason, though, there aren't many companies out there building drives in that form factor.

      If it makes you feel any better, though, my 1st generation 10GB iPod has been abused like crazy, including drops from shirt pocket level onto concrete, while it was running, and the thing's still going like a champ.

      I wouldn't let the drive sway you from buying an iPod, it's the battery that is their weak point, and Apple's gotten much better recently in dealing with those problems. Although I figure by the time my battery gives up, I'll have already moved to a bigger iPod, and will just use this one as a portable 10GB hard drive.

  72. Re:Toshiba rocks, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    his machine is WAY less than an inch thick.

    "WAY less"? What is it, a negative dimension?

    The Porteges are about .6"-.7" thick. The 359's are over an inch thick. I think you're mixing up your models.

  73. Perfect for . . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    . . . my collection of midget porn.

  74. If you have a Toshiba... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you don't need a big disk.

  75. Why not handheld PCs? by LS · · Score: 1

    Everyone is talking about iPods and other portable media players. How about using one of these hard drives in a handheld PC? I've been waiting for this for years. Forget carying around a stupid mp3 player AND a palm-top. How about XMMS in your pocket? And for that matter, I wonder how long before Apple decides to add a stylus, color display, and a general purpose OS on the iPod? When handheld PCs eventually do have enough memory/disk space to store large amounts of media, what niche will these hard-disk based players fill anyway?

    LS

    --
    There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
  76. Imagine by BlueJay465 · · Score: 1

    ...a beowulf^H^H^H^H^H^H^H RAID cluster^H^H^H^H^H^H^H array of these in an ipod!

    OW! STOP HITTING ME!! THE VOICES MADE ME DO IT!

  77. Re:Creative, Rio, RCA Already Using 1" 1.5GB Drive by bonehead · · Score: 1

    Why wait?

    Because I'm already running into space limitations on my 10GB iPod between the music on it and that data that I carry back and forth for work. Once the whole Christmas fiasco is out of the way, I'll be upgrading to the 40GB. And you think 1.5GB is going to cut it?

    As for oversized? The frickin' thing is the same size as a deck of cards. Very easy to slip into a shirt pocket and carry from my desk to my car. That's all the portability I need.

  78. spin "density" by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't a 1" cube 3 of these drives at right angles (X, Y, Z) to each other appear to be a very heavy little box, because of the gyroscopic "inertia" in each plane?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  79. shock resistance? by grmb1 · · Score: 1

    They mention plans on using it in mobile phones... AFAIK, micro-HDD aren't quite shock-resistant, compared to solid storage. I wonder, how long such drive will live in "sporty" phone, like my Nokia 5100?

    --
    -- grmbl woz heer
  80. Re:Creative, Rio, RCA Already Using 1" 1.5GB Drive by jaysones · · Score: 1

    Well, you only have to wait -2 years for a 5 gig iPod, and when you figure out how to wait negative years then you'll make more money than any mp3 player manufacturer.

  81. Nice afterall but where are we going by tobibobi · · Score: 1

    For quite sometime the HD drive has been the only way of storing large quantity of data, but is it still the only way?
    The memory devices presented as small flashram IC's are certainly moving forward as the prices keeps dropping.
    My guess is that its only a matter of time before the small hard disk devices will be dropped again - it is still way to fragile to store data on a HD device.
    But is it only me?

  82. Maybe it was swimming? by arcite · · Score: 1

    ...just like a frightened turtle!

  83. That's 22.6mm by EnglishTim · · Score: 1

    For the metric among us.

  84. Imagine... by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 1

    An EMC frame made of these things. It could sit on your desk! Mmmmm, terabytes.

    --
    When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
  85. Or... by mwood · · Score: 1

    ...you could put a 4x7 array of them on a carrier to fit a normal 3.5" bay. RAID on 28 spindles in one bay, think of it! :-)

  86. 80Gb Archos by meehawl · · Score: 1

    Once the whole Christmas fiasco is out of the way, I'll be upgrading to the 40GB

    A friend of mine swapped out her Archos 20GB for an 80GB and she still runs out of space. This thread is discussing small-factor drives so I think that in a way you are thread crapping.

    But there is a more general issue. The drive to ever larger capacity for a media handheld is a symptom of there not being sufficient broadband wireless. Eventually, when everyone can get decent 100+ Kbps downloads, then all you will need will be a relatively small hard drive such as the Cornice or the Toshiba. Streaming is the way to go!

    I have 1TB+ of mp3s and video that I stream over land line internet (I have Cyberonic DSL 786K upload) so for me it's a relief not to have to carry that damn file server everywhere. Future generations will wonder why everyone assumed they had to sneakernet their entire music collections around with them...

    --

    Da Blog
  87. Different Strokes by meehawl · · Score: 1

    I think the point you make is spurious. We are talking about a significantly smaller form factor drive. Remember when Appl brought out the iPod it was a year later than Archos and Creative and offered only 5GB (compared to their 10GB and 15GB models).

    Apple traded capacity for size. At the time some people commented that people wanted and were used to more than 5Gb so the iPod was doomed. They were wrong.

    Now today you can get 80GB in the 2.5" factor, 40GB in the iPod's 1.5' factor, and some companies are creating a new niche with these sub 1" drives.

    And you are putting yourself in the same position as Apple's competitors a couple of years ago. Do you really feel that confident, to say that the current iPod form factor and capacity is the optimal handheld audio size?

    If Apple or anyone else bring out a model using these 22mm drives, then they will be limited to around a GB at present. But they will have marvellously small drives with long battery life.

    Maybe they will compete well with flash ram players, maybe not. Personally I think they will have to wait for a year or two so their capacity can exceed the 1GB and 4GB CF cards now available at a lower cost.

    --

    Da Blog
  88. See Christensen's The Innovator's Dilemma by mulp · · Score: 1

    Clayton Christensen was interested in technology innovation and adoption but was having a hard time figuring out how to study it. Then someone suggested that he study disk drives. He makes the case that disk drives are the fruit flies of technology.

    In his book he examines why the drives smaller than 3.5" haven't revolutionized disk storage as 3.5", 5.25", 8", 12" did for previous generations.

    HP developed a microdrive but the project/product failed because it was "too good" which meant it was too expensive.

    The question for the Toshiba drive is whether it will enable new products which will find a new and exploding market.

    Cell phones, PDAs, MP3 players are not likely to be that market.

    Maybe 100 drive RAID arrays will be the market. (Think bare drives wave soldered to the board.) Then again, maybe not, because this idea was proposed in the mid-90s and went nowhere.

    How about kids toys? A toy bear loaded with 1000 stories and rhymes, with the story selected based on randomness and keying off some crude voice recognition. "Tell me a story" starts it talking.

    One advantage of the small drive is that it has far less mass and with less mass, less rigidity is required to shock proof the drive. Why can't ants be scaled up to man size? The greater mass of a man sized ant would require material strength beyond any natural or man made technology.