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!

Hitachi's Terabyte DVD Recorder

CmdrTaco posted more than 8 years ago | from the finally-enough-space-for-every-episode-of-the-simpsons dept.

Television 78

lposeidon writes "Hitachi has a terabyte DVD recorder. Looks like its an oversized TIVO box with 2 500GB harddrives, all for the low, low price of $1180" It's also fully high def capable.

cancel ×

78 comments

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

It's also fully high DUPE capable... (5, Informative)

TripMaster Monkey (862126) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498473)


Story is a dupe...original story can be found here [slashdot.org] .

Re:It's also fully high DUPE capable... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13498511)

Hey, look at that! The duped article headline is just as misleading as the original. What a surprise!

So, I interupt this dupe to bring you your scheduled trolling.

People in the computing field like to spur the use of spurious jargons. The less educated they are, the more they like extraneous jargons, such as in the Unix & Perl community. Unlike mathematicians, where in mathematics there are no fewer jargons but each and every one are absolutely necessary. For example, polytope, manifold, injection/bijection/surjection, group/ring/field.., homological, projective, pencil, bundle, lattice, affine, topology, isomorphism, isometry, homeomorphism, aleph-0, fractal, supremum/infimum, simplex, matrix, quaternions, derivative/integral, ... and so on. Each and every one of these captures a concept, for which practical and theoretical considerations made the terms a necessity. Often there are synonyms for them because of historical developments, but never "jargons for jargon's sake" because mathematicians hate bloats and irrelevance.

The jargon-soaked stupidity in computing field can be grouped into classes. First of all, there are jargons for marketing purposes. Thus you have Mac OS "X", Windows "XP", Sun OS to Solaris and the versioning confusion of 4.x to 7 to 8 and also the so called "Platform" instead of OS. One flagrant example is Sun Microsystem's Java stuff. Oak, Java, JDK, JSDK, J2EE, J2SE enterprise edition or no, from java 1.x to 1.2 == Java 2 now 1.3, JavaOne, JFC, Jini, JavaBeans, entity Beans, Awk, Swing... fucking stupid Java and fuck Sun Microsystems. This is just one example of Jargon hodgepodge of one single commercial entity. Marketing jargons cannot be avoided in modern society. They abound outside computing field too. The Jargons of marketing came from business practice, and they can be excusable because they are kinda a necessity or can be considered as a naturally evolved strategy for attracting attention in a laissez-faire economy system.

The other class of jargon stupidity is from computing practitioners, of which the Unix/Perl community is exemplary. For example, the name Unix & Perl themselves are good examples of buzzing jargons. Unix is supposed to be opposed of Multics and hints on the offensive and tasteless term eunuchs. PERL is cooked up to be "Practical Extraction & Reporting Language" and for the precise marketing drama of being also "Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister". These types of jargons exude juvenile humor. Cheesiness and low-taste is their hall-mark. If you are familiar with unixism and perl programing, you'll find tons and tons of such jargons embraced and verbalized by unix & perl lovers. e.g. grep, glob, shell, pipe, man, regex, more, less, tarball, shebang, Schwartzian Transform, croak, bless, interpolation, TIMTOWTDI, DWIM, RFC, RTFM, I-ANAL, YMMV and so on.

There is another class of jargon moronicity, which i find them most damaging to society, are jargons or spurious and vague terms used and brandished about by programers that we see and hear daily among design meetings, online tech group postings, or even in lots of computing textbooks or tutorials. I think the reason for these, is that these massive body of average programers usually don't have much knowledge of significant mathematics, yet they are capable of technical thinking that is not too abstract, thus you ends up with these people defining or hatching terms a-dime-a-dozen that's vague, context dependent, vacuous, and their commonality is often a result of sopho-morons trying to sound big.

Here are some examples of the terms in question:

    anonymous functions or lambda or lamba function
    closure
    exceptions (as in Java)
    list, array, vector, aggregate
    hash (or hash table) ? fantastically stupid
    rehash (as in csh or tcsh)
    regular expression (as in regex, grep, egrep, fgrep)
    name space (as in Scheme vs Common Lisp debates)
    depth first/breadth first (as in tree traversing.)
    operator
    operator overloading
    polymorphism
    inheritance
    first class objects
    pointers, references
    tail recursion

My time is limited, so i'll just give a brief explanation of my thesis on selective few of these examples among the umpteen.

In a branch of math called lambda calculus, in which much theories of computation are based on, is the origin of the jargon _lambda function_ that is so frequently reciprocated by advanced programering donkeys. In practice, a subroutine without side-effects is supposed to be what "lambda function" means. Functional languages often can define them without assigning them to some variable (name), therefore the "function without side-effects" are also called "anonymous functions". One can see that these are two distinct concepts. If mathematicians are designing computer languages, they would probably just called such thing _pure functions_. The term conveys the meaning, without the "lamba" abstruseness. (in fact, the mathematics oriented language Mathematica refers to lambda function as pure function, with the keyword Function.) Because most programers are sopho-morons who are less capable of clear thinking but nevertheless possess human vanity, we can see that they have not adopted the clear and fitting term, but instead you see lambda function this and that obfuscations dropping from their mouths constantly.

Now the term "closure" can and indeed have meant several things in the computing field. The most common is for it to mean a subroutine that holds some memory but without some disadvantages of modifying a global variable. Usually such is a feature of a programing language. When taken to extreme, we have the what's called Object Oriented Programing methodology and languages. The other meaning of "closure" i have seen in text books, is for it to indicate that the things in the language is "closed" under the operations of the language. For example, for some languages you can apply operations or subroutines to any thing in the language. (These languages are often what's called "dynamic typing" or "typeless"). However, in other languages, things have types and cannot be passed around subroutines or operators arbitrarily. One can see that the term "closure" is quite vague in conveying its meaning. The term nevertheless is very popular among talkative programers and dense tutorials, precisely because it is vague and mysterious. These pseudo-wit living zombies, never thought for a moment that they are using a moronic term, mostly because they never clearly understand the concepts behind the term among the contexts. One can particular see this exhibition among Perl programers. (for an example of the fantastically stupid write-up on closure by the Perl folks, see "perldoc perlfaq7" and "perldoc perlref".)

in the so-called "high-level" computing languages, there are often data types that's some kind of a collection. The most illustrative is LISt Processing language's lists. Essentially, the essential concept is that the language can treat a collection of things as if it's a single entity. As computer languages evolve, such collection entity feature also diversified, from syntax to semantics to implementation. Thus, beside lists, there are also terms like vector, array, matrix, tree, hash/"hash table"/dictionary. Often each particular term is to convey a particular implementation of collection so that it has certain properties to facilitate specialized uses of such groupy. The Java language has such groupy that can illustrate the point well. In Java, there are these hierarchy of collection-type of things:

  Collection
      Set (AbstractSet, HashSet)
          SortedSet (TreeSet)
      List (AbstractList, LinkedList, Vector, ArrayList)

  Map (AbstractMap, HashMap, Hashtable)
      SortedMap (TreeMap)

The words without parenthesis are Java Interfaces, and ones in are implementations. The interface hold a concept. The deeper the level, the more specific or specialized. The implementation carry out concepts. Different implementation gives different algorithmic properties. Essentially, these hierarchies of Java show the potential complexity and confusion around groupy entities in computer languages. Now, among the programers we see daily, who never really thought out of these things, will attach their own specific meaning to list/array/vector/matrix/etc type of jargons in driveling and arguments, oblivious to any thought of formalizing what the fuck they are really talking about. (one may think from the above tree-diagram that Java the language has at least put clear distinction to interface and implementation, whereas in my opinion they are one fantastic fuck up too, in many respects.)

The price is wrong too (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13498543)

Dupe or not, once again a submitter fails to correctly understand the article they are submitting. If you read the story at CNN, it is clear that the price listed in the submission is NOT for the 1 terrabyte system, but is instead the price of a smaller system. Sigh.

Re:It's also fully high DUPE capable... (-1, Offtopic)

Parelius (892100) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498576)

As if companies paying slashdot to post their product ads wasn't bad enough, now they are actually paying to get them duped too!

Re:It's also fully high DUPE capable... (1)

stretch0611 (603238) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499882)

Instead of linking to articles, maybe we should just link to prior slashdot posts...

Re:It's also fully high DUPE capable... (3, Insightful)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 8 years ago | (#13500611)


Again, it took me about 20 seconds to type:

site:slashdot.org hitachi (dvd or dvr)

into google and the first hit was the duplicate article.

There is no excuse to keep doing this shit!

I'm glad that over 99% of the reason I come to slashdot is because of people like me and not the "editors". I wish it was easy to simply migrate the community to another site, but that is much easier said than done.

Not really a dupe (1)

BobPaul (710574) | more than 8 years ago | (#13506856)

Not actually a dupe!

The origional story said "hitachi will do this in a month"

The current story says "hitachi it's, and it costs this much". The story should have had a "previously mentioned" but that doesn't make it a dupe
--
Don't fight Firefox! Let FireFox fight YOU! [bobpaul.org]

dupe! (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13498476)

i swear this is a dupe

Not only is the story a dupe... (4, Funny)

rindeee (530084) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498488)

...but many people will have to reply in "dupe" pointing out that it is NOT a "Terabyte DVD recorder". It is a terabyte DVR with a normal DVD recorder built in to the case.

I, for one, (2, Funny)

inkdesign (7389) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498536)

welcome our new misleading title overlords..

Re:I, for one, (-1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498715)

I unfortunately don't think these overlords ruling us are new. :-(

Re:I, for one, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13498868)

So you're saying that the title is misleading?

Re:Not only is the story a dupe... (1)

Shard013 (530636) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498539)

I think they mean it records DVD's. Either way its stupid, why would you label it as a tool that can only record DVD's when it can record so much more?

Re:Not only is the story a dupe... (-1)

springbox (853816) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498550)

Well, seeing how CNN calls it a "Terrabyte DVD recorder" I guess we can't totally blame the poster for duplicating it in the title, but it would have been nice to get a technical correction the second time around.

Obligatory (-1, Offtopic)

BubbleSparkxx (879715) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498492)

gee - I bet those are "deathstars" drives they're using - I'd rather wait for a WD or a Maxtor with a 5 yr warranty.... /sarcasm

WOW thats cheap! (1)

HG Slashdot (895363) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498502)

all for the low, low price of $1180
WOW thats really really cheap... I am running now to the store to buy one... Maybe I will meet Bill Gates at the store also looking to buy one, this is the happiest day of my life.

Ahh ... time shifting... (5, Funny)

oneiros27 (46144) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498508)

It's like someone recorded the article [slashdot.org] , and is playing it back for us to flame a second time!

The terabyte version is not $1180... (5, Informative)

prattle (898688) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498527)

Looks like its an oversized TIVO box with 2 500GB harddrives, all for the low, low price of $1180

The terabyte version is not $1180; it is nearly double that.

From TFA:

The recorders will go on sale in Japan from next month. They are expected to retail from about 130,000 yen ($1,180) for the cheapest model to 230,000 yen for the one-terabyte recorder, which stores data on two 500 gigabyte hard disk drives.

Re:The terabyte version is not $1180... (1)

IAmTheDave (746256) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499085)

Whatever it costs, is the interface better than the HD Rent-a-DVR from Comcast? Cause man, is that thing trash.

Re:The terabyte version is not $1180... (1)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499286)

It might be - but you won't get some of the other benefits. I have Cox but the boxes are all basically the same. It's not nearly as nice as a TiVo but I *can* record two high-def channels and watch a recording - all at the same time.

The interface is kinda slow and clunky, and it's only got 150GB storage. But the ability to watch something on one channel and record on another shouldn't be underestimated!

Maybe with CableCards, moving forward, we'll be able to ditch the cable companies boxes and use our own, like the good old days. But it's not good enough yet - and a lot of that is because the cable company either doesn't support cablecard, or if they do they don't put all their channels on them.

Re:The terabyte version is not $1180... (1)

Gondola (189182) | more than 8 years ago | (#13500042)

Agreed. It's unfortunate that there are so few HD channels, because I just don't watch low def anymore. Seriously.

Even with maybe a dozen HD channels, there are times I've had conflicts in my recordings.. with the ability to record two streams at once. That means there were three shows I would have potentially wanted to record at the same time.

"Fortunately," programs on cable networks usually get repeated ad nauseum, so I just scan forward a day or less to find another airing of the same show I couldn't record.

The Time Warner box isn't bad, if you just want to use the grid interface. For browsing by title, it's painfully slow because there's no virtual keyboard *and* half the stuff isn't indexed in the listings by title for some reason.

For someone with even half a life, having to scan through a paper TV Guide to choose my programs, and set them up to record manually... fugedaboutit. I'd rather not watch any TV than go through all that BS.

I do miss my "bloop" sound effects from the TiVo though.

Re:The terabyte version is not $1180... (1)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 8 years ago | (#13500304)

You Comcast guys don't know what you've got =) I have the Cox High Def package, and it has SEVEN channels. ABC, NBC, INHD1, INHD2, Disc, Sho1, HBO1. That's all. I mean, they look great (especially INHD2 when there's a game on NESN on it) and they all do full 1080i except for the SD stuff on NBC/ABC and some older HD Discovery stuff (720p.)

Comcast has so many more channels. My friend lives a mile away in Mass, and when he gets his new TV he'll have something like 21 channels of HD to use including FOX and CBS, which I don't get at all.

But at least the Cox stuff is really 1920x1080i though, unlike some of the satellite providers that'll do 1280x1080 and scale it to save bandwidth.

If only *any* of these companies had SciFi HD..

Re:The terabyte version is not $1180... (1)

Gondola (189182) | more than 8 years ago | (#13503614)

SciFi HD is the holy grail. They don't know the opportunity they're missing out on. Just like TiVo standalone HD.

Telephone game, anyone? (2, Funny)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498529)

Geez, it's like that stupid game you played in grade school where a whispered phrase went around the room, and was almost totally different by the time it had gone through 15-20 people.

The article subtitle meat is "...the world's first hard disk drive/DVD recorder that can store one terabyte of data..."

Is there really that little space in /. titles that you can't add "HDD"? "Terabyte HDD / DVD recorder combo box." There, now that wasn't so hard.

As for the dupe, does it count if the first post on it was vaporware?

Good thing it has TWO hard drives. (5, Funny)

bigtallmofo (695287) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498534)


You can store the first Slashdot story [slashdot.org] on the first drive, and the second Slashdot story [slashdot.org] on the second drive.

I'll speak on behalf of Tivo (4, Informative)

Manchot (847225) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498567)

Tivo's a brand name. This device is made by Hitachi, so it's not a Tivo. Hence, you should just call it an oversized DVR.

Hoover that muck up and pass me a kleenex (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13498618)


i for one welcome Tivo to brandings holy grail

Re:I'll speak on behalf of Tivo (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13498649)

oversized AND overpriced.

You can buy a terabyte of storage (4x250 gig hds in a raid0 array) for $600, and they want $2500? (the $1300 is for a half-terabyte)

For the same price, set up a linux box as an 12-drive (extra controller cards are cheap enough) 3-terabyte network storage unit, and store all sorts of stuff on it, not just movies.

It might even be big enough to hold the average slashdotters' pr0n collection.

Re:I'll speak on behalf of Tivo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13499305)

Good idea! Don't forget to include instructions for configuring a suitable computer to act as your DVR, buying the necessary input card/hardware, buying and installing a DVD-R if you don't have one already, installing and configuring MythTV or BeyondTV or whatever, making sure your graphics card either puts out suitable video or you install a secondary card for that, and then be sure to put it all in a box that will fit nicely with your home entertainment rack.

Or, pay a little more for the convenience of having it all done for you and wrapped up in a nice package with a warranty. I do get your point, though, but for what this does, there's a lot of extraneous time and effort to build something simliar.

Re:I'll speak on behalf of Tivo (1)

hazzey (679052) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499567)

Tivo's a brand name. This device is made by Hitachi, so it's not a Tivo. Hence, you should just call it an oversized DVR.

Many people know how big a Tivo is. Not many people know how big a DVR is. Why? Because this device is a DVR, so it is exactly as big as a DVR.

People often use brand names (1)

jd0g85 (734515) | more than 8 years ago | (#13500439)

Could you please pass me a Kleenex("soft facial tissue")?

I'm out of Q-tips ("cotton-tipped swabs"), can you pick up another box at the store?

Do you have any Chapstick ("moisturizing lip balm")?

Re:People often use brand names (1)

smackjer (697558) | more than 8 years ago | (#13501638)

Instead of Chapstick, I recommend good old Vaseline (petroleum jelly).

You know... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13498585)

ScuttleMonkey

passes stupid yellow-press-buzzword-style articles

CmdrTaco

passes dupes because he's impressen by ScuttleMonkey's skill in passing stupid yellow-press-buzzword-style articles

Subscriber

passes out because he did read it first and paid for it

Finally! (4, Funny)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498588)

Now I can download the entire Internet like I've always wanted to.

Re:Finally! (1)

mysqlrocks (783488) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498612)

Well, actually, it wouldn't fit. The Internet is at least 10 terabytes: http://library.indstate.edu/newsletter/feb03/inter netsize.html [indstate.edu]

Re:Finally! (1, Funny)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498820)

Well, actually, it wouldn't fit. The Internet is at least 10 terabytes

So 10 discs as opposed to how many if I used floppies?

Re:Finally! (2, Informative)

Pharmboy (216950) | more than 8 years ago | (#13501390)

So 10 discs as opposed to how many if I used floppies?

Around 714,000 floppies using very rough math. (some bigger nerd will now offer an anal retentive correction, surely down to the fraction of the floppies needed, followed by a debate over formatting methods, followed by a MAC vs. PC debate, until someone calls someone a Nazi, at which time, the debate is officially over.)

That is about the same number of floppies AOL used to send out each day back in the 90s, or about the total amount of AOL disks I personally received in the 1990s.

If it takes you 3 minutes to copy to each disk, it will take you 35700 hours, or 1487 days to complete (assuming no pee breaks), which is about as long as it would take a manned flight to Mars, and back, with plenty of time to drive around and explore inbetween. Or the equivelent of 28.5 dog years.

If you put them end to end, that is a buttload of disks. Almost a buttload and a half, making it just about 3/4 of a shitload.

Ok, the story is a dupe, thus NOTHING is offtopic, right? Might as well calculate truly useful things with the space CmdrTaco has provided here...

Re:Finally! (1)

lotrtrotk (853897) | more than 8 years ago | (#13501520)

"(some bigger nerd will now offer an anal retentive correction, surely down to the fraction of the floppies needed, followed by a debate over formatting methods, followed by a MAC vs. PC debate, until someone calls someone a Nazi, at which time, the debate is officially over.)"

Hitler is a Nazi!! .... there, now the Debate is over ;)

Re:Finally! (1)

Thalagyrt (851883) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499199)

I'd read that article you linked again, it says something more along the lines of 7500 terabytes.

Re:Finally! (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 8 years ago | (#13501639)

Nope... for that you'd need a couple Buffalo TeraStations.

Temporal TIVO (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13498594)

I'm waiting for a temporal TIVO so I can watch shows before I record them.

RTFA? (0, Offtopic)

NewStarRising (580196) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498611)

Anyone who has been visiting /. frequently knows that no-one reads the articles.
Now we can dispense with readng the summary.
And knowing the title to be misleading and innaccurate, we can dispense with tat, too.
Soon we will have a page full of nicely formatted filler text and a forum of flamewars regarding how the filler text supports/unfairly dismisses thier favourite OS/application/background colour.

Or, in Bizaarro World, the editors might do thier job. Submitters may read their own articles/submissions.

Not that we care. We don't read them anyway.

My OS can beaet up your OS.
My OS was in the army.

Re:RTFA? (0, Offtopic)

TwoTailedFox (894904) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498619)

My OS Shagged your OS!

Misleading (0, Redundant)

brokenarmsgordon (903407) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498630)

Calling it a "terrabyte DVD recorder" is intentionally misleading. It is obviously meant to imply that it records terrabyte-sized DVDs. Good job, guys.

Re: Misleading (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499676)

Terrabyte? My god, the disks must be the size of a planet!

Terabyte TiVo exists (3, Interesting)

Nonesuch (90847) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498656)

TiVo originally charged around $1K for a 250GB HD DVR, so the price is right.

netdude [tivocommunity.com] built a 1.6TB (usable) TiVo unit, but doesn't say what it cost.

I'd complain about this being a dupe but... (3, Funny)

mshmgi (710435) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498666)

... but then I'd be repeating myself ... again.

Dupe Filtering (-1, Offtopic)

tdsanchez (15549) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498688)

Hey Slashd00dz...

How about adding a dupe checker to Slashcode and allow users to 'turn off' duplicate stories. Dupes frustrate me to a point (dupe complaints are more frustrating), but their utility (for non-frequent readers) has been touted by some. It should be easy to check each storie's URL against previous post URL's in the same topic area, right?

Is really that hard? (-1, Offtopic)

Saiyine (689367) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498697)


Why don't the editors have a "Check" button, just like us have a "Preview", that performs a search in the database looking for the keywords, or the title, or even if the same urls has been mentioned earlier?

--
Superb hosting [dreamhost.com] 4800MB Storage, 120GB bandwidth, $7,95.
Kunowalls!!! [kunowalls.host.sk] Random sexy wallpapers (NSFW!).

Because Rob & Co. are lazy and contemptuous (0, Offtopic)

MondoMor (262881) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498729)

They don't care. They have contempt for their readers and apparently for their subscribers.

It's not that hard to search for a few keywords from an article.

It also wouldn't be that hard to do a quick grammar & spell check of a submission that was otherwise acceptable.

And, hey, here's a crazy idea - how about knowing a little about what you're submitting so that you don't post articles with obvious errors, omissions or lies?

The Slashdot editors merely mash "ACCEPT" on articles, apparently arbitrarily. They don't check to make sure the links work. They don't change obviously misleading or flamebaiting titles to something less inflamatory. They do zero spell checking.

This is the definition of "contempt for readers".

I'll Settle For.... (1)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498761)

A 250 meg drive and decent content. Really this smacks to me of one of those 100 CD jukeboxes. Nice to impress your friends for 35 seconds, but after that...

Not all bytes are created equal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13498827)

From the article:
One terabyte is equal to 1 trillion bytes of data.
One gigabyte equals 1 billion bytes.

Uhh isn't is .
1 Terabyte (TB) = 1,099,511,627,776 Bytes
1 Gigabyte (GB) = 1,073,741,824 Bytes

Why do they have to do this.. other than to try and rip us off?

Re:Not all bytes are created equal. (1)

Poromenos1 (830658) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499511)

Nothing... other than to try and rip us off.

Re:Not all bytes are created equal. (2, Informative)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499809)

Get with the times. The metric meanings as applied to units of bits and bytes have been officially adopted and tbe binary meanings are now tera-binary-bytes, tebibytes, or TiB and giga-binary-bytes, gibibytes, or GiB. (Similarly for MiB and KiB, and up the scale too.)

Google gibibytes to find out more, both for the official words and people still complaining about it (i.e. get both sides). Frankly, adopting kilo- because 1024 is close to 1000 was a bad idea from the start, and that choice is why there is a difference of nearly 0.1 TB between 1 TB and 1 TiB.

Re:Not all bytes are created equal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13499998)

Screw ISO. Real men use binary, and the day I start quoting RAM in "gibibytes" is the day I start wearing a floppy hat and move to France.

Re:Not all bytes are created equal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13500096)

Meanwhile, Sean Combs has announced that units of storage shall in future be known as Kiddybytes, Middybytes, Giddybytes and Tiddybytes.

There has been no comment from the Snoop Standardization Society on how this will comport with their "shizzybytes" standard.

Re:Not all bytes are created equal. (1)

narkalepse (903741) | more than 8 years ago | (#13502613)

Actually, the metric prefix can still be used for both. If you want to be specific you use GiB.

Re:Not all bytes are created equal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13505327)

Hmm no. What if I use the metric prefix to mean the metric amount and want to be specific about it? Call it a "metric metric prefix"? Geez.

Re:Not all bytes are created equal. (1)

KillShill (877105) | more than 8 years ago | (#13503362)

actually, you need to get with the times.

we've been using binary for as long as there have been computers.

suddenly the hard drive manufacturers want to inflate the size of their drives to deceive customers; that doesn't mean we have to adopt their nonsensical system.

ram isn't measured in kibbles n' bits, sorry i mean bibbybytes. no operating system or computer program uses dog food notation.

this is just a new way to deceive end users for the benefit of storage manufacturers.

anyone who knows anything about computers, knows that storage is measured in binary and not metric. it has a different meaning in computing technology and has since we've had computers. even now, unix, linux, windows, mac report the binary size for storage, including RAM.

so no, you bought their ridiculous propoganda and marketing but thankfully, not everyone did.

they can keep their fraudulent metric system and stuff it. i hear it's all the rage amongst dogs ages 1-5.

Re:Not all bytes are created equal. (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 8 years ago | (#13504613)

suddenly the hard drive manufacturers want to inflate the size of their drives to deceive customers;

It isn't sudden, sonny. They've been using metric measure of hard drive capacity back when hard drives were still measured in megabytes.

And remember those high-density 1.44 MB 3.5-inch disks? That "MB" is a combination of a metric 1000 and a binary 1024 factor. They're actually 1440 KiB disks.

For a long time the discrepancy between metric and binary maeasure was glossed over by saying it was "unformatted capacity" and that "formatted capacity" was much less. The truth is that the actual space taken up by formatting a drive for a particular filesystem is miniscule compared to the difference between a GB and a GiB. Yet people still quote the "formatted capacity" myth when trying to explain why their new 500 TB drive comes up 50 GB short.

It's just wrong to make people learn one special meaning of kilo- for computer memory and have every other unit in the world using the standard meaning. Or do you think a Liter of water should have a mass of 1024 grams?

It gets worse when you have to consider whether metric or binary measure is intended, especially when people are using them in DSL transfer rates. It's bad enough that people can't keep their bit and byte unit capitalization consistent (b vs. B). Is that megabytes per second or megabits per second? Surely not millibits per second! And is that mega- as in million or mega as in 1,048,576? Or is it 1,024,000? I know of one ISP that said their DSL transfer caps were metric. They wouldn't start charging for overages until the binary threshhold was passed, but the overage charge would be calculated from the amount you were over in metric units.

I too first objected to "kibibytes" as so much kibitzing (and snickered at my own cleverness at that), but the rationale behind it is sound. When I want to be absolutely clear, I will use GiB for binary gigabytes and metric-GB for metric gigabytes.

Besides, when you're talking about hundreds of gigabytes of storage, do you really care that the block size is a power of two anymore?

"Get with the times?" The time you want me to get with is the 20th Century. You should get with the 3rd Millennium.

Re:Not all bytes are created equal. (1)

KillShill (877105) | more than 8 years ago | (#13504732)

well overall consistency is a very good thing but as you've pointed out, we're a long way away.

i personally object to having to use demeaning new standards that non-computer scientists have deemed to be the official nomenclature.

we need more education, not capitulation to confusing new standards, which i still believe is mostly for the benefit of the storage industry.

that would solve the problems which you bring up. people don't know about using small b for bits and capital B for bytes. and yes, it isn't confusing at all to have kilo mega giga etc mean one thing for the computing industry and another for every other field. it can be learned in a few minutes if given the opportunity of education. and quite frankly, the transfer rates of mechanical and optical devices is certainly fine being expressed in bits rather than bytes. again it doesn't take too much time or effort to convert from one unit to another.

progress is good but here it's just being done for the sake of change. take 60 seconds and explain the issue and most people will be just fine and ready to go.

Ok, I'm confused (-1, Offtopic)

vuzman (888872) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498935)

Is this a dupe? I'm not sure... anyone?

Slashdot Club (0)

Viper Daimao (911947) | more than 8 years ago | (#13498944)

First rule about Slashdot Club is you do not talk about dupes in Slashdot Club.
Second rule about Slashdot Club is you DO NOT talk about dupes in Slashdot Club.
Thrid rule about Slashdot Club is someone yells Dupe!, points out a dupe, or comments on a dupe, story is over.
Forth rule, two editors to a dupe.
Fifth rule, one dupe at a time users.
Sixth rule, no search, no google.
Seventh rule, stories get duped as long as they have to.
And the eighth and final rule, if this is your first night at Slashdot Club, you have to dupe.

Dupes on /. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13499198)

I feel like, as a casual reader, I can spot a dupe much more regularly on Slasdhot than the eds. And this is 'Taco! I guess once you're a millionaire you have better things to do than run your business.

NOT a terabyte DVD Recorder (1)

PortHaven (242123) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499211)

I'm disturbed. After seeing this article twice and just now catching that it is not what it mentions in the title.

This is a crap article....misleading to say the least.

Whoop-di-doo. Two 500gig hard drives and a a common DVD-burner. Anyone could build a PC with 1gig of storage and a DVD burner.

This is a "1 Terabyte Hard Drive Recorder w/DVD Burner"

What I want is a new bloody medium that will hold 1,000gig so I can burn archives of photos, video, etc. on to a just a few discs.

Re:NOT a terabyte DVD Recorder (1)

mwilli (725214) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499452)

Anyone could build a PC with 1gig of storage and a DVD burner.

No, most people wouldn't know where to find such small drives. You have to raid some pretty old hardware in order to find those 1 gig drives. That won't even hold my pROn collection!

Re:NOT a terabyte DVD Recorder (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 8 years ago | (#13504644)

most people wouldn't know where to find such small drives. You have to raid some pretty old hardware

Want to put video on a 1 GB solid-state medium? Try Froogle: 1 GB CF [google.com] , or if you just got a PSP, 1 GB memory stick duo [google.com] . Sure, it's not 1 TB, but at least you can take it with you.

Japan Only (1)

tji (74570) | more than 8 years ago | (#13499992)

From TFA: "Hitachi said it did not have concrete plans for launching the products in overseas markets, explaining that consumers in Europe and the United States were not as keen on high-end recorders."

I am very happy with my MythTV PVR (well, it could be a bit more stable, but it's still very usable). I have two HD tuners and two analog tuners, so I can record a lot of stuff.

One difficulty of open solutions is that they can't handle encrypted channels (ESPN, Showtime, etc). A commercial DVR, with 'CableCard' support would solve this. -- Of course, you would also give up the commercial removal/skipping, full networked operation, unlimited hardware/software, etc.. I guess I'll stick with MythTV.

Why no modular DVRs? (1)

swb (14022) | more than 8 years ago | (#13500381)

I'm curious why there appear to be no commercial, modular DVRs where you can add storage via USB2/Firewire.

In an ideal world, the entire system would be modular with connectivity via both Ethernet and USB2/Firewire.

I'd have:

Base module -- akin to a Tivo. Includes CPU, storage, tuner and display output. Has Firewire/USB2 ports and Ethernet

Remote module -- Base module with no storage, but ethernet ports, USB2/Firewire, tuner & display. Ideal for bedroom.

Storage modules -- HDD / DVD recording boxes cabled via FW/USB2 to a base or remote module.

Recording scheduling would be distributed dynamically among units based on existing schedules and available storage, and the units could play any program on a connected unit.

For the neophyte, they could sell a "base" module akin to a Tivo's hardware and sophisticates could add additional stuff as they see fit.

Re:Why no modular DVRs? (1)

Gary (9413) | more than 8 years ago | (#13503811)

I can say that the Scientific Atlanta 8300HD [scientificatlanta.com] has an external SATA port for supposedly expanding the storage capacity of it's DVR. I haven't tried it yet to see if it actually works though.

Re:Why no modular DVRs? (1)

shawngarringer (906569) | more than 8 years ago | (#13504699)

I have, and it works fine for me... The fact that the boxes UI sucks in general though is unavoidable...

even if.... (1)

joerdie (816174) | more than 8 years ago | (#13501926)

The price for this is higher than buying the shows that you would want to record anyway. the artical used the Simpsons as an example, all of the DVD box set will only cost approx $400. Do you realise how long it would take to see any profit from this? (hint: by then better/cheaper stuff will be around)

Fix the title (1)

nedder (690308) | more than 8 years ago | (#13503966)

Hitachi's Terabyte......................DVD Recorder

This is like the Playstation 2 box, manual, dualshock that was selling on ebay for $300 when the PS2 first came out.

Hard drives are not DVDs (1)

Old Wolf (56093) | more than 8 years ago | (#13504621)

How can it be a DVD RECORDER if it is recording onto two HARD DRIVES ?

What is the point of recording 1TB of data onto harddrives if you can only fit 4.7Gb on a DVD?

Sure, you can play it back off the hard drives, but then you have not recorded any DVDs.

Communication: 10/100 Base-T LAN (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13506192)

You'd think for the price, they could've included 10/100/1000.....
Check for New 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>