


Hitachi Predicts 3D Hard Disks by Year's End 382
daria42 writes "Hitachi has announced that its perpendicular, or 3D, hard disks should be out by the end of 2005." From the article: "Today, hard drives record and store data in a longitudinal fashion, with the read/write heads scanning over a horizontal plane. In perpendicular recording, data bits are aligned vertically, allowing for more data to be squeezed into a finite area. Put another way, data will go from being stored on a two-dimensional XY grid to living in a three-dimensional XYZ space."
Either way. (Score:5, Funny)
Hah (Score:2, Interesting)
True enough I s'pose
Re:Either way. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Either way. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Either way. (Score:2, Troll)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Either way. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Either way. (Score:5, Funny)
Add the same all over again for offsite storage and you get something like 3 Googlebytes (where a Googlebye is defined as the amount of stuff held by Goggle at some point or other in time)
Hayzeus... How's a guy supposed to keep up ?
Re:Either way. (Score:3, Interesting)
The other aspect of your wish for higher capacity drives is that your expectation
Believe it when I see it.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Get back to me when it's actually a marketable, mass-producable product.
RTFA (Score:3, Informative)
So, it looks like it is finally happening for real...
Also factor in.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Get back to me when it's actually a marketable, mass-producable product.
Also remember that what was marketable in 1989 isn't marketable in 2005. To force a technology shift, you have to provide a superior technology, which is quite hard when the other is rushing ahead. Many other good technologies have fallen on that sword.
Kjella
This was first suggested c. 1982 (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Read the FUCKING article. (Score:5, Informative)
Sure, there are companies like IBM who put more money in to R&D than the GDP of a small Central American country, and they've been prototyping holographic drives and such for years. Yes, there were press releases, but they never said they were going to be releasing by year end.
Besides, this isn't some pie-in-the-sky technology, it's turning data stored on its side to data stored on its end...if they already having working prototypes in the field that are mass produced, why couldn't they put these on shelves by year end? I mean, it's not a new product, it'll just be the hard drive sizes we've been expecting for a while. Wouldn't surprise me if they started with 650GB in November/December and ramp up over a few years to 1.5-2.0 TB.
Oh, and also note that this isn't some no-name company (i.e. Bit Boys, Infinium) coming out with this release, it's one of the market leaders in hard drive technology (IIRC, Hitachi was the first to produce those CF-form-factor micro drives, even though they were IBM branded).
I don't think believing this makes someone a sucker; I think you're being a bit too cynical. But then again, any sucker would say that, wouldn't they?
But when... (Score:3, Funny)
I'd hazard a guess and say... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I'd hazard a guess and say... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:But when... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:But when... (Score:3, Funny)
Simple... (Score:2)
Re:But when... (Score:5, Funny)
I had one of those. Reading the same location at different times gave different results. It's not really very useful.
Re:But when... (Score:2)
I'd be happy with 2D drives. So long as the storage capacity of one of them is >0, you could fit an infinite amout of storage into a single 3.5 inch bay. Of course, the wireing gets rather intricate.
Re:But when... (Score:2)
Vinyl stores information in 3D (Score:4, Interesting)
Although storing information in 3D is nothing new, that's how you get music in stereo from a vinyl record.
Re:Vinyl stores information in 3D (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Vinyl stores information in 3D (Score:2)
Re:Vinyl stores information in 3D (Score:2)
Axis 1: Horizontal Groove
Axis 2: Vertical Groove
Axis 3: Time
Re:Vinyl stores information in 3D (Score:2)
Re:Vinyl stores information in 3D (Score:2)
Re:Vinyl stores information in 3D (Score:5, Informative)
The pick-up head has inertia due to the mass of a hefty ceramic magnet and several hundred turns of copper wire. There's a counterweight balancing it so that there is only a couple of grammes' weight bearing down on the record, but it has a hell of a lot of inertia compared to the steel shank of the stylus, which is attached to a very flexible coupling. So when the groove pulls the needle to the left, the needle moves left but doesn't take the whole pick-up head with it; the magnetic flux lines change and induce a current in the coils. The preamplifier has a relatively high input impedance, so the needle isn't actually doing much work generating electricity. Otherwise it would feel stiffer.
Side-to-side motion is the sum of left and right signals. Up-and-down motion is the difference. By using four coils, not two, and pulling cunning stunts with the wiring, you can create a sum and difference of the sum and difference signals without resorting to op-amps. Which, of course, gives you {more or less} the original signals
I don't quite get it... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I don't quite get it... (Score:5, Funny)
Anyone know...? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Anyone know...? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Anyone know...? (Score:5, Informative)
Imagine one of the tracks on the platter. Suppose that the track contains 1KB. Further suppose that it takes
Now, double the density of data on the platter. This would make 2KB in the same track, increasing the transfer rate to about 1/3 MB/sec.
(Historically the read/write sensitivity, time required to convert the signal to true binary for the computer, and distance to controller card have been speed bottlenecks. However, I think that the current bottleneck is the data transfer rate from the platter to the read/write head.)
Not to be pedantic.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe I just don't understand the article. If the drive is still physically a bunch of cylinderical platters spinning and an armature that moves across the surface of the platters, all this means is the drive firmware has been re-written to use a different logical disc format. Big whoop.
Re:Not to be pedantic.. (Score:5, Informative)
With the longitudal system, the particles are magnetized so that the North and South are both on the surface of platter (bar magnets lie flat on the surface).
ie. <N-S> <S-N> <S-N> <N-S> <N-S>
With the perpendicular system, the particles are magnetized by a field that is perpendicular to the surface (bar magnets point up or down) ie.
^ ^ ^ ^ ^
N S S N N
| | | | |
S N N S S
v v v v v
Obviously, this has the potential for increasing storage capacity.
Additional benefit (Score:2)
Obviously, this has the potential for increasing storage capacity.
I suspect it could also improve read/write speed. If the bits are stacked vertically, it seems that the read/write head should parse the stacked bits in parallel instead of the current serial fashion.
Let's see if I can dodge the lameness filter...
bit 0 ----\
bit 1 ----\\
bit 2 ----\\\
bit 3 ----\\\\
---------read/write connection (electrical connection back to controller)
bit 4 ----////
bit 5 ----///
bit 6 ----//
bit 7 ----/
To pr
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not to be pedantic.. (Score:2)
Re:Not to be pedantic.. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Not to be pedantic.. (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re:Not to be pedantic.. (Score:3, Insightful)
See other comments for what it really means.
Re:Not to be pedantic.. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Note to mods: parent is troll (Score:2)
I almost don't care anymore (Score:5, Interesting)
Give me a guaranteed 5-year lifespan on a drive, then you'll have my patronage... more gigs don't get my attention anymore.
Re:I almost don't care anymore (Score:5, Interesting)
What this tech is really useful is making really small (1") drives for next gen DAPs. Whereas the highest density Hitachi currently (or rather, will soon, I don't think these have hit the market yet) offers is 30 gb/platter (that's a 30gb 7mm thick, 1 inch HD or 60gb 10mm thick, 1 inch HD) with this tech they say they can get over 100gb. That'd be awesome for a DAP, as you'd finally be able to compress large music collections losslessy, or have an even smaller HD (say, 3/4") that has enough capacity for your whole music collection in a lossy format.
Either way, I'm excited to see their next gen (or two gens away or whatever) HD and the DAPs that use them. Hopefully Hitachi fixes the reliability issues they've been having (I know the Hitachi drive in the Rio Karma gets a fair amount of press, although mine has never had problems)...
I want a software fix.... (Score:2)
With that, harddisks are completely reliable *enough*. Maybe burn a DVD of pics every once in a while, the digicam ones are p
Re:I almost don't care anymore (Score:2)
Re:I almost don't care anymore (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I almost don't care anymore (Score:3, Insightful)
On what planet exactly? Traditionally Large businesses and governments have been the ONLY ones willing to pay more for more reliable hard drives. While it's true that RAID can improve the reliability of your storage solution it's not by any strech perfect.
Re:I almost don't care anymore (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I almost don't care anymore (Score:3, Informative)
little difficult... (Score:4, Funny)
That's been done! (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, what you describe exists. There's a team that was making, a decade ago, transparent gelatinous cubes containing bacteriorhodopsin, a light-sensitive protein similar to the light sensor in your own optical rods in your retina.
By indexing the cube with two different lasers simultaneously, you could cause the bacteriorhodopsin in an indexable 3D location to s
What is Perpendicular Recording Technology? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Here's what they mean by perpendicular storage (Score:3, Informative)
For a "3d" disk, take all of those pencils and stand them on end, so that they are either pointing towards you or down towards the paper. Now you can pack a lot more in there without (theoretically) ble
Terrible writeup. (Score:5, Insightful)
I say this because the writeup describes what 3D means bout four times, even though it's perfectly obvious from the first time it's said.
When it comes to the important bit - how it will actually work - there is no mention of it at all.
Are the heads going to detect things at multiple distances? Are these just going to be like multi-layer platters? Or is it going to be one solid block? How would that be read?
The article would have been much better if it had cut out all but one of the descriptions of what 3D is, instead giving us some details on how this will actually work.
Just my $0.02,
Michael
Re:Terrible writeup. (Score:2)
Extra space... (Score:4, Insightful)
Am I the only guy on the planet who doesn't seem to need more than about 80GB?
My MP3 collection fits happily on my 20GB player. Every project I work on fits easily in my 20GB home partition. /usr is at well under 50% usage, and /var can probably handle the web logs for an average Slashdotting.
Frankly, short of gratuitously downloading porn and leaving dirty copies of the Mozilla source tree lying about, how does one fill up the kind of space that one of these drives would make available (without running a server of some sort, of course)?
Re:Extra space... (Score:5, Insightful)
You might be surprised at how much storage people require for their MP3 collections. Why, ripping just my collection of actual physical CDs that I personally own runs a couple hundred gig. Not to mention, if you backup your personal collection of legally owned DVDs to xvid, you could be using up a few hundred gig for a decent home collection.
And aside from those uses, think about the incredible amount of data that builds up over time if you're an avid digital photographer taking medium to high quality photographs. Or if you are scanning the family photo albums. Or if you like to keep your paper records light, so you scan them and shred the physical copies of documents older than three or five years.
Or if you make your own home movies or edit your band's music on your PC. Or if you're backing up the important data from all the machines in your own into a central location frequently.
Damn, even just a handful of videogames will eat up hundreds of gigs after awhile. Act of War, WarCraft, Unreal Tourney 2004, and TotalWar: Rome each take up between about 3gb and 6gb.
Granted, your grandmother and your youngest brother will probably not consume much space at all. But most geeks will - and in fact, as more tech becomes available to the world and actively used (like digital cameras have in the last few years), the average person will find that they need more and more storage.
I really feel we're going to hit a terrabyte sized consumer drive within the next three years. And even that might not be enough. Game manufacturers are only now starting to distribute more games on DVD format. Remember when games used to ship on one CD? Then three, four, five and even six over time? Well, today they can fit it all on a single DVD. Give it a couple of years when they start making games with enormous quantities of animation, live-action, cut-scenes, music... and we start seeing games that come on two, three, four or five DVDs. Imagine a 30gb game!
I might sound crazy, but a decade ago, a game that would take up more than a single 600mb CD seemed absurd.
Re:Extra space... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Extra space... (Score:2)
Even home sessions can start chewing up diskspace rather frighteningly if you keep your raw audio tracks laying around (frequently when you don't have time to mix down).
Also, a f
Re:Extra space... (Score:2)
Pre-configured virtual machines, stored CD images, lots of high-res graphics files (different content than what you think), quite a few installed games, development environments, service packs, multiple releases of development environment images.
This is a server, of course. It runs my home stuff quite nicely. It needs a bit more RAM though, only 1GB at the moment, and that's simply not enough.
Re:Extra space... (Score:2)
140G
[galt@damballah music]$ find . -name \*.flac | wc -l
4794
[galt@damballah music]$ find . -name \*.mp3 | wc -l
4228
I have at least another fifty CDs I've yet to encode because I'm out of space.
I'll likely be looking to build a bare minimum of a terabyte over the next year, in anticipation of having some place to store digital video of my children once they're born.
Re:Extra space... (Score:3, Insightful)
1. MythTV (a Tivo like software package) that needs about 1GB to record 1 hour of TV.
2. Work related data storage (Met Radar Data), since I work at home sometimes I need the space to store quite a bit of that.
On top of the applications, I like to RAID just about everything and backup critical data to secondary machines once in a while. I do this because backup technologies (Tape/DVD etc) have not kept pace with hard drives in terms of cost an
Re:Extra space... (Score:3, Informative)
RAID is a good "continuation-of-service" solution (i.e. you stand a good chance of being able to continue using the system during a failure), but IMHO it's absolutely no substitute for a backup. For one, the RAID applie
Re:Extra space... (Score:2, Insightful)
The 640KB comment was in reference to RAM -- does that mean you still run DOS? Or ROM BASIC? If so, you are far more patient than I. :)
Re:Extra space... (Score:2)
Re:Extra space... (Score:2)
1x1 hour mini-dv tape -> about 12G avi.
Sure you can loosy-compress them - but then there is more loss if you want to edit them.
I still don't get it. (Score:2)
They should really put their energy into something more solid (ie less movement). Reliability is most important. I don't care if I have 30TB of space if I have to replace drives every week.
Dual Layer Platters! (Score:2)
Screw capacity, make em faster (Score:2, Insightful)
Rather than increased capacity, I'd like to see improvements in the speed of storage, since it's still the biggest bottleneck in overall systems performance.
Imagine defragmenting one of these disks in XP (Score:4, Insightful)
What sacrifices do you make to which dieties to ensure the power doesn't go out while it's in progress?
Re:Imagine defragmenting one of these disks in XP (Score:2)
Re:Imagine defragmenting one of these disks in XP (Score:2)
Re:Imagine defragmenting one of these disks in XP (Score:3, Funny)
Well, first sacrifice to the power deity. That is, switch off everything except your computer. This includes everything in your neighborhood, too (yes, your neighbours will get angry on you, but then, it's sacrificing, so it should hurt you a bit).
Then, sacrifice to the god of information. For example by burning one of your favourite book (books not available anymore work best).
And of course, you have to
old news? (Score:2, Informative)
It's not actually 3d (Score:2)
From what I can make out, these drive will be the same as normal disks, but the data will be aligned like so:
N
| as opposed to N=S
S
All this means is that a single bit of data will take up approximately a third of the platter real estate and so you can probably squeeze about three times as much data on it.
Anyway looks like the 80's are back, people are using 3D as a cool wo
Re:It's not actually 3d (Score:2)
Why is this important to me? I can't stand those 7200RPM disks on the desktop. Too noisy. Tried to buy a 5400RPM SATA disk recently and figured, there aren't any on the market! This sucks.
Toshiba announced this last year (Score:2, Informative)
forget 3D (Score:2)
3 dimensional...???? (Score:2)
Rubik's Cube (Score:2, Funny)
Access Times (Score:2)
If the increase in access speed continues to lag the increase in capacity, then increased storage capacity isn't much good. After all, what good is it if I can store 50 TB of data if it takes two days to read it?
An idea I've wondered about for increasing HD (Score:2, Interesting)
Let me know, hard drive experts.
Re:Backwards compatability? (Score:2, Informative)
And if not, it won't matter anyway. By the time these drives are released, the bugs worked out, better versions released, and then price reduced to an affordable range, they'll be making motherboards with whatever new bus interfaces is required.
All I know is
Re:Backwards compatability? (Score:5, Insightful)
2D or 3D, we still want to store the same kind of data, it just gets stored on a different medium.
Not a bad question (Score:5, Informative)
A long time ago, in a galaxy far away, we had MFM and RLL drives which (A) required the controller to have a pretty intimate knowledge of a drive's internal workings, and (B) an access scheme that again was tightly coupled to the drive's geometry. It was in fact an addressing where you had to explicitly state the track, sector and head. So if you moved to some other scheme (e.g., adding a 4'th parameter: depth) it would fall flat on its face.
In the meantime, though, technology got smarter. Both problems got solved as follows:
A) IDE (Integrated Drive Electronics).
The industry basically moved away from having dumb drives and a controller that needs to know the exact internal workings of the drive. It took a lot of hint from SCSI. Nowadays the real controller is on the HDD itself, and the "IDE controller" on the mobo is merely a bridge to the specialized bus to commnicate with the real controller.
That's why nowadays you can have CD-ROMS, DVD-burners, etc, on an ATA ribbon. Or why you can have cache on the drives nowadays. Or why you don't have to buy a new motherboard each time a HDD vendor comes up with a new encoding.
So the short story is that as long as the drive comes with an ATA or SATA compatible controller in it, it will work.
B) LBA (Logical Block Addressing)
The addressing scheme also got more agnostic. We no longer tell the drive the exact track-sector-head coordinates. We just tell it "give me the 1075'th sector" and let the drive figure out for itself where that sector is. (That's another point where IDE comes in handy.)
So the short story is: as long as the sectors can be numbered, any geometry will work. Adding an extra dimension just means you'll have to number the sectors differently. But as long as you can number them, you're all set.
(Of course, this is assuming your drive doesn't end up bigger than 144 PETAbytes, which is the limit for 48 bit LBA with 512 byte sectors. If it's more than that, well, we'll have to switch to using more bits.)
Re:Seeking? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Seeking? (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Seeking? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BRZ/i
The alleged move to 3D is something of a red herring.
It appears that with current longitudinal technology, each bit is encoded by a magnet with a North-South axis that lies in the same plane as the platter itself and occupies some 100 grains of the magnetic material. The novelty here is that in perpendicular recording, the magnet is stood on end with its North-South axis perpendicular to the plane of the platter.
Apparently this theoretically leads to greater areal densities of data exceeding that of the longitudinal technology. This is where the win occurs.
In particular, what initially confused me is that we are not talking about multiple layers of data within one platter. There is still only one layer of data per side per platter, but we have achieved greater areal density of that data. Exactly what that density will be once these drives are in production is anyone's guess.
Any help?
Re:Seeking? (Score:2)
Yes, then, a genuinely good thing and all, but rather a hyped article. Typically with multiple platters I've always thought of drives as "3D".
Bit of ASCII art (Score:5, Informative)
distance - - - - - - - - >
N S . S N . S N . N S
is now shorter
- - - - - - >
N S S N
S N N S
(Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.)
It does and it doesn't. (Score:3, Informative)
When they say 3D, the mean the angular direction of the magnetic field. In current drives, the only thing that is measured is the presence or absence of magnetism. With their drives, the direction of the magnetic field also matters.
The limiting factor would be how accurately they can record and read the direction
Re:Details? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:2.88 meg floppies do this (Score:3, Insightful)
Imagine taking a bunch of bar magnets and putting them in a chain, end to end. This is how it's normally done. Of course on a disk it's all much smaller and the magnets are just parts of the surface coating.
Perpendicular recording is like magnets that are perpendicular to the surface, meaning not end to end in a chain but with one of their poles pointing out of the surface and another pointing in.
So normal is ------- and perpendicular