Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Samsung Unveils 64-Gbit Flash Memory Chip

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the thanks-for-the-memories dept.

Data Storage 150

Lucas123 writes "The chips can be combined to create a 128-GB flash storage device capable of holding up to 80 DVD movies or 32,000 MP3 music files. The chip was created using 30-nanometer processing technology that was developed with Samsung's self-aligned double patterning technology. Manufacturing will start in 2009; but the article quotes a Gartner analyst who reminds us, 'Samsung has had a difficult time adhering to its timelines for mass production due to the complexity of MLC architectures and ever shrinking process geometries.'"

cancel ×

150 comments

64Gb = 8GB = incremental improvement (4, Insightful)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113371)

I don't know if I want storage that can't be addressed in 4 bytes.

Re:64Gb = 8GB = incremental improvement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21113423)

>>> (1024.0**3*8)/(2.0**32)
2.0

Just make the minimal chunk precision 16 bits (2 bytes)

Re:64Gb = 8GB = incremental improvement (2, Funny)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113435)

Yup. This is why I prefer my bytes to be 16 bits long. My memory addressing is much more efficient this way.

Re:64Gb = 8GB = incremental improvement (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113969)

20 bits for the win! Anyone remember THAT? lol

Re:64Gb = 8GB = incremental improvement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21113665)

The storage is likely not addressed in bytes, but in 512 byte blocks.

SCSI faces this problem in a little while (once capcities exceed 2 terabytes.)

One interesting thing, flash will be 1-2 years late with an order of magnitude _less_ storage.

Who uses 32-bits anymore (or will in 2009) (1)

Actually, I do RTFA (1058596) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114405)

At least on their main machine... My work computer, home computer, and laptop are all 64-bit already. And by 2009, so will everyone elses'

Pocket PC 64? Nintendo DS 64? (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114577)

My work computer, home computer, and laptop are all 64-bit already. And by 2009, so will everyone elses'
Including PDAs and handheld video gaming systems?

Re:Who uses 32-bits anymore (or will in 2009) (1)

Vexor (947598) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115925)

From a gamers perspective 32 bits is still very viable. Mainly due to the fact that there are many many games that are fully 32-bit however they only have 16-bit installers thus making them useless on a 64-bit OS (64-bit Operating Systems do not support 16-bit anything iirc)

Re:64Gb = 8GB = incremental improvement (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115297)

I don't know if I want storage that can't be addressed in 4 bytes.

Your 8GB hard drive will miss you.

Combine (4, Funny)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113389)

So you can combine 16 of these to get 128GB. Can you combine 32 to get 256GB? And what if you combine 128 of them for 1TB!? The possibilities are endless.

Re:Combine (4, Funny)

jimstapleton (999106) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113487)

no, no, it's not like that. Flash memory chips are like uranium/plutonium/etc - once a chunk reaches a certain mass (depending on purity), they have a habit of exploding.

See, if you combine 16 of them, you'll probably just lose your computer, and be otherwise ok. However at 256, the room your computer is in will probably be a lost cause. At 128? Good by city.

Re:Combine (2, Funny)

William Robinson (875390) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113997)

See, if you combine 16 of them, you'll probably just lose your computer, and be otherwise ok. However at 256, the room your computer is in will probably be a lost cause. At 128? Good by city.

What's the point in blowing up just a room, when I could blow up entire city with half the number of chips.:-P

Re:Combine (2, Funny)

MindKata (957167) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114167)

What's the point in blowing up just a room, when I could blow up entire city with half the number of chips.:-P

256 is a more stable computer number than 128

Re:Combine (1)

jimstapleton (999106) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114327)

Typo. Meant 32.

Whatever you do, DONT COMBINE 256 CHIPS. The world sucks, but I like it anyway.

Re:Combine (1)

alexhs (877055) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114119)

You're talking about indirect damages right ? That's actually the damages done by MPAA/RIAA lawyers ? :P

So the analogy would be that flash memory chips are radiating copyright infringement lawsuits ? :)

Majestic 10 incher (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21113395)

Coming to a Linux User Group near you.

Great math, author. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21113425)

"128-GB flash storage device capable of holding up to 80 DVD movies"

Those must be some pretty small DVDs.

Re:Great math, author. (1)

ungybungy (872087) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113579)

The standard release size for DVD rips is (or was at some point, and depending on the length of the movie) 1400M.

128*1024/1400 ~ 93.6.

Re:Great math, author. (2, Informative)

Ledsock (926049) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114157)

It's Mbits, not Mbytes. Therefore, 128/8*1024/1400~11.7

Also, they specified DVD movies. Rips from DVDs are usually called AVIs, DivX, XviD, or whatever. If you compress a standard 2 layer DVD down to a little less than a single layer, then you might be able to get 4 crammed in that space, but there'd be some heavy compression.

Re:Great math, author. (1)

Ledsock (926049) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114265)

Actually, I reread TFA, and saw they combined 16 of the 64 Gbit chips to make a 128 Gbyte chip. The point still stands about DVDs != movie files.

Re:Great math, author. (1)

absorbr (995554) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115127)

No it's not. A standard single layer DVD is 4GB. So that's 32 DVD's they could fit on this thing.

Re:Great math, author. (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115957)

Most movies don't use an entire disk. Heck quite a few don't even use half the disk. I'm talking to you "breakout romantic comedy of the year"

God bless the summaries... (5, Funny)

doyoulikeworms (1094003) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113441)

...that provide storage sizes in units easy to relate with, namely pirated media.

Re:God bless the summaries... (2, Informative)

T-Bone-T (1048702) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113645)

I have no idea how they got 80 movies from 128GB. DVD ISOs tend to be 7-10GB and divx rips tend to be 700MB in which case you get either 10-15 movies or over 160 movies.

Re:God bless the summaries... (2, Informative)

J0nne (924579) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113881)

I have no idea how they got 80 movies from 128GB. DVD ISOs tend to be 7-10GB and divx rips tend to be 700MB in which case you get either 10-15 movies or over 160 movies.
Most recent DVD rips are of the 2CD variety, so 1,4 GB total per movie (which gives us about 85 movies). You can see they know exactly what people use them for ;).

Re:God bless the summaries... (1)

T-Bone-T (1048702) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114029)

I can't believe I haven't seen that before! That is really funny.

Re:God bless the summaries... (1)

soulsteal (104635) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114877)

Maybe they're going with the scene-standard 2CD release size of 1400MB.

Re:God bless the summaries... (1)

whoop (194) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114469)

Considering recent class action lawsuits against Seagate and Western Digital on their labelling of "megabyte" or "gigabyte," maybe companies are going to adopt this new unit of measure.

Re:God bless the summaries... (2, Funny)

CompSci101 (706779) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114689)

Hey, I'm an American, and I can't think in these fancy units. I have no idea how you'd represent this in Football Fields.

How many Car Analogies is that, and how many ripped DVDs equal a Football Field?

Have we no standards anymore?

C

Re:God bless the summaries... (1)

Oliver Defacszio (550941) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114863)

Ha ha! Awesome. Those idiotic analogies always drive me nuts. The "full-grown elephants" one is another. How many adolescent-elephants does that equal? How about adult-but-undersized elephants?

Sigh. Remember when people were expected to consider things for themselves, without infantile illustrations for the lowest common denominator?

Storage size limit? (2, Interesting)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113489)

"The chips can be combined to create a 128-GB flash storage device capable of holding up to 80 DVD movies or 32,000 MP3 music files.

Am I missing something about that statement, or is it really as stupid as it sounds?

With some time, I could create a 128-*Peta*byte storage device with those chips. In the worst case scenario, you build a device out of multiple 128-GB flash devices.

Re:Storage size limit? (2, Interesting)

obergfellja (947995) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113659)

forget that, I want a 128 YottaByte (YB [wikipedia.org] ) drive.

Re:Storage size limit? (3, Funny)

Drizzt Do'Urden (226671) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113809)

I'd prefer 128 YodaBytes, and let the force hold my data!

Re:Storage size limit? (3, Funny)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114509)

I'd prefer 128 YodaBytes, and let the force hold my data!
Yeah, but then Lucas will come along every few years and make changes to your data to bring it more in line with his original vision.

Re:Storage size limit? (1)

rossdee (243626) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113979)

I'm waiting for a 256 Zigabyte drive (Ziga is the binary equivalent of a zillion)

Re:Storage size limit? (3, Insightful)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114581)

Surely nobody needs that many porno movies one one drive?

Re:Storage size limit? (1)

obergfellja (947995) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115163)

With the release of the 128 YottaBite Drive, there has been a record number of men in the hospital for a sudden drop in blood pressure. Doctors are baffled until they connect the dots with whats left of their IT department.

128 Yattabytes (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115275)

forget that, I want a 128 YottaByte (YB) drive.
Everybody say Yatta! [albinoblacksheep.com]

Well, aside from price... (1)

wattrlz (1162603) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113909)

There's probably a limit to the amount of chips you can fit on a controller or in standard flash drive form factors. You'd have to either have custom hardware or stack a thousand 128GB boards together on some kind of bus. So, sure, you could have a 128PB storage device, but you'd need a steamer trunk to keep it in, a full-sized AC unit to keep it cool, and a killowatt power supply to keep it running at any decent speed.

dicBk (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21113525)

Trying to diisect users', BigAzz, FreeBSD project, would like to need your help! ASSOCIATION OF

Oblig. Porn Comment (5, Funny)

R2.0 (532027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113545)

So if I can hold all my porn in one hand, and work the keyboard with the other...

How's this supposed to work, again?

My 80 Gb iPod wnats one of those. (1)

ThirdPrize (938147) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113555)

It can only dream though.

Re:My 80 Gb iPod wnats one of those. (1)

ThirdPrize (938147) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113605)

A couple of them even.

Re:My 80 Gb iPod wnats one of those. (1)

pthor1231 (885423) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114605)

No, it doesn't. I'm willing to bet there aren't even 4 flash chips in the ipod. It would take 10 of these chips just to equal your ipod.

This Is Great, But... (2, Interesting)

MrCrassic (994046) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113565)

Has Samsung improved on the inherently bad Flash write speeds? If not, then I don't really see too much of a point for anything other than desktops (where much more revenue could be made for server or workstation-based uses).

Re:This Is Great, But... (2, Informative)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114087)

You're thinking of NOR devices.
NAND organized flash has good write speeds but poor read speeds and NOR is the other way round.
The controller has a lot to do with overall performance as well.

Finally, Hynix has demonstrated a 22 die stack, but not in HVM. Samsung could *possibly* do a 16 die stack, but I'm betting on two packages, each with 8 die when this comes out.
-nB

BBC (1)

Alan_g_Dundee (721988) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113609)

At least Slashdot have a better summary than the BBC for once http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7057717.stm [bbc.co.uk] I contacted them as they originally claimed something similar to "The 64 gigabit (Gb) chips [are] capable of holding the equivalent of 80 DVDs.". They have since corrected it.

Re:BBC (1)

Distortions (321282) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114251)

It can hold 80 - 1.6GB DVDs movies? Huh? More like: 13 - 9.4GB DVDs 26 - 4.7GB DVDs 200 - 650MB CDs 4 days of 128kps audio 2 weeks of 32kps speech 250,000 4x6 photos

Re:BBC (1)

IRGlover (1096317) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114647)

More importantly - how many football pitches does that equate to???

Re:BBC (1)

pimpimpim (811140) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114847)

It all depends on the amount of compression you use when copying the DVD. To fit 80 DVDs on 8 GB one needs movies of about 100 MB. Maybe for mobile phone quality movies...

Why? (1, Interesting)

darthflo (1095225) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113671)

This flash based player thingie Samsung's building will extremely probably be way more expensive than it'd be using a 1.8" hard drive. OTOH they can shape it more freely (why would they? Hard drives are shaped quite like widescreen displays. Perfect for portable media players) and probably shave off a few millimeters in thickness while providing the same battery runtime.
While this might turn out to be something awesome, I can't really imagine to be willing to pay double (or more?) just to have a 10-15% slimmer media player. Do you?

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21114055)

The read data faster than hard drives.

They use less electricity than hard drives.

It's about way more than just thickness of the media.

Say Goodbye to Microdrives (3, Interesting)

wolff000 (447340) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113779)

I never liked the micro drives for portable devices. I move around a lot and the micro drives tend to die on me. Where as the flash players I have had last well forever so far. The only one that died was one I dropped from 300 feet up while rock climbing.

Re:Say Goodbye to Microdrives (2, Interesting)

Firethorn (177587) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115885)

The only one that died was one I dropped from 300 feet up while rock climbing.

I'm surprised you found it at all.

I wonder if the only reason you couldn't access it was because the interface was damaged - IE you fix the USB port and it'd work again.

Stuff as small as thumb drives tend to have a pretty low terminal velocity - 20 ft and 300 ft end up being pretty much the same.

Size Matters (1)

reabbotted (871820) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113845)

How big are these things? Could Apple fit 16 of them inside a Nano? That seems like an important piece of information that has been left out of the article.

What about the limited number of rewrites? (2, Interesting)

ke_da_wei (1154533) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113857)

Until they make it possible to rewrite as many times as you can on a traditional hard drive, why would you need one so big?

Re:What about the limited number of rewrites? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21114317)

Because it will last longer than a hard drive anyway? If I have to choose between a device that lasts 10 years and a device that allows me enough rewrites to last me 15 years, I'm going to go with the latter. I don't know why people are so hung up on rewrites. Maybe they think this is 2002 when flash devices really DID have a restrictive number of rewrites. But it's not 2002. Unless you're using this as a swap device AND swapping to it like crazy, it's going to last you longer than a hard drive will.

Re:What about the limited number of rewrites? (1)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114445)

Until they make it possible to rewrite as many times as you can on a traditional hard drive, why would you need one so big?

Decent wear-levelling algorithms accomplished that at the interface level almost 20 years ago. On top of that, modern flash usually has some degree of on-chip healing capability (remapping failed blocks from a small pool of reserved good ones).

Virtually all of the traditional objections to flash no longer apply. They last longer than HDDs, they can read/write faster (at a bulk level - Each individual block still takes longer, but unlike HDDs you can basically read/write every block in the device at once), and many of them now "look" like plain ol' ATA devices, meaning you can simply use them as drop-in replacements for traditional HDDs.

Re:What about the limited number of rewrites? (1)

bdcrazy (817679) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114817)

remapping failed blocks from a small pool of reserved good ones
Is that before or after you save data to that block?!

Now for the serious part of the discussion: How does flash determine when a block failed? I know regular hard disks use this feature too, but how does it determine a block failed also? If a block fails, how would it be able to recover the data contained there? How does wear leveling fit into securely erasing flash storage? Even if you overwrite a block, how can you be sure it was really overwritten?

Re:What about the limited number of rewrites? (2, Informative)

Torne (78524) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115213)

remapping failed blocks from a small pool of reserved good ones
Is that before or after you save data to that block?!

During. Flash blocks fail while you are writing to them (or more specifically, when you are reading back the data to verify the write), so you have the data you wanted to write right there to save to another block. Flash blocks, under normal circumstances, don't go bad when they are just storing data or having it read out.

Now for the serious part of the discussion: How does flash determine when a block failed? I know regular hard disks use this feature too, but how does it determine a block failed also? If a block fails, how would it be able to recover the data contained there? How does wear leveling fit into securely erasing flash storage? Even if you overwrite a block, how can you be sure it was really overwritten?

Flash block remapping normally works by detecting write failures as above, so you don't need to recover any data. HDDs do it by using ECC, usually by marking sectors as bad after errors are detected and corrected (so unless it's so bad it's gone past the ECC correction threshold you keep your data).

Wear levelling makes it impossible to securely erase flash storage without taking flash-chip specific measures.

Re:What about the limited number of rewrites? (1)

Asic Eng (193332) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114711)

I guess for MP3 players and the like - it would get the smaller form factor flash players into the same storage range as hard drive players have currently. I'd buy that if the price is ok.

Re:What about the limited number of rewrites? (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115017)

With wear levelling they have drives (ok, not cheap USB sticks) that have above-HDD write cycles already. Not that I expect HDDs to die from write cycles anyway, they die because they're platters spinning at 7200rpm that sooner or later will wear down and break, whether I write to them or not. Seriously, it's a complete non-issue unless you're doing heavy database IO on a tiny flash card that's almost filled to the brim. If you did enough swapping for it to matter, you'd have bought another stick of RAM long ago.

Re:What about the limited number of rewrites? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115091)

Store for playback ripped movies to xvid. I rip and never delete. so this would be perfect for me. just stack up a crapload inside the pc case.

Bad math (4, Interesting)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113889)

Am I the only person tired of seeing storage listed in terms of "songs"? Come on,

32,000 MP3 music files
Really, that number doesn't mean squat. I have a friend who love punk music, where the songs are on average about 45 seconds long. I have another friend who listens to classical music, where many songs are 5 minutes or more. How could you possibly equate those two?

Wouldn't it just make a lot more sense to say it could hold X hours of music, instead?

Re:Bad math (4, Funny)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113941)

How much does that work out to in Libraries of Congress?

Re:Bad math (1)

wwahammy (765566) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114179)

That was the very first thing I thought of when I read the summary

Re:Bad math (1)

snl2587 (1177409) | more than 6 years ago | (#21113975)

Yeah, but a lot of consumers don't really think about that kind of thing, so it sounds better to them to hear "32,000 mp3s" with a footnote that suggests 4 minute songs than to say "2133 hours and 20 minutes of music". So in this case what would make sense takes a back seat to what sells.

Re:Bad math (2, Insightful)

doombringerltx (1109389) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114309)

Even listing "2133 hours and 20 minutes of music" is going to need a footnote of thats its of mp3s encoded at a bit rate of 128kbps. I listen to punk and hardcore and 128 kbps is more than enough for most of my stuff, but I know some people who listen to real music and will complain to no end if its less than 256 kbps.

Re:Bad math (1)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114085)

Wouldn't it just make a lot more sense to say it could hold X hours of music, instead?

How many hours of music are in the library of congress?

Re:Bad math (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21114093)

No kidding. What if I have 32,000 copies of the extended, 20 minute live version of Free Bird in WAV format?

Re:Bad math (1)

wattrlz (1162603) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114127)

The, "average" mp3 is just over three minutes long and takes up 4MB. 32,000 mp3 x 4,000,000 ANSI standard bytes = 128GB

Re:Bad math (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114203)

Yeah except that 128Gbit is 16Gbyte.

Tom

Re:Bad math (1)

Asic Eng (193332) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114927)

But they are talking of combining 16 chips of 64Gbit which gets you 128 GByte. Of course, they are just saying "businesses can create a 128GB flash storage device". Which, while true, doesn't really mean anything apart from "you can use multiple chips in the same device".

Re:Bad math (1)

tomknight (190939) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114163)

I'd want to be told how many reams of sheet music. Reams? No, make that furlongs of score.

Re:Bad math (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114613)

I'd want to be told how many reams of sheet music. Reams? No, make that furlongs of score.
Sheet music? Score? Come on, most of pop music is accompanied by the same beat box noise that's been used since the late 70's. I'd bet you could write the "score" for most top 40 music on a postage stamp and have room to spare.

Now get off my lawn, you dang whippersnappers!

Re:Bad math (1)

xigxag (167441) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114181)

Seems to me they provide the mp3's as a BOTE [gaarde.org] estimate, an order of magnitude for point of reference, nothing more. If anybody wants to calculate it into hours (which is meaningless without a corresponding bitrate), then they've got the actual storage space, 128GB, and can do the math themselves.

Re:Bad math (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114483)

Really, that number doesn't mean squat. I have a friend who love punk music, where the songs are on average about 45 seconds long. I have another friend who listens to classical music, where many songs are 5 minutes or more. How could you possibly equate those two?
By ignoring them completely. The standard length for pop songs is three minutes. Anything above or below that is discarded as sample bias.

Re:Bad math (1)

Kjella (173770) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114865)

Wouldn't it just make a lot more sense to say it could hold X hours of music, instead?

Would that be in 128kbps AACs, 256kbps AACs, 320kbps MP3s, VBR MP3s or FLACs? It's a ballpark estimate based on what's typical anyway, and you're not going to make it exact by making another ballpark estimate. In short, if you needed the first estimate it's as good as yours, and if you want it exact then your estimate is just as poor.

Re:Bad math (1)

Bo'Bob'O (95398) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115293)

Yeah, how about us hippies that own Indian Music? A good Raga can be 45 minutes long. That and I will generally encode higher then 128 bits/second.

Because most of my music is FLAC (1)

r_jensen11 (598210) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115365)

Well, it's not just because of *me*, but because so many people encode using different codecs and at different rates. I get frustrated whenever I see an mp3 player saying that it can hold "n Hours of music!," only to see in the fine print that it's in .wma format @ 96kb/s. I'm a fan of just saying how much space, in human-readable format (df -h) in terms of GB. Not Gb, not MB or Mb, but GB....

And just as Gartner will remind you that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21114023)

samsung is often off, I will remind you that Gartner is normally always way off. Lets wait and see what happens.

Re:And just as Gartner will remind you that... (1)

djupedal (584558) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114461)

And we all know that anonymous cowards, with their anecdotal remarks, are always way right on.

Samsung hasn't enjoyed worldwide success & growth [samsung.com] since 1970 by being 'off'. As well, it is more important to focus on who will buy what Samsung produces...in this case, Apple.

Your agenda? ...blather would be my guess.

bits or bytes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21114231)

is it gigabits of gigabytes? a lot of news stories don't seem to know the difference.

Nobody else pointing this out? (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114241)

64Gbit is only 8Gbyte which is still fairly big, but not enough to store 40 DVD movies (hell it could hardly hold two).

Me thinks whomever wrote the summary was a bit off to lunch that day.

Tom

Re:Nobody else pointing this out? (1)

rtyhurst (460717) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114473)

128GB is what you'll need just to load Vista's successor "Microsoft ReVista, Now With Extra-Intrusive Auto Update and Ultra-Annoying DRM!".

So you'll be able to play Windows Solitaire on your Zune.

That's so cool -- these guys are way ahead of the curve!

Re:Nobody else pointing this out? (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114519)

That's the stupidest rant I've read all day. It's only cool to hate on MSFT if you're old enough to remember using DOS. If your entry to computers was Windows 98 you might as well shut up since you don't know what you're missing anyways.

That said, not an MSFT fan in the slightest, but if you're going to rant against them at least make sense and stop pulling rancid poser comments out of your ass.

ProDOS 8 V1.9 (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115349)

It's only cool to hate on MSFT if you're old enough to remember using DOS.
I'm old enough to remember ProDOS [wikipedia.org] ; does that count?

Re:ProDOS 8 V1.9 (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115829)

This isn't fucking word association, pay attention. We're talking MSFT products. As in, if you haven't used a bunch of them [say from the DOS days onwards] you probably don't have anything to bitch about.

Re:Nobody else pointing this out? (1)

Mattsson (105422) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114867)

According to the summary (and TFA) you can combine these 64Gbit chips into a 128GB[yte] device.
1 one-layer DVD ~4.5GB
That's still only bout 28 DVDs on one of these though.
They probably actually mean "up to 80 high-quality DVD-ripps", since they're much smaller. =)

Will they be arrested for conspiracy to commit... (3, Funny)

Simonetta (207550) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114373)

Will they be arrested for conspiracy to commit piracy? Let's see 30,000 MP3 songs at $250,000 each time 1,000,000 chips. A lot of zeros means a lot of money! Everyone knows that if you sell a memory device that can hold 20000 MP3 songs that all but a handful will be 'pirated', that is to say copied without permission of their so-called owners. No one except loud-mouth fuckhead billionaire Steven Jobs is actually paying $30000 for 30,000 iTune songs. So if you make a device that facilitates file copying, aren't you guilty of conspiracy to commit intellectual property fraud?

    And don't tell me that there are alternative legal uses for hard drives and memory chips. After all, isn't the scope of the intellectual property crisis dire enough to overrule such petty and superficial uses of these devices? Isn't that what the entertainment industry is telling us? Aren't they the most important 'industry' in the USA and the world?

  In my town any teenager can have his life ruined by being arrested for having a little piece of blank paper in his pocket. The pigs (excuse me, I meant to say 'the Republicans') here call it 'conspiracy to possess marijuana paraphernalia', and it means just a cigarette rolling paper. And it's a serious crime with serious time.

  But every consumer electronics store in the city sells drives and media that are specifically used to commit so-called 'intellectual property theft'. Listening to music, having a little scrap of paper in your pocket, even suggesting that this is all nothing but corrupt,racist, selective law enforcement, it's enough to get you arrested and thrown into the vast American rape-torture gulag.

  But if the MPAA/RIAA is so smart and so bad, then why aren't they actually going up face-to-face, lawyer-to-lawyer against the manufacturers that make the hard drives and memory chips? Sure they'll go after single mothers making $8/hr and win $250,000 with their $300,000/yr lawyers and hand-written laws. But will they go after the Fry's, Walmarts, and BestBuys for selling the drives, PCs, and modems that make it possible for ordinary people to 'steal' their 'intellectual property'? Why not? They have the money, they have the lawyers, they have the testicles! So where's the beef?

  If they won't do this, then the entire music and entertainment global industry (it's what now, four giant companies?) should be taken over by the government as a RICO enterprise. We should make them do it. After all, it's us that are the most embarrassed by this corrupt extortion. Why aren't we doing anything about these assholes? Of course, they will self-destruct on their own, but they will do a lot of damage on the way down. We should put our collective heads together and deliver a coup-de-grace to these pathetic losers. Consider it a mercy killing. Which is legal here, but carrying a little piece of rice paper is not.

The Visit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21114629)

Okay, thats enough talk, Simonetta. You will be receiving our "visit". And you can't just throw away all those blank papers and blank dvds.

Regards,
mafIAA

Re:Will they be arrested for conspiracy to commit. (1)

mdielmann (514750) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114957)

Consider it a mercy killing. Which is legal here, but carrying a little piece of rice paper is not.
Hmm, you'd think a bunch of old people would be more worried about making it legal to kill old and/or debilitated people than they would be about teenagers smoking pot.

Ten MAFIAA members can't stop the Betamax (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115455)

No one except loud-mouth fuckhead billionaire Steven Jobs is actually paying $30000 for 30,000 iTune songs.
Pawn shops sell cheaper CDs.

In my town any teenager can have his life ruined by being arrested for [...] 'conspiracy to possess marijuana paraphernalia', and it means just a cigarette rolling paper.
Ages 13 to 17 aren't supposed to possess tobacco paraphernalia either in any U.S. state I can think of.

But will they go after the Fry's, Walmarts, and BestBuys for selling the drives, PCs, and modems that make it possible for ordinary people to 'steal' their 'intellectual property'? Why not?
They have tried, and they have failed, at least in the United States. Google will tell you all about Sony v. Universal and RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia.

If they won't do this, then the entire music and entertainment global industry (it's what now, four giant companies?)
There are six major movie studios: Columbia (Sony), Disney, Fox, Warner, Paramount (Viacom), and Universal (GE). There are four major record labels: Sony BMG (Bertelsmann), the other Universal (Vivendi), the other Warner, and EMI. That makes ten companies at the top of the MAFIAA.

YOU INSENSITIVE cLOD! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21114415)

Romeo and Juliet a8d distraction

30nm? (2, Informative)

keithjr (1091829) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114495)

I don't like how the article doesn't state any projected costs. 30nm is on the bleeding edge of process sizes and I'd be surprised if they don't take pretty severe hit to their chip yield as a result. We'll see.

What cost ? (2, Interesting)

Alain Williams (2972) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114595)

and how long does such storage last before bits go bad ?

Data lasts as long as you want. (1)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115279)

You write to the device once.

I can sell you a certainty policy that guarantees your data is safe, as long as you do not access it.

Low annual premiums available.

80 DVDs??? (1)

siliconeyes (154170) | more than 6 years ago | (#21114707)

How the heck is 128 GBs supposed to hold 80 DVDs?? Even assuming these are single layer DVDs (which I don't think any high quality movie is), 80 DVDs work out to over 320 GBs. If you're talking double-layer, then it is twice this figure.

I won't even start on the 32,000 MP3 figure. That is almost always based on somebody's arbitrary assumption on how big a song is supposed to be..

Re:80 DVDs??? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115185)

simple Compressing to Theater quality on Xvid with AC3 audio intact (2 pass) I can compress most Movies to 3Gb easily so that it looks fantastic on a 100" screen. HD content at 1080i takes 6-7gb. this is at full resolution with the black bars removed to save room. all but a very few people can tell the difference between the original and the rip. only on Ice Age2 opening sequence can you with close inspection see the artifacts easily.

my calculation shows 240gb needed for 80DVD's. many people compress to 1.6gb for a typical 90 minute movie. that is actually viewable on a laptop or PC in a window or on a SDTV just fine. longer movies are much bigger.

32000 songs? (1)

caywen (942955) | more than 6 years ago | (#21115613)

Unfortunately, I love those 45-minute Yanni jam sessions, so it'll be more like 5000 songs for me.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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

Loading...