Seagate 300TB HD for the ps4?


Recommended Posts

Seagate - the answer to digital distribution?

Posted Jan 2nd 2007 1:00PM by Justin Murray

Filed under: Sony PlayStation 3, Microsoft Xbox 360, Business

When thinking of gaming, the companies that make the storage medium are rarely thought of. Seagate, however, is offering up an interesting view of the future; a future that could effect the way we buy our games.

According to Seagate, they are working on a technology that will drastically increase the amount of data we store on hard drives. Using a technology called heat-assisted magnetic recording (HAMR), the company expects to be able to shove 50 TB of information into a single square inch of drive space, or around 300 TB of information on a standard 3.5" drive. With that kind of space, the entire Library of Congress can be stored ... without any compression.

The technology is expected to become commercially viable in a scant three years, by 2010. This means we may be seeing the Xbox 720 and PS4 being entirely based around digital distribution or fully installed console games, mostly eliminating ugly load times and noisy disk drives. With that kind of space, we may never have to worry about filling it up; 300 TB can hold around 6,144 50 GB Blu-ray disks (or the entire Library of PS through PS3 games that could ever be created with room to spare).

News Source: Joystiq

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well let the PS3 survive and stay ahead of the game then worry about PS4, but that article also mentions Xbox so I don't see why the title is PS4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And then the PS4 would be $1000 since it used "futureistic" technology way ahead of it being actually needed. Xbox 720 intagrates a 8x HD-DVD when it is actually needed along with a 320GB perpindicular recording 2.5" HDD. Along with intagrated 802.11n wireless

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who thinks this is going to happen is dreaming...

He knows what he's talking about ^. Not going to happen anytime soon at all so don't believe in everything you read kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who thinks this is going to happen is dreaming...

yeah try 2050 for 300TB ;)

300TB ought to be enough for anybody.

255GB is enough, heck 160 is midrange...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And then the PS4 would be $1000 since it used "futureistic" technology way ahead of it being actually needed. Xbox 720 intagrates a 8x HD-DVD when it is actually needed along with a 320GB perpindicular recording 2.5" HDD. Along with intagrated 802.11n wireless

that was close... :shifty: :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt it. Sony promised this with the PS3, they said the PS3 wouldn't have an optical drive and all PS3 games will be downloaded to the console, but that promise fell through (what a surprise ;) ) and they went with Blu-Ray. So while possibly the next Xbox/PlayStation etc will most likely come with a HDD in the range of that capacity, I somehow get the feeling games will still be distributed as they are now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt it. Sony promised this with the PS3, they said the PS3 wouldn't have an optical drive and all PS3 games will be downloaded to the console, but that promise fell through (what a surprise ;) ) and they went with Blu-Ray. So while possibly the next Xbox/PlayStation etc will most likely come with a HDD in the range of that capacity, I somehow get the feeling games will still be distributed as they are now.

I hope you're wrong and they indeed are all distributed through a network, that to me is the next logical step for media in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

300TB ought to be enough for anybody.

640TB ought to be enough for anybody.* :laugh:

This is crazy, crazy in the "why are you believing this, it's not true" sense, we won't suddenly jump from 750GB to 300TB drives in 4 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who thinks this is going to happen is dreaming...

Why? Technology accelerates at exponential rates. Think back to 2004. Just 2 (dammit 2007! :p alright 3) years ago, a 250GB hard drive was the biggest available, and it was over $350. Back in 2000, a 30GB hard drive was easily worth more than $200. Today, a 320Gb is like $90 hehe. While the jump to 30TB does seem a bit extreme, it makes sense since it would be achieved with cutting edge technology vastly different from the once that is used today, as opposed to the small increments seen by maturing current technology. I'm sure these news have been around for a long time though...I remember reading something about HAMR a few years ago.

On another note, I hope the next generation of hard drives are marketed correctly. Since the drives in question should offer 300 Tb of storage space (the article misquoted, saying it was 300 terabytes when it is, in fact, 300 terabits), which is equivalent to 37.5TB. But I insist measures should be given in TiB instead of TB (tebibytes instead of terabytes) so users don't go "WHERE HAS MY STORAGE GONE?!" when they view their drives in Windows :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? Technology accelerates at exponential rates. Think back to 2004. Just 2 (dammit 2007! :p alright 3) years ago, a 250GB hard drive was the biggest available, and it was over $350. Back in 2000, a 30GB hard drive was easily worth more than $200. Today, a 320Gb is like $90 hehe. While the jump to 30TB does seem a bit extreme, it makes sense since it would be achieved with cutting edge technology vastly different from the once that is used today, as opposed to the small increments seen by maturing current technology. I'm sure these news have been around for a long time though...I remember reading something about HAMR a few years ago.

On another note, I hope the next generation of hard drives are marketed correctly. Since the drives in question should offer 300 Tb of storage space (the article misquoted, saying it was 300 terabytes when it is, in fact, 300 terabits), which is equivalent to 37.5TB. But I insist measures should be given in TiB instead of TB (tebibytes instead of terabytes) so users don't go "WHERE HAS MY STORAGE GONE?!" when they view their drives in Windows :p

I realize that it's not uncommon to purchase a drive now with several hundred GB of space. But how many people are purchasing the absolute largest drives available? Of all the drives that are sold world-wide, how many are 750 GB? I'd guess less than 1%. And look at existing consoles; both the Xbox 360 and the PS3 are using drives less than 100 GB in size. My point is that nearly no one buys (or needs) the largest drive available on the market... If they DO need that much space, they're probably using RAID or clusters for reliability - because who wants to lose 750 GB of data? Take this four years into the future, and very few people will be buying 37 TB drives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how about they try to sell ps3 before ps4. theres like 400 consoles at a futureshop store near me collecting dust. They have been there for over a month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how about they try to sell ps3 before ps4. theres like 400 consoles at a futureshop store near me collecting dust. They have been there for over a month.

I'm gonna send you my money so you can buy me one, because I can't seem to find one in EBGames and Gamestop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the local EB Games near where I live they have around 60 PS3s (as of yesterday) just sitting there. No one wants them it seems. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah try 2050 for 300TB ;)

255GB is enough, heck 160 is midrange...

:o. 255GB... I have 160 and everyday I see the remaining GB dwindling, ever reminded that external hardrives are a must.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

640TB ought to be enough for anybody.* :laugh:

This is crazy, crazy in the "why are you believing this, it's not true" sense, we won't suddenly jump from 750GB to 300TB drives in 4 years.

Exactly. I'll be perfectly fine with my 10TB HDD. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.