I personally think that Scaled Composites' White Knight/SpaceShipOne combination will not only win the X-Prize, but also lead to the idea of travel to low Earth orbit (LEO) with very little throwaway components.
Note that the Scaled Composites entry launches the spacecraft at around 50,000 feet; this means you don't need to lug a big load of propellants just to get to the 100 km altitude minimum as required by the X-Prize requirements. Orbital Sciences' Pegasus launcher has shown that when you launch at altitude you can drastically reduce the size of the launch vehicle to lift a payload to LEO; Rutan's entry could lead to something similar.
Imagine a joint project with the Russians and Ukrainians using a modified Antonov An-124 transport. Modify the An-124 with a stronger structure, twin-vertical surface tail, and replace the original engines with Western-built 65,000 to 70,000 lb. thrust jet engines used on the Airbus A330-300 airliner. Then fit the back of the plane with a decently powerful rocket motor. The result is a launch system that could launch a small spaceplane around 50,000 feet with the launch plane in a steep 35 degree climb, which means the space plane will only need a small disposable fuel tank to carry enough fuel to reach LEO, unlike the giant external fuel tank used on the Space Shuttle.
Indeed, there were serious studies about just such a space plane launched from a modified 747-200B during the late 1980's.
I think people are WAY too ignorant of the Windows Update page (http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com).
Given the fact the Microsoft products are the most targeted by hackers and crackers, users should regularly monitor this web page at least three times per week to download the latest security patches, code updates, and so on. I've updated my Windows 2000 Professional setup on my home machine with all the latest patches from Windows Update, and that combined with running McAfee VirusScan 7.0 (which has a software firewall) ensures I won't get hacked into anytime soon. =)
While Linux desktop versions may not have the issues of virus attacks (for the most part) or licensing issues, the default installations of the current distributions of Red Hat, Mandrake and SuSE Linux may not be set up to have the proper security precautions in a networked environment.
I'd rather have an IT department-approved setup of a Linux distribution that already has been configured by the IT department so when it is push-installed onto a client machine over a network the installation already has all the proper security settings for the corporate network in place.
In my personal opinion, unless the IT department approves, corporate machines should NOT have operating systems installed that are not officially sanctioned by the IT department.
The reason is simple: system and network maintainance. When the IT help desk clearly knows what operating system each desktop machine is running, they can easily standardize on setup, security, what apps need to be installed, and so on.
Clearly, right now the situation for corporate IT setups is often going to be Linux or BSD variants for servers, Windows 2000 Pro or Windows XP Pro for x86 desktop clients or MacOS X 10.x versions for newer Macintosh machines.
I really think what that Austrian skydiver demonstrated may have some real military applications.
Imagine US Special Forces soldiers wearing these suits (which have been coated with radar-absorbing materials to reduce radar cross-section) and being launched from 32,000 feet on a C-17 cargo plane at night. They could glide 30 miles or more, which would allow these forces to be inserted far into enemy territory.
(Come to think of it, the US Special Forces may already HAVE this capability.)
Both the USAF and a small number of civilian companies are actually studying this very possibility. We may within 20 years have the technology to have astronauts fitted with strap-on components to their spacesuits that will allow them to safely return to Earth--fiery re-entry included. This will make is possible to escape the International Space Station or its successors in more dire situations.
The arrival of the Pocket Monsters (aka Pokemon) games in the middle 1990's was a huge factor in keeping the original Game Boy going a lot longer than it should have. I think if it weren't for the success of Pokemon Nintendo would have given serious thought about phasing out this platform.
After all, Sega had a serious competitor to Game Boy, and it didn't last that long.
I have my doubts this new machine will be successful.
The reason is simple: you need high-quality first- and third-party games in order to make it popular--and I haven't heard of such announcements from the makers of Helix.
Nintendo's Game Boy series have done well not only because of the fairly wide range of games developed in-house, but also games developed by third parties. Sony's upcoming PSP machine will likely get quite widely support from third parties, too, given Sony's marketing muscle.
I think the reason why Shrek did so well was 1) there was pretty much no competition during the 2001 summer box office and 2) the movie is a major satire of everything Disney (if you think of the movie that way it becomes nothing short of brilliant =) ). Many people on/. may quibble, but I thought the storytelling was quite good, too.
In short, it all comes down to this: you need decent writers to make an animated feature good. Why have Pixar's films been so well-liked? It's because they have excellent storytelling, thanks to people like John Lasseter (sp?). The same applies to Disney's 2002 hit Lilo & Stitch, which not only had excellent 2-D animation but also a great writing team in Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois that made the movie great.
I think this case could have a big precedent if the plantiffs win.
It could mean that your installed DSL line could have several different choices of ISP's instead of just the ISP officially supported by the telephone company, which will lead to price competition and eventually monthly pricing more akin to dial-up pricing (e.g., US$20 to US$22 per month unlimited access).
Interestingly enough, at least here in the USA movie piracy is not as rampant as people think.
There are two reasons for this:
1. The price of a new-release DVD movie is about US$20, pretty reasonable considering you not only get the movie, but also a huge amount of background features on how the movie was made, multiple commentaries, and so on. Don't forget on DVD you often the movie the way the director intended without the cuts necessary for the movie to get a PG-13 or R rating from the MPAA.
2. A DiVX file of a movie takes about 350 megabytes of disk space per hour of film. That means a two-hour movie will need 700 MB of disc space, and downloading that 700 MB of data is still a daunting experience even with today's broadband connections.
Is it small wonder why DVD sales are continuing to be very strong indeed as compared to audio Compact Disc sales?
I can say that once IPv6 is widely adopted the biggest beneficiary will be companies making networking gear.
This is due to the fact much of the hardware handling the world's Internet traffic are NOT IPv6 compatible. It could result in a major economic boom for networking companies as telecom companies around the world, web host providers, software companies and others scramble to enable IPv6 support. I'd hold on to shares of Cisco, Nortel Networks, etc. because they could really boom as the scramble to buy IPv6-compatible networking hardware takes off.
Well, except for one thing: if you want Linux installations that work well and can scale to mainframe-level hardware easily, there's only one company you can turn to, one that goes by the initials I-B-M. =) You know, that huge company based in the USA?
Indeed, a lot of the new large-scale Linux installations are being done using S/390, AS/400 and other IBM hardware running Linux on systems using the excellent POWER CPU architecture.
I think it's obvious that people should sign for for official email notifications from the OS vendor of the latest patches and updates or at least monitor the OS update site at least three-four times per week. I think people will be surprised how many people need to update their OS for security reasons because they haven't bothered to check for such updates on a regular basis.
I think if you want to safely fly the X-Prize contenders without being a threat to people on the ground and NOT need fly it out over the ocean, there are two places to do this.
The first is the flight test range operated by Edwards Air Force Base east of Mojave, CA. If NASA and the USAF can fly the X-15 inside this range even though the X-15 can fly at over Mach 5 top speed and 350,000-plus feet altitude, it sure can accommodate the X-Prize contenders. Why do you think the White Knight/SpaceShipOne combination will fly inside this range?
The second is the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. Indeed, given the size of this missile range it may actually be a better choice, given the huge safety margins available there.
Now, if only the X-Prize contenders can get Warren Buffett or Bill Gates to pay for the use of this range for the flight attempts....
One thing I did notice about the letter to the US government is the distinct absence of support by Burt Rutan of Scaled Composites.
I think I know why: the White Knight/SpaceShipOne combination will be flying in the same airspace around Edwards AFB that was used during the X-Plane research projects, an airspace that is closed off to the general public and has huge factor of safety margins in case something does go wrong. Why do you think NASA and the USAF were able to test the X-15 safely in the range, given that the X-15 could fly faster than Mach 5 and higher than the minimum altitude for X-Prize flights?
I'm still not sure if small capsule-like spacecraft going into space is a good idea.
Recovering only a small space capsule can get very expensive, especially if you have to involve a water landing. Also, people forget the G-forces encountered during an Apollo CSM flight can be quite strong--as much as 6-7 G's during the launch phase, which means the astronaut has to be very physically fit to fly such a mission.
Here's an article on what the Russians nearly did during the 1980's:
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/lks.htm
The Chelomei LKS--had it been properly funded and developed--could have been the natural successor to the Soyuz spacecraft. If it had actually gone into operation right now we could have LKS spaceplanes docked at the International Space Station, not updated Soyuz spacecraft.
Unfortunately, using one-use systems to ferry astronauts to and from the space station is not as cheap as you think.
Remember, the Apollo Command/Service Module (CSM) was designed for WATER landing, not landing on dry land. There will quite a lot of expense involved in sending a recovery team out into the middle of the ocean to get the returning spacecraft, complete with a large enough ship to house the recovery crew (and provide a safe area to safely remove any remaining propellants from the spacecraft), a couple of recovery helicopters, etc. Why do you think during the Gemini and Apollo programs the main recovery ship was an aircraft carrier?
From looking at Orbital Sciences' web page, their proposal for the spaceplane puts the spaceplane at the very front of the Boeing Delta IV Heavy launch vehicle. Because it's up at the front, you don't risk the type of foreign object damage (FOD) from ice, since the source of the ice falling off will be behind you, not ahead of you like it is with the current Space Shuttle configuration. Indeed, the Russians seriously studied the idea of putting a small reusable spaceplane on top of a Proton booster rocket; that could have become the successor to their Soyuz spacecraft had they developed it fully.
Actually, during the late 1980's there were some serious studies of building a small spaceplane that could be launched from the top of a modified 747-200.
Essentially, the 747-200 would be fitted with a de-rated version of the Space Shuttle main engine, which will allow the 747 with the spaceplane on top to do a steep 35 degree climb to around 50,000 feet. The spaceplane, which has a small external fuel tank attached, would then launch at that altitude and fire its engines (essentially 3-4 RL-10's used by the Centaur upper stage) for a 7 minute flight to orbit. Because the launch happens at 50,000 feet, there is no need for the spaceplane to lug along a big load of propellant fuel, and that means it could carry a load as large as seven crew members or its equivalent weight in cargo to the International Space Station. I can envision by 2014 crews will visit the ISS either by using this new spaceplane or much-updated versions of the Soyuz spacecraft; ISS consumables and future extensions to the space station will be brought up by lifting them to orbit on uprated versions of the Atlas V and Delta IV Heavy rockets plus updated versions of the Russian Proton rocket.
I personally think (despite what Microsoft publicly says) we will see a standalone Internet Explorer 7.0 browser, but unlike earlier versions of IE, it will only work under Windows 2000, Windows XP and the upcoming Windows Longhorn (where IE 7.0 will be part of the OS).
By limiting it to a true WIN32 API environment, it means the potential for substantial speed increases in terms of web page rendering. IE 7.0 will likely implement a full Sidebar function (which was actually in the betas for IE 6.0 but was removed in the final version).
I agree on that! The vehicles in this race doesn't sport the type of regenerative system to keep the battery charged like what you see on the Toyota Prius (original and the upcoming 2004 model). I think the organizers of the World Solarcar Challenge should eventually allow regenerative systems because that will allow the solar-powered car to go a long way even if the sky is cloudy.
...but what happens when you get an e-mail that you open in some flavor of outlook that takes advantage of an unkown security flaw and compromises your system that way.
This is why I don't run Outlook.:-)
With Outlook Express, you can easily configure it so it will NOT allow the running of file attachments. Since I don't know of anyone I am familiar with that sends file attachments, I just disable the downloading of file attachments on OE.
I think people forget that Windows clients can be pretty secure if they apply all the current security patches for the operating system.
I right now run Windows 2000 Professional with Service Pack 4 installed plus the current version of ZoneAlarm running; unless you're a cracker with extremely intimate knowledge of the OS kernel itself, it'll be very hard to hack into my system. Indeed, Tech TV actually showed on TV that once you apply all current security patches for Windows 98/98SE, Me, 2000 and XP, plus installing a decent software firewall program or put your broadband connection behind a hardware firewall, breaking in will be nearly impossible.
I have to commend Microsoft for providing their excellent Windows Update page, which provides a centralized location to download and install all security updates. Mind you, a few commercial Linux distribution vendors have done the same, notably Red Hat.
I don't think the solid-state drive I suggested is going to run at the same speed as main system RAM! =)
What I am thinking of is something more like the memory used on CompactFlash and SD memory cards, only with vastly improved durability and 250 GB capacity. Because you don't have to go through the mechanical process of physically writing and reading data on a spinning disk, such a drive could load the OS is a small fraction of the time it needs now even with today's fastest ATA-133 or Serial ATA hard drives.
Slashdot Mirror
I personally think that Scaled Composites' White Knight/SpaceShipOne combination will not only win the X-Prize, but also lead to the idea of travel to low Earth orbit (LEO) with very little throwaway components.
Note that the Scaled Composites entry launches the spacecraft at around 50,000 feet; this means you don't need to lug a big load of propellants just to get to the 100 km altitude minimum as required by the X-Prize requirements. Orbital Sciences' Pegasus launcher has shown that when you launch at altitude you can drastically reduce the size of the launch vehicle to lift a payload to LEO; Rutan's entry could lead to something similar.
Imagine a joint project with the Russians and Ukrainians using a modified Antonov An-124 transport. Modify the An-124 with a stronger structure, twin-vertical surface tail, and replace the original engines with Western-built 65,000 to 70,000 lb. thrust jet engines used on the Airbus A330-300 airliner. Then fit the back of the plane with a decently powerful rocket motor. The result is a launch system that could launch a small spaceplane around 50,000 feet with the launch plane in a steep 35 degree climb, which means the space plane will only need a small disposable fuel tank to carry enough fuel to reach LEO, unlike the giant external fuel tank used on the Space Shuttle.
Indeed, there were serious studies about just such a space plane launched from a modified 747-200B during the late 1980's.
Sheesh.
I think people are WAY too ignorant of the Windows Update page (http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com).
Given the fact the Microsoft products are the most targeted by hackers and crackers, users should regularly monitor this web page at least three times per week to download the latest security patches, code updates, and so on. I've updated my Windows 2000 Professional setup on my home machine with all the latest patches from Windows Update, and that combined with running McAfee VirusScan 7.0 (which has a software firewall) ensures I won't get hacked into anytime soon. =)
While Linux desktop versions may not have the issues of virus attacks (for the most part) or licensing issues, the default installations of the current distributions of Red Hat, Mandrake and SuSE Linux may not be set up to have the proper security precautions in a networked environment.
I'd rather have an IT department-approved setup of a Linux distribution that already has been configured by the IT department so when it is push-installed onto a client machine over a network the installation already has all the proper security settings for the corporate network in place.
In my personal opinion, unless the IT department approves, corporate machines should NOT have operating systems installed that are not officially sanctioned by the IT department.
The reason is simple: system and network maintainance. When the IT help desk clearly knows what operating system each desktop machine is running, they can easily standardize on setup, security, what apps need to be installed, and so on.
Clearly, right now the situation for corporate IT setups is often going to be Linux or BSD variants for servers, Windows 2000 Pro or Windows XP Pro for x86 desktop clients or MacOS X 10.x versions for newer Macintosh machines.
I really think what that Austrian skydiver demonstrated may have some real military applications.
Imagine US Special Forces soldiers wearing these suits (which have been coated with radar-absorbing materials to reduce radar cross-section) and being launched from 32,000 feet on a C-17 cargo plane at night. They could glide 30 miles or more, which would allow these forces to be inserted far into enemy territory.
(Come to think of it, the US Special Forces may already HAVE this capability.)
It's not a crazy as you think.
Both the USAF and a small number of civilian companies are actually studying this very possibility. We may within 20 years have the technology to have astronauts fitted with strap-on components to their spacesuits that will allow them to safely return to Earth--fiery re-entry included. This will make is possible to escape the International Space Station or its successors in more dire situations.
I have news for you.
The arrival of the Pocket Monsters (aka Pokemon) games in the middle 1990's was a huge factor in keeping the original Game Boy going a lot longer than it should have. I think if it weren't for the success of Pokemon Nintendo would have given serious thought about phasing out this platform.
After all, Sega had a serious competitor to Game Boy, and it didn't last that long.
I have my doubts this new machine will be successful.
The reason is simple: you need high-quality first- and third-party games in order to make it popular--and I haven't heard of such announcements from the makers of Helix.
Nintendo's Game Boy series have done well not only because of the fairly wide range of games developed in-house, but also games developed by third parties. Sony's upcoming PSP machine will likely get quite widely support from third parties, too, given Sony's marketing muscle.
I think the reason why Shrek did so well was 1) there was pretty much no competition during the 2001 summer box office and 2) the movie is a major satire of everything Disney (if you think of the movie that way it becomes nothing short of brilliant =) ). Many people on /. may quibble, but I thought the storytelling was quite good, too.
In short, it all comes down to this: you need decent writers to make an animated feature good. Why have Pixar's films been so well-liked? It's because they have excellent storytelling, thanks to people like John Lasseter (sp?). The same applies to Disney's 2002 hit Lilo & Stitch, which not only had excellent 2-D animation but also a great writing team in Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois that made the movie great.
I think this case could have a big precedent if the plantiffs win.
It could mean that your installed DSL line could have several different choices of ISP's instead of just the ISP officially supported by the telephone company, which will lead to price competition and eventually monthly pricing more akin to dial-up pricing (e.g., US$20 to US$22 per month unlimited access).
Interestingly enough, at least here in the USA movie piracy is not as rampant as people think.
There are two reasons for this:
1. The price of a new-release DVD movie is about US$20, pretty reasonable considering you not only get the movie, but also a huge amount of background features on how the movie was made, multiple commentaries, and so on. Don't forget on DVD you often the movie the way the director intended without the cuts necessary for the movie to get a PG-13 or R rating from the MPAA.
2. A DiVX file of a movie takes about 350 megabytes of disk space per hour of film. That means a two-hour movie will need 700 MB of disc space, and downloading that 700 MB of data is still a daunting experience even with today's broadband connections.
Is it small wonder why DVD sales are continuing to be very strong indeed as compared to audio Compact Disc sales?
I can say that once IPv6 is widely adopted the biggest beneficiary will be companies making networking gear.
This is due to the fact much of the hardware handling the world's Internet traffic are NOT IPv6 compatible. It could result in a major economic boom for networking companies as telecom companies around the world, web host providers, software companies and others scramble to enable IPv6 support. I'd hold on to shares of Cisco, Nortel Networks, etc. because they could really boom as the scramble to buy IPv6-compatible networking hardware takes off.
Well, except for one thing: if you want Linux installations that work well and can scale to mainframe-level hardware easily, there's only one company you can turn to, one that goes by the initials I-B-M. =) You know, that huge company based in the USA?
Indeed, a lot of the new large-scale Linux installations are being done using S/390, AS/400 and other IBM hardware running Linux on systems using the excellent POWER CPU architecture.
I think it's obvious that people should sign for for official email notifications from the OS vendor of the latest patches and updates or at least monitor the OS update site at least three-four times per week. I think people will be surprised how many people need to update their OS for security reasons because they haven't bothered to check for such updates on a regular basis.
I think if you want to safely fly the X-Prize contenders without being a threat to people on the ground and NOT need fly it out over the ocean, there are two places to do this.
The first is the flight test range operated by Edwards Air Force Base east of Mojave, CA. If NASA and the USAF can fly the X-15 inside this range even though the X-15 can fly at over Mach 5 top speed and 350,000-plus feet altitude, it sure can accommodate the X-Prize contenders. Why do you think the White Knight/SpaceShipOne combination will fly inside this range?
The second is the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. Indeed, given the size of this missile range it may actually be a better choice, given the huge safety margins available there.
Now, if only the X-Prize contenders can get Warren Buffett or Bill Gates to pay for the use of this range for the flight attempts....
One thing I did notice about the letter to the US government is the distinct absence of support by Burt Rutan of Scaled Composites.
I think I know why: the White Knight/SpaceShipOne combination will be flying in the same airspace around Edwards AFB that was used during the X-Plane research projects, an airspace that is closed off to the general public and has huge factor of safety margins in case something does go wrong. Why do you think NASA and the USAF were able to test the X-15 safely in the range, given that the X-15 could fly faster than Mach 5 and higher than the minimum altitude for X-Prize flights?
I'm still not sure if small capsule-like spacecraft going into space is a good idea.
Recovering only a small space capsule can get very expensive, especially if you have to involve a water landing. Also, people forget the G-forces encountered during an Apollo CSM flight can be quite strong--as much as 6-7 G's during the launch phase, which means the astronaut has to be very physically fit to fly such a mission.
Here's an article on what the Russians nearly did during the 1980's:
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/lks.htm
The Chelomei LKS--had it been properly funded and developed--could have been the natural successor to the Soyuz spacecraft. If it had actually gone into operation right now we could have LKS spaceplanes docked at the International Space Station, not updated Soyuz spacecraft.
Unfortunately, using one-use systems to ferry astronauts to and from the space station is not as cheap as you think.
Remember, the Apollo Command/Service Module (CSM) was designed for WATER landing, not landing on dry land. There will quite a lot of expense involved in sending a recovery team out into the middle of the ocean to get the returning spacecraft, complete with a large enough ship to house the recovery crew (and provide a safe area to safely remove any remaining propellants from the spacecraft), a couple of recovery helicopters, etc. Why do you think during the Gemini and Apollo programs the main recovery ship was an aircraft carrier?
From looking at Orbital Sciences' web page, their proposal for the spaceplane puts the spaceplane at the very front of the Boeing Delta IV Heavy launch vehicle. Because it's up at the front, you don't risk the type of foreign object damage (FOD) from ice, since the source of the ice falling off will be behind you, not ahead of you like it is with the current Space Shuttle configuration. Indeed, the Russians seriously studied the idea of putting a small reusable spaceplane on top of a Proton booster rocket; that could have become the successor to their Soyuz spacecraft had they developed it fully.
Actually, during the late 1980's there were some serious studies of building a small spaceplane that could be launched from the top of a modified 747-200.
Essentially, the 747-200 would be fitted with a de-rated version of the Space Shuttle main engine, which will allow the 747 with the spaceplane on top to do a steep 35 degree climb to around 50,000 feet. The spaceplane, which has a small external fuel tank attached, would then launch at that altitude and fire its engines (essentially 3-4 RL-10's used by the Centaur upper stage) for a 7 minute flight to orbit. Because the launch happens at 50,000 feet, there is no need for the spaceplane to lug along a big load of propellant fuel, and that means it could carry a load as large as seven crew members or its equivalent weight in cargo to the International Space Station. I can envision by 2014 crews will visit the ISS either by using this new spaceplane or much-updated versions of the Soyuz spacecraft; ISS consumables and future extensions to the space station will be brought up by lifting them to orbit on uprated versions of the Atlas V and Delta IV Heavy rockets plus updated versions of the Russian Proton rocket.
I personally think (despite what Microsoft publicly says) we will see a standalone Internet Explorer 7.0 browser, but unlike earlier versions of IE, it will only work under Windows 2000, Windows XP and the upcoming Windows Longhorn (where IE 7.0 will be part of the OS).
By limiting it to a true WIN32 API environment, it means the potential for substantial speed increases in terms of web page rendering. IE 7.0 will likely implement a full Sidebar function (which was actually in the betas for IE 6.0 but was removed in the final version).
I agree on that! The vehicles in this race doesn't sport the type of regenerative system to keep the battery charged like what you see on the Toyota Prius (original and the upcoming 2004 model). I think the organizers of the World Solarcar Challenge should eventually allow regenerative systems because that will allow the solar-powered car to go a long way even if the sky is cloudy.
...but what happens when you get an e-mail that you open in some flavor of outlook that takes advantage of an unkown security flaw and compromises your system that way.
:-)
This is why I don't run Outlook.
With Outlook Express, you can easily configure it so it will NOT allow the running of file attachments. Since I don't know of anyone I am familiar with that sends file attachments, I just disable the downloading of file attachments on OE.
I think people forget that Windows clients can be pretty secure if they apply all the current security patches for the operating system.
I right now run Windows 2000 Professional with Service Pack 4 installed plus the current version of ZoneAlarm running; unless you're a cracker with extremely intimate knowledge of the OS kernel itself, it'll be very hard to hack into my system. Indeed, Tech TV actually showed on TV that once you apply all current security patches for Windows 98/98SE, Me, 2000 and XP, plus installing a decent software firewall program or put your broadband connection behind a hardware firewall, breaking in will be nearly impossible.
I have to commend Microsoft for providing their excellent Windows Update page, which provides a centralized location to download and install all security updates. Mind you, a few commercial Linux distribution vendors have done the same, notably Red Hat.
Tom,
I don't think the solid-state drive I suggested is going to run at the same speed as main system RAM! =)
What I am thinking of is something more like the memory used on CompactFlash and SD memory cards, only with vastly improved durability and 250 GB capacity. Because you don't have to go through the mechanical process of physically writing and reading data on a spinning disk, such a drive could load the OS is a small fraction of the time it needs now even with today's fastest ATA-133 or Serial ATA hard drives.