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.
Come on man, 120gb HDDs don’t exist!
Well, they don’t exist. (yet)
Do you mean “anymore”?
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
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.
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.
And any 8TB disk with bad blocks makes a fine 5TB disk.
I own a couple of 5TB drives. At the time when 8TB and above were rare and expensive, it wasn’t that strange.
Still rocking an Xbox one with a 4tb external drive. It’s got to be going on 10 years old at this point
Finally, all of my homework on one drive.
I finally won’t have to check hard drive space when saving a Word document.
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.
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.
Oh definitely. I’m sure backblaze and the like will pick these right up.
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.
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!
Seagate is always finding new ways to brick your data!
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.
deleted by creator
Eeeeh… 26TB drives have been available for a short while now, but keep in mind they are being snatched up almost the moment they go in stock. On top of that, they are undoubtedly an enterprise purchase, with the price that goes along with that.
I’ve also seen reports that scalpers have been snatching them up, but I don’t have any more than the random opinion of a reporter to back that up, so I’d take it with a grain of salt.
Work at a tech shop and the largest drive I’ve seen in person are 12 tb
deleted by creator
Why not 124TB? Pathetic.
I feel sorry for those with tech OCD, it should be 128TB.
It wont help since you probably loose just enough partitioning it.
Should be 140.7375TB
Resilvering a drive failure gonna take ages
Backups will be fun too.
How much for one???
If you have to ask . . .
Uhhhhhhhhhhh 3k minimum probablyEdit: this is HARD DRIVE not SSD, so im estimating $500 instead
Edit 2: im bad at this
$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.
Lol i remember spending $300 on 200gb hdds. And i got a discount since some buddies and i pooled to get a batch together
It was an exciting time when we finally passed the $1/GB mark.
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
$500 would be an insane price. 16TB drives alone are like $300-500 CAD
I think the existing 100TB SSDs are over $10k. Halo products charge a premium.
I just want giant SSD’s for not an insane price. But don’t see it happening anytime soon.
They’re not even making them yet.
… from a homelab pov I should start comparing dB/TB …
That brings lemmy hosting its own videos much closer!
Oh oh… I feel the sudden urge to start hoarding stuff and hosting an IPFS node 😅
Anti Commercial AI thingy
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.
New technology to increase hard drive storage? “Get perpendicular!”
Sexy
