Those are 3.5" drives. The platters are not very much different.
We have the same situation here. These are not really 2.5" drives.
I'm speaking about standard drives. Those aren't out yet.
I think I could hold off until a 120gb Seagate 10k rpm 2.5" 9.5mm form factor (ie. FITS in MacBook) drive. Maybe end of this year.......
In Australia/USA you can get the Seagate 100gb 7200rpm 2.5" 9.5mm drive easily. In Malaysia these are rare, everyone seems to just be carrying the usual 5400rpm 2.5" mainstream stock.
I tell you what though, MacBook Core[1/2]Duo 2ghz, 2gb RAM, and a 10k 2.5" 120gb, that would frickin' ROCK THE HOUSE. AND BE FUTURE-PROOFED for at least going into the end of 2008.
Battery life would suffer, but so far I'm seeing some decent computing/ viewing DVD/ video sessions on battery alone, with Seagate's brilliant tech a 10k rpm 2.5" 120gb in a MacBook would be doable. Maybe trim off 25minutes of battery life, but if running as "desktop replacement" most of the time, very doable.
The question in any of this is just how much storage does anyone really need?
It really depends on the application. And some applications do require tremendous amounts of storage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Do we really need multiple terabyte drives in our desktops?
Five years ago, the answer would've been a resounding "no".
Today, with consumers buying digital camcorders, and using programs like iMovie and iDVD to make home movies, I think a few people could say "yes" to that question. In a year or two, it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of people will be able to say "yes".
And I'm sure Leopard's Time Machine will also increase people's storage requirements. Especially if people want to use it to keep backups of their multimedia projects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Do we need 500 GB in our phones or music players?
Not at the moment. But how long do think it will be before people want to start carrying their home movies around all the time, just like they carry around still photos today? I'd guess less than a year for the geeks to do this, and less than five years for it to become mainstream.
It really depends on the application. And some applications do require tremendous amounts of storage.
Five years ago, the answer would've been a resounding "no".
Today, with consumers buying digital camcorders, and using programs like iMovie and iDVD to make home movies, I think a few people could say "yes" to that question. In a year or two, it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of people will be able to say "yes".
And I'm sure Leopard's Time Machine will also increase people's storage requirements. Especially if people want to use it to keep backups of their multimedia projects.
Not at the moment. But how long do think it will be before people want to start carrying their home movies around all the time, just like they carry around still photos today? I'd guess less than a year for the geeks to do this, and less than five years for it to become mainstream.
My point isn't that a few people will want, or need, that much, but will the majority?
A study done recently (if I can find it, I will post it) said that few people used more than 25% of their storage space. I believe that.
I don't think that too many people will be loading up on movies. A very few might.
In the future, we will probably see movies downloaded from wherever they are when we watch them, much like pay for view.
The average person doesn't watch movies, or tv programs more than once. There are few options for that on computer platforms as yet, but it will be coming.
As broadband speeds get higher, and the backbone capacity goes up, it will come, despite what Google says. No one will want to store that much stuff at home, nor will there be a need to.
If you get to the UK, which way would you go, right or left?
I don't know. I'd probably spend the 1st month or so with my brother and his fiancee in London, trying to decipher this supposed "English" the various English, Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, etc. are speaking. I'd love to chill with some NYC peoples that are hanging around in London, and discover the secret cluster of Australians that are known to operate in packs in London.
I think people are not realising if they have 250-500gb of storage, that's fantastic, but really, you need an external of almost equal size for redundant x1 backup.
For anything above 200gb just a spare external drive is enough for a backup and Leopard Time Machine, I imagine.
I dunno, for me manual back-up is just too much of a PITA. I guess I could keep an external drive connected all the time and use a scheduled back-up, but then that kinda defeats the purpose of having a removable drive.
I was actually thinking about internal, hot-swappable RAID 5 myself. No muss, no fuss once it's set up. Backup happens automagically as you write files to it. But then, I guess that solution doesn't really work for laptops.
I personally rsync the home directory on my laptop to the RAID 5 on my file server regularly for backup. Of course, that isn't always easy to do when you're on the road unless you can find high speed internet access regularly.
I was actually thinking about internal, hot-swappable RAID 5 myself. No muss, no fuss once it's set up.... But then, I guess that solution doesn't really work for laptops....
Nope, not at this stage. Exicting idea. However, I prefer a backup that can be place *away* and *outside* of the computer. An external drive meets this criteria and increases success of disaster recovery. One can have all the RAID in the world but if you lose your laptop your whole data goes Poof! ..
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio
I personally rsync the home directory on my laptop to the RAID 5 on my file server regularly for backup. Of course, that isn't always easy to do when you're on the road unless you can find high speed internet access regularly....
What I do is for critical documents I absolutely need, I just email them to myself with my gMail account. "Scattershot online repository method" - kinda like gMail poor person's iDisk. I would carry the external drive with me - a 2.5" USB pocket drive type thing would work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by auxio
"...Backup happens automagically as you write files to it... "
Well this is the promise of Time Machine, you don't have to always have the external drive connected, just long enough or overnight or something for it to do its thing. I'm interested to see how it backs up and tracks changes especially huge video files and stuff. It's ambitious, even for Apple.
I don't know. I'd probably spend the 1st month or so with my brother and his fiancee in London, trying to decipher this supposed "English" the various English, Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, etc. are speaking. I'd love to chill with some NYC peoples that are hanging around in London, and discover the secret cluster of Australians that are known to operate in packs in London.
However, I prefer a backup that can be place *away* and *outside* of the computer. An external drive meets this criteria and increases success of disaster recovery. One can have all the RAID in the world but if you lose your laptop your whole data goes Poof! ..
Yeah, RAID is definitely more of a server thing than a solution for laptops. My external hard drive is sitting beside my computer on my desk as I type this, so it's not really a good candidate for an "offsite" backup.
And I haven't had to deal with data loss from natural disaster yet -- never lived near a coastline or a tornado belt and I'm careful with fire -- so I guess I've never bothered to prepare for that. Maybe when I have kids and writable Blu-ray discs are dirt cheap...
Quote:
What I do is for critical documents I absolutely need, I just email them to myself with my gMail account. "Scattershot online repository method" - kinda like gMail poor person's iDisk.
Yeah, I actually have an offsite domain server which gives me 2GB of storage which I could use for this purpose -- I'm just too lazy about it sometimes.
Superduper is good as a local backup solution, but rsync is ideal for me because it works both locally and remotely. I can do it from anywhere I have internet access. As long as I haven't modified a lot of large files (I do programming work, so most of the files I modify are relatively small), it doesn't take very long to remotely synchronize the files between my laptop and my server via SSH from anywhere on the internet.
since it can handle changes on both copies of the filesystem. Which is handy since I work on source code which is cross-platform. So I can be modifying it on both computers and keep both in sync without hassle.
I dunno, for me manual back-up is just too much of a PITA. ... I was actually thinking about internal, hot-swappable RAID 5 myself. No muss, no fuss once it's set up. Backup happens automagically as you write files to it.
RAID is great to protect against single-drive failures, but it is hardly a backup solution.
It won't do squat if some critical document gets deleted or corrupted (whether by virus, software bug, or human error.)
It also won't help if something happens that takes out multiple the drives at once, like a power supply or IDE controller that goes bad and fries the drives' logic boards. (Don't laugh, it's happened.)
RAID is great to protect against single-drive failures, but it is hardly a backup solution.
It won't do squat if some critical document gets deleted or corrupted (whether by virus, software bug, or human error.)
It also won't help if something happens that takes out multiple the drives at once, like a power supply or IDE controller that goes bad and fries the drives' logic boards. (Don't laugh, it's happened.)
The only reliable methods require tape or other out of machine media, such as CD or DVD. I'm looking foward to Blu-Ray for this reason. 50 GB is good enough for entire large projects, and is re-recordable, so the price of the disk is not really an issue.
The only reliable methods require tape or other out of machine media, such as CD or DVD. I'm looking foward to Blu-Ray for this reason. 50 GB is good enough for entire large projects, and is re-recordable, so the price of the disk is not really an issue.
Ditto.
I currently use 33G VXA-1 tapes to back up my Mac. This setup cost me $800 for the drive, and costs $50 per tape whenever I have to buy new ones.
BD-RE is already close to being a more economical system at today's prices. Personally, I'm hoping they will have worked out the kinks in those 4-layer BD-RE discs I read about last year. At 100G per disc (assuming good reliability, of course), it would become a phenomenal backup system.
...Until some flash memory manufacturer offers a huge leap forward in flash memory capacity, you can forget about Apple offering an all-flash memory video iPod until at least 2010.
The more likely thing happening for the few (in my humble opinion!) are:
1) The iPod Shuffle will increase its flash memory to 2 GB.
2) The iPod nano will no longer be offered in 2 GB version, but we'll see a 4 GB low end, 8 GB midrange and 16 GB top end model.
3) The 5.5G iPod will be replaced by a new model derived from iPhone technology (e.g., full-screen 16:10 aspect ratio display and touchscreen controls), but with either 80 GB or 120 GB hard disk storage.
But there's still such a large difference in price between 3.5" and 2.5" drives.
I just bought 2 SATA drives - the 5400RPM, 2.5" 160GB drive cost 25% more than the 7200RPM, 3.5" 500GB model (both Seagates)
I expect 3.5" 500GB drives to be under $100 by the end of the year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
The drive cap was difference was fairly large, but the move was made.
3.5" drives do come in 10k and 15k versions, with some work done on faster rotation, but without success. I don't know why you don't know that. Do you mean 2.5" instead?
There are no 15k drives in the 2.5" size, and, offhand, I don't recall if there are any 10k drives in 2.5, though I seem to remember an article about one somewhere.
We will be seeing 300 GB 2.5" drives before too long. That has already been stated by drive manufacturers. 500 GB drives are expected around 2008.
Most computers would be quite fine with 2.5" 300-500 GB drives rotating at 7,200 rpm.
3.5" models would linger a while longer, as did the full height 5.25" drives did after all the others had gone.
Comments
This is an odd time for you to be posting.
Those are 3.5" drives. The platters are not very much different.
We have the same situation here. These are not really 2.5" drives.
I'm speaking about standard drives. Those aren't out yet.
I think I could hold off until a 120gb Seagate 10k rpm 2.5" 9.5mm form factor (ie. FITS in MacBook) drive. Maybe end of this year.......
In Australia/USA you can get the Seagate 100gb 7200rpm 2.5" 9.5mm drive easily. In Malaysia these are rare, everyone seems to just be carrying the usual 5400rpm 2.5" mainstream stock.
I tell you what though, MacBook Core[1/2]Duo 2ghz, 2gb RAM, and a 10k 2.5" 120gb, that would frickin' ROCK THE HOUSE. AND BE FUTURE-PROOFED for at least going into the end of 2008.
Battery life would suffer, but so far I'm seeing some decent computing/ viewing DVD/ video sessions on battery alone, with Seagate's brilliant tech a 10k rpm 2.5" 120gb in a MacBook would be doable. Maybe trim off 25minutes of battery life, but if running as "desktop replacement" most of the time, very doable.
Hey Sunil! Where are you boy?
This is an odd time for you to be posting.
Oh yeah, I'm not usually on at USA late afternoon/evening time.
It's 10am here in SouthEastern Australia. Melbourne...
Slept at 12midnight last night, had some weird dreams, woke up at about 8.30am this morning and just cruising on the web. Time for some breakfast now
Leaving on a jet plane.... middle of next week. Destination: will be revealed upon arrival.
Oh yeah, I'm not usually on at USA late afternoon/evening time.
It's 10am here in SouthEastern Australia. Melbourne...
Slept at 12midnight last night, had some weird dreams, woke up at about 8.30am this morning and just cruising on the web. Time for some breakfast now
Leaving on a jet plane.... middle of next week. Destination: will be revealed upon arrival.
Time for dinner here in NYC.
Give us a hint. Which point of the compass are you traveling to? I hope it's not South!
The question in any of this is just how much storage does anyone really need?
It really depends on the application. And some applications do require tremendous amounts of storage.
Do we really need multiple terabyte drives in our desktops?
Five years ago, the answer would've been a resounding "no".
Today, with consumers buying digital camcorders, and using programs like iMovie and iDVD to make home movies, I think a few people could say "yes" to that question. In a year or two, it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of people will be able to say "yes".
And I'm sure Leopard's Time Machine will also increase people's storage requirements. Especially if people want to use it to keep backups of their multimedia projects.
Do we need 500 GB in our phones or music players?
Not at the moment. But how long do think it will be before people want to start carrying their home movies around all the time, just like they carry around still photos today? I'd guess less than a year for the geeks to do this, and less than five years for it to become mainstream.
It really depends on the application. And some applications do require tremendous amounts of storage.
Five years ago, the answer would've been a resounding "no".
Today, with consumers buying digital camcorders, and using programs like iMovie and iDVD to make home movies, I think a few people could say "yes" to that question. In a year or two, it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of people will be able to say "yes".
And I'm sure Leopard's Time Machine will also increase people's storage requirements. Especially if people want to use it to keep backups of their multimedia projects.
Not at the moment. But how long do think it will be before people want to start carrying their home movies around all the time, just like they carry around still photos today? I'd guess less than a year for the geeks to do this, and less than five years for it to become mainstream.
My point isn't that a few people will want, or need, that much, but will the majority?
A study done recently (if I can find it, I will post it) said that few people used more than 25% of their storage space. I believe that.
I don't think that too many people will be loading up on movies. A very few might.
In the future, we will probably see movies downloaded from wherever they are when we watch them, much like pay for view.
The average person doesn't watch movies, or tv programs more than once. There are few options for that on computer platforms as yet, but it will be coming.
As broadband speeds get higher, and the backbone capacity goes up, it will come, despite what Google says. No one will want to store that much stuff at home, nor will there be a need to.
Time for dinner here in NYC.
Give us a hint. Which point of the compass are you traveling to? I hope it's not South!
Ah, it's pretty obvious. "Back" to the Equator. Mmm... 33degC | 91degF ...All year round.
I may try and get to the UK 2nd half 2007/early-mid 2008 - I got the UK Working/Holiday visa that's fully valid until April-2009.
Ah, it's pretty obvious. "Back" to the Equator. Mmm... 33degC | 91degF ...All year round.
I may try and get to the UK 2nd half 2007/early-mid 2008 - I got the UK Working/Holiday visa that's fully valid until April-2009.
If you get to the UK, which way would you go, right or left?
If you get to the UK, which way would you go, right or left?
I don't know. I'd probably spend the 1st month or so with my brother and his fiancee in London, trying to decipher this supposed "English" the various English, Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, etc. are speaking. I'd love to chill with some NYC peoples that are hanging around in London, and discover the secret cluster of Australians that are known to operate in packs in London.
I think people are not realising if they have 250-500gb of storage, that's fantastic, but really, you need an external of almost equal size for redundant x1 backup.
For anything above 200gb just a spare external drive is enough for a backup and Leopard Time Machine, I imagine.
I dunno, for me manual back-up is just too much of a PITA. I guess I could keep an external drive connected all the time and use a scheduled back-up, but then that kinda defeats the purpose of having a removable drive.
I was actually thinking about internal, hot-swappable RAID 5 myself. No muss, no fuss once it's set up. Backup happens automagically as you write files to it. But then, I guess that solution doesn't really work for laptops.
I personally rsync the home directory on my laptop to the RAID 5 on my file server regularly for backup. Of course, that isn't always easy to do when you're on the road unless you can find high speed internet access regularly.
I was actually thinking about internal, hot-swappable RAID 5 myself. No muss, no fuss once it's set up.... But then, I guess that solution doesn't really work for laptops....
Nope, not at this stage. Exicting idea. However, I prefer a backup that can be place *away* and *outside* of the computer. An external drive meets this criteria and increases success of disaster recovery. One can have all the RAID in the world but if you lose your laptop your whole data goes Poof!
I personally rsync the home directory on my laptop to the RAID 5 on my file server regularly for backup. Of course, that isn't always easy to do when you're on the road unless you can find high speed internet access regularly....
What I do is for critical documents I absolutely need, I just email them to myself with my gMail account. "Scattershot online repository method" - kinda like gMail poor person's iDisk. I would carry the external drive with me - a 2.5" USB pocket drive type thing would work.
"...Backup happens automagically as you write files to it... "
Well this is the promise of Time Machine, you don't have to always have the external drive connected, just long enough or overnight or something for it to do its thing. I'm interested to see how it backs up and tracks changes especially huge video files and stuff. It's ambitious, even for Apple.
I don't know. I'd probably spend the 1st month or so with my brother and his fiancee in London, trying to decipher this supposed "English" the various English, Welsh, Scots, Irish, Cornish, etc. are speaking. I'd love to chill with some NYC peoples that are hanging around in London, and discover the secret cluster of Australians that are known to operate in packs in London.
Well, if you go by New York...
However, I prefer a backup that can be place *away* and *outside* of the computer. An external drive meets this criteria and increases success of disaster recovery. One can have all the RAID in the world but if you lose your laptop your whole data goes Poof!
Yeah, RAID is definitely more of a server thing than a solution for laptops. My external hard drive is sitting beside my computer on my desk as I type this, so it's not really a good candidate for an "offsite" backup.
And I haven't had to deal with data loss from natural disaster yet -- never lived near a coastline or a tornado belt and I'm careful with fire -- so I guess I've never bothered to prepare for that. Maybe when I have kids and writable Blu-ray discs are dirt cheap...
What I do is for critical documents I absolutely need, I just email them to myself with my gMail account. "Scattershot online repository method" - kinda like gMail poor person's iDisk.
Yeah, I actually have an offsite domain server which gives me 2GB of storage which I could use for this purpose -- I'm just too lazy about it sometimes.
Also consider http://www.shirt-pocket.com/SuperDup...scription.html as an alternative to RSync?
Superduper is good as a local backup solution, but rsync is ideal for me because it works both locally and remotely. I can do it from anywhere I have internet access. As long as I haven't modified a lot of large files (I do programming work, so most of the files I modify are relatively small), it doesn't take very long to remotely synchronize the files between my laptop and my server via SSH from anywhere on the internet.
The only replacement I've considered is Unison:
http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/unison/
since it can handle changes on both copies of the filesystem. Which is handy since I work on source code which is cross-platform. So I can be modifying it on both computers and keep both in sync without hassle.
I dunno, for me manual back-up is just too much of a PITA. ... I was actually thinking about internal, hot-swappable RAID 5 myself. No muss, no fuss once it's set up. Backup happens automagically as you write files to it.
RAID is great to protect against single-drive failures, but it is hardly a backup solution.
It won't do squat if some critical document gets deleted or corrupted (whether by virus, software bug, or human error.)
It also won't help if something happens that takes out multiple the drives at once, like a power supply or IDE controller that goes bad and fries the drives' logic boards. (Don't laugh, it's happened.)
RAID is great to protect against single-drive failures, but it is hardly a backup solution.
It won't do squat if some critical document gets deleted or corrupted (whether by virus, software bug, or human error.)
It also won't help if something happens that takes out multiple the drives at once, like a power supply or IDE controller that goes bad and fries the drives' logic boards. (Don't laugh, it's happened.)
The only reliable methods require tape or other out of machine media, such as CD or DVD. I'm looking foward to Blu-Ray for this reason. 50 GB is good enough for entire large projects, and is re-recordable, so the price of the disk is not really an issue.
The only reliable methods require tape or other out of machine media, such as CD or DVD. I'm looking foward to Blu-Ray for this reason. 50 GB is good enough for entire large projects, and is re-recordable, so the price of the disk is not really an issue.
Ditto.
I currently use 33G VXA-1 tapes to back up my Mac. This setup cost me $800 for the drive, and costs $50 per tape whenever I have to buy new ones.
BD-RE is already close to being a more economical system at today's prices. Personally, I'm hoping they will have worked out the kinks in those 4-layer BD-RE discs I read about last year. At 100G per disc (assuming good reliability, of course), it would become a phenomenal backup system.
The more likely thing happening for the few (in my humble opinion!) are:
1) The iPod Shuffle will increase its flash memory to 2 GB.
2) The iPod nano will no longer be offered in 2 GB version, but we'll see a 4 GB low end, 8 GB midrange and 16 GB top end model.
3) The 5.5G iPod will be replaced by a new model derived from iPhone technology (e.g., full-screen 16:10 aspect ratio display and touchscreen controls), but with either 80 GB or 120 GB hard disk storage.
I just bought 2 SATA drives - the 5400RPM, 2.5" 160GB drive cost 25% more than the 7200RPM, 3.5" 500GB model (both Seagates)
I expect 3.5" 500GB drives to be under $100 by the end of the year.
The drive cap was difference was fairly large, but the move was made.
3.5" drives do come in 10k and 15k versions, with some work done on faster rotation, but without success. I don't know why you don't know that. Do you mean 2.5" instead?
There are no 15k drives in the 2.5" size, and, offhand, I don't recall if there are any 10k drives in 2.5, though I seem to remember an article about one somewhere.
We will be seeing 300 GB 2.5" drives before too long. That has already been stated by drive manufacturers. 500 GB drives are expected around 2008.
Most computers would be quite fine with 2.5" 300-500 GB drives rotating at 7,200 rpm.
3.5" models would linger a while longer, as did the full height 5.25" drives did after all the others had gone.