Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Next (the other next) Gen "DVD" storage

Reply
Thread Tools

Next (the other next) Gen "DVD" storage

 
 
Alan Browne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2005

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/

Heading towards the Tera-byte...

Cheers,
Alan
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Gaderian
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2005
Alan Browne wrote:
> http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/
>
> Heading towards the Tera-byte...
>
> Cheers,
> Alan

Interesting. Imagine the cost of the burner.
But then again, I said somthing similar when cassettes replaced 8 tracks!


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Matt Silberstein
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2005
On Fri, 27 May 2005 10:10:31 -0400, in rec.photo.digital , Alan Browne
<(E-Mail Removed)> in <d779og$khu$(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>
>http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/
>
>Heading towards the Tera-byte...


An interesting notion. It would require extensive processing and so
would be slow. (Yes, with faster processors it would be faster, but
still slower than less complex systems.) I would not expect to see
this on the market particularly soon, particularly from a company with
no record of innovation.


--
Matt Silberstein

All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alan Browne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2005
Matt Silberstein wrote:

> On Fri, 27 May 2005 10:10:31 -0400, in rec.photo.digital , Alan
> Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> in
> <d779og$khu$(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>> http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/
>>
>> Heading towards the Tera-byte...

>
>
> An interesting notion. It would require extensive processing and so
> would be slow. (Yes, with faster processors it would be faster, but
> still slower than less complex systems.) I would not expect to see
> this on the market particularly soon, particularly from a company
> with no record of innovation.


eh? The zip drive system was, at the time quite innovative. They lost
that, and this is their leapfrog (if it comes to fruition, of course).

By the time this reaches the market (if), then processing will be
faster, memory will be larger, video requirements will be greater, etc. etc.

10 years ago, proposing something like DVD was considered a monumental
amount of storage. Today, it doesn't cover a few weeks worth of RAW
shooting.

Everything just keeps going and going (faster and more).

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Scott W
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2005
It would be great, if it works. I had to laugh at the idea that 800 GB
was more storage then normal people would need. I have 490 GB of hard
drive connected to my computer, they are not currently all full, but to
backup that amount of data would take over 100 DVDs.

For years now removable storage has not been keeping up with hard
drives. On my first computer, that had hard drive, I had 20 MB of hard
drive space, I could back this up with 17 5 1/4 floppys. Pretty soon
the hard drives were up to 500 MB and we could no longer backup the
whole drive with floppy, but then came CDs and life was good, for a
while. When hard drives started getting to the 20 GB range even CDs
were getting to be small for doing backups, then came DVDs, but 250 GB
drives where right behind them.

Blue Ray will help but we are going to be looking at 1000 GB hard
drives soon so even Blue Ray won't be enough.

Scott

 
Reply With Quote
 
Cheesehead
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2005
For may of us, our first hard drive was 5 or 10 meg.
No enough for a single raw image today.
And 1 gig of camera storage is roughly the same as 4 rolls of 135/24
film.
The changes are amazing.

Collin

 
Reply With Quote
 
Dragan Cvetkovic
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2005
"Scott W" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> It would be great, if it works. I had to laugh at the idea that 800 GB
> was more storage then normal people would need. I have 490 GB of hard
> drive connected to my computer, they are not currently all full, but to
> backup that amount of data would take over 100 DVDs.
>
> For years now removable storage has not been keeping up with hard
> drives.



Oh, yes, it has, but not in the price range we would like to have. There
are LTO tapes with 100GB, 200GB or 400GB _uncompressed_ (usually advertised
as 200GB/400GB/800GB tapes) storage. There are SDLT with similar
capacity. But the prices assume that you are at least a small business:
e.g. 4-5k for 10 LTO2 autoloader.

Or you can go with DLT drives with (up to) 160GB comporessed storage for
2-3K -- again an autoloader.

They both are SCSI devices. I am sure there are some IDE based backup
technologies as well.

Expensive? Maybe. How important is your data to you?

Bye, Dragan

--
Dragan Cvetkovic,

To be or not to be is true. G. Boole No it isn't. L. E. J. Brouwer

!!! Sender/From address is bogus. Use reply-to one !!!
 
Reply With Quote
 
Matt Silberstein
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2005
On Fri, 27 May 2005 12:32:18 -0400, in rec.photo.digital , Alan Browne
<(E-Mail Removed)> in <d77i2b$kg6$(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Matt Silberstein wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 27 May 2005 10:10:31 -0400, in rec.photo.digital , Alan
>> Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> in
>> <d779og$khu$(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/
>>>
>>> Heading towards the Tera-byte...

>>
>>
>> An interesting notion. It would require extensive processing and so
>> would be slow. (Yes, with faster processors it would be faster, but
>> still slower than less complex systems.) I would not expect to see
>> this on the market particularly soon, particularly from a company
>> with no record of innovation.

>
>eh? The zip drive system was, at the time quite innovative. They lost
>that, and this is their leapfrog (if it comes to fruition, of course).


Let me re-state then, a company with a poor record of innovation. They
came up with a single poor product and done nothing since.

>By the time this reaches the market (if), then processing will be
>faster, memory will be larger, video requirements will be greater, etc. etc.


A point I made. But it will still require significant processing:

"The angles would be detected by analyzing light after it had bounced
off several ridges - calculating which combination of slopes would
have produced the result."

That looks like a non-trivial problem.

>10 years ago, proposing something like DVD was considered a monumental
>amount of storage. Today, it doesn't cover a few weeks worth of RAW
>shooting.


I agree that 1T storage will make sense at some point. The question is
how.

>Everything just keeps going and going (faster and more).


Which does not mean that all technologies are a good idea.

--
Matt Silberstein

All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Frank ess
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2005
Matt Silberstein wrote:
> On Fri, 27 May 2005 12:32:18 -0400, in rec.photo.digital , Alan
> Browne
> <(E-Mail Removed)> in
> <d77i2b$kg6$(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>> Matt Silberstein wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 27 May 2005 10:10:31 -0400, in rec.photo.digital , Alan
>>> Browne <(E-Mail Removed)> in
>>> <d779og$khu$(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2005/05/27/Nanoscale_DVD/
>>>>
>>>> Heading towards the Tera-byte...
>>>
>>>
>>> An interesting notion. It would require extensive processing and
>>> so
>>> would be slow. (Yes, with faster processors it would be faster,
>>> but
>>> still slower than less complex systems.) I would not expect to see
>>> this on the market particularly soon, particularly from a company
>>> with no record of innovation.

>>
>> eh? The zip drive system was, at the time quite innovative. They
>> lost that, and this is their leapfrog (if it comes to fruition, of
>> course).

>
> Let me re-state then, a company with a poor record of innovation.
> They
> came up with a single poor product and done nothing since.
>


<snip>

My wife has a polo shirt that proclaims proudly that the wearer was a
member of the uh, uh, I forget what Iomega product it was, but it was
well after the Zip things.

>
> Which does not mean that all technologies are a good idea.


Ya got that right, Pilgrim.

--
Frank ess

 
Reply With Quote
 
Alan Brownbe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-27-2005
Matt Silberstein wrote:

>>By the time this reaches the market (if), then processing will be
>>faster, memory will be larger, video requirements will be greater, etc. etc.

>
>
> A point I made. But it will still require significant processing:
>
> "The angles would be detected by analyzing light after it had bounced
> off several ridges - calculating which combination of slopes would
> have produced the result."
>
> That looks like a non-trivial problem.


I do agree...

But, quadrature phase (QPSK) modems would have been considered a
non-trivial problem 25 years ago. They're already well behind us. Some
military radios have had dramatic increases in effective bandwidth
through complex modulation schemes... and so on.

It is non-trivial to do thses things at first; once they're done, they
become standard very quickly.


>>Everything just keeps going and going (faster and more).

>
>
> Which does not mean that all technologies are a good idea.



The marketplace arbitrates that. Cruelly.

(Whether the marketplace rewards silliness is another matter. People
are silly and buy silly things).

Cheers,
Alan.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: "Win32:Trojan-gen. {VC}""Win32.trojan-gen.{UPX!}" jamesa01 Computer Support 2 02-27-2006 02:54 PM
"Win32:Trojan-gen. {VC}" "Win32:Trojan-gen. {UPX!}" D@Z Computer Support 5 01-30-2006 07:52 PM
Next-gen Windows finally gets a name Silverstrand Software 34 09-12-2005 02:57 PM
CurrentElement->next = CurrentElement->next->next (UNDEFINED?) Deniz Bahar C Programming 2 03-09-2005 12:45 AM
[ANN] Next-gen IDE development vacancies in UK Russ Freeman Java 0 09-23-2003 08:48 AM



Advertisments