A Faster, Denser Hard Drive Debuts

[o_someoldguy]

For the hardware geeks:

Faster Denser HD's with Perpendicular Recording

[o_legacy]

Heres a few good links;

Touch screens; http://mrl.nyu.edu/~jhan/ftirtouch/
Transistor alternative; http://www.wired.com/news/technology...?tw=rss.index#
Batteries; http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1...tart.html?pg=9 and http://www.batteriesdigest.com/id471.htm

[o_jinx]

sounds like it will work in flash memory, too, as they are talking about 50GB mp3 players etc. Just in time, with iPod video and those multimedia devices getting more popular.

[o_broodingdude]

Will this be using the SATA II interface? But cool beans... Does it do that native location arrangement, or that random thingy? I forget all that damn terminology...

[mervaka]

exactly the same as a normal hard drive, otherwise, and is still random access ofc.

lol heres me thinking they were perpendicularly orientated before... its the logical way of thinking, isnt it? stack them like upright dominoes instead of flat on the table

[o_ivaqual]

Anyone remembers this ?
http://www.hitachigst.com/hdd/resear...Animation.html

[o_jinx]

Originally Posted by broodingdude

Will this be using the SATA II interface? But cool beans... Does it do that native location arrangement, or that random thingy? I forget all that damn terminology...

It can be PATA, SATA, or SATA II... or USB, Firewire, etc. for externals I assume. The interface is the same, it's just that the drive is set up slightly differently. Your computer wouldn't know the difference I don't think, other than the extra capacity.

I think you mean Native Command Queuing. That helps the hard drive seek data move efficiently when it has multiple requests.... sort of like picking the best 'route' to get all the data as quickly as possible, as opposed to hopping back and forth all over the drive without thinking. As far as I know it doesn't have anything to do with rearranging the data on the drive, that's a matter of the file system.

[o_someoldguy]

For the most part, Jinx, you are correct.

However, based on the latest evaluations I've seen, it can run slightly to significantly faster accessing data depending on what you are doing. Basically, that's because the head movement is less due to getting more bits/bytes per pass.

YMMV

[o_jinx]

I think Maximum PC said that while seek times weren't much faster, sustained throughput got a noticable boost from perpendicular recording, for the reasons you cited SOG.