Humpty Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Look how far we have come in the past half century? In September 1956 IBM launched the 305 RAMAC, the first computer with a hard disk drive (HDD). The HDD weighed over a ton and stored 5MB of data. Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldmannen Posted December 18, 2006 Share Posted December 18, 2006 Yeah, and now 50 years later, the hard disk drives weighs about 1 kg (?), and contains up to 750 gb of data. Thats roughly 1000 times less weight and 150000 times more disk space. Maybe I counted wrong, math never was my strong side. But our disk technology still is based on mechanical parts. I would love to run a solid-state disk. Less heat, no noise, no moving parts, less prone to failure, less energy consumption, faster, no spin-up time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Andavari Posted December 18, 2006 Moderators Share Posted December 18, 2006 But our disk technology still is based on mechanical parts. Something without any moving parts would be nice with at least the storage capacity of a hard disk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Ross Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 I would love to run a solid-state disk. Less heat, no noise, no moving parts, less prone to failure, less energy consumption, faster, no spin-up time. Yeah, same here. Some MP3 Players have solid-state memory in them. Puts my Zen 2.0 to shame... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEK800i Posted December 19, 2006 Share Posted December 19, 2006 Yeah, and now 50 years later, the hard disk drives weighs about 1 kg (?), and contains up to 750 gb of data. Thats roughly 1000 times less weight and 150000 times more disk space. Maybe I counted wrong, math never was my strong side. But our disk technology still is based on mechanical parts. I would love to run a solid-state disk. Less heat, no noise, no moving parts, less prone to failure, less energy consumption, faster, no spin-up time. 1kilo? think it would be more correct when its 1TB for 1kilo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now