backtop


Print 30 comment(s) - last by thinairbikes.. on Apr 2 at 9:48 AM

The thousand gigabyte-per-disk era is almost upon us

Earlier this year Seagate confirmed it would ship a 1TB hard drive before the second half of this year. With the first quarter of this year already over, the launch window for Seagate's next generation drive is rapidly shrinking.

Seagate would not confirm or deny the expectation of a new 7200.11 series this morning.  Seagate representatives responded to our inquiries stating, "We already stated earlier this year that we would have the 1TB drive before the second half of this year." 

Spanish-language site Chilehardware countered Seagate's announcement with specifications of the 11th generation Seagate Barracuda drive, which it listed as follows:
  • 1 Terabyte capacity
  • 7200RPM
  • SATA 3.0Gbps interface
  • Perpendicular recording
  • NCQ
  • 16MB of buffer
  • 4 platters
  • 8 heads
Seagate traditionally reserves new generation designations for platter advancements; the company has never released new generation indicators for storage increases alone.  However, it has been a year refresh since the last platter update so it would not be unrealistic to expect new features on the soon-to-ship devices.

Seagate replied to DailyTech stating, "There is no embargo yet." However, we were still assured that the company would fulfill its ship date promise.

Hitachi Global Storage and Seagate released 1TB hard drive promises within hours of each other last January.  Both manufacturers utilize Komag platter configurations -- Komag is the only platter manufacturer to announce 1TB designs to date.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Too Big
By someguy123 on 3/29/2007 4:56:33 PM , Rating: 5
That logic doesn't make any sense because you could say that for any advancement in HD storage size. Technically a on a 10gb hard drive you could lose years of work with a malfunction, but does that mean that we should all be using an array of 1gb hard drives? No. Increase in HD size can only benefit the consumer as smaller drives are reduced in price and we go into the coming high definition era. A single 1080p movie can already suck up the majority of a regular consumer's hard drive, and in four or five years I guarantee you'll see these 1tb drives filling up with gigantic PC games and the like.

if you do have data that you can't afford to lose then obviously you should have multiple backups, but saying 1tb hard drives are pointless makes no sense.


RE: Too Big
By Ralph The Magician on 3/29/2007 5:16:53 PM , Rating: 2
It makes sense because most content today is downloaded and there isn't an effective way to back it up. If you have a 120GB drive, you can backup to DVDs. If you lose some of that data, it can be redownloaded.

Backing up 930GB of data is more difficult, and redownloaded it takes...5 times longer.


RE: Too Big
By zaroba on 3/29/2007 6:10:02 PM , Rating: 2
so...you've checked every pc in the world and verified that most is downloaded? :P

you think a 1tb drive is too big...all i have to say to that is, lol.
take a look at computer advancement threw the years. the same could have been said about EVERY piece of computer hardware that ever came out since the birth of the pc.

yet, here we are useing the stuff and needing more.

businesses could use them, web hosts could use them, data centers could use them, any type of company that has lots of stuff to store could use them.


RE: Too Big
By splint on 3/29/2007 7:03:40 PM , Rating: 5
He is not saying that 1TB is too big, the point being made here is that data integrity is becoming a problem. Simply put, with a (1+)TB drive you are putting too much eggs in one basket. I completely agree with this. No one in their right mind would buy a drive this size, having the potential of being used for several years to come, without redundancy. Regardless of future usage trends, 1TB of data is still 1TB of data.


RE: Too Big
By gramboh on 3/29/2007 8:00:36 PM , Rating: 2
The argument doesn't make anymore sense than saying 500/400/320GB is 'too big'. Ignoring cost, why can't you RAID1, RAID5/6 a bunch of 1TB drives (not for backup, but for redundnacy/live integrity). Or have a separate NAS for backup.


RE: Too Big
By SmokeRngs on 3/30/2007 5:47:45 PM , Rating: 3
I'd bet you data integrity is no more a problem than it was in the past. If anything, it's probably less of a worry.

The first PC I had came with a 250 meg hard drive. My next system I built myself and had a 1.6 gig drive. That is over 6x the capacity. I still had nothing bigger than floppies to backup my stuff on. And guess what, I still backed up my important stuff to floppy.

At the time I had that 1.6 gig drive I worked in a computer shop. An order came in for a machine that I had to build. It had a 9 gig SCSI drive in it. In a way, that drive did scare me a bit as it was even larger than my 1.6. I had the same fears about data loss. Guess what, I ended up slowly upgrading to a 3.2 and 6.4 gig IDE drives and then four 4.3 gig SCSI drives. It wasn't until after I had the SCSIs that CD burners were affordable. That meaning they were under $300. I had 26.8 gig of drive space. Anything truly important was backed up on floppy and then CD.

Today's situation is no different from the situation I was in years ago. I backup my important files to DVD instead of floppy. I currently have about 750 gig of drive space between three computers and most of it is in one. Soon that will jump to over a terabyte once I purchase my next hard drive which will be soon. A power surge in my apartment could wipe out every byte of that data except for 14 gig that is at a friend's house. That's no different from having a single 1 terabyte drive.

I would hope no one here waits until they fill up a terabyte drive before backing up their data. Intelligent people make backups of their important data as soon as possible. It's not like you would spend the time and money all at once to back up a terabyte. At least, not if you are intelligent.


RE: Too Big
By Captain Orgazmo on 3/30/2007 2:22:26 AM , Rating: 2
In four or five years I hope there are no 1TB hard drives. I'm tired of the slow transfer and seek speeds, short safe working lifetime, and ever increasing power consumption and heat production of modern high-capacity spinning disk drives. Specifically the lagging speed of hard drives is currently the worst bottleneck of PCs, and in the coming years of high-def-everything, this situation will only get worse. If a state-change type non-volatile memory storage solution could be made with data capacity in the same league as a HDD (of course, in the same price league as well), then hard disk drives would go the way of the magnetic tape.


RE: Too Big
By Mudvillager on 3/30/2007 6:15:35 AM , Rating: 2
Where are you NAND SSD's?? We love you even though you have a bit slower transfer speeds and less disk space @ higher costs - because you have serveral advantages too,

like close to 0 ms access times,
no moving parts,
close to no power consumption,
sustained transfer speeds

and your transfer speeds will soon be far ahead of magnetic platter HDD's, so please, be available in the customer market now!


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki