| Poster | Thread |
 Samwel
|  |
Re: 10x Hard Disk capacity?!
Posted on 12-Apr-2005 23:02:03
| | [ #21 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member
 |
Joined: 7-Apr-2004
Posts: 3404
From: Sweden | | |
|
| Does this mean higher transfer speeds to?
As the head doesn't have to move as much..
Maybe only the seek speed is affected?
Of course a highly fragmented 1 terabyte drive would very slow 
As any harddrive would.
/Harry
EDIT: Wow! Post number 400!!!  Last edited by Samwel on 12-Apr-2005 at 11:03 PM.
_________________
/Harry
[SOLD] µA1-C - 750GX 800MHz - 512MB - Antec Aria case
Avatar by HNL_DK!
|
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
Samurai_Crow
|  |
Re: 10x Hard Disk capacity?!
Posted on 13-Apr-2005 3:07:19
| | [ #22 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member
|
Joined: 18-Jan-2003
Posts: 2320
From: Minnesota, USA | | |
|
| I doubt the transfer speed would increase but since the drive wouldn't need to spin as fast the spin-up time would be faster... |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
Argo
| |
Re: 10x Hard Disk capacity?!
Posted on 13-Apr-2005 6:30:45
| | [ #23 ] |
|
|
 |
Regular Member
 |
Joined: 8-Mar-2003
Posts: 312
From: St. Lawrence Co., NY, USA | | |
|
| Quote:
| In 1990 we were using 10 years old, battle proven, storage technology. Nowadays we're lucky if they even test it for 3 months before shipping the new ideas. And frankly I'm beginning to see some problems with that. |
I know what you mean. I have an older drive that is working just fine. I had a 120 GB disk die last year that was just over 12 months old. Of course it only had a 12 month warranty.
_________________
|
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
cell
| |
Re: 10x Hard Disk capacity?!
Posted on 13-Apr-2005 7:15:59
| | [ #24 ] |
|
|
 |
Super Member
 |
Joined: 26-Feb-2005
Posts: 1078
From: the depths of hell | | |
|
| Hitachi deskstars suck pretty badly -- keep dying on me. I have a 30GB Western digital that works fine and an old 120MB quantum scsi that's never broken down. They should make sure that the drives are reliable before releasing. |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
olegil
| |
Re: 10x Hard Disk capacity?!
Posted on 13-Apr-2005 7:40:41
| | [ #25 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member
|
Joined: 22-Aug-2003
Posts: 5895
From: Work | | |
|
| For seeking, you would still move just as much. It's the mechanics that limits the number of tracks you can have. Density inside a track is bits per length, which means that for the same (or even slower) length per second (rotation speed) you WILL get a higher bits per second count (transfer speed). A harddrive should spin quite fast in order for the heads to stay clear of the surface etc. Spinning at 1/10th of the speed just isn't viable, methinks.
On the other hand, I would MUCH rather have better flash memory, because I'm growing RATHER tired of seeing old drives die. I wonder if a SCSI-IDE adapter and an IDE-CompactFlash adapter together with a 128 or 256MB CF would work on my A500? I need a backup plan for when my last 200M SCSI drive dies...
_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.
|
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
herewegoagain
| |
Re: 10x Hard Disk capacity?!
Posted on 14-Apr-2005 13:38:23
| | [ #26 ] |
|
|
 |
Elite Member
|
Joined: 8-Jan-2003
Posts: 3270
From: Charlotte, NC | | |
|
| Maybe they should look at something that would increase the transfer speed of their website. It must be running from a C64 and 300 baud modem. |
|
| Status: Offline |
|
|
36 crawler(s) on-line.
70 guest(s) on-line.
1 member(s) on-line.
