4 ms·
It's funny how everybody's reading this backwards. It's a press release, guys, take it with a grain of salt. "Look, 1184305% increase! wow!". If you take 30 sec
by wazoox 14y ago
It's funny how everybody's reading this backwards. It's a press release, guys, take it with a grain of salt. "Look, 1184305% increase! wow!". If you take 30 seconds to put drives capacities in a spreadsheet, you can't miss this actually announces a huge drop in the speed of HDD size increase.
From 1990 to 2005, HDD size (and density) roughly quadrupled in 3 years. From 2005 to 2012, drive size grew by a mere factor of 2.66 every 3 years. And they dare triumphally announce that in the future, the multiplication factor will drop to 1,66 every three years, that's a hell of an improvement indeed.
For those who'd point out that this is a report about platter density and not drive capacity, I'd say that 3.5" HDD have had at most 5 platters for twenty years, so platter density always reflect quite exactly maximum available drive capacity anyway.
- reitzensteinm 14y agoWho exactly is reading this backwards? That's a bit of a straw man. I think you're jumping the gun a bit ruling that storage capacity is already slowing down; I tend to agree it's just around the corner, but this chart definitely does not indicate a conclusive trend in already released drives: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/90/Hard_drive_capacity_over_time.svg/700px-Hard_drive_capacity_over_time.svg.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/90/Har...
- wazoox 14y agoI'm counting only the highest available capacity drives in 3.5" format. If you mix various physical sizes it changes the overall tendency quite a bit. Until around 1999 (availability of 50GB 3.5" drives) the biggest available drives were 5.25" (up to 43 GB). 5.25" drives were also much more common than 3.5" drives during all of the 80s. That's why I'm counting starting in 1990, which flattens the curves.