Why are hard drives still stuck at 1TB for the past decade? Why don't we have 10TB, 20TB, 40TB etc yet?

Why are hard drives still stuck at 1TB for the past decade? Why don't we have 10TB, 20TB, 40TB etc yet?

Other urls found in this thread:

amazon.com/Seagate-BarraCuda-3-5-Inch-Internal-ST10000DM0004/dp/B01IA9H22Q/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

To explain it very simple to retards like you, imaging folding a piece of paper in half and then doing it again and again. Eventually it gets harder to do.

I hate using analogies because it's Reddit-tier and always full of holes but hey you're the one who asked a Reddit question anyway.

you can get 10TB hdd's now

-- also, i'd imagine the apparent slow down in hdd capacity jumps is at least party due to more effort being spent on improving flash, now that it's closer than ever to actually replacing hdd's altogether

400 Dollars for fucking storage.
Go away jew

i spend $1000 on hdd's back in 2010

-- arguably that was 16TB worth of disks

average gamer boy doesnt need that

You can get 10TB drives. You can get 8TB drives. You can get 2TB, 3TB, 4TB, 6TB, as well.

Please neck yourself, faggot.

because nobody needs 10 TB,, 20TB or 40 TB

normal human beings barely use up their 1TB HDDs

most people need 200,300 GB max

Nobody needs that much for storing tranny porn

i'd argue that you'd need plenty of space to store media high enough in resolution and fidelity to make out their minuscule penises

I used to burn my porn on 700 MB CDs. Then I filled a 500 GB of hard drive with porn.

Now everything is avaliable instantly on the websites. And with a 100 mbit connection, I dont need to store anything.

until the thing you want is no longer available
i've seen several threads even here of people asking for help tracking down a copy of a porn video that is no longer available on the site they were streaming it from

if you want to keep it, store it!

>normal users don't need that much storage
>people who need more can just buy more hard drives

HDDs have hit the ceiling. SSDs are far more likely to surpass the 10TB milestone. It might take another 5 years but I'm sure it will happen.

I'm more concerned with why 7200rpm is still the standard

>because nobody needs 10 TB,, 20TB or 40 TB

People who produce videos for YouTube (etc) and want to keep the raw footage.

Photographers who want to keep raw versions of all their pictures.

People who like to have huge archives of data but want to easily create RAID mirrors with a smaller number of drives.

I spent $1000 on 1TB of storage back in 2000. That was pretty epic at the time.

yeah thats like 0.0000000000000001% of the user base lmao

That's less than one person on this entire planet bro. It is indeed very uncommon but there are plenty of people who produce video and want to keep it archived

i'd be interested to hear more details about that
the first time i had enough money to even consider looking into brand new hdd's was in 2003, when i got an 80G hdd, i forget how much it costs, probably less than $200
1TB in 2000 for under $1000 sounds like a bit of a stretch, but then, you're probably talking US dollars

either way, 1TB in 2000 is a ridiculous amount of storage, what were you doing? running a DVD duplication operation?

You don't notice the difference in quality? Streaming always looks like crap.

spending the extra 5 bucks to get 10k isnt hard user

>not buying 5400rpm drives for extreme reliability
If you want speed get an SSD

I may be off with the year, but it was when 200GB HDDs were about as good as it got, so I bought 6 of them and a PCI-X SATA RAID card, which itself cost $600.

I did it primarily for the lulz, because saying you had a 1TB server back then actually sounded impressive. I used it to store porn, obscure videos, and obscure porn. Oh, and chinese cartoons in RM format because Real Media was the shit back then. On a more serious note, I also used it to help people backup and recover their broken HDDs, because when your 100GB HDD crashes, there weren't a lot of people who could casually lend you that amount of space. We would then watch chinese cartoons while the backups were under way.

200G was the biggest they had when i got my 80G drive in 2003
but i only recall what the store had, not what may have been available elsewhere

>chinese cartoons in RM format
yes
>because Real Media was the shit back then.
well... they were better than nothing, took so long to get those high quality 174M xvid versions, i only got those occasionally
my local video store had a pretty abysmal selection of anime

>>Now everything is avaliable instantly on the websites. And with a 100 mbit connection, I dont need to store anything.
When the SJWs and the Christian right conspire to censor porn on the internet, you'll be left without any and you'll wish more than anything that you'd saved it while you could.

>most people need 200,300 GB max
A single modern game is 70GB and you make a statement like this.

We were blessed with the downright amazing technological progress in most components of mans most complex machine.

But growth at this rate is profoundly unsustainable. Physics starts hitting quite hard now. Plus the growth has been a bit ahead of utilization, I guess.

>1tb WD black 7200rpm - $75
>1tb WD velociraptor 10,000rpm - $399

> 200,300 GB max

He meant 200.3 TB.

>10 TB hard drive.

amazon.com/Seagate-BarraCuda-3-5-Inch-Internal-ST10000DM0004/dp/B01IA9H22Q/

This. There's only so much physical room on a HDD platter, and until now it's primarily been a matter of improving how efficiently that room's used. But unless you start slapping more and more platters on HDDs (thereby increasing their size and their potential for failure) there's probably not much room left for growth there.

I used to have an ancient 5.25" full-height SCSI drive. Bigger and a lot heavier than two DVD drives stacked on top of each other. Like 14 giant fucking platters. I wish we still had those, I bet you could fit 40GB in one of em.

I tore the magnet out of it when it died, it'll easily stick an inch-thick book to my fridge.

My porn is already censored to begin with so I have nothing to lose.

muh cloud means that people are storing more of their shit on other people's computers

$400 for storage for you to store thousands in media that never paid for

Because there are 10k and 15k drives, in the enterprise. They are very expensive because the hardware/bearings needed to spin a disk continuously at those speeds have to be very heavy duty. An enterprise disk is easily 50% heavier on average due to mechanical differences. Just think about the abuse an average HDD goes through over its life, the fact that they last more than a few months is frankly amazing.

because the average consumer dont need anymroe than 1tb. and to be honest who would want 10tb worth of data when the transfer speeds are fucking slow as hell?

do you not fucking read or are you just retarded?

>normal human beings
>durrr youtubers, photographers, people who need archives

yes cause the average consumer is all of those

>who would want 10tb worth of data when the transfer speeds are fucking slow as hell?
you mean like they are over an internet connection?

what i'm saying is, its better to have multiple hdds over having one single big one.

>need
>games

user do you know what board this is?

>the year of our lord 2021-4
>not caring about rotational velocidensity
do you have brain damage?

anyways

Hard drives are topping out at ~1.2TB/platter, 2TB with HAMR or SMR*, but that's a crutch not a solution and can make your storage less reliable. This means a 7 platter hard drive is going to have ~8TB without any assitive technology, or ~14TB with. Obviously you can't just add more platters ad-infinitum, so we're going to hit a wall sooner or later.

NAND, on the other hand, is getting more dense with no end in sight. 3D NAND/V-NAND specifically is a huge jump, with chip sizes exceeding 128GB. On top of this, unlike disk drives you can keep slapping NAND chips on a board until you either run out of physical space or channels/banks on the IC.

*Could only find a citation for HAMR, but I'm assuming SMR gives a similar density bump.

>Most people
Did you miss that bit?

most people don't play games. most people don't need much storage space at all. most people don't know what any unit of data storage is at all. most people are blissfully ignorant tech illiterate plebs.

sometimes we forget how 1% we are.

because we're nearing physical and practical limits. if there were a way to make a 20TB hard drive today, it wouldn't fit in the standard accepted slot size, and it wouldn't be as practical as creating a 20TB RAID in a NAS solution.

commercially it's hard to find customers (not businesses) that can even create 20TB of data to store in a single place; and even if they could doing that would be very silly. if the drive fails that's an enormous data loss, presuming that you couldn't feasibly backup 20TB of data regularly, on-site or off-site.

tl;dr demand doesn't exist, where it does, there already exists solutions.

>most people don't play games
That's not a good argument. If most people don't play games, why build Xboxes and PSes at all if it's such a tiny segment of the population? If people are going to play on modern consoles, then they are going to need modern storage mediums. And as a bonus, non-gamers can also take advantage of larger drives.