Why did this never catch on? 1PB of storage on a single disk far exceeds the capacity of any storage media you can buy in 2018, let alone 1999.
Hyper CD-ROM
>Why did this never catch on?
What the fuck good is all that storage at 300Mb/s?
That's less than USB 2.0
Jesus fucking christ, OP, do you not see the problem of moving a FUCKING PETABYTE through a 300Mb/s connection?
For fuck's sake, 50GB BluRays are useless due to their shitty capacity vs transfer speed ratio.
Either too expensive or a fraud.
People have no problem with 100MB/s 1TB hard drives.
>MB == Mb
lol
>People have no problem with 100MB/s 1TB hard drives.
No fucking shit, that's 100MB/s for a Terabyte, roughly 155 Minutes to transfer the formatted capacity of the device.
>People have no problem with 100MB/s 1TB hard drives.
>people have no trouble with disks 1000 times smaller that can be read 2.7x faster
at that size/speed ratio, it would only be useful for long term backup/storage purposes, being user-writable is basically mandatory
basically use it like it was a gigantic roll of tape
Yeah, let's just draw up a rule of thumb, here.
A storage medium must be able to be written to formatted capacity in under three hours time.
Else, the medium, and or the transfer protocol is pants on head retarded.
Physical media died around 2006.
1PB sounds cool and I could live with the slow transfer speed, but I don't think a lot of people would.
new 14TB drives have about 260MB/s sequential write and read
it depends on it's purpose, though this does rule out a lot of things
for example, you couldn't use this for super ultra HD movies, since there's no way to read more than 263GiB from the disk within 2 hours at that speed
nah 300mbit is was too slow now
>1PB of storage on a single disk
Self explanatory
it'd be pretty nice if it was recordable, i would use it as a media storage disk, it only really needs to be faster to write than my internet connection (it is), and fast enough to read than the bitrate of my media (it is), so i can just keep dumping more and more shit on it over time, and still have room to spare for weekly backups of all my machines for a year or two
It's hilarious, I mean, even IDE had a 1Gb/s transfer rate.
I bet this shitpile was designed around Ultra320 SCSI.
There has been talk about using this technology on tape, and in my opinion, that's where it would shine.
>optical ultra-tape
Is it read only?
Then fuck that.
I was thinking on a server 300mbs wouldn't be that bad.
i don't know if it's recordable
actually wait, it does mention "write mechanism", so i suppose it is writable
How the fuck does 1000 times smaller even compute, you incompetent bumblefuck anglophonic shitnigger?? What would 2 times smaller be? What would 1 times smaller be? Can you explain that, you FOX-level retard?
>dr pavel
>Dr Pavel
?
You're a new guy...
Romania delivers again
oh, it's part of that
i haven't seen the thing those quotes are from
Is it rewritable?
No hard disk does 100 megaBYTES per second.
t. never used a hdd
My whole life i've been using HDDs and the max transfer rate I've seen is about 20-30MBps
What garbage bin WD drives have you been using? My 8tb ironwolfs get 100MBps no problem.
Would be cool AF even if just for long term storage?
You are an absolute retard, even 2.5" 5400RPM drives can sustain 140MB/s now.
Here are the specs read for yourself
seagate.com
Modern hard disks can reach up to around 200MB/s. When data is written in sequential order hard disks can get quite fast. They suck at random reads and writes
>Either too expensive or a fraud.
Or unreliable to the point of being utterly worthless in a real world environment.
>takes a year to read a single disk
nice
>optical ultra-tape
what type of alien technology is that ?