Beta
×

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!

87GB On DVD-Sized Media

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the you-will dept.

Technology 354

BostonMACOSX points to this report in the Detroit News that says, in part, "Boston College researchers have found a way to store about 19 times more data on a disk than a common DVD can hold, using optical media made with common products, the December issue of Nature Materials reports." And it's a mix of high and low tech: the disk is formed of "an epoxy glue sold at hardware stores and a glass-like substance," but written with a currently expensive laser.

cancel ×

354 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Another quality first post. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672196)

This quality first post is claimed for the Queen of Spain.

Thank you.

Frost Pist (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672198)

D to the Motherfuckin' C!

What happened to our 100 gig CDROMS? (4, Insightful)

purduephotog (218304) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672205)

Great technology, but again, remember back when they announced 100 gigs on a CDROM? Seems storage size is getting smaller ;P

When I see someone manufacturing it, I'll be impressed, but until then.....

oh yeah- don't forget- just how long would it take to back this up (should it ever become RW?) At SCSI 120mb/sec..... right, you get the picture.

Re:What happened to our 100 gig CDROMS? (5, Insightful)

GigsVT (208848) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672228)

And the more important question, would the RIAA/MPAA ever let it happen? Imagine people selling discs of thousands of hours of music, or a whole year's popular films for $5 on the street.

I think we may be doomed to never have large capacity disposable/cheap removable media.

Re:What happened to our 100 gig CDROMS? (4, Insightful)

|absolut| (31939) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672249)

well the article says the Air Force is very interested in these types of technologies.

I'd like to see the responce of the AF when the RIAA tries to tell them no :)

Re:What happened to our 100 gig CDROMS? (5, Funny)

Blimey85 (609949) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672356)

"My fellow Americans...

You will be happy to know that today,
I wrote into law legislation that will ban the RIAA forever.

The bombing will start in 5 minutes." - Former President Ronal Reagan
speaking on behalf of the US Air Force in response to the RIAA saying no.

Re:What happened to our 100 gig CDROMS? (4, Funny)

IIRCAFAIKIANAL (572786) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672388)

Charlie: Excuse me, Lieutenant. Is there something wrong?
Maverick: Yes ma'am, the data on the DVD reader is inaccurate.
Charlie: How's that, Lieutenant?
Maverick: Well, I just happened to see a DVD containing...
Goose: We!
Maverick: Uh, sorry Goose. WE happened to see a DVD containing 89 megabytes.
Charlie: Where did you see this?
Maverick: Uh, that's classified.
Charlie: It's what?
Maverick: It's classified. I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.

(All credit to IMDB [imdb.com] and none to me - I didn't even try to make it funnier. I'd say I am a lazy karma whoring bastard, but I think i'm capped :)

Re:What happened to our 100 gig CDROMS? (1)

paranoidia (472028) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672376)

Oh they'll let it happen, not much they can do. But they will make sure they make thier cut and themsome. I'm sure they will require a percentage of every blank disk sold, just like CD's. This is to compensate for copyright infringments. Then when people do copy mp3/ogg's to them, they will cry foul, and demand more money. 'tis the way.

Re:What happened to our 100 gig CDROMS? (5, Insightful)

IanBevan (213109) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672390)

I think we may be doomed to never have large capacity disposable/cheap removable media.

I disagree. We will, because we can. It's human nature. It's why the RIAA is destined to fail to control all digital entertainment media in the same way that the suffragettes (sp ?) eventually got the vote. It makes sense, most people want it, and therefore it will happen.

I have a similar theory that I apply to my everyday working life (software development projects); given enough time, common sense will prevail.

Re:What happened to our 100 gig CDROMS? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672419)

given enough time, common sense will prevail.

Why did Windows peak at W2K and start to get worse again then? :)

Re:What happened to our 100 gig CDROMS? (2)

coryboehne (244614) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672360)

With larger hard drives becoming more common place everyday this technology is really far overdue, It's virtually impossible for some of us to really be responsible about backups the way we should be because of the prohibitive amount of data that needs to be backed up, yea it might take a while to fill up 100 gigabyte using IDE, however let's just figure .5 meg per second, that's 30 mb per minute, or 30 minutes per gig, equaling out to about 3000 minutes, that's about 50 hours for a full burn at the rather fast rate of .5 meg per second. But, consider the alternitives, swaping out 1000+ CDR's... Personally, I'll take the 100 gig disk and let it do it's thing for two days...

Re:What happened to our 100 gig CDROMS? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672385)

sounds like they need a new standard for buses... where's intel to push a new one.

And in other news (2, Funny)

xchino (591175) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672207)

The RIAA and MPAA has banded together with researches from Boston to create a "fail safe" copy protection technique. And in yet other news, Media companies sales have dropped 99% as now people can fit 19 times the copyrighted content on cheap media with faulty copy protection.

backup (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672209)

Sounds like this could replace tape drives for backup, if it's cheap enough

Re:backup (1, Informative)

gato_mato (572107) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672265)

Only if the speed of the backup is worthy of replacing tapes. I mean Afterall you can get a Tapedrive that will do 400 Meg/Sec backup these days and that is still too slow.

Gato

Re:backup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672395)

If they can write at ~2 megabytes a second then they can keep up with DLT tape drives, which hold half of the data that these would.

Low tech (-1, Flamebait)

Gubble (619690) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672210)

I would be very impressed if you can find a 1960 specimen of those low tech epoxy glues, dickhead.

Re:Low tech (0, Offtopic)

FooGoo (98336) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672389)

Epoxy was invented by the Shell Chemical Co. in the 1950s...jerkwater.

As seen on Ars... (-1)

cut-N-paste Troll (584533) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672213)

Slapbutt is a day late and a dollar short, as usual.

So... (2)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672216)

Instead of paying $27 for my four DVD set of Lord of the Rings, I might have only paid $17 if this technology were available today?

Cool.

Re:So... (2, Insightful)

Silvermask (596398) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672260)

Naw, they'd probably charge you more becuase they could fill up the disc with less compressed data and then use "87 Giga-Bytes of entertainment!" as a reason to tack on another $15 >.>

Re:So... (2)

_ph1ux_ (216706) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672371)

that, and they would have 4 hours of non-fast-forwardable previews before each movie

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672261)

Likely you would've paid $26.95

The cost of physical media is almost nill nowadays, its all royalties and middlemen

Re:So... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672287)

Yes but the fundamental difference is that you'd be able to store your DVD on the wall. Simply lick the glue side as you would a postage stamp and leave your dvd on the wall next to your entertainment center. In this way you can show off you serious 'bling-bling' to your geek friends.

Re:So... (2)

diesel_jackass (534880) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672362)

Back in the days of my Yamaha 4x burner, I tacked up the coasters throughout my apartment. After I ran out of nails and wall-space, I decided that a new burner would be a good investment. It was kinda cool because everywhere you looked there would either be a blue or silver disc, as well as several other colors of the rainbow.

Re:So... (3, Insightful)

Havokmon (89874) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672370)

Instead of paying $27 for my four DVD set of Lord of the Rings, I might have only paid $17 if this technology were available today?

No, you'd still pay $27, but you could watch the whole movie without changing discs.

Epoxy Glue + Disposable Media (3, Funny)

Dareth (47614) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672220)

What next, you play it more times than your supposed to, it melts in your DVD drive as punishment glueing it shut to prevent future acts of piracy?!?

HAHA! (-1)

Salad Shooter (600065) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672274)

Yeah, I hate Micro$haft too! Fuck the RIAA and MPAA!!!!

I am with you there, my brotha! Fuck 'em I say!

Help our brothers out (hobo.com)

Well... (2, Interesting)

Flyskippy1 (625890) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672224)

I must say that this will be good for backing up my harddrive, but when else will I really have an opportunity to fill the entire thing up?

One can only use so much porn....

Re:Well... (1)

Angry White Guy (521337) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672247)

Yeah, about eleven disks worth.

Re:Well... (1)

bsharitt (580506) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672252)

I could back up my hard drive a couple of times with this.

Re:Well... (2)

ejaw5 (570071) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672324)

Some films released today already do this, but since there's no excuse now...they can put BOTH Fullscreen and Widescreen formats on all DVD releases, along with the multilanguage sounds and subscript, as well as the other crap that comes on DVDs.

I mean, come on! I think widescreen's just a ploy to sell more 16:3 tvs. Sure the pano effect looks nice even on a large 4:3 tv..but what about the folks with only a 20" tv? Why the Fsck should I buy a widescreen TV when everything else comes in standard format.

Re:Well... (1)

hprotagonist0 (312387) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672344)

I remember when I got a 100M (external) harddrive for my MacPlus. I wondered how I could ever use all that space. I mean, I transferred all my 720k floppies onto it, and that was only like 20M. What was all that space useful for?

early post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672227)

ep

Cool and all, but... (4, Insightful)

phraktyl (92649) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672235)

While getting 87 Gig on something the size of a CD is cool and all, how is it possibly going to effect us? It has very little chance of being adopted by major manufacturers, and even less of becoming a standard. I'm sure that, to the folks that created it, it was a neat project, but that's about as far as it will go...

Re:Cool and all, but... (2, Informative)

xchino (591175) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672384)

Why do you think it has little chance of adoption? Many media types have given greater MB/$ ratios, but people seem to LIKE the size and shape of CD's, which is one reason why DVD was adopted. If you can fit more information into a smaller space it ALWAYS has at least one useful application, even if it is just consolidating all your porn.

Typical Slashdot Storage Story (2)

swb (14022) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672407)

They're all like this. "Researchers at Acme, Inc have discovered a way to put 2 TB on a Post-It with 2GB/s transfer rates, excellent durability and low cost...."

There's seldom a followup story, unless it involves the mythical holographic cube storage, in which case we hear about it all the time; maybe each time Taco watches 2001.

In reality, we have lots of cheap ata disks and 4.7GB DVDs will be everywhere in about a year or so, but no zillion-gig storage devices.

obligatory UHF reference (2, Funny)

IndependentVik (582582) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672238)

Headline reads "Researchers boost computer data storage with common materials". This discovery is, of course, nothing to the great Filo's "How to build plutonium out of common household objects".

Re:obligatory UHF reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672299)

That quote is even better if you own the UHF DVD and you watch the deleted scene where he actually TELLS you the steps involved....

can't wait to see the drive... (1)

buzban (227721) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672240)

When the same laser was set at a lower intensity and fired at the same area, the material gave off a fluorescent glow indicating readable data was present. Lasers used on standard DVDs and compact discs read pits either engraved on the surface by another laser or stamped in mass production.

it'll be interesting to see what the optical drive involves!

also, i have to say...i think accidents make the best discoveries! ;)

"We don't yet know how this happens, exactly," Fourkas said.

Here it comes. (1, Redundant)

Fugly (118668) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672242)

Yeah yeah... think of how much porn you could fit on one of those... blah blah blah...

Size Matters (0, Redundant)

bkruiser (610285) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672254)

I don't care what anyone says, I like em big, 87G sounds fine to me!

Dust (4, Insightful)

zebs (105927) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672258)

If you're packing more on then dust will have a much bigger impact on the readability of the disks?

Bring back caddys?

Re:Dust (3, Informative)

IIRCAFAIKIANAL (572786) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672313)

I think they are increasing the layers of data, not the density, so the impact of dust would be the same.

The article doesn't really confirm either way, however.

When will consumers see this technology? (5, Interesting)

g00z (81380) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672262)

You know, I've been waiting a damn long time for a optical storage solution that catches up to the size the will make backing up todays hard drives (40 Gigs and Up) a realistic possibility. 700 Megs just isn't cutting the mustard anymore when were talking about trying to back up 200+ Gigs worth of data.

I Currently have about 1.4 TB of data sitting here in my room on CD-R right now, and let me tell you -- it's getting out of hand. DVD writables are not a solution (Too little, too late theory). I would love nothing more than to consolidate the 13 200 CD Cases I have here into something a little bit more compact.

I've seen a couple of companies working on something like this (Optical CD-Sized solution that stores around 100 GB). Anybody have any theories to when the common dude can roll down to compusa (pick your posion) and snag a few blank 100 GB Disks for a reasonable price? I'm starting to feel like it's 1995 again when a 1.4M Floppy disk was as good as it got.

Re:When will consumers see this technology? (1)

Jus ad Bellum (592236) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672334)

Pack rat.

Even if you do get this won't you feel nostalgic for the old media types, "back in my day we were only able to store 640 megs of data on a disc and were happy to. Without all you youngins' uppity sass-back and terabyte storage on a needles point..."

And so on and so forth...

Re:When will consumers see this technology? (2)

fungus (37425) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672358)

God, what do you do with 13,200 CDs? Those are all music CDs you bought? Or full of open-source software?

Or of homemade videos? (Probably not - else you would have got a DVD burner)

Speaking of standards, lets not forget (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672391)

CD-R is to 1.44 MB floppy as
DVD-R is to 2.88 MB floppy (remember those?).

Your right too little, too late, but I doubt we will see anything above 9.something DVD-/+R anytime soon.

Re:When will consumers see this technology? (4, Informative)

Rader (40041) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672401)

I hear ya. I have exactly half of the data you have, and having 20 spindles of 50-paks laying around isn't that hot.

Buying hard drives to hold it all isn't feasible, since it's a huge investment, and sizes keep going up and prices go down. (Not to mention you'd still want backups of that on....cdr!?)

And DVD-R will only help by 7X.

If blue-laser discs were out right now at the pace DVDR is, then that would be be a different story. That would be the perfect size to convert to right now to make it worth it.

I need something like this. (5, Insightful)

Blimey85 (609949) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672268)

Then I need an mp3 player for my car that can use this type of media. My entire music collection on one disc. All those thousands of dollars on one disc. Hmm... would seem like such a waste at that point.

Think of the uses for this though. Being able to back up all of my servers to a single disc without compressing anything. That would be a great time saver. And then there are the not-so-legal-but-who-cares-we're-all-going-to-die- eventually-anyway uses... like storing all the episodes of shows that aren't released on dvd in the US (Family Guy for one).

But how much would they cost per disc and how much for the burner? While dvd burners are getting pretty cheap now, the media still isn't as cheap as I would like it.

So...If I understand this.... (5, Funny)

GeneralEmergency (240687) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672269)


...it means that when all the LOTR movies are done, we can REALLY piss off Jack Valenti by ripping them on to just one disk?

Must go buy more popcorn now.

Re:So...If I understand this.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672291)

And several other movies too. And if the disc is double sided...

Get it now before it gets slashdotted (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672273)

You heard right, get Opera version 7.0 beta 1 [opera.com] before the page gets slashdotted. Much better than M$ bloated IE crap or that buggy and experimental open source Mozilla browser.

Common [ ] products (5, Funny)

Matey-O (518004) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672275)

My brain inserted 'household' between Common and products. I got real excited when I thought something like Lemon Plegde would allow me to store more data on a DVD...

...kinda like taking a hole punch to a SSDD 5 1/4 floppy.

(ya see, when _I_ was your age, floppy disks were actually bigger, and floppy, not 3.5" on a side and 'stiff')

Re:Common [ ] products (4, Funny)

IIRCAFAIKIANAL (572786) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672346)

I got real excited when I thought something like Lemon Plegde would allow me to store more data on a DVD...

Dude, be careful! You'll start a new rumour for those silly audiophiles - first it was cd greening, next it will DVD pledging!

(No offense to the not-so-silly audiophiles - you know who I'm talking about :)

Re:Common [ ] products (2)

Havokmon (89874) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672414)

...kinda like taking a hole punch to a SSDD 5 1/4 floppy.

Or a 1/4" drill bit to a DD 3-1/2" floppy :)

burnable media (2, Interesting)

datsclark (46380) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672279)

It seems as though every so often someone comes out with a new form of media storage which reflects our current style, as well as about the standard size of storge. I remember when DVD's were announced, i had two 9 GB harddrive in my PC. Now i have two 80 GB drives.
And by the time this comes out, or something like it, it will cost considerably too much for a while, and then it will be fairly priced and it will be a norm that we find boring. The RIAA will have a fit about it.
I think that new generations of storage media that use entierly new technologies, that really push the envelope, will be the real exciting times.

That is ALMOST enough room (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672280)


You could just about fit Cmd Tacos entire collection of gay kiddie porn jpgs on that kind of media. Well, if you had 6 or 7 of them.

MOD PARENT UP! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672359)


why the FUCK is this considered a troll? Off-topic MAYBE but facts are facts, bitch.

Not good enough (2)

ucblockhead (63650) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672283)

I need something to backup my 120 gig drive onto.

Re:Not good enough (1)

xenocytekron (586678) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672369)

Couldn't you just use 2 of them? and if you can't for some reason, do you mean to tell me that you have the entire 120 gigs filled up? couldn't you get rid of a little of it...

Too bad about the expensive laser (5, Insightful)

IIRCAFAIKIANAL (572786) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672284)

Though it may placate the MPAA/RIAA a bit :)

On another topic, I hate shit like:

"...equal to 87,000 paperback books."

My mother in law knows what a gigabyte is. I think it's safe to stop with the point-of-reference crap.

Re:Too bad about the expensive laser (5, Funny)

sharkey (16670) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672364)

"...equal to 87,000 paperback books."

You also have to wonder what is being left out of the transcription of, say "War and Peace", to make it use the same amount of disk-space as "Tales of a Fourth Grade Nothing".

Re:Too bad about the expensive laser (5, Funny)

micromoog (206608) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672375)

When did "paperback books" replace "Libraries of Congress"? Is this part of the U.S. metric system changeover?

Re:Too bad about the expensive laser (2)

Bonker (243350) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672387)

An epoxy glue sold at hardware stores and a glass-like substance were formed into a DVD-size disk able to hold about 87 gigabytes, equal to 87,000 paperback books

Hmm... Since when did a paperback weigh an entire megabyte? Few novels reach 800,000 characters let alone 1M.

An authoring friend tells me that most first time novelists are only allowed 100,000 words... around 400k, or the size of the first Harry Potter book.

That's for the text-only contents of a book. If you start talking about diagrams or fancy print that has to be scanned in as an image, you can go anywhere from 10MB-50MB, depending on detail.

But, sticking to straight byte-weight, Let's try closer to 150,000 paperbacks, if you're going to start making real-world comparisons.

Re:Too bad about the expensive laser (2)

IIRCAFAIKIANAL (572786) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672423)

Exactly!

Not only that, but they say "equal" and not "roughly equal."

And, of course, what about compression? Different formats? HTML vs pdf vs ascii vs images.

We could go on for weeks. But that's all I have to say about that.

Yay (1)

orangepeel (114557) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672286)

No more god-awful tape backups. :-)

Seen it before...... (-1, Redundant)

zebs (105927) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672289)

1) Make disk with huge capacity
2) ???
3) Profit

N Libraries of Congress? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672290)

<insert joke about non-standard units here>

Sorry, I'm too tired to be any funnier...

what? (5, Funny)

bje2 (533276) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672293)

it's a mix of high and low tech: the disk is formed of "an epoxy glue sold at hardware stores and a glass-like substance,"

c'mon, what is this? MacGyver's [imdb.com] guide to making storage media???

damn.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672295)

87GB On DVD-Sized Media

damn, that's a lot of porn!

LOL - I JUST DUMPED 87GB IN MY TROUSERS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672339)

Imagine, a joke about how much porn this new technology could be used to store! Touche!

Too many "said"s (2, Insightful)

medscaper (238068) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672297)

Sorry, this just struck me as weird. 30 sentences, and I counted 14 uses of the word "said". Is this bad journalism? Or simply repetetive, dry and boring?

Whatever happened to declared, spoke of, pronounced, noted, claimed, admitted, told, pointed out... ??

Re:Too many "said"s (0, Offtopic)

medscaper (238068) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672326)

For instance, if I used the word "fuck" as much as they used the word "said", I'd have to say it every other sentence.

Oh.

My new invention (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672304)

Papertape(tm) imagine, all 8 bits represented in a single line one cm long on a 8 cm wide strip of paper, A 250 metre reel of paper tape can hold 50kbytes while the 20 km one can hold a whopping 2 megabytes. 1 Metre of Papertape (tm) costs $0.10 and holds an amazing 200 bytes of data.

PaperOGGS are a new copy protected media based on papertapes, which destroy them selves when played, can be bought for just $17.95 per song per play. With my new PaperOGG Player.

So... (3, Funny)

Longinus (601448) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672308)

...how many Libraries of Congress is this?

Journalism grammar school? (3, Funny)

redfenix (456698) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672315)

By John Stebbins / Bloomberg News
"and the data don't degrade"


Looks like Mr. Stebbins might be a slashdotter himself!

Re:Journalism grammar school? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672421)

Data is a plural noun. It's the plural form of "datum." Therefore, "the data don't degrade" is correct.

If you don't believe me, look up "data" on an Internet dictionary. I don't need to, because I am extrasmart.

Big deal...Constellation 3D had better...and died (4, Informative)

WaxParadigm (311909) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672316)

The FIRST version of FMD from c-3d would have been 100G...they were thinking 20 layers (200Gig+...I think I read somewhere they were hoping for a terabyte) would easily be possible..and they had tested throughput at rates high enough for 1080i HDTV (full-resolution) reads.

I think the company (which I once owned stock in) is now dead. Their site is not working. Here's a a couple interesting links to info...

http://www.filmandvideomagazine.com/Htm/2000/10_ 00 /News/c3d.htm

http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~roidy23/technology s. htm

If they couldn't make it with this killer technology (TONS of storage) how does this other company expect to fare any better with technology that is only 1/10th the product.

C-3D was doing pretty well with agreements for disc makers, agreements with WAMO (who pushed DVD), etc.

Sucks ass when something this promising doesn't ever come to fruition. I remember last year this time they had working RW drives.

Damn it, I want FMD...not this wussy 80GB crap.

Re:Big deal...Constellation 3D had better...and di (1)

WaxParadigm (311909) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672338)

Oh, Yah...they would have been just as cheap to make as today's CDs/DVDs...and they were CLEAR.

--
I want my, I want my, I want my FMD.

Re:Big deal...Constellation 3D had better...and di (1)

WaxParadigm (311909) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672372)

Sorry, way over-excited/over-stimulated...

At certain sizes (terabyte?) future capabilities were being stated at something like 8 hours (or was it 24 hours) of HDTV content being stored on one of these puppies. I'm sure the market would have settled on like 2.5-3 hours max...but that would be sweet.

Screw Media (3, Interesting)

bkruiser (610285) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672319)

Why are we looking for Media Solutions... Data should all be Stored Dynamically. I need a 10t store at "Yahoo" (pick your flavor) for $5 amonth with a data access rate in the 5ms range accessable from any spot on earth, by me and anyone else I so desire. - anyone working on that?

Word of Caution: (5, Funny)

Quaoar (614366) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672323)

Take it from me...pouring epoxy glue on a DVD does not increase the storage capacity.

so what? (5, Informative)

io333 (574963) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672325)

I've been seeing reports of stuff like this for at least two years. Wasn't there someone just a few months ago, probably reported here... hang on a sec...

yea here it is [slashdot.org] .

Anyway, I've been seeing reports like this forever, but zero consumer products. When something hits the market, I'll be interested. Until then I don't care.

Suggestion. (3, Funny)

3-State Bit (225583) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672327)

Whoever implements this:
PLEASE BRING BACK THE CADDY!

Breathe the wrong way on this baby and you've wiped out HOW MANY library of congresses worth of text?

Okay, no panic, we're not there yet. But we will be.

CADDY! CADDY!

I'm tired of renting blockbuster dvd's with cigarette burns on them.

Um, yeah. I just got a down-mod shiver, so here's something insightful.

a DVD-size disk able to hold about 87 gigabytes, equal to 87,000 paperback books
EXCUSE ME?? Are you saying a paperback book is 87 megabytes? NOT EVEN IF YOU SCAN EACH PAGE IN BITMAP!!! (Because paperbacks are black and white.)

What's the writer smoking?

Re:Suggestion. (1)

Bonkers54 (416354) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672392)

We're you absent when division was taught? 87GB / 87,000 = approx 1MB per book, that seems very reasonable to me. Lay off the crack.

Re:Suggestion. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672410)

I think the question is "What are you smoking?" 87,000,000,000 / 87,000 = 1,000,000. And if your "paperback book" unit is "L. Ron Hubbard's Battlefield Earth"...

Re:Suggestion. (3, Funny)

TheKey (465831) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672416)

Also of note - they had to specify paperback? I mean, are they any larger or smaller than hardbacks? Are they basing the file size of book on weight?

Re:Suggestion. (2, Insightful)

WaxParadigm (311909) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672420)

Uuh, do the math moron...that's 1MB per book...not 87.

87,000,000,000 / 87,000 =! 87,000,000

87,000,000,000 / 87,000 = 1,000,000

Not only are /. ers poor at spelling, they can't divide either.

Sigh (1)

Gaggme (594298) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672329)

Another technology promising the world. I recall a year or so back of the forthcoming Blu-Ray DVDS which would hold a whole season of Sponge Bob Square pants, or 3-4 hours of HDTV. Why will such media never exist? It doesn't fit a buisness model. Right now they can sell two episodes for $12.99 and pace that all out over 12 disks. Then why compress it all into one? There is no profitable reason to.

Question (2, Interesting)

mpost4 (115369) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672330)


Other then people doing video work, at this time who really needs this kind of storage.

I have a 20Gb mp3 player and I still have not filled it 1/2 way.

I would hope that a system would never need more then 15Gb for a full useful install (included a suit of programs for use to be productive)

With the above listed size I would hope a system would never need, a 20 Gb system would still have 5Gb for user data, a 40 Gb system would leave 25 Gb for user data. (admittedly some specialty apps such as cad systems would need more storage, but here I am thinking more on the lines of home users, maybe I am wrong thinking there, maybe these systems are targeting business then I can see the use, databases can get very large)

Also how is the speed of this DVD?
What applications would you see for use of this technology?

Re:Question (1)

bkruiser (610285) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672355)

sounds like you don't have jack for media... go to movielink.com and see how fast you can fill it up.

Re:Question (3, Insightful)

Frobnicator (565869) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672408)

Perhaps bandwidth, not media, is his problem.

Uh.. I think the Editor missed something. (0, Troll)

TheMayor (123827) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672348)

Who wrote this article? and for that matter, who edited it?

"The materials that the team used are stable, and the data don't degrade after repeated readings by the low-intensity laser."

The data "Don't" degrade? Shouldn't it be "doesn't"? Oh wait.. this is a Detroit newspaper.

Buy this instead of a space trip (2)

jki (624756) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672353)

it's much cheaper:

A number of issues still need to be worked out, Fourkas said. One is that once data is written to the disk, it can't be changed. Each disk has to be written individually, he said. A mass- production method would need to be found to lower costs. The cost of the laser also is prohibitive. "The one we use is about $100,000," Fourkas said. The cost would come down with mass production, he said.

forget gigabytes (3, Funny)

drxenos (573895) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672382)

They should start measuring storage space in hours of porn.

Remember the 'Scotch Tape Drive'? (5, Informative)

Jack William Bell (84469) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672400)

This seems pretty similar to the 'Scotch Tape Drive' [ecrix.com] where they were getting 10 gigabytes of data onto a roll of adhesive tape using a laser in much the same way.

Jack William Bell

Incredible (1)

DoctorGrim (589154) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672412)

That's enough to hold 87,000 paperback books! Incredible. It's not a Library of Congress though...

oops... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4672425)


misread that to be "... using optical media made with common products, the December issue of Nature Materials."

I hate to say it... (2, Interesting)

Cervantes (612861) | more than 11 years ago | (#4672432)

I really do, because I hate the "old news" posters, but I do recall seeing this for CDs. A guy in check-o-slow-va-kia (those who've seen the show will get the joke) made a multilayer CD that could hold gigs worth of data. It was revolutionary, but was derided because HD's were getting so large. Why do I think the same thing will happen here? (after everyone is done the pr0n jokes)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>