Slashdot Mirror


IBMs 73Gig Drive

goon wrote in to point us to this bit at news.com about the new UltraStar 72ZX which has a 4.9ms seek time, is an inch thick, and can store a comfortable 73 gigs. Its supposed to be available in 2000, and will make porn webmasters and MP3 addicts alike very happy.

22 of 128 comments (clear)

  1. Re:mp3 is yesterday's breakfast. by FreeUser · · Score: 2

    Amen brother! Why use lossy compression with that kind of space. Simply digitize the sample raw and, at most, bzip2 it ... absolute clarity. Resample as mp3 for the car unit as required ...

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  2. Re:IDE will be a PITA by nevets · · Score: 2

    My system can only handle 8.4G. :(

    But when I buy a new computer I will like one of these!!

    Just a note, with a 70+G drives, thats a lot of data to loose if one were to crash. What is the best media to use to back these suckers up?

    Steven Rostedt

    --
    Steven Rostedt
    -- Nevermind
  3. next tech by mTor · · Score: 2

    So... how long before we get terrabyte storage for under $300? I don't think magnetic media will ba able to store this much so what is the next tech that will be able to do that? Holographic memory?

  4. Wow! by eriko · · Score: 5

    You could get Windows 2000 AND Office 2000 on the SAME drive!

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une sig.
  5. Minor nitpick about 1 inch thick by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 2

    The only mention of size of the 36G version, and it's not clear:

    Arriving this year, though, will be new 36GB drives. The drives are based on the same innards as the 73GB model, but will be only 1 inch thick. Current 36GB drives aren't as thin.

    It's not clear whether the double capacity version is also 1 inch thick.

    --

  6. mp3 is yesterday's breakfast. by schmack · · Score: 2


    forget MP3, with 73GB i'd keep my audio in 44KHz AIFF files!

  7. Additional Link by BadlandZ · · Score: 2
    The 36G Version has specs listed on IBM's web site already, but no mention of the 73G drive.

    It would be sort of nice to not have to do a "make distclean" ever again ;-)

  8. Storage Observations by Effugas · · Score: 3

    I'd say we're about three weeks away from conspiracy theorists deciding that Magnetoresistative technology was Alien Derived.

    IBM is pretty much owning price/performance and raw storage curves--it's insane how fast storage expectancies have dropped. $10/GB is the magic number now, and I'm pretty sure we have IBM to thank for that.

    64MB of RAM now costs more than a 12GB IDE drive. The mind boggles.

    I believe this is the same technology jump, incidentally, that means 2GB on a one inch Microdrive platter. Personally, I'd prefer a third party reverse engineering of MiniDisc, but a 2GB swappable drive would also work fine.

    I must say, I'm enjoying the storage (r?)evolution. The media server we're building into our stereo cabinet will store more music than we'll know what to do with...;-) And yes, the code will be nice and GPL.

    Here's to mindless abuse of technology...

    Yours Truly,

    Dan Kaminsky
    DoxPara Research
    http://www.doxpara.com

    1. Re:Storage Observations by Cuthalion · · Score: 2

      Personally, I'd prefer a third party reverse engineering of MiniDisc

      You mean sony's optical audio medium? I think it's not worth the bother. 74 minutes at 5:1 compression means it doesn't hold a lot more than a zip disk. (~160 MB?) They do, however, have a kind of anime-cyber-cool to them which zip disks lack. I'm not sure how fast they CAN be, since for standard audio applications they only NEED to deliver 30 KB/s.

      All that aside, a MD based portable MP3 player would be nice.

      --
      Trees can't go dancing
      So do them a big favor
      Pretend dancing stinks!
  9. Re:IDE will be a PITA by TommyW · · Score: 2
    You've not looked quite far enough. There's an explanation of the problem further through the same document:

    12.1 IDE problems with 34+ GB disks

    Drives larger than 33.8 GB will not work with recent kernels. The details are as follows. Suppose you bought a new IBM-DPTA-373420 disk with a capacity of 66835440 sectors (34.2 GB). Recent kernels will tell you that the size is 769*16*63 = 775152 sectors (0.4 GB), which is a bit disappointing. And giving command line parameters hdc=4160,255,63 doesn't help at all - these are just ignored. What happens? The routine idedisk_setup() retrieves the geometry reported by the disk (which is 16383/16/63) and overwrites what the user specified on the command line, so that the user data is used only for the BIOS geometry.

    The routine current_capacity() or idedisk_capacity() recomputes the cylinder number as 66835440/(16*63)=66305, but since this is stored in a short, it becomes 769. Since lba_capacity_is_ok() destroyed id->cyls, every following call to it will return false, so that the disk capacity becomes 769*16*63. A patch is available - probably it will soon get into some official kernel.

    I can vouch for this first hand, since I've got one of the IBM 37GB drives. Andreas' patch certainly seems to fix the problem. But it'll be nice when it does officially get to be part of the kernel.
    --
    Too stupid to live.

    --
    Too stupid to live.
    Too stubborn to die.
  10. Re:73GB? by Delphis · · Score: 3

    Heh.. 69GB ? .. this thing really IS a drive for porn ... :>

    --
    Delphis
  11. Still 2 gigs per file by heroine · · Score: 2

    Well even if you like watching movies 5 minutes at a time, it would take hours to delete all 24 2 gig files such a movie would take.

    1. Re:Still 2 gigs per file by Stonehand · · Score: 2

      ...on *32-bit systems*, courtesy of things like the size of an offset or file length. Even 'tho ext2 itself (design-wise) can handle larger files, the programming interface doesn't.

      --
      Only the dead have seen the end of war.
  12. Controller by pete-classic · · Score: 2

    Anyone notice that this is a Fibre Channel drive? I doubt even the hardest core MP3 junkies will be adding a FC controller to their systems.

    Better of with a pair of 50GB LVD drives, more space and less $$ (when you take the conrtoller into account)

    -Pete

  13. Transfer rates by ebcdic · · Score: 2
    Quite apart from the problem of finding a backup device with enough capacity, it's going to take longer and longer to just copy all the data off these ever bigger devices.

    The capacity goes up because the recording density increases. This increases the transfer rate too, but only by the square root of the capacity increase (because reading speed depends on the linear, rather than area, density).

    So unless spin speeds increase further (which is a problem because of heat), a disk of double the capacity takes 41% longer to copy.

  14. Re:A lot of music... by jonathanclark · · Score: 3

    CDDB the online CD database claims
    "still the world's largest CD database with over 390,000 titles and 4,500,000 audio tracks".

    Estimate an audio track to be on average 3MB, and you are looking at 12 terabytes
    of music right there. From my experiences CDDB has pretty good coverage of english
    music, but it's lacking some foreign titles. So add 10-20% more to the estimate. They are
    currently working on a version with international character sets, so it might be a lot higher
    if they don't have any Asain titles. Also you add maybe another few TBs for new
    bands and old bands that are not available in CD form.

    I wonder how many years it will be before 16TB is easily affordable? Less than 10 if moore's
    law holds for storage. hmm.. it would take you ~64 years to listen to it all though. course
    there is very little of that which you actually *want* to listen to. that's where group filtering comes in.

    Anyhow, my prediction is that within 10 years an ordinary person will have a complete collection of the world's published music in their home. Legal issues aside, I think this is pretty exciting.

  15. 73GB? by tomk · · Score: 3

    Don't forget, this drive is "only" 69.6 Gibibytes.

    Those funny marketing people.

    -TomK

  16. Off Topic RAM Prices by BadlandZ · · Score: 2
    64MB of RAM now costs more than a 12GB IDE drive.

    I have heard rumor that the devistation of the earthquake has been "repaired" (not saying it wasn't devistating as far as personal life/property), and that RAM manufactures were up to full speed already.

    The rumor further says that it's the markets willingness to pay over $2/M still that has kept the prices up for the last couple weeks, when not that long ago prices were well under $1/M.

    Anyone know of any proof of these "rumors"???

  17. Drive by chandler · · Score: 2

    I'm running out of hard drive space right now... this is sweet.
    Brian's Rule For Hard Drive Space Says:
    Actual hard drive space=Total hard drive space/Number of OS's.
    I have 5 GB total / 3 OS's (Linux, Windblows, Solaris) = 1.66 GB.
    Yuck.

    --

    Visit

  18. A lot of music... by .pentai. · · Score: 3

    Ok, for 256kbit mp3s, it's approx 2 megs per minute...that means 512 minutes per gig. So 512 minutes * 73 gigs means approx. 37376 minutes, or just under 623 hours, which is just under 26 days, a few days short of a month.

    Now if we're talking 128kbit mp3's, well then you're good for a few months.

    Not that anyone would *EVER* hoard that much copyrighted material, oh no, not us, that would be wrong...

  19. seagate already has 50G by mysticbob · · Score: 3

    i'm always bugged when a press release garners more attention than real products. seagate makes 50G drives today. you can get them today here .(also they have some drives which are slightly less than $10/G) or read the specs on the 50G here .

    cool -- large, but cool.

  20. IDE will be a PITA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2
    It will be a while before the IDE version shows up, but when it does will we be ready? According to the Large Disk mini-HOWTO, current systems can't handle
    a size over 33.8 GB. The problem is that with the default 16 heads and 63 sectors/track this corresponds to a number of cylinders of more than 65535, which does not fit into a short. Maybe no BIOS in existence today can handle such disks. Linux still needs a patch.