Holodisks (13)

1 Name: Sling!XD/uSlingU 2005-11-25 15:28 ID:ytSUUtQ1

http://www.computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/storage/story/0,10801,106288,00.html
"“The holographic disk promises to retail for $100, and by 2010, it will have capacity of 1.6TB each. That’s pretty inexpensive,” said Ron Tarasoff, vice president of broadcast technology and engineering at Turner Entertainment. “Even this first version can store 300GB per disk, and it has 160MB/sec. data throughput rates. That’s burning. Then combine it with random access, and it’s the best of all worlds.”

Holographic disk storage can attain far higher density than standard magnetic disk drives, which store data only on the surface of a disk, because the holographic technology allows data to be stored throughout the polymer material that makes up a disk. Analysts said holographic storage is well suited for broadcasting and video editing because the data is read and stored in parallel at a million bits at a time, and prototypes of the holographic disk arrays have a data transfer rate of 27MB/sec. "

2 Name: Unverified Source 2005-11-28 19:25 ID:K4Ugnvpy

How reliable are they? I need to keep data around a long time, not just a couple years until the disk breaks.

3 Name: Sling!XD/uSlingU 2005-11-28 20:57 ID:iLXZdZFL

I haven't seen any longevity claim yet.

As one said on the Slashdot article, if you want long durability right now then use a DVD-RAM -- they are supposed to last more than 30 years.

Refs:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/05/11/28/141241.shtml
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD-RAM

4 Name: Sling!XD/uSlingU 2005-11-29 02:20 ID:iLXZdZFL

"Since holography is a photographic process, recordable media does need to be protected until it is used, but once the media is exposed to light the images are permanently stored, as on film. Optware describes the archival quality of its media as at least 50 years."
http://www.manifest-tech.com/media_dvd/dvd_holo.htm

It seems that HVD's durability is superior to DVD-RAM, then.

5 Name: Unverified Source 2005-11-30 03:13 ID:v3RKZbbn

50 years isn't very much compared to a stone tablet :(

6 Name: Sling!XD/uSlingU 2005-11-30 04:26 ID:JwrATrJj

How many stone tablets is 1.6TB?

7 Name: Not 5 2005-12-01 14:17 ID:A5/g6ssS

Assuming a 9x12 tablet, and using a font that will remain legible for thousands of years (about 30 pt.), that would be approximately 1/3 to 1/4 the character capacity of a comparably-sized sheet of paper printed with standard 10 pt. or 11 pt. fonts. An average printed sheet of paper contains on average 4 KB of data, so an average stone tablet would contain about 1.3 KB on average.

Therefore, 1.6 TB would require approximately 1.3 billion (or 1.3 thousand million) stone tablets to store.

8 Name: Unverified Source 2005-12-01 14:56 ID:Heaven

A 3 time increas in font size would mean a 1/9th decrese in data density, would it not?

9 Name: 7 2005-12-02 04:47 ID:Heaven

>>8
Good point. I had assumed a 1/3rd decrease, so it would in fact take 4 billion stone tablets, not 1.3.

10 Name: Unverified Source 2005-12-05 19:01 ID:Heaven

>>9 what if you use holographic stone tablets?

11 Name: Unverified Source 2005-12-17 16:20 ID:k6SNvDKR

YOu can store a virtual holographic stone tablet. you might even go as far as writing the binary code to store this data on stone tablets.

Intriguingly, virtual holographic stone tablets stored on real stone tablets last exactly as long as the stone tablets themselves. This is an important parity.

12 Name: Unverified Source 2005-12-18 17:53 ID:dKvRb2oz

lol slashdot more liek SMASHDOT amirite

13 Name: Unverified Source 2005-12-18 22:41 ID:Heaven

This guy who posts "amirite" everywhere is starting to get on my nerves. The stuff about stone tablets and holodisks is interesting, though.

This thread has been closed. You cannot post in this thread any longer.