×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Seagate Ships Billionth Hard Drive

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the ok-how-much-pron-is-that-now dept.

Data Storage 245

Lucas123 writes "Seagate's first drive, shipped in 1979 was the ST506, which had a capacity of 5MB and cost a cool $1,500 — or $300 per megabyte. Today, a typical Seagate holds 1TB and cost just 1/5000th of a cent ($0.0002) per megabyte. Seagate, which claims to be the first company to ship a billion drives, says all those drives amounted to 79 million terabytes of capacity, enough for 158 billion hours of digital video or 1.2 trillion hours of MP3 songs." Update: 04/23 14:56 GMT by CT : The quoted fraction is wrong. Someone complain to ComputerWorld. Update: 04/23 15:13 GMT by CT : TY. The site is corrected to say "just 1/50th of a cent ($0.0002) per megabyte." The universal equation is once again balanced.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

245 comments

Bad Sector (5, Informative)

kmsigel (306018) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171076)

$0.0002 is 1/50th of a cent, not 1/5000th. Still a good value, though.

My first hard drive was a 20MB Seagate that went into my 8Mhz 8088 Sanyo PC, which was originally bought with two 360KB floppies and no hard drive. I remember feeling very lucky at the time, because while I was saving up for the hard drive (which cost ~$400 in ~1985 as I recall) the 10MB model (which I was going to get) was replaced by the 20MB model at the same price.

Same as it ever was. (4, Interesting)

willeyhill (1277478) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171156)

It's funny how it always seems as if the next drive we purchase offers virtually limitless and impossible to use storage space but is never really enough [slashdot.org].

Re:Same as it ever was. (4, Interesting)

gnutoo (1154137) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171600)

Ugh. 20MB, 540MB, 5GB, soon 500GB all filled with binary crap over 25 years of use but free software changed all of that. I remember when 20MB seemed impossible to fill up. It was hard to do with nothing but text files but indeed adding a few games, AOL and a hand held scanner to a IBM XT clone cramped me for space. Then I remember when the 540 MB hard drive seemed like a vast space for text and images on a 486 box. It easily fit my old DOS stuff but then came Windows 95 and finally someone did me the "favor" of loaning me a copy of M$ Office so I could work with them and two 540MB drives was not enough. The same kind of cycle repeated itself with the next computer and a 5GB drive. Sooner than later it was filled with binary crap, starting with Windows 98. XP would have been impossible to run on the hardware and that's where I got off the treadmill. The same equipment has lasted to this day and was only replaced when I felt like having real hardware upgrades. Some of it, like a ten year old thinkpad, is still useful. It's also true that free software network storage has made it easier to get to the things I care about and drastically reduced my overall storage needs that way. Today, 500GB is way more than I need for my music and movies and I'll be able to buy a deeply discounted multi TB drive in a year or two when I feel pinched again.

It's easier to ride the backside of the upgrade wave than to be pushed and crushed in front of it.

Re:Same as it ever was. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171742)

Oh for fucks sake. I now avoid reading the comments in any story even remotely microsoft related because the conversations often get dominated by Twitter and his growing collection of sockpuppets (twitter, erris, gnutoo, mactrope, intheloo, willeyhill, among others).

This story doesnt have anything to do with microsoft, yet I still have to see this bullshit? Stop having conversations with yourself, Twitter. For god sake, don't you have anything better to do with your time? Some people are here for honest conversations and you ruin it for everyone.

Re:Bad Sector (1)

david.given (6740) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171200)

I used to have an uber-expanded 8088 computer of about the same vintage: a Zenith Z150 with passive backplane, ethernet, 1.5MB of RAM, 3.5" floppy, Hercules graphics --- and *two* 20MB Seagate MFM drives. Those things were awesome. Not only was the revving-jet-engine noise as they spun up seriously cool, but when the machine was turned on I didn't need any heaters on in the room...

I slightly miss those old MFM drives. While modern ones are far more sophisticated and generally better in every way, the old drives had a kind of mechanical elegance to them that the new ones don't. Also, big chunky rectangular red access LEDs.

Makes me nostalgic too (5, Funny)

explosivejared (1186049) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171230)

ll those drives amounted to 79 million terabytes of capacity, enough for 158 billion hours of digital video or 1.2 trillion hours of MP3 songs."

I remember the first time I put the whole Library of Congress on a hard drive. It brought tears to my eyes, as I felt so lucky. Of course, this was in 2007, so I still had a few hundred more gigs to fill up with wares and music. Still it was an important experience.

Hackable too! (1)

pegr (46683) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171280)

Any one else remember using an RLL controller with an MFM drive to get 50% more capacity? (And 200% more failures? ;)

Don't get me started on Perstor controllers... Those things were voodoo...

Re:Hackable too! (5, Funny)

Fast Thick Pants (1081517) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171754)

Hell yes... got a 30 megabyte drive that way, which lasted about a month. (But I didn't even need it for that long; I just wanted it make a 30 megabyte text file containing nothing but spaces. This was ARCed twice and ended up at 50k or so, and reserved as a "poison pill" upload for to DOS an unfriendly BBS that had a script in place to convert all ARCs to ZIPs. I was a rascal. I have reformed.)

Re:Makes me nostalgic too (1)

pegr (46683) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171360)

Ah yes... The days of MFM hard drives, when real mem low-level formatted their drives, and Steve Gibson was relevant...

Re:Makes me nostalgic too (5, Insightful)

EvilNTUser (573674) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171526)

How much is that in football fields?

Seriously, though, I don't understand why people feel the need to simplify things in slashdot submissions. Why would you write "79 million terabytes" when the proper way is both more understandable and more concise. Just say 79 exabytes or even just 79 EB. News for nerds, ok? We didn't smoke our way through high school.

Similarly, it would be more useful to define a quality level for some well known video codec and estimate how many hours that would be instead of just giving us a semirandom number. Not that even that is necessary, since the real news is Seagate's achievement.

The submitter shouldn't feel like I'm targeting him specifically. I just wish more people would take advantage of the fact that people on this site should have a basic understanding of things like SI prefixes. It would just be a nice touch to make things that small bit more readable.

Re:Makes me nostalgic too (1)

shamer (897211) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171694)

agreed.
some of my favorites;
when calculating
Weight:
          Boeng 747's
          elephants
Distance:
        football fields
        trips to the moon
        time around the earth
        from New York to LA
of course storage:
          mp3's
          DVD's
        * these really get my blood going, due to compression and so on.

Re:Bad Sector (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171314)

Today, a typical Seagate holds 1TB and cost just 1/5000th of a cent ($0.0002) per megabyte.
Verizon: Two dollars per megabyte?!

Re:Bad Sector (1)

MyDixieWrecked (548719) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171670)

Verizon: Two dollars per megabyte?!

actually... verizon would think it was 2 cents per MB... .02 cents is really 2 cents according to verizon. hehe.

Re:Bad Sector (1)

jschen (1249578) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171350)

To clarify, at about $200 for a 1 TB drive, that's $0.20 (20 cents) per gigabyte, or 0.02 cents (1/50 cent, or 1/5000 dollar) per megabyte.

Re:Bad Sector (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171760)

It's also important to remember inflation. $1,500 in 1979 is over $4700 today, so the cost was more like $1K per megabyte.

Storage, Another Part of the Windows Tax. (1, Troll)

willeyhill (1277478) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171080)

A large percentage of all that storage space has been sucked up by Windows and other binary files. Each time storage space expands considerably, Microsoft's storage demands do too. Vista starts at 10GB, roughly 1% of of the average 1TB drive, but their new indexing mechanism will suck multiples of that. "Backups" must be made of every system because of Microsoft's obnoxious registry and other anti copy technology won't allow for centralized image repositories.

Free software, by way of comparison, still takes up less than 2GB and it's always better to install fresh binaries from networked repositories. The savings in storage requirements start at an order of magnitude and get better depending on how large an organization you are. Tools like Red Hat's Global File System take advantage of all that extras storage space to provide users with high capacity and reliable storage for things that matter - the files and information created by people using their favorite tools.

Re:Storage, Another Part of the Windows Tax. (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171190)

The amount of space demanded by my film and lossless (FLAC) audio collection dwarf anything that a Windows operating system would.

Re:Storage, Another Part of the Windows Tax. (1)

willeyhill (1277478) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171284)

Sure, but that's stuff you want to have. You can have it once efficiently with free software or multiple times inefficiently on Microsoft. Vista's indexing system will make slow your system to a crawl and make backups of it all that will eat multiples of what you think you are starting with.

Re:Storage, Another Part of the Windows Tax. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171464)

Yeah, and you like, hardly ever use your operating system. That is 10 GB of pure dead weight.

mp3s (0, Offtopic)

youthoftoday (975074) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171096)

> Seagate, which claims to be the first company to ship a billion drives, says all those drives amounted to 79 million terabytes of capacity, enough for 158 billion hours of digital video or 1.2 trillion hours of MP3 songs

... illegally

Re:mp3s (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171176)

Which is pretty amazing when you think about it. Currently, 1/2 terabyte drives are the norm. I remember buying a computer 10 years ago, and 4 GB was more than enough. Things certainly have changed since the early days.

Re:mp3s (1)

spacerog (692065) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171386)

I remember buying a computer 10 years ago, and 4 GB was more than enough.

You must be new here. :P

My first hard drive was a Seagate. All 20MB of it. For $500.

It was for my Mac SE. You were supposed to remove one of the 800K floppies to install it but I left both floppy drives in and still managed to squeeze the drive into place. I remember thinking that it was a pretty neat hack. Then I promptly partitioned the drive into two 10MB chunks and copied ALL of my floppies at the time onto ONE of the partitions and ran a BBS off the other one.

Now I feel old, thanks.

- SR

Re:mp3s (2, Interesting)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171392)

Yeah, but nobody expected to be ripping entire DVD collections to HD for use in a media server back then. Now it's economical to do it, especially if you've already got a PC doing DVR work. At less than 20c/GB, it's less than a dollar to rip a typical movie (without the extras and ads) to a server. That compares favorably to putting discs into a jukebox, and has the advantage of speed and playing multiple streams at once.

Now that HD content is out, we need the capacities to go up another order of magnitude so that storing HD is as easy*/cheap as SD.

*I buy discs, but download the rips. My setup is only 720p, so it's easier to get someone else's recode at 720p than do it myself, and it takes less space on my server. With 2TB in DVDs and recorded content off TiVo/OTA, I'm always worried about bumping into the limit on my unRaid box and having to buy more drives.

Re:mp3s (5, Funny)

Waffle Iron (339739) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171342)

1.2 trillion hours of MP3 songs

... illegally

With statutory damages of $150,000 per CD, it looks like the RIAA has been cheated out of at least $1.8e17 in revenue. No wonder the music industry is hurting.

Wrong photo! (4, Informative)

pegr (46683) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171126)

The article has a photo of a drive that's supposed to be the ST506. It looks more like an ST225, as the ST506 was full height. Jeez, you'd think Computer World would get the technical details right!

Of course, maybe you have to be over forty to know the difference... ;) Get off my lawn!

Re:Wrong photo! (2, Interesting)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171306)

You're right. The ST506 was full-height, (remember the squeaky monkey-like noise it made?) the ST225 was half-height - somewhere in my basement, I still have an ST225 I paid $250 for.

Re:Wrong photo! (1)

wombatmobile (623057) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171420)

The article has a photo of a drive that's supposed to be the ST506. It looks more like an ST225, as the ST506 was full height.

The article pictures what looks like a 40MB 5.25" (half-height) drive, the ST412.

As you say, the ST506 [pcworld.com] is a full height drive, twice the height (and weight) of the drive pictured.

Re:Wrong photo! (1)

scsirob (246572) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171654)

Absolutely right! The ST506 was full-heigth, 306 Cylinders, 2 heads, 17 sectors per track, 512 bytes per sector.

My first harddisk was even smaller, only 4MB. It was part of a Grundy 8200 series CP/M business machine. That system couldn't boor from harddisk, it needed to load the bootstrap from 8" floppy...

Usable stats (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171128)

Seagate, which claims to be the first company to ship a billion drives, says all those drives amounted to 79 million terabytes of capacity, enough for 158 billion hours of digital video or 1.2 trillion hours of MP3 songs."
But how much pr0n is that?

Re:Usable stats (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171416)

Seagate, which claims to be the first company to ship a billion drives, says all those drives amounted to 79 million terabytes of capacity, enough for 158 billion hours of digital video or 1.2 trillion hours of MP3 songs.
But how much pr0n is that?
All of it.

Re:Usable stats (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171434)

Roughly 1.31666 * 10(14) average porn movies.

The most important unit of measurement (4, Informative)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171134)

That's also roughly 4 million Libraries of Congress.

Re:The most important unit of measurement (1)

StonedYoda47 (732257) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171234)

I was about to ask this important question, but am glad to see it already answered. Thank you.

Re:The most important unit of measurement (1)

qw0ntum (831414) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171362)

That's also roughly 4 million Libraries of Congress.
Something I've always wondered... when measuring a Library of Congress, are we talking about the text data from the books, or each page of the book as perhaps an image? I'd imagine that for many of those books, there is a good deal of relevant information that is not in the book's text, such as the condition of the book, etc. Not to mention the many historical documents I am sure are in the Library; the information contained within them is richer than just their text. Has this been taken into account in your calculations? :P

Re:The most important unit of measurement (1)

oni (41625) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171506)

158 billion hours of digital video

or 18 million years of porn.

Having purchased a few Seagate products... (1, Flamebait)

AioKits (1235070) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171138)

... let me know when they ship their billionth working hard drive. Sounds harsh, but I have not had any luck with their gear. Could just be me. Could be Oklahoma is where they send all their crappy stuff. I could be a Chinese jet pilot!

Seriously tho, kudos for moving that much hardware.

Re:Having purchased a few Seagate products... (1)

techpawn (969834) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171266)

let me know when they ship their billionth working hard drive.
That was my first thought, does this include numerous returns? IF so they may be up to two billion...

Re:Having purchased a few Seagate products... (1)

afidel (530433) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171338)

Uh, our failure rate for Seagate drives is 0.5% per year, you're doing something horribly wrong.

Re:Having purchased a few Seagate products... (1)

AioKits (1235070) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171448)

Uh, our failure rate for Seagate drives is 0.5% per year, you're doing something horribly wrong.
Yeah, I suppose I should stop cleaning them in the dishwasher prior to use... I mean, what the hell do I know about my own experiences with their products as you've this AMAZING failure rate that can clearly contradict my use of their stuff. Maybe I can hire you to just touch the Seagate gear for me as I am obviously the cold hand of death to them.

Re:Having purchased a few Seagate products... (3, Interesting)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171382)

Everybody I know has some vendor they swear by, and some vendor they think is just terrible. I know people who think Western Digital is the best, and that Maxtor is crap. I know people who say the exact opposite. None of these people buy enough hard drives to have any real say in which one is better than the other. Google probably buys enough drives, but they don't buy the consumer level desktop drives either, so I don't know if I'd trust their opinion much either.

Re:Having purchased a few Seagate products... (5, Funny)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171496)

Google probably buys enough drives, but they don't buy the consumer level desktop drives either, so I don't know if I'd trust their opinion much either.

Yeah, they only buy the secret black market drives that were forged with the blood of a newborn goat and never fail, but smell faintly like souls burning whenever they spin up.

Re:Having purchased a few Seagate products... (1)

AioKits (1235070) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171516)

Yeah, they only buy the secret black market drives that were forged with the blood of a newborn goat and never fail, but smell faintly like souls burning whenever they spin up.
I need these drives... WTB [Seagate Soul Demon 500G] drive!

Re:Having purchased a few Seagate products... (1)

tompaulco (629533) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171618)

Could be Oklahoma is where they send all their crappy stuff.
Careful now. Oklahoma used to be where they were made.

yes, but how many libraries of congress is that? (0, Redundant)

Grokmoo (1180039) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171140)

Strange that they use such antiquated units of measure as hours of video or MP3 songs. Clearly, the useful measure would be Libraries of Congress (LoCs).

1tb = typical? (1)

qw0ntum (831414) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171144)

I find that hard to believe. Looking around their products pages [seagate.com], it appears that 1TB is the highest capacity offered for some of their models. Am I just missing something?

Either way, congrats to Seagate, it is a very remarkable milestone.

Re:1tb = typical? (4, Funny)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171688)

I find that hard to believe. Looking around their products pages [seagate.com], it appears that 1TB is the highest capacity offered for some of their models. Am I just missing something?
Yes.

Customer: "I want one of those congress library storing things for the computing machine I bought for my kid".
A: "What capacity? 1 Tb is the typical size. Less than that and you risk your kid turning gay overnight. And die."

Its all relative (2, Interesting)

phpmysqldev (1224624) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171160)

While todays hard drives may be much larger, its not going to be long before we move on. I remember when I got my first 100mb HD and thinking "wow this is it ill never need any more storage than this". But now we know that as HD capacity increases so will the features and size software and media. Think of how big the first windows distro was and how big Vista is. Soon we'll all have HD DVD rips and real life quality music filling our new 100TB HDs

In short, we as consumers don't need to worry about how to use this multitude of ever expanding space; software and media companies will do it for us. ;)

Re:Its all relative (4, Interesting)

rlk (1089) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171400)

The problem is that bandwidth (and for that matter latency, only more so) hasn't kept pace with capacity. So yes, we have a lot more storage capacity, but getting the data onto and off the disk hasn't improved by nearly as much.

It's relatively not *too* bad if you're working with large files that can stream. A system I bought in 1994 had a 420 MB disk, which was state of the art at the time. Its bandwidth was on the order of 1 MB/sec. In contrast, the 500 MB disks I'm using now get about 60 MB/sec (internal SATA, at any rate -- USB disks are still limited to 20 MB/sec). That's about 1200x the storage with 60x the transfer rate, so the relative transfer performance (a word I just made up) is about 5% of what it was then.

Latency's another matter altogether. Both seek time and rotational latency are about half what they were then (rotational latency based on 7200 RPM today vs. 3600 RPM in the mid 1990's). So if you're latency-bound, you're really in tough shape. If you're streaming ogg files or what have you, you don't have this problem, but if you're paging to disk (or use applications that create a lot of small files, or scan directories containing lots o'files) you're really in a world of hurt.

Enterprise SAS disks tend to be a lot lower in capacity (74 and 150 GB are common sizes), but rotate at 15000 RPM. So you're spreading out your data over a lot more disks, improving your net throughput, and you're suffering much less from latency. If your application's multi-threaded, with plenty of threads performing queued I/O and plenty of workers, you can make progress even while you're waiting for other I/O ops to complete.

Seagate: Over 1 Billion Sold (2, Funny)

denverradiosucks (653647) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171162)

I would love to see a huge sign outside Seagate Headquarters similar to that of McDonald's. Anybody with Photoshop skills and in the mood to waste their time? I would love to see this.

Re:Seagate: Over 1 Billion Sold (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171344)

Find an image of Seagate HQ first.

Best not to brag (4, Funny)

russotto (537200) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171186)

Seagate, which claims to be the first company to ship a billion drives, says all those drives amounted to 79 million terabytes of capacity, enough for 158 billion hours of digital video or 1.2 trillion hours of MP3 songs.


Immediately following the announcement, the MPAA and RIAA each sued Seagate for 5 quintillion dollars in contributory and vicarious copyright infringement.

tag "spam" (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171188)

tag "spam"

Capacity references elude me. (2, Funny)

Corf (145778) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171224)

At 93 ft^3 per unit, how many Volkswagen Beetles full of telephone directories does that equate to?

Re:Capacity references elude me. (1)

SpinyNorman (33776) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171524)

And just as importantly, if you stacked them all up, would it get you to the moon or not?

Yet more fudged Seagate arithmetic (3, Informative)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171226)

I'm guessing that they haven't sold 1 billion Seagate branded drives, but that they're including all the drives made by all the other drive companies they've bought in the past.

Units? (5, Funny)

sootman (158191) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171232)

Wait... is that their 1,000,000,000the hard drive, or their 1,073,741,824th?

Re:Units? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171456)

Of course manufacturers of storage always used proper SI prefixes. ST-506 had 32 sectors per track, 256 bytes per sector and 612 tracks.

Capacity = 32 * 256 * 612 = 5,013,504 bytes

ST-506 was 5 megabytes disc drive.

Re:Units? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171638)

1,000,000,000th. Remember that companies like to use the decimal system, but that's just silly. The real reason is because they want people to believe they are getting more. Which would you like? A 1000gb or a 938gb? (trick question they are the same :))

Yes but how much is this (1)

jalet (36114) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171304)

in the "Library of Congress" and "Football Field" units ?

Re:Yes but how much is this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171412)

You might want to consider searching the page before you post.

Re:Yes but how much is this (1)

jalet (36114) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171562)

> You might want to consider searching the page before you post.

You must be new here !

Imagine that... (4, Interesting)

onion2k (203094) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171310)

158 billion hours is a shade over 18 million years. If you had a camera fixed to record for the past 18 million years you'd only have started in the Miocene era ... it'd all look really quite modern. It'd have been a bit more grassy, but there'd be recognisable mammals like deer and wolves, birds like ducks and grouse.

It sounds a like long time, but it really isn't.

how much do the fake clouds cost? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171312)

considering the quandary most of US are in, it's a fair question. the much more important/over riding question would be; where have the real clouds gone? pay attention, it doesn't cost much, & can lead to yOUR survival. let yOUR conscience be yOUR guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. there are still some choices. if they do not suit you, consider the likely results of continuing to follow the corepirate nazi hypenosys story LIEn, whereas anything of relevance is replaced almost instantly with pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking propaganda or 'celebrity' trivia 'foam'. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on yOUR brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071229/ap_on_sc/ye_climate_records;_ylt=A0WTcVgednZHP2gB9wms0NUE
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080108/ts_alt_afp/ushealthfrancemortality;_ylt=A9G_RngbRIVHsYAAfCas0NUE
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?em&ex=1199336400&en=c4b5414371631707&ei=5087%0A

is it time to get real yet? A LOT of energy is being squandered in attempts to keep US in the dark. in the end (give or take a few 1000 years), the creators will prevail (world without end, etc...), as it has always been. the process of gaining yOUR release from the current hostage situation may not be what you might think it is. butt of course, most of US don't know, or care what a precarious/fatal situation we're in. for example; the insidious attempts by the felonious corepirate nazi execrable to block the suns' light, interfering with a requirement (sunlight) for us to stay healthy/alive. it's likely not good for yOUR health/memories 'else they'd be bragging about it? we're intending for the whoreabully deceptive (they'll do ANYTHING for a bit more monIE/power) felons to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather', as well as a # of other things/events.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying

dictator style micro management has never worked (for very long). it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & softwar gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster. meanwhile, you can help to stop the bleeding (loss of life & limb);

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/28/vermont.banning.bush.ap/index.html

the bleeding must be stopped before any healing can begin. jailing a couple of corepirate nazi hired goons would send a clear message to the rest of the world from US. any truthful look at the 'scorecard' would reveal that we are a society in decline/deep doo-doo, despite all of the scriptdead pr ?firm? generated drum beating & flag waving propaganda that we are constantly bombarded with. is it time to get real yet? please consider carefully ALL of yOUR other 'options'. the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption. fortunately there's an 'army' of light bringers, coming yOUR way. the little ones/innocents must/will be protected. after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit? for each of the creators' innocents harmed in any way, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available. 'vote' with (what's left in) yOUR wallet, & by your behaviors. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable. some of US should consider ourselves somewhat fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate. it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc.... as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis. concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order. 'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

meanwhile, the life0cidal philistines continue on their path of death, debt, & disruption for most of US. gov. bush denies health care for the little ones;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/10/03/bush.veto/index.html

whilst demanding/extorting billions to paint more targets on the bigger kids;

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/12/bush.war.funding/index.html

& pretending that it isn't happening here;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3086937.ece
all is not lost/forgotten/forgiven

(yOUR elected) president al gore (deciding not to wait for the much anticipated 'lonesome al answers yOUR questions' interview here on /.) continues to attempt to shed some light on yOUR foibles. talk about reverse polarity;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3046116.ece

They forgot one capacity statistic (1)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171358)

Seagate, which claims to be the first company to ship a billion drives, says all those drives amounted to 79 million terabytes of capacity, enough for 158 billion hours of digital video or 1.2 trillion hours of MP3 songs."
-OR- 14.73 TBytes of failed backups!

LoC (0, Redundant)

Sean0michael (923458) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171388)

all those drives amounted to 79 million terabytes of capacity, enough for 158 billion hours of digital video or 1.2 trillion hours of MP3 songs."
Who cares? Those units of measure are completely irrelevant. I want to know how many Library Of Congress' all those drives can store.

hay! how much is that in... (4, Funny)

revlayle (964221) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171424)

Library of Cong... no wait... was done

How about a beowulf clus.... no... no makes no sense.
Heh, I, for one, welcome our large-capacity-cheap-per-megabyte-storage.... argh


ok fine - no one wants to hear it!

DOES IT FUCKING RUN LINUX?

I'm amazed (2, Interesting)

SeePage87 (923251) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171428)

Just thinking about how much of that storage is filled by redundant data blows my mind. It seems like such an inefficient structure. Imagine how much could be saved if there was only one copy of each song (lossless, why not), each movie, etc, and instead the trillions of dollars spent on storage, we spent slightly less trillions to build up massive networking infrastructure and a few server farms that make it all accessible on the fly. Obviously unrealistic, but a fascinating idea. I have approaching 2.5TB of media at home, but the vast majority of it just sits there essentially never used. I only need it locally because my home network has the bandwidth to access it whenever I want. But even so, I only use a small part of that bandwidth an hour or two a day at most. Getting rid of redundant storage could realistically reduce storage needs 99% (ever see a torrent with 100 seeds? All the time), and bandwidth consumption wouldn't be too many times greater (by some measures) than YouTube uses, because by far most of the time we aren't consuming highly dense media. You'd need a world with completely free culture, though. Just a thought.

1/5000th of a cent != $0.0002 (0)

devnullkac (223246) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171462)

$0.0002 is 1/50th of a cent, 1/5000th of a dollar. Guess they don't keep math literate fact checkers on staff :-(

Working ST506 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171536)

I actually have a working ST506 drive here, installed in the expansion ProFile hard drive for my Apple Lisa (Actually running the Mac XL stuff now). I wrote this thinking there'd be some sort of Geek Street Cred for that, but I think it really just means that I'm an old packrat.

Wasteful (2, Insightful)

moxitek (744525) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171644)

This makes me wonder how many of those drives are leeching heavy metals into the ground water tables while they rot in landfills or metal scrappers in China. Computer HDDs have to be one of THE most wasteful consumer electronic devices ever created.

Redundant data (2, Interesting)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171660)

all those drives amounted to 79 million terabytes of capacity, enough for 158 billion hours of digital video or 1.2 trillion hours of MP3 songs.
This just made me realize how much redundent data there is in the world. Think about just how many copies of some media there are and imagine what could be saved if we could find a way to do highspeed, centralized, streaming server for multimedia. Yeah, you wouldn't be able to listen to your music everywhere you go, but does the world really need a million digital copies of the new Brittany Spears cd?

Re:Redundant data (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171776)

All that centralized server hardware and network capacity for streaming. Imagine what could be saved if we could find a way to store it all locally.

oblig (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171664)

A billion drives.

Thats alot of porn!

142 Million Wind Chimes! (2, Funny)

starglider29a (719559) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171680)

I tore an ST-238 apart after it died the 3rd time. The two platters were SO BEAUTIFUL, their iridescent copper color. And they rang like bells when you suspended them. Those and a couple more modern, smaller, silvery drives and they make the most lovely wind chimes.

Now, I'm trying to figure out how to coat my bike tank in that coloration.

Or 68.5 Exbibytes ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#23171748)



If you like the new uniambigious units

- Garick

Too bad transfer times haven't kept up (1)

Jeff1946 (944062) | more than 5 years ago | (#23171796)

Looked up the ST506 specs. 3600 rpm and 612 tracks. Thus I calculate it can read 60 tracks/sec or about 500 kbytes/sec or 10 secs to read the entire disk. Current 1 Tb disk drives can read about 50 Mb/sec which means to read the entire disk would take about 20,000 secs or about 6 hours. Didn't find how much it weighed but recall these old drives weighed somewhat around 10 lbs and actual MTBF was about 1 year for an office environment. Also recall computer had to wait 5-10 secs on boot up for drive to get up to speed. The specs for the ST-506 had a date of 1990. Of course then the internet was a twinkle in Al Gore's eye.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...