• Transporter Room 3@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Man, I remember when someone on reddit got mad upvotes for saying “5tb hard drives don’t exist” in response to me, as the external 5tb hdd I was using sat 2ft away from me.

    And here we are looking at the [BRAND] advertisement for 120TB drives.

      • lost_faith@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I remember when I got my forst 120gb drive. I happily installed it on my win 2k and… bios didn’t like it, OS didn’t like it and read its capacity wrong. I forget if I used windows or linux but after I cut the drive into 2x60gb it worked great

        • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I was already sick of this shit the first time I saw a 1GB harddisk, a Quantum Bigfoot using a 5.25" form factor. Massive thing. Could fit a whole day of a comprehensive USENET feed.

    • exscape@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’m pretty sure they were referring to how the more common sizes are 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 12 TB and so on. 6 is semi-common. 5 is relatively rare, so they probably didn’t realize they exist.

  • pezhore@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    9 months ago

    I remember reading an interesting take on the 20TB drives when they came out - the impact of drive failure skyrockets with large density drives.

    Back with 2TB drives, you could fit 60-70 Blu-ray rips. If that drive dies (without backups/RAID), you’ll be hurting but not as bad as if you have a filled 20TB with 600-700 rips. Plus, even with RAID, the rebuild time increases with density, and for 20TB drives you could be waiting a week for rebuild.

    I like the idea of higher density drives, but in my opinion they only really make sense in large drive arrays where you can spread the data over dozens and dozens of replicated drives.

    • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      I do miss being able to back up my 8 GB drive onto five bucks’ worth of CD-Rs.

      I do not miss having only 8 GB to work with.

    • lud@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      but in my opinion they only really make sense in large drive arrays where you can spread the data over dozens and dozens of replicated drives.

      Luckily the ones that are considering buying this have that or something similar and/or extensive backups.

  • Throw a Foxtrot@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    9 months ago

    The info graphic suggests that they use the different cooling rate of the first and second layer to lock in the applied magnetic field of heat assisted magnetic recording.

    They beat both layers

    They apply a magnetic field to save a “1” bit

    Both layers are magnetized to a “1” bit

    The first layer cools down and locks that bit into place permanently.

    They apply the magnetic field to save a “0” bit

    While the second layer is still hot and accepts the “0” orientation of the magnetic field, the first layer is already too cold and will not change its magnetization.

    The second layer cools down and locks that bit into place.

    Neat!

    • MyNamesNotRobert@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Fuck yes now I can lose 120tb of data and they’ll still refuse to replace the drive despite it being under warranty because apparently 1399235195 bad reads + the drive being unusable isn’t considered broken enough to get a replacement.

    • bbbbbbbbbbb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Uhhhhhhhhhhh 3k minimum probably

      Edit: this is HARD DRIVE not SSD, so im estimating $500 instead

      Edit 2: im bad at this

      • astrsk@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        $500 for 120TB!?

        I spent about $1200 for 100tb of spinning rust for one of my NAS boxes. Please tell me where I can get 20% more for 40% less!

        For clarity, at the $240 per 20tb CMR drive, assuming no inflated cost due to novel production processes, it would be around $1440 for one drive. I’m going to assume ~$1600 minimum. Also, I’m not going to buy one until they can prove it doesn’t have the same issues as shingled drives.

        • Taleya@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          9 months ago

          Lol i remember spending $300 on 200gb hdds. And i got a discount since some buddies and i pooled to get a batch together

            • Taleya@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Those were the days my friend…

              I’ll tell you what though, i still have that 200gb WD. It still works. Chucked it under disk tools and ran some deep diags for shits and giggles, no errors found. 24 years old (ditto with an ancient 20gb toshiba that runs the head for a nas). Ya just can’t kill them. I have quantum fireballs in a DOS box that are still trucking

      • Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I just want giant SSD’s for not an insane price. But don’t see it happening anytime soon.

  • lightrush@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Multilayer recording sounds like it would require read-rewrite similar to how SMR works. Still perhaps we’d be okay with that for the dramatic capacity increase.