Western Digital Announces 1TB Mobile HD 252
Western Digital has announced a couple of new 2.5-inch mobile hard drives weighing in at 750GB and 1TB. The drives feature a 3 GB/s transfer rate and Western Digital's "WhisperDrive" tech along with specialized shock tolerance and head parking to ensure durability. "Both models are shipping now through various channels; the 1TB model is currently available in My Passport Essential SE USB drives. The Scorpio Blue 750GB model has a suggested sticker price of $190 while the Scorpio Blue 1TB is a mere $250. The My Passport Essential SE 1 TB portable drive is $299.99 USD and the 750 GB model is $199.99 USD."
Now I can upgrade my PS3 (Score:4, Informative)
to 1 TB since you can put 2.5" hard drives in there.
Re:Now I can upgrade my PS3 (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Now I can upgrade my PS3 (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
to 1 TB since you can put 2.5" hard drives in there.
Maybe not. According to an article [eweek.com] on eWeek it's height is 12.5mm. The PS3 probably has more clearance than most if not all laptops so it may fit in. I was hoping it'd fit in my MacBook Pro but I doubt it. And the thing is is I replaced the 160 GB HDD my MBP came with with the biggest drive I could find for it a 320 GB drive a few months ago.
About all the drives are good for is USB or Firewire, however I already have a 1.5 TB external drive.
Falcon
Keeping up their mojo (Score:4, Insightful)
Having just had to deal with a string of bad 1 TB+ size Seagate drives going bad (100% failure rate in 6 months, baby!) and switching to WD with good results, I have to say that I hope WD keeps up their good name.
I tend to find that none of the manufacturers are consistently better or worse than the others. Seagate has a good line of firmware, and for a year or two their drives are excellent and reliable. They they go sour and it's a good idea to switch to somebody else for a while. They go off and on, back and forth. For the past few years I've steered towards Seagate. Now, I'm a WD fan. I've loved Maxtor, Western Digital, Seagate, Quantum, Fujitsu, Conner, and Micropolis. (remember them?)
All have had their good runs and bad runs. Some of the bad runs killed the company. (eg: IBM's Desk-star "death-star" line)
Go WD!
Cool. Now my music will change again. (Score:4, Interesting)
Finally: Done.
Re: (Score:2)
If it's just sitting there, why use a more expensive 2.5" drive?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Cool. Now my music will change again. (Score:4, Insightful)
elegance - don't have to deal with the freakin' wall wart from a larger drive. Also, WD says the WD TV is optimised to work with WD passport drives. I don't really know what they mean by that, but I guess it is safe to consider it a good thing.
Really? Really....? You really think they say it works best with THEIR drives for any reason other than to make you think you should buy their drives? It's just marketing fluff, like when Kraft Mac and Cheese says it tastes great with Kraft Parmesan cheese on top, as if any other Parmesan cheese isn't going to provide the same taste sensation.
-Taylor
Re: (Score:2)
Four words: Specially Activated Flavour Crystals (tm)
Re:Cool. Now my music will change again. (Score:4, Insightful)
There is no "Kraft Parmesan". There is a product called something like it - even containing cellulose if I recall correctly - but it is not Parmesan cheese [wikipedia.org]. Kraft's abomination is an attempt to identify a crappy, industrialized low quality item as a high quality, hand made product of specific origin. In other news: It is only champagne if you make it from special grapes from a special region in a special way. If it isn't, it is sparkling wine.
Re: (Score:2)
There is no "Kraft Parmesan". There is a product called something like it - even containing cellulose if I recall correctly - but it is not Parmesan cheese [wikipedia.org]. Kraft's abomination is an attempt to identify a crappy, industrialized low quality item as a high quality, hand made product of specific origin. In other news: It is only champagne if you make it from special grapes from a special region in a special way. If it isn't, it is sparkling wine.
Actually that's exactly what they call it. They don't call it Parmigiano-Reggiano, but they do call it Parmesan.
http://www.indojin.com/shop-online/catalog/images/kraft-parmesan.gif [indojin.com]
Of course it's almost nothing like good Parmigiano-Reggiano, but if we're being pedantic, you are wrong in saying there is no "Kraft Parmesan", even if they are wrong in calling it that.
-Taylor
Re:Cool. Now my music will change again. (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly, I hate when the Plebians call things based on what they look like, taste like, and are manufactured in identical processes too, instead of where they were made! Indeed the other day I saw a man in the deli order a sandwich! How absurd, as if you could get a layered meat and bread product assembled in Sandwich, in the Kent region of England, in a deli in the United States. I politely tried to correct him, but he persisted in his error, and after my repeated attempts, told me to "Shut-up and fuck off".
Re:Cool. Now my music will change again. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's both the ports and the drives, but more likely to be the drives these days. There are low powered ports out there (G4 Powerbooks were really bad), but as these 2.5" drives get bigger they also seem to be sucking more power.
These days it seems most (certainly all the ones I've used) disks above say 160GB now need extra power - eg a USB Y cable or separate power cable. Even on ports that previously ran 80GB disks just fine. Maybe the move from IDE to SATA might also have something to do with increased po
Record my life, I guess (Score:3, Funny)
I guess I'll just record my life so I don't forget where I put my keys? I'm sure I'm suffering from lack of creativity in my old age, but that's all I think can think of anymore!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I've loved IT for decades, and this level of data storage still boggles my mind. At every step, I could think of applications for greater storage - "oh, more OS space is needed", "wow, music would be nice", "movies... obviously", "make an incremental restore point at any point in time"... ok, now what???
I guess I'll just record my life so I don't forget where I put my keys? I'm sure I'm suffering from lack of creativity in my old age, but that's all I think can think of anymore!
Yeah, I was just thinking of that last week. If you read the Wikipedia Entries on Petabytes and Exabytes, and Zettabytes it really starts to make you wonder what we will be using all that space for. On 50 meg drives it was more space for documents, then a couple of gigs and you had just enough space for all your music. On Terabyte drives you can store lots and lots of BluRay rips, something we didn't even think about ten years ago. A good movie collection might still be a few TB though. Beyond that though,
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Hmmm... let's see. I've got about a terabyte of stuff that I've accumulated over the years. Every CD/DVD/Video cassette I've ever bought or borrowed from a friend has been digitized, reencoded and written to a hard drive. That's 100-300 MB per CD and somewhere between 700 and 8000MB per movie. Over the years, I'm up to a 120GB music collection and 800+GB of video... _without_ downloading a single one. If you're a pack rat, you'll fill a terabyte pretty easily, even with legal means :)
If I'd downloaded and k
Re: (Score:2)
Borrowing a DVD from a friend and ripping it is the same as pirating it.
*note - I'm not attempting to throw stones here, just stating a point that just because you haven't downloaded a single one, doesn't mean you are better than everyone else who has.
Re: (Score:2)
At every step, I could think of applications for greater storage - "oh, more OS space is needed", "wow, music would be nice", "movies... obviously", "make an incremental restore point at any point in time"... ok, now what???
And you know what... The Exchange Administrators still only give 50mb for your mailbox 10 years later. ;)
Seriously, what is up with that... My home computer has more hard drive space than many business servers combined.
Re: (Score:2)
Whilst data density has kept increasing, data transfer rates have not. Even doing an offline defrag or repair on a 10GB Exchange store is going to piss of a lot of people for a good few hours at least. What happens when your exchange store is 500GB and hosts 1000 users mailboxes and something goes wrong?
Also backup systems haven't kept up either, backing all that data up is another problem entirely
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, what is up with that... My home computer has more hard drive space than many business servers combined.
Your home PC has to store 1 persons stuff, and you personally can sport the money for you. Should the company provide a terabyte per person? Why? You're not storing dozens and dozens of movies on the office server. 1 movie = several thousand emails/spreadsheets/text documents.
Re: (Score:2)
I won't be able to win if I argue with you :)
If I say: well if 6 people send me each a 10MB file then I'll be over quota
you will probably say: email is not for sending big files, you should use "blah"
I will counter that it's the most convenient way for off-network or off-company people to send me the files
But you will say this is abuse of email and if you were my sys admin, you would hurt me.
Then I will say technology is here to serve me not so I conform to it and if everything was used for its original pur
Re: (Score:2)
If I say: well if 6 people send me each a 10MB file then I'll be over quota
Trust me...I hate this crap too. Managing not only my space, but also managing what other people send me. But no matter how much space on the mail server is granted, someone will bitch about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First, we will see purists who say they want to store movies uncompressed. That's about a terabyte per movie. So your typical movie collection (including your kids' movies and movies of your kids and movies of your friends' kids and a bunch of stuff listed on IMDB - that's easily a petabyte. Then you figure we'll need 16-bit color, and 10Kx10K resolution and you are easily in the exabyte range. Then you add third dimension and you add another four zeros. Etc.
I have said this before and I will say this again
Seriously, is that much space neccessary ? (Score:2)
I can understand having this much space at home, for movies, TV series, pictures and the like, but on the go ?
it's the same thing with iPods. the 30 GB model I had was enough to put all my music there, but I only listened to a small subset of it, nothing that a cell phone with a 4 GB couldn't handle.
so, wouldn't it be better to have a smaller, but more energy efficient and thougher disk better ?
then, at home just load and unload what you need, and that's it.
Re:Seriously, is that much space neccessary ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Imagine being a photographer on the Paris-Dakar race [wikipedia.org] where you're shooting hundreds (thousands?) of photos on a high-res DSLR for three weeks (a week before hand, the race, the aftermath) out in the field. There are a ton of week long sailing races [flickr.com] that any one photographer might blow through 1000 photos a day. Highest quality 1080p is said to consume 1GB/minute. How many hours of video could national geographic tape with just three of these in the field with a MacBook Pro? Lots of options for pros. Consumers will buy these but rarely use them to their potential.
Re:Seriously, is that much space neccessary ? (Score:4, Insightful)
And then he drops something the size of a cigarette pack into the drink or into the sand and it's all gone. They need to make sure they buy 2.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And then he drops something the size of a cigarette pack into the drink or into the sand and it's all gone. They need to make sure they buy 2.
Not a problem.
This is a business where a Nikon lens can set you back $5-$10,000, easy - and the $30,000 lens isn't unknown. Sigma Ultra-Telephoto Lens [amazon.com]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Highest quality 1080p is said to consume 1GB/minute.
Is that right? I thought completely uncompressed 1080p was supposed to be something like 3Gbps. Looking at the wikipedia [wikipedia.org]:
The movie industry has embraced 1080p24 as a digital mastering format in both native 24p form and in 24PsF form.... For live broadcast applications, a high-definition progressive scan format operating at 1080p at 50 or 60 frames per second is currently being evaluated... as it has doubled the data rate of current 50 or 60 fields interlaced 1920 Ã-- 1080 from 1.485 Gbit/s to nomin
Re: (Score:2)
I googled h.264 gb per second storage and 1gb/sec was the 8th result or so. I make no claims to it's accuracy. Its a good, round ballpark number though.
fun fact about movie standards (and I know this because I used to be an art house movie theater projectionist) is that most digital transfers (to "film") are 4096x2048 already. 1080p as a standard is a huge step back in quality to what you're already seeing as "digital". The only plus right now of getting rid of film is financial and economical reas
Re:Seriously, is that much space neccessary ? (Score:4, Interesting)
fun fact about movie standards (and I know this because I used to be an art house movie theater projectionist) is that most digital transfers (to "film") are 4096x2048 already. 1080p as a standard is a huge step back in quality to what you're already seeing as "digital".
I don't have the sources now but it was a study on resolution in theaters. Basically a good master negative of a film can have 1500-2000 lines of resolution, but even the best analog cinema prints had only 800-1000 lines of resolution. So digital 1080p movies on digital screens are no worse than before. However, analog film directly scanned to digital is very impressive and probably needs a 4096x2048 (4K) camera to match. Fortunately things are progressing fast and the RED Scarlet coming this year should bring 3K to the 3000$ mark and 4K below 10000$. Compared to all the other costs, that's not much. Hell, even 9K IMAX should drop below 50000$ this year. Personally I'm most impressed with the prosonsumer cams though, it's amazing what they pack in a small HD camera and it gets better every year.
Re:Seriously, is that much space neccessary ? (Score:5, Informative)
3 Gbps = uncompressed 1080p60 video, used for high-end interconnects and such. Recordings are almost always made compressed, even in professional cameras. AVCHD has a maximum of 24 Mbps = 180MB/minute, there's probably more exotic format for huge movie production cameras but even cameras in the 2000$-5000$ range use AVCHD since it takes a helluva camera to capture more detail than that. The rest is basicly to avoid generational loss so a pipeline looks like:
Camera -> (lossy) -> RAW -> (lossless editing, filtering, special effects etc.) -> Movie -> (lossy) -> final encode for consumer.
You may think it sounds a lot but video compresses very, very well along in the x, y and time axis. In fact, the better the camera the better it usually compresses because everything is clean while noisy, grainy and flickery video eats bandwidth like crazy. I guess if you're shooting staged movie shots with tons of explosions you'll hook up the camera via one of these 3 Gbps interconnects to a real storage kit and save it uncompressed directly, but then you'll need something much faster than this disk anyway.
On a related note, a lot of the videos today are basicly just "filling out the disk" of a BluRay, they don't have that amount of detail. You can tell when there's 1080p reencodes that you need a magnifying class to tell is a reencode. At BluRay sizes we should have had 2160p video instead, you'd get much more detail for 50GB - not that many can tell anyway. So you don't really need all that much space except when you're working with uncompressed intermediaries, but that's what the huge workstations with attached SANs are for.
Re: (Score:2)
3Gb/sec is the SATA interface speed. There's no way in hell the spinning disk will give you 3Gb/sec.
Re: (Score:2)
The comment I replied to said HD was 3 Gbps, he said that because HD-SDI/3G-SDI [wikipedia.org] is 3 Gbps and that was the interface I was talking about throughout my post. High-end equipment will have those to handle raw HD in realtime. I probably should have spelled that out in a post where it could be confused with the SATA 3Gbps interface.
Re: (Score:2)
is 1080p still a movie industry mastering format? don't they master at 2k and 4k nowadays?
or 8K. For example Baraka on Blu-Ray was transferred at 8K. I just watched it last week after receiving my copy on Blu-Ray from Amazon. I am very happy with this mode of consumption and don't want to even think about the hassle time and expense of trying to download something like that.
Re: (Score:2)
so, wouldn't it be better to have a smaller, but more energy efficient and thougher disk better ?
But making smaller, more energy efficient disks also mean that it's easier to fit bigger, higher capacity disks into the same packaging. It's part of the same deal.
I mean, yes, I agree with what you're saying. Putting this drive in my laptop would be overkill. My laptop is currently only using 25 GB. But the nice thing about having lots of different options is everyone can get what they want. With the new flash-based notebook drives, I can get a small, fast, energy-efficient drive, and with this relea
Re: (Score:2)
I have the same thought.
When I bought my MSI Wind, I decided to upgrade the HDD to a 320GB merely because I wanted the faster 7200rpm and because it was fairly cheap. I then put the old drive in my PS3 so it didn't go to waste. The old drive from the PS3 is now my OS drive for my Media Center.
I think with all of my utilities and OS it's taking up maybe 6GB? There's probably some music on there, too.
I keep all of my media on my Media Center and that is because its in my living room. Music, TV Shows, Movies,
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Some of us don't enjoy having our data spread out all over the place on multiple systems with multiple drives. I don't want to have to worry about if I'm going to want some file while I'm traveling, so why not just take everything? That's what these allow people to do.
Re: (Score:2)
I like spreading my data out, keeping it in different places, redundantly. And the My Passport form factor fits in a bank safe deposit drawer with lots of room to spare.
Re: (Score:2)
I can understand having this much space at home, for movies, TV series, pictures and the like, but on the go ?
I actually use my MSI Wind netbook as more-or-less my primary machine nowadays. The main problem I had with the netbook is the lack of a DVD drive, so my solution was to just spend $100 for a 500GB 2.5" hard drive and copy images of every DVD I own to it. I take my netbook almost everywhere since it's so light, and it's quite handy to be able to show any movie from my collection whenever I'm at a friend's place. It's also been handy for offloading several gigabytes worth of photos/videos from my digital cam
Re: (Score:2)
I have a big honkin' fileserver at home, but I'm not always there.
Then plug in your 3G modem, MiFi router, or phone with a tether plan, and mount it remotely. Of course, it's not for everybody; some people don't find it worth $60/mo, and others find it too expensive for the 5 GB/mo cap that all the carriers enforce.
games take a rediculous amount of space nowadays
DS games aren't more than 128 MB. Or is that more "greeniculous"?
Re: (Score:2)
OK, I'm convinced. where can i get one of these here in brasil ???
Parity with desktops now (Score:2)
Roughly two 2.5" drives fit in the space of a 3.5" drive (using common adapters). So with a standard two-drive 2.5" to 3.5" adapter (such as a Bay Rafter), you can now have 2TB with 2.5" or 3.5" drives as your choice.
What might this be useful for? It would reduce the space needed for a RAID-5 array. For example, you could have four drives in two 3.5" slots, running in RAID-5, 3TB usable. With desktop drives, you could at best do RAID-1 with 2TB usable.
It also potentially could have performance benefits. It'
Re: (Score:2)
It actually is clear -- it is 5200rpm, 12ms seek, 8MB buffer.
(at least it is clear if you download the spec sheets from WD)
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why I will stick to my seagate 7200RPM 500G drive :)
WD pulled the same thing when they launched their 2TB 3.5" drives, they all originally came out as "green" drives, which means 5200rpm spindle speed.
Sweet Zombie Jesus that's so cool!!! (Score:2)
Yes, now laptop computers can have a whole terabyte to get bashed around, lost and stolen! Yeah!
No, seriously it's Sweet Zombie Jesus level of coolness. Really.
Reliability? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's a lot of bits and bytes in a very small space... what's the expected Real Life Span of one of those? I mean it would make a great backup solution, but would you really trust it over (or at least on par with) say, a 3.5" 1TB internal hard drive? Most people I know use these to backup their photos/home movies (pirated media's not worth backing up in most cases, and can be had for free more or less instantly nowadays with BT; home movies are only archived on one computer typically).
Personally, I'm wary of keeping anything on a drive much larger than 300GB for long term data storage.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't knob who steals media on the high seas?
But when you *download* media from the net, there are many rare things to keep. Some of them so valuable, that you might never ever see anyone on this planet have it again.
I own music that there are only 7 pressed vinyls of on the whole planet. I own videos of rare events that you can't get off the net at any chance.
I own movies in full-hd, with german and enlish ac3 streams, two comment streams and full chapters. Try to find something like that on the net.
Beli
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I'm wary of keeping anything on a drive much larger than 300GB for long term data storage.
Why the arbitrary figure? On every announcement of a new drive size, people always wonder about the reliability because of the seemingly huge size. I recall this being said about 1GB drives, and now we're at 2k times that size.
I really can't say I've seen a reliability difference based on differences newness of the drive or the absolute capacity. If you're not backing up, you're risking the loss of your data, regardless of the size of the hard drive. It doesn't even have to be drive failure. What if yo
Re: (Score:2)
300 gb = less platters = less moving parts = less points of failure. A 1tb drive might use 4 250gb platters, but a 300gb drive might use 2 250 gb platters and be artificially limited to 300gb. That's not exactly how it works, but I'm too lazy to look up what size platters WD uses these days and how many are in each drive. Smaller drives tend to use newer technology but with fewer platters to save money (again, = less moving parts). 80gb drives typically only have one platter which is about as small as platt
Re: (Score:2)
--I'm definitely with you on that. I haven't bought *anything* higher than a 320GB SATA drive because that's the maximum amount of data that I'm comfortable trusting to a single drive/unit. If it starts going bad, I have enough free space to copy it over somewhere else until the replacement arrives.
Capacity vs formats (Score:2)
So hard drive technology has not yet reached it's brick wall. It's good to see that the miniature sized drives also getting huge capacities and are quite affordable. Now, if only SSD's would catch up with larger capacities and more importantly, less stratospheric prices.
As for speed, my WD passport USB2 pocket drive is fast enough to play back full HD video without dropping frames, so there's no speed problems there. Now if only the eeePC had a faster processor.....
Re: (Score:2)
Transfer rate (Score:5, Insightful)
Read: The drives feature a SATA 2 interface, which has a theoretical maximum of 3 Gigabits/s transfer rate, while in practice you'll get 1/4th of that if you're lucky.
Re: (Score:2)
Got any data to back that up?
Re: (Score:2)
The OP implied that the SATA 2 transfer rate is, in practice, only capable of 1/4 of its theoretical maximum. That is clearly nonsense. We don't know what the sustained transfer rate of the drive will be, but SATA 2 won't have anything to do with it.
You guys can choose to be as stupid as you please, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's a benchmark summary of interface testing. It does not include the current Seagate 7200.4 drives:
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/2.5-hard-drive-charts/Interface-Performance,682.html [tomshardware.com]
Obviously, hard drives are capable of utilizing far more than 1/4 of SATA 2's theoretical bandwidth.
Re: (Score:2)
I just did a search, and I failed to confirm the OP's stupidity. The only western digital drives that I could find that were faster than the claimed rule of thumb were Velociraptor drives. And those can't break 1/3 of the theoretical. While the possibility remains that they could have made a massive breakthough in hard drive platter tech, I doubt it'll debut in a drive marketed for being a high-density mobile drive.
In short, the statement was not "clearly nonsense".
Theological transfer (Score:2)
It rather fits my sampling of the IT sector these days. People who understood technology have been replaced with people who simply parrot information without much regard to its context.
Re:Transfer rate (Score:5, Informative)
And don't forget that's 3Gbit/s in 10 bit encoding with two parity bits, so you'll at most get 300MB/s. From cache you can get fairly close to that but reading from platters is slower, couldn't find any info on actual sequential read/write speeds.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Of course not, they were very good at hiding the fact that their "green" desktop drives are really just 5400RPM drives, they even obfuscated it from their own datasheets.
As an interesting note, the new line of Patriot SSD come very close to the 300MB/s speed, clocking in 280MB/s in reads.
Re: (Score:2)
As an interesting note, the new line of Patriot SSD come very close to the 300MB/s speed, clocking in 280MB/s in reads.
Yep, the next step up seems to be PCI express cards directly, even with SATA3 on the horizon it's not moving fast enough. For example the OCZ Z-Drive [ocztechnology.com]. These are basicly just internally RAID'd SSDs but a preview of what's to come.
Re: (Score:2)
Shazam! [runcore.com]
Hype aside I really like the runcore products. Especially the PCIe units with the USB header for cloning your drive.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, the transfer rate is usually the rate of the interface, not of the disk itself. Which usually is just a fraction of that.
call me when it's 7200RPM (Score:2)
Excellent! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm looking forward to the speed increase. (Score:2)
A 5400 RPM drive of this size should have twice the data transfer of drives that are currently available (500GB). In fact, this should have 10x the throughput of my current laptop drive. I'm drooling already...
Obviously, this only applies to sequential reads/writes. Is there any other bottleneck, or can I actually expect to write large files 10x faster?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if the disk is full and spinning at a constant rate, the head is passing over a given number of bits each second--this rate depends on the disk size. (I don't think the number of platters should matter.)
I'm making a big assumption--that the head can read/write as fast as the disk spins. Even with large and sequential reads/writes, I don't know whether this is true.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I'm an idiot. I've thought of a bunch of unstated assumptions I made that are probably wrong. I still think a bigger drive may have more throughput, but it's not something that I can take for granted without detailed specs (that I don't have).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Larger drives generally do have more throughput for a few reasons. First, there are likely to be more platters / read + write heads that can work in parallel. Second, as the drive spins the rate at which the head traverses over sectors does increase - as you assumed.
But there are plenty of reasons why the actual increase will be reduced. First, the time taken to traverse an entire platter at a given RPM increases with denser platters. So if a platter can hold X bits and takes Y seconds to traverse, t
Cripes, it's like they're IN the porn business... (Score:2)
...oh give me a break. Like 1TB on a laptop is gonna be used for Word Docs or "official business"...Please.
YouTube != porn (Score:2)
Some people shoot home movies. Lots of home movies. Then they edit the movies and upload them to YouTube or Vimeo or somewhere similar. But get this: YouTube doesn't allow porn.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people shoot home movies. Lots of home movies. Then they edit the movies and upload them to YouTube or Vimeo or somewhere similar. But get this: YouTube doesn't allow porn.
Some people shoot home movies. Lots of them, even some of them in 1080p HD format, consuming hundreds of Gigabytes of space.
Then they upload them to YouTube or Vimeo where they're compressed down to the same shitty format my 5-dollar playskool webcam can produce.
Yeah, you're absolutely right. YouTube sure as hell ain't porn. The quality sucks too bad.
Re:Cripes, it's like they're IN the porn business. (Score:5, Funny)
2 and a half inches doesn't get you into the porn business.
Believe me I've tried.
Nice, except you probably can't use them (Score:5, Informative)
These are 12.5mm drives. The VAST majority of laptops from the last several years (certainly any new enough to have a SATA interface) only allow for 9.5mm drives. I'm sure there's some Alienware rig that's large enough to take them, but chances are your laptop will not.
This is a marketing stunt to say "we're first", even though it won't be usable for most people.
Re: (Score:2)
Not only that, they say "now shipping", but where? They don't even offer the drive for sale on their own web store, and it's not even listed at Newegg.
Re: (Score:2)
There is apparently a firmware bug.
http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/27/bios-password-snag-subdues-intels-34mn-x25-m-g2-launch-party/ [engadget.com]
Mine, and a bunch of other folks who ordered from the egg got an RMA sent. Mine never made it out of shipping. Others got a return label.
Re: (Score:2)
Where is your data to support that claim? Even the last generation Macbook Pro 17 supported 12.5mm drives. They aren't as rare as you think.
hopefully (Score:2)
they will switch their giant power-hungry 3.5" external drive models like the 2TB Mirror edition to this drive to conserve both power and space.
The mirror edition is a friggin' brick and a half!
Too big to lose? (Score:2)
I must admit that this capacity is attractive in that form factor but 320GB is about as big as I "need" really... actually bigger than I need. The last time I was deciding on a new drive for my latest Fedora install (I always install fresh and mount the old drive into a USB case for data recovery), I decided that while the price of a 500GB drive was within the "affordable" window, the lower price of the current high performance 320GB drives was quite attractive and at the same time was more than adequate f
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It raises some interesting possibilities and questions. A person could theoretically be assured of never forgetting anything. Of course, there is also the question of whether one would really want their entire life recorded.
I like your idea, but I want an off switch. If I wanted to see a POV masturbation of myself I would just go do it.
Re: (Score:2)
Recording everything would be several orders of magnitude worse.
As far as never forgetting, would one record oneself reviewing his own recording, to "remember" something? I can see it now...
"There was that time I was reviewing MyLife(tm), trying to find my car keys, and I found them in the septic tank... funny story that." But it was really hilarious, when I was watching my watch the found-my
pricing model (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I am now exceedingly glad I waited to purchase a new HDD for my laptop.
The drive is 2.5 inches, but it is 12.5 mm rather than the standard 9.5 mm thick [anandtech.com] - so it is unlikely to fit in a laptop. On a side note, I wish they started using metric proper instead of this mix of metric and legacy measurements.
Re: (Score:2)
What's the other 250GB for?
Re: (Score:2)
I think he means that he'll buy the 750GB drive.
What's the other 250GB for? (Score:2)
I assume he's talking about the 750GB not the 1TB drive. Me, if I could get an internal 1TB drive for my laptop I'd use maybe 50GB for each OS, and the rest for the home or user partition. I could install Leopard, Kubuntu, Ubuntu Studio, and another two OSes for testing and still have 750GB for user files.
Falcon
Re: (Score:2)
to purchase a new HDD for my laptop.
You may be waiting longer. It's height is 12.5mm so it doesn't fit in most laptops.
While this is just slightly ridiculous, now I can give windows i nice happy 250 GB to play with and give linux 500 GB.
I gave OS X Leopard and Linux 30 GB each on the 320 GB drive in my MacBook Pro with the rest setup for the home folder, both OSes will use the same home folder when I install Ubuntu. I'd like to get a bigger drive though, to give both OSes and the home folder more space.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I look at the My Passport Essential SE [wdc.com] specs and see length of 3.1 inches. I look at the WD Scorpio Blue [wdc.com] and see 2.75 inches. Nowhere on their site do I see 2.5 inches. Unless they're doing some horrible rounding.
I think that is platter diameter inside the drive.
-Taylor
Re: (Score:2)
The drives themselves are 2.5", not including the USB/Firewire housing...
Re: (Score:2)
I thought it was what the bits looked like when read in a certain way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i'm definitely smelling what you're stepping in. i used to be a WD back in the 40mb days. Eventually I became a Quantum guy, then switched to Maxtor, then switched to deathstar when maxtor bought quantum. After IBM started sucking i had what i thought was a forever and ever with Seagate until a 1.5tb part died in my NAS and they dropped the 5 year warranty. Now it's back to a torrid affair with WD's jasmine-scented asshole, but who knows where i'll be in a month?