Compact Disks make Comeback: Memory could Exceed Petabytes
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ส.ค. 2024
- Explore courses in mathematics, science, and computer science with Brilliant. First 200 to use our link brilliant.org/sabine will get 20% off the annual premium subscription.
Memory storage technology has come a long way from compact disks. Or has it? In a recent paper, scientists report they were able to fit petabytes of memory onto a compact disk using new laser technologies and advanced material design. Is this the future of data storage? Let’s have a look.
Learn more here: www.nature.com/articles/s4158...
🤓 Check out my new quiz app ➜ quizwithit.com/
💌 Support me on Donatebox ➜ donorbox.org/swtg
📝 Transcripts and written news on Substack ➜ sciencewtg.substack.com/
👉 Transcript with links to references on Patreon ➜ / sabine
📩 Free weekly science newsletter ➜ sabinehossenfelder.com/newsle...
👂 Audio only podcast ➜ open.spotify.com/show/0MkNfXl...
🔗 Join this channel to get access to perks ➜
/ @sabinehossenfelder
🖼️ On instagram ➜ / sciencewtg
#science #sciencenews #technews #tech #technology - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
By 2040, TV/VCR repair will be kickin it rad
Who watches TV anymore? ST:NG Data: [TV] "That form of enternment ended around 2040".
Although I doubt it will be around by the early 2030s. Only older boomers still watch TV consistently.
@@guytech7310 You think there's a fundamental difference between streaming Netflix and streaming a tv channel?
Redlettermedia will be glad to hear it! Maybe Mr. Plinkett can finally get to watch his Night Court tapes!
@@guytech7310 I watch yt on my smart TV.
@@guytech7310 Yeah, this isn't true at all. The amount of people who own and watch TV rises every year.
I wish the development team much luck! I worked for years on holographic storage using similar polymers. We found writing the data would change its physical location in the medium, and the physical offset may not be constant. We could always recover the data, but the search algorithm was called far too often killing read performance.
We use holographic storage and computational technology all of the time. True, the physical nature of the storage medium is problematic for classical data storage and retrieval, but as far as a computational matrix, it actually proves ideal for quantum solutions to problems like classic cryptography and NP hard algorithms. We achieve this through the use of intra-phase encoding, which has the added advantage of making the indexing bit both encodable and addressable either laterally or temporally.
I knew I heard about this before. Could have been your work.
I was wondering about this, read in a magazine 20 years ago about a holographic disk which could store mass information. Sounds similar to this video
I Love hearing intelligence above my understanding. I am a artist so I am wired differntly Words is my things song writing Math is so hard to comprehend at a certain level my brain just shuts off. They start with a simply box by the time mathmataians get to this angle that angle. Brain has shut down.BUT ASK me about YAHWEH ELOHIM !!! I can go on for days@@TheFeaz
Damn, I was still waiting for the technology to mature...
CDs and DVDs weren't too long ago, but it still amazes me how fast tech moves.
For me those medias aren't that old at all but I've been talking with a lot of "young" people that doesn't even know what the heck those are, and I'm 37 yo.
I'm 15 and I'm surprised that people aren't familiar with CDs and DVDs. Hell, I remember watching Bob the Builder on a CASSETTE. It really is crazy how quickly innovation is moving, right?
It's a bullshit
CD and DVDS are still on the market and you can order it in almost all e-shops with PC accessories. As well as are still available audio cassetes (still better then CDs if you own really good "old school" cassette deck). Also I think are still made floppy discs.They doesn't seems be so useful, but.. I think it was very operative medium.
If we end up with a petabyte storage device you can count on smart phones with cameras that take a 500TB pic and we'll still be running low on storage. 😁 Thanks for the great videos!
Yeah. Smart phone pics are already comically large considering the lens is pure garbage. You can't get any quality back by having a larger sensor or using less compression. It's a telephone with a toy camera inside. Also a toy PC Since when did people even care about taking phonecalls when they're ouside, anyways? People are soooo dumb
@@ashscott6068 And yet technology is advancing so rapidly that soon AI will allow people to take a sub-par photo with a sub-par lens and the processor will turn the garbage into an Ansel Adams.
"Want what"? 🤣 I think that was her best joke yet.
Yeah, it took me a moment to fully take in, but hit hard then.
I’ve forgotten the joke.
Loved it!
Yeah, I didn't catch it until I read this comment. 😂
Great delivery.
Bit != byte
It's 0.125 petabyte which is very impressive anyways. 125 terabytes.
Make it a cube or some geometric shape and move the laser to read instead and you have "data crystals" like the scifi shows.
Has been tried. Volumetric density can be impressive, but only per crystal volume, ie if you ignore the small refrigerator sized peripherals for the laser and optics.
She literally said "Yes a bit isn't the same as a byte, but then again it's only a prototype". I don't know where the need to point this out again comes from 😅
They must have confused to Petabytes = Pebibits (not Petabits) analogy where:
(PB) Petabytes = 1 000 000 000 000 000 bytes (For easier read for consumers) and,
(PiB) Pebibits = 1 125 899 906 842 624 bytes (For the accurate details of bytes)
(Pb) 1 Petabits = 140 737 488 355 328 bits (1/8 of the actual size of Petabytes)
@@xeqqail3546, you’ve messed up units in your comment.
For prefixes: ‘T’ is ‘tera’ and equals 10¹². ‘Ti’ is ‘tebi’ and equals ‘2⁴⁰’. ‘P’ is ‘peta’ and equals 10¹⁵. ‘Pi’ is ‘pebi’ and equals 2⁵⁰.
For units: ‘B’ is byte and ‘b’ is bit. 1B = 8b.
Furthermore, there’s no need to complicate things with binary prefixes since those are only ever used in regards to consumer RAM. (And also for some reason Microsoft refuses to stop using them for storage). In context of this video those aren’t relevant.
Sabine has said that petabit and petabytes are not the same thing so she hasn’t confused anything.
@@mina86 , you’ve ALSO messed up units in your comment.
Love the channel. I produced Blu-ray discs for a major Hollywood studio. It's not a shiny coating. A purchased disc (instead of burned) is literally a piece of metal foil stamped by a glass master disc and sandwiched between plastic! That way you can create a 50GB disc in literally a second.
I have had so many Bul-ray discs fail to be read because i had touched it. It's for this reason that I can't imagine a "stable" CD that can reliably hold petabytes of data unless it's inside a sealed enclosure.
It’s crazy we moved too fast from those.
@@BonFShaw theres a sheet of plastic that covers the stamped portion. Touching it doesn't ruin it unless it's scratched or too much skin grease is left behind.
@@davidbetancourt4028 surface oil wont ruin a disc
@@howard5992Yeah, I thought about correcting that, but wasn't in the mood. Finger grease just attracts dust and will interfere with the reads. Easily fixed by cleaning. I would just take my CDs/DVDs under the sink and use some dish soap _(no fragrance)_ and rinse + dry with a gentle paper towel.
multi layer optical has been tried many times in the past. I remember around 2000 there was a company that had a 10 layer disk that could hold a lot but they never got off the ground. This 100 layer sounds more promising but like you say if the speed may be too slow right now. The one from the 2000s didn't even spin as it was in that format for simplicity and the availability of packaging would save money. The laser would do the aiming and all the work back and forth.
i remember that.....don't kid yourself..they do still have it...but we don't & we won't because it's not cost effective to make them for us....they have Many things in the private sectors we will never see in the public, because they can't make enough $ on mass production.
A bit is the smallest unit in computing, representing a single binary value, whereas a byte comprises 8 bits. A bit can represent only two distinct values, whereas a byte can represent 256 combinations (2^8).
There are some older architectures where a byte is 9 bits, or even 36 bits (which I believe is an IBM mainframe architecture). Noone's made a new architecture with those rare byte sizes, but at least the IBM version apparently does have new hardware being made for it, so there's always a risk that the difference with give you some trouble.
@@absalomdraconis Actually the AI computer company I worked for in the 80's, Symbolics, had a 42 bit word. With custom hardware to process it and running LisP.
But the point was to provide a simple basic most agreed correction to the bit/ byte confusion. Not to increase it.
nice job explaining 'bit' with 'binary value'
@@absalomdraconis
no.. you might be confusing words.. or bit sizes of memory.. busses..
36 bit words does sound...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/36-bit_computing
She literally said "Yes a bit isn't the same as a byte, but then again it's only a prototype" in the video 😅
Tapes are still used in archiving because they have yet higher density than hard drives. The problem with optical/magnetic media is latency of random reads. The main advancements in storage over the last 10 years has been making randomly addressable storage, like SSDs, large enough and cheap enough for consumer use.
Not really: Tapes deteriorate & are a pain to deal with, & high cap. tape drives have high failure rates & need to be replaced. Most backup\archival storage switched over to virtual tape systems which use hard drives with very high MTBF. Optical is dead for archiving storage do to cost & slow write speeds.
Yes it is amazing and completely unknown by the masses just how popular tape is for data storage. The massive robotics. And I understand new LTO-10 and LTO-11 are in the works yet?
CERN use magnetic tapes for LHC data storage. They migrate it to new tapes every 4 years or so. Tapes are cheap and low resource consuming.
@@guytech7310 Maybe this changed in the last 5 years. Up until 2019, doing offline backups on tape was economical and the media of choice for "archiving" in the strict meaning of the word (e.g. what museums do). Hard drives were always the next best thing so I would believe if you told me that most archives have moved on to those.
SSD need connection and be driven by a power source for long storage, i belive?
When I was in play-school, my dad and I used to use MS-DOS on our IBM Aptiva. We used Windows 98 in grade 2 while other computers were using either Windows 95 or 2000 (the latter being my schools computers). On that grade's school supplies list was a 1.44 MB floppy disk. 2006-7 we got a slightly more modern machine that ran Windows 7. I used Windows 8.1 in university and now I'm holding out against Windows 11 while on Windows 10. I've seen records, tapes, floppies, Zip Drives, CDs, DVDs, Blu-Rays, 256 *KB* USB sticks, 2 GB sticks, 60 GB sticks, 24 GB - 24 TB HDDs, 58 - 16 TB SATA SSDs, and 32 GB - 8 TB NVMe drives. I've personally owned a 1.44 MB floppy, a 256 *KB*, 2 GB, 16 GB, 32 GB, 58 GB, 256 GB USBs, 58 GB, 256 GB, 512 GB, 1 TB, 2 TB, 8 TB, 16 TB HDDs, 58 GB, 128 GB, 256 GB, 1 TB SATA SSDs, 58 GB, 256 GB, 1 TB NVMe drives.
The most data I've ever needed to store is about 5 TB.
Love DOS! 😁.....i was one of the geeks selected to test run Win10 a year before it was released..not only was it Free, i actually Liked it..not as flexible as 7 but far better than 8, which was a friggen block carved in stone. & 9 which was so bad it never got off the ground. i believe they called that one Longhorn? shoulda been called Longshot.
i wonder what happened to Billy boi's Assurance that Win 10 would be "The Last of Win OS" we had to buy..because it could be upgraded indefinitely. **snorts** They can keep 11..it's terribly flawed, chock full of spyware & bloat...totally Commercial.
The mechanical stability of the medium is also important. If the medium distorts, as plastics are known to do, the narrow tolerances for distances may be violated.
Transparent Aluminum it is then.
@@Deodexidus😂
I can see how this tech could play out
Won't load
Won't load
File corrupted
File seriously corrupted
What file?
same thing would happen to the discs used in hard disks... which is why u need to build the enclosure to protect the fragile material that stores your data on it...
but hey nobody say u cannot build an equally strong hard disk enclosure around the optical disc to protect it... this way u get best of both worlds and with a capacity much higher than hard disk... u would not even be worried about water damage as the storage medium itself is much more resistence so u can always take out the optical disc and replace its enclosure.. try taking the discs out from the hard disk without a clean room and specialized equipment without damaging the storage medium...
You can also just put some track markings in there. Then even if the whole thing stretches or shrinks a bit, you can still identify the data you're reading from an unknown place.
This could be what physical media needs to make a comeback. A TV show like Friends was released as a 40 DVD set which is crazy. Even the 20 disc BluRay includes a lot of disc swapping. Now imagine a single disc containing the entire series, bloopers, extras, commentary tracks, etc that didn't fit on the old discs, all in 4K.
There was a time where we had 80+ installations floppy disks for a software, then the CD arrived.
The entire Library of Congress is 10 terabytes. You could fit 100/1000 Libraries of Congress on one petabyte/exabyte disc.
VPN and a $60 1TB microSD is all you need to store a sizeable media collection. ...and not reward greedy CEO's through official channels.
CD and DVD became unpopular because they scratched easily and were unreadible.
CDs and DVDs became unpopular because of streaming not because of the material.
So, about three decades ago there was a guy, Dr Eugen Pavel, if I'm not mistaken. He built a thing that stored information in the same way, on a thick piece of glass, the capacity being about 10 to 20 PB and, being glass, the data would have remained in there for like 2000 years. The name of the product was Hyper CdRom, I think. Now we know who did he sell his technology :)
It is beautiful, clear and precise, the English language but the one that comes out of your mouth and then the TH-cam subtitles easily detect the words and translate them without fail
It's always funny seeing memory advance. It's like waiting for the rain and then suddenly there is a flash flood and you just sit there astounded.
This was already possible more than a decade ago, it seems we have 2 worlds: 01. What we are allowed to experience and 02. More than 5000+ US patents innovations/inventions that are made secret (classified!) for "security" reasons without proper oversight ... We are being lied too so many times on so many levels that even "scientists" are conditioned to believe the false tunnel vision narratives.
I'm not too excited about the prospect of more memory, as I think that what we currently available is enough. I don't personally find that we need more memory, seeing as we have plenty of it already. I would like to add that, in my opinion, the amount of memory we have access to is sufficient for all practical purposes.
your opinion is only including storage capacity. You also need to consider availabilty, cost, latency, data stability, storage-life, and there are so many specific use cases for many specific scenarios that you never really know all the times when this could be applied and be the most optimal solution. @@BET-BOY
@@BET-BOYI 100% agree. 640k ought to be enough for anybody.
@@BET-BOY Well, I guess if you think we have enough everyone should just pack it up. smh
I love a "comeback" when I still use the thing that's coming back 😆
200GB Quad Layer Blu-ray Disc, love these things for backup.
I've been a hipster since the 70's. People laughed at stuff that I did as a kid that's cool now.
Indeed. I hadn't realised CDs went away.
I just went back from streaming services to BluRay rental, because turns out that their image and sound quality is just so much better.
In January I bought a NAD cassette tape deck, and a few days ago og bought a ReVox B77 reel-to-reel tape recorder.
I am also collecting vinyls.
Forward to the past!
I have just read an article saying it is Pb (petabit), not PB(petabyte). 1B=8b. 1PB=8Pb=1000TB
Sabine! I love your content! And finally you have touched on an industry that I was involved in and I have a few comments about this video (most of the time I'm intrigued but don't fully understand what you are talking about!). I implore you to read my comments: I was a software developer for Blu-Ray products for a major studio (I'm under NDA so i'm not sure if I'm able to tell you which one).
In my opinion optical storage of any size is not coming back due to some inherent disadvantages. But let me explain the background:
Compact Discs were popular because it delivered Digital quality music to the consumer and high capacity data for installation discs etc for computers. CDs were simply not large enough to play a movie even in SD (Standard Definition)
DVD could store about 5GB... That was large enough to store a compressed movie in SD. Remember DVDs existed at the same time of the birth of the internet yet DVD was preferred because downloading 5GB was not practical back then... it was more convenient to go to the store and buy a disc. But something VERY important to understand is that the quality of a movie was GREATLY effected by the Variable Bit compression of the media.... there is a profession called a compressionist who artfully adjusts many parameters (mainly the Variable bit rate) in order to create the highest quality movie experience that can fit in 5GB...
Blu-Ray was introduced and at a minimum a Blu-Ray disc could store 50GB (and Blu-Ray is actually where the layering technology was introduced allowing up to 4 layers so that a Blu-Ray disc could get as large as 200GB.). Blu-Ray was large enough to compress HD (High Definition) and later 4k & HDR. incidentally can you guess what Blu-Ray's secret sauce is? its in the name! Blue lasers have a smaller light wave that DVDs red laser and therefore more data could be stored in the same sized media.
Now, you might think "Why not create a Gamma Ray disc! The wavelengths are even smaller!" That is true but getting a small nuclear explosion needed to generate gamma rays inside a consumer device turned out to be too challenging.... (ok, i'm joking about gamma ray discs)
The thing is people prefer Download to own for its convenience. Instead of going to the store and buying a disc, People prefer to watch the same movie online which will be delivered in a handful of GB vs a 200GB Blu-Ray because its easier, however, the download to own movies have a smaller bit budget therefore they are far more compressed (even if they brag being 4k and HDR the real measure of quality is a high bit rate in compression and high bit rate equals more bits that has to be downloaded etc.)
The other thing is that recording the data (i.e. Burning a disc) has always been a very long process.... hours and hours to burn a 50GB blu-ray... so even though it makes a great archiving product it is just not even close to as convenient as the cloud.
I think a movie put on a disc that stored a petabyte would be AMAZING but consumers will not favor it over the convenience of deciding he or she wants to see a movie and then watching that movie 30 seconds later without leaving home.
Again, LOVE your content! You have taught me much oh sensei!
Holographic Versatile Disc(HVD) was suppose to do 3.9 TB storage, that was 20 years ago and it failed miserably.
And several others, some of which didn't even got to the market or got a name yet. I think it will be the same here. It is not about density, but price per bit and speed. This system seem to fail in both counts. A petabyte over a too big price would cost too much, a petabyt with too slow speed it would take forever to write and read.
3.9 TB is a big call for back in 2000. You'd get all of Napster on that. Probably have to witness the heat death of the universe a couple of times before your 56k dialup modem downloaded it all though.
@@edmunns8825🤣🤣
It failed because of the speed of writing that was very low and the device was very expensive
It failed mainly also because there was no stable material storing the information. My Wife was working on that and it failed because every readout changed the material and introduced errors so bad that after some reads data was unreadable.
I'm so old, I saw toys that I used to play with as a kid being sold in an Antique Shop.
I'm old enough to seriously regret throwing away my first X-Men comic - 'cos it was the first X-Men comic and it's worth more than $50000 now :-(
Green Day is Classic Rock. Has been for AWHILE
If I feel old I just need to remember that the Rolling Stones started 1962 and are still active. ^^
😮
Some of us are old enough to remember listening to music at 45rpm and 78rpm 😉
Just mini disks! I loved those. The protective case type were probably the best. You can still find them although rarer.
Back in the late 1960s, a science paper that we got in high school told of an advance in data storage using a solid crystal and lasers. That paper stated that a block the size of a cigar box could hold all the music ever written and recorded. I never heard any more about that technology.
BTW, I still use CDs to distribute recordings and to make "mixtapes" for the car. Yes, my car is only 3 years old and has a CD player. I also use Blu-ray discs as extra backup for important files.
I am looking for increased storage for my home computer for audio and video recordings, as well as books and other files. There is a Reddit group for data hoarding, and this development will thrill them. Perhaps they've already heard.
There was a company in Australia many years ago that researched and proto typed a disc that was very similar to this they called it 5d disc by memoryit was over 26tb. It was supposed to be the come back of dvd storage. And everyone was very excited. Then the technology vanished. My guess is they sold to a company and they made it disappear.
More like more hype than substance and too many issues.
1:53 Flash drives don't use magnetism at all. They use basically MOSFETs with a floating gate. Charge is stored there (tiny amounts). The only integrated devices that used magnetism were magnetic bubble memories and thick layer magnetic memories (that were a kind of integrated form of magnetic core memories). They are not used anymore for a long, long time.
Well yes and no. There is no magnetic storage of information like as with hard drives, however MOSFET's work on a principle called Field Effect which uses magnetism to control the flow of current between the Drain and the Source of the MOSFET.
@@justincase9471The relevant field in FET is an electric field not a magnetic field.
@@Stephen.BinghamElectric fields are just magnetic fields that aren't straight.
Magnetic fields are gay electric fields, got it @@cortster12
There is also ferroelectric RAM
i remember invention of terabyte DVD using current hardware and discs with changing only lenses to donut-shape, it was in the news like 10+ years ago. Donut lenses upgrades laser to nano scale. But students of that american university don't deliver it to market, it's really hard to find documents about it in archives.
Yup a 3 laser disk, the ir for the instruction sets red DVD and violet HDDVD. They were an experimental format for video games 🎮 but didn't work out.
Who remembers the HVD (holographic versatile disc) that was announced some time back, never made it outside the lab, i think at the time it held a terabyte of storage which is still a fair bit.
Hi Sabine, great channel, very informative! Interesting to see how much could be stored on "newer" CDs. I havent had a CD player/reader/writer in my home for the last 10 years, but been thinking about it as a super affordable backup medium. Cheers!
And in addition to technical comments below, a bit is only one eighth of a byte, so a 1 petabit disk would be 128 terabytes of storage.
But fun to watch. Thanks Sabine.
I think maybe she was trolling us. Glad you caught it too.
Just a nibble bit ;-)
Oh, the byting satire ;-)
That is in the ball park of the backup tapes datacenters use today. So it wil come down to cost/longevity and time to market.
I wonder if this technology can be used for WOM (write-only memory)?
Usb flash / ssds don't have "magnetizable cells", though. It's charge that is stored. It can also leak given time :)
The unit cells store electric charge. It's basically either
DRAM: A transistor with a capacitor on one port. The capacitor stores charge that can be read out as current when the transistor is switched on.
Flash: A field effect transistor with an additional floating gate. On that floating gate charge is stored or removed (via electron tunneling). That charge modifies the threshold voltage needed to tun the transistor on or off.
What Sabine was thinking of is FeRAM (Ferro Electric RAM). It's similar to DRAM but uses a ferro electric gate. It's faster than Flash and longer lasting however it's storage density is far lower and it's much more expensive.
Solid state devices must be powered up occasionally.
@@bite-sizedshorts9635 Most people are blissfully unaware of the fact. "Let me show you those family pictures that are so important to me which I'm keeping on this janky Chinese USB flash drive I last plugged in 5 years ago"
Those floating gates on those NAND flash chips can keep their charge supposedly for about 400 years. I seriously doubt that we will even be here, let alone a compatible read out device 😂
@@christopherleubner6633 keyword is supposedly. And it depends on the MLC/xLC architecture, the more levels, the worse the charge retention. And it also depends on the temperature - the hotter it gets, the easier it is for the electrons to go travelling.
Just like with cd-r/rw and the like, which also boast ridiculous longevity which often is much worse IRL due to data layer degradation
Speed is definitely a major factor here. When SSDs were starting to become a thing, I traded in my old large capacity HDD for a lower capacity SSD. The speed increase was worth the storage downgrade.
In 1963 when I was a pre-teen schoolboy just getting into Sc-Fi, I imagined a "crystal memory", which consisted of a semi-transparent cube with light beams reading and writing in 3-D via 3 facets at right angles to each other, to create and read distortions in the atomic rows of the crystal lattice.
They're getting closer! :-)
Exactly this concept has existed for nearly 30 years now. Look up "three dimensional optical memory with a photoreactive crystal"
@@edry18 If it is EXACTLY this concept, then hasn't the concept existed for sixty years? 🙂
It was already invented in 1990. It is like a cylinder. Yup. Forbidden technology.
A similar method was discussed in a school science paper in the late 1960s when I was in high school. The article said that a crystal the size of a cigar box would be able to hold a copy of all music ever recorded.
@@bite-sizedshorts9635 As a lifelong music lover, I say "Sign me up!".
If the data retention is significantly longer than current optical media, this could be useful as an offline archival data storage method.
Current optical media (the quality ones) last longer than solid state and most magnetic storage. If stored correctly it can last decades, so if they can match that they would be great for archiving. The highest-quality optical storage we currently have uses gold layers though, so it will be difficult to equal that kind of durability with so many layers.
I stored hundreds of movies on 25 GB recordable Blu-ray disks. A few years later, they are unreadable despite storing them in cool dry places and being careful not to leave smudge marks on them. The rule of thumb is the more data you store on an optical disk, the more likely it will be unreadable. Putting a petabyte of data on an optical disk is a very bad idea especially for archival purposes.
@@kokoleka808 You need to use Archival grade BD-R and do a checksum and write at a slowest speed. I have optical media working for over 25 years and perfectly readable.
@@kokoleka808Sounds like you could use some M Discs!
I remember back in the early 1990s, at an IEEE meeting, they were talking about 3D optical state storage being the future. Basically the same thing as this, except it wasn't spinning. Good to see that 35 years later, this is still being talked about and China has finally gotten ahold of old IEEE papers.
Hi. I used to rely on DVDs as my storage for a while. There were some problems with that. Firstly, when they appeared, burning (writing to) to them could fail, destroying the disk. Also, while you could write several times, filling the disc gradually, it took quite a while for each operation, so I did that maybe 2 times. You did have re-writable discs, but most were one write only, so any modification (like removing a picture from a catalog) was impossible (the many-use ones cost about 5 times more and could also fail). So, if you had some data that you wanted to keep and access only rarely, or that you just wanted to backup, they were fine. Still, in time, some could degrade and this was the main reason I witched to other media eventually. I look to this new (or new/old) technology with hope, but I wonder if the issues suffered by the DVDs wont be even more pronounced here.
Note that it was possible to change data on a write-only disc, if it was written correctly the first time. Essentially, the data that would be erased or changed would not be linked to anymore and replacement data would be written to new areas on that disc.
Some of us, Sabine, still use DVD and even CD storage.
Extra backups of important files, playing movies, and playing music in the car. Yes, my car (3 years old) has a CD player.
She's talking jibber jabber. Optical discs were replaced by flash memory and streaming, not magnetic platten drives as per her graphics. Magnetic hard drives were around before and after optical discs. And we don't refer to flash memory as magnetic. (For the ultimate in security by obscurity, who is going to look on a 3.5" floppy for someone's passwords?) It will be interesting if optical memory makes a come back, though; a bit like how magnetic tape did for a while.
I like the CD and DVDs, because I kept losing the Flash Drives or accidently erased them.
@@jam99 Me: I would be the person who sees someones stack of floppy drives and goes "They probably put some important files on that".
If you want security, a password manager, and a means of securing everything:
Set up a raspberri pi or similar, with a USB connection to your PC that acts as a Keyboard input. What you want is a small program that will, on request, type in the relevant password after you hit a confirmation button (a physical button on the pi). For real fun security - have several books or such as text files on the pi, and have a program pull up the relevant file, and per algorithm enter the words and do replacements based on said algorithm. The way you secure that algorithm is using a physical device you plug into the raspberri pi - and of course, you can always have a physically printed back up put somewhere secure; to the untrained eye it will look like a math formula. No formula, no password - and since you could conceivably back most of this stuff up in plane text the secret sauce to getting your password is all you need. And because of transformations - brute forcing the password is impractical at best.
1:53 Modern flash drives store information magnetically, in little magnetizable cells? I think a citation is needed here.
You got disk storage and NAND/NOR memory mixed up.
Instead of writing some pretentious comment, how about explaining the mix-up?
@@JackTheAwesomeKnot Flash drives use NAND/NOR memory, not magnetic storage. There, explained the mixup. And also, said exactly as much before.
She also said a bit and byte were the same thing too. I stopped watching the video when she said that.
Nope you got it wrong, they dont store magnetically, they store by means of an electrical charge, think of an array of millions of tiny capacitors storing a charge that produces a 1 or a 0 if discharged.
CHAMPION ISLAND
Speed was a huge factor for CD's/DVD's as well. If it takes 4X longer to get the info off these discs than compared to an SSD or HDD, they will likely not be adopted except for companies using them for backups. But those companies using them for backups would only adopt this tech if the discs are stable and don't have issues with losing data over periods of time which is an issue with some CDR's where some could lose data after a while.
CD's stored well are going to hold data just fine. But the cost compared to a Tape Drive is astronomical. And since we already have the infrastructure for secure long term storage of magnetic media - the investment into storing CD's and validating the data etc just isn't worth the investment cost. And for data you are going to use semi-frequently, a pair of data servers with Raid storage arrays validating each-other periodically is so far above what the minimum requirement of most cases is - but is stupidly affordable these days, that you can basically set it and forget it.
CD Back up just doesn't really make sense. Even if a company were to produce an archival grade set of disks. Same kind of issue 3D-XPoint as a Memory technology had: It's really cool, potentially really efficient, consumer friendly in many ways but... For bulk scale it's too expensive, for speed it's too slow, and for consumers it's just not practical: In other words, it just doesn't have a big enough market; at least for now - improvements in the technology could very well see Resistive memory become faster and more stable, and if they can get the cost of manufacturing to come down far enough it would likely prove more reliable than Magnetic tape.
If made commercially, these would most likely be enclosed in a standard HDD casing of sorts, simply because anything on the surface of the disk would start to be a problem - imagine one of these getting scratched! Instead of one song being glitched out, you just lose gigabytes of data X_X
This is similar to floppy disks and hard-drives; both run on the same principle - but the HDD requires a level of cleanliness only available inside a sealed metal box!
When Philips started producing compact disks in England in 1983, many were skeptical and doubted if this would work at all !
Sony CDP-101 is the world's first commercially released compact disc player. thats in 1982.
@@newchannel1220 That was indeed 1982. But I refer to the production factory in England by Philps, who jointly with Sony develop ed the CD System.
I lived through it and i can tell you, it did not.
Newer generations don't know the Eldridge horror of your favorite songs being massacred by a dust particle :)
@@carlbrenninkmeijer8925 When did the Sony facility in Terre Haute start production?
Not MUCH later than Phillips.
Not me, when I saw optical video discs I waited for CDs to come out. It seemed the obvious next generation.
Very minor correction: Only the re-writable media used lasers to encode data on optical media like DVD & CDs. The movies and music you'd buy from the store were stamped physically with indentations.
She is talking about the glass master. People are jumping on her for this.
@@usx06240 I don't know what you are referring to here.
Thanks for the update Sabine! Promising news indeed. A few years ago I heard they were working on a similar technology in the shape of a cube, with data stored as holograms. They were talking about all the data that mankind ever created in the size of a sugar cube!
This would be so cool! I'd love to be able to save my routine back-ups permanently on optical media. Currently, I have to use spinning external drives and cycle them, as my back-ups take close to 10TB. Petabyte optical disks would be so cool!
My record collection didn’t survive the transition to CD’s, but I still have my CD collection despite the fact that they’re filed away and never used. Not even sure if they’d play on my computer, but I’m guessing they would. At 58, I have witnessed a lot of changes in technology in my lifetime starting with AM radios in cars with manual push button presets, the birth of FM radio, Hi fi stereos, eight track tape players, VHS video units for the home, digital watches, home computers, dial up internet with Earth link, cell phones, smart phones, etc. I would be interested to see what the next few decades has in store for us.
I still have records, CDs, and even a few cassettes. Don't have any 8-tracks left though.
Still rocking out to spinning silver disks.
Sadly, I never found a perfect physical media for a music collection.
Vinyl is the best for storage, as tapes and CDs both degrade and become unreadable over time. But vinyl has the recurring cost of needle replacement, can't be written to unless you have a vinyl lathe and press, some of the better encodings like the dbx remain proprietary, and last but not least, even Vinyl degrades as you play it, unless you use a laser turntable.
4 banger calculators, BBSs, 8-Trax, Japanese portable transistor radios (we couldn't make them reliable yet), color TVs, moon rockets, and Tang! 😁
P.S. Whoops.. almost forgot 'The Icecapades'!
Do I need to consider moving my cylinder collection?
At about 1:30. Commercial CDs were actually discs of aluminium mechanically stamped with all the holes representing the binary data in one go. They were only read using a laser. CD-Rs and CD-RWs were read and written (and erased if possible) using lasers, here the medium is a kind of ink I believe. Also, the description of Flash drives at 1:55 isn't right. Information isn't stored in magnetisable cells; instead it's stored as electrons across a transistor's PN junction. Applying a reverse polarity overcurrent causes the electrons to 'permanently' tunnel across the junction causing the transistor to read a 0, but the electrons can be forced to tunnel back using an even higher, current a limited number of times causing the transistors to read 1 again. Modern flash uses multi-level transistor currents for higher density storage, but the principle remains. In any case, it's not magnetic.
If this succeed then it can be a great thing for gaming consoles. There was a time of consoles like ps2, ps3, xbox 360 when you didn't needed to install the game onto the console from the disc you've bought. The entire game used to be fit on the disc. This was the time when blu ray discs were new in the market.
If this technology succeeds then definitely not a petabyte, but creating a small size version of these discs which can store atleast like 500gb of data would be enough to saving the feeling we used to get from using discs and making collections (ahhh good old days)...
And yeah ofcourse sharing your games would also be a lot easier.
Imagine losing all your data to a scratched Peta-byte disc. Not gonna relive the nightmare.
Imagine not backing up to another Peta-byte disc beforehand, or extabyte or zettabyte SSD!
The problem for me is not the amount of storage in a medium, it is the lentgh of time the medium can reliably store the information. Any regular optical disc for storage (different from commercial audio or video discs) uses dyes that deteriorate over time, somewhere between 10 - 20 years, the same is true for harddisc drives, and it gets worse for thumbdrives, or even tape storage that uses magnetism (LTO) to write the information.
I therefore switched for any photography, family research, document storage that need to last beyond my lifetime (especially for genealogy) to M-disc, that like the commercially produced entertainment discs burn a physical deformation (pit) into the information layer.
Gotta get permanent CD/DVDs. Rewritables degrade quickly.
I have some music CDs from 1995 that still work absolutely fine.
Yeah, we had that in the 60's, It is called a Record, and you listen to t with a record player. :P
@@Alondro77 That might be true, depending on the qualities of the dye and the protective layers. I have somewhat differnt ecperiences with write only disc, many of those uplayable now after only 10 or 15 years.
Write only discs use changes in reflectivity of the dye layer, which I guess can deteriorate through environmental influences.
M-disc however acyually change the surface of the "inorganic layer" by producing pits, similar to a commercially produced CD or DVD. The difference is in the inorganic layer the pits are burned into..some users refer to it to writing in stone. You need a burner with a stronger laser that can write the info that physically deforms this layer. reading can be done by any cd/DVD, Blu-ray reader.
I use 50 GB blu-ray M-discs for finisched projects, and 25 GB for projects in progress that i add the info to on a daily basis.
Also, as I remember, there are archival burnable CDs that use a gold layer instead of silver for better longevity when in combination with dyes.@@krautsky
@@silverthorngoodtree5533 I guess you need some help distinguishing between different information storage formats? There are various forms, like written records, records through mechanical, electromagnetic, or optical means, and I found it hard, nay, impossible, to retrieve information from what you call a record on a cd player or from a cd on a record player, or go even so far using a magnetic tape recorder to retrieve the information contained in those two media.
First time in my life that I really feel I am 40 😅 Sabine explaining CDs as paleology, priceless!
I used 8 track tapes, floppy disks we carried in school books on green screen computers, we used Dbase coding in computer class in the 80's. Then came casette tapes, and then CD's. Back then not too many people liked CD's, because it seemed the mediums were changing too fast. But, being able to change to a different track or song with a single button was pretty interesting. I know I always liked how amazing the sounds can be on vinyl. But being able to jog and enjoy music on a walkman was very enjoyable in the day. The only problems seemed the best way to run so they did not skip while you were running. There was a lot of changes going on back then and it was very fast. Portable phones had to be wired into cars or a large battery you would carry in a bag to now being able to walk around with it in your pocket. Modern smart phones are more powerful than most rooms full of computers back then. It will be nice to see how this new tech makes CD's more prevalant again.
Later iterations of the DVD had two layers and the empty ones where called dual-layer DVD+RW or DVD-RW. They almost doubled the amount of memory to be stored from 4.5 GB to 8.5 GB to the disk. But writing to those took a long time.
OUCH! I remember using cassette tapes for computer storage. My first real computer had a 140K Floppy disk. We would notch one side with a paper punch to make a Flippy for double-sided storage. My mother even worked seasonal during tax season as a keypunch operator for the IRS in the 60s. "If you're old enough..." That hurt. lol
Oh yeah, I'm so old I used IBM punch cards in college! (Apologies for the one upmanship)
Casettes? I remember 40-track, 2" wide, vacuum-regulated pre-feed reel to reel tapes with drives as big as a refrigerator and twice as heavy!
@@MilarzI've used all of these, single sided floppies and IBM punch cards, but before that I stored BASIC programs on paper tape that was punched on a 110 Baud teletype.
I remember using paper tape and punch cards for computer storage.
I still have my punch for making proper flippies. It wasn't just the read/write notch either. You had to punch another hole near the hub so that the light beam could count the revolutions and find data. This was on the Radio Shack Color Computer. The drives only read one side, but the disks inside the jackets were actually coated on both sides.
I still have all those disks, as well as the cassette tapes I used with my Timex-Sinclair computer.
Playing some of the big pc rpg games from the early 90's now and it's amazing how they put all these amazing ideas, stories and music into 20 megabytes or less.
In that time backgrounds, textures, sprites were very low sized and repetitive.
The gameplay could be fit into that size and scale still for the most part.
What you won't fit in is the hundreds of unique textures, the detail of textures, models, and so on. Basically: As Storage became more abundant, computational power grew exponentially, video games took advantage. This is why for years (basically 90's through till around 2014ish) games visual quality got remarkably better every single year. Realism got better - but if we look back now, every "realistic game" that was incredible for it's time is... dated, like severely. The games that have stood up in their visual look are those that went with a visual style that reflected the limits and capabilities of the time and pushed those to the limit.
So yes - what have gotten bigger are the art assets - audio, and visual.
In truth, most modern "Ultra" settings are just a "Lets roast the computer without gaining any real benefit of note". Where as, in the past, the Original Crisis game was literally a pushed to the limits showcase of the CryEngine and, ya, if you didn't have a top end system of the day: Forget it. It's why the entire meme around "will it run crisis" emerged because if a computer could run crisis decently, it was a really good system of the day.
What a fair number of people have kind of clued into now though, is - a good art style, that will run on the modern toaster equivalent of the past, is actually a far better way to go. For one - a good art style will stand the test of time better, but - and this is key - you can reach a wider audience. If you think about Controller + Mouse and Keyboard when you design the game as well, you can create a really good experience with the user selecting how they play the game to their preference - and that means both console and PC release simultaneously becomes more common. Add in control customization by default and - accessibility becomes better.
@@formes2388thanks for reply, wow. I'm playing the new master of magic remake and it actually does feel exactly like the original from the 90's (which was basically a civilization 1 rip off with fantasy), however no matter how many xcom remakes or similar styles I play I never like any of them as much as the first 2 games in the 90s, xcom and terror from the deep. I posted the original comment because I've started playing ultima 6 through to ultima 8, I got used to how bad the graphics are in ultima 6 and enjoy it a lot now (just put it down for a while because I have to grind and level up a couple levels to continue the main story)
Back then they had actual engineers working on games, not just art departments and DEI hires.
@@danm3570 Master of Magic remake??? I loved that game. Too bad it didnt grow as civ into series. to some extent heroes are simular... but not the same.
Great way of explaining this, enjoyed your sense of humour 👍
read about this 30+ years ago in a science magazine at school, back then it was called PAP-DVD (using Photo-Adressable-Ploymeres) which could be 3d aligned with a green laser and read with a red laser, only problem back then was, that the material was very brittle.
2:33 Correction:
A bit (b) is not the same as a byte (B)! One Byte is composed of 8 bits (or 9 bits if there is a parity bit). So a Petabit (Pb) is one eighth (1/8) the size of a Petabyte (PB).
I am astonished at the number of people who don't comprehend what Sabine said and think a Physicist doesn't know a bit from a byte.
@@stargazer7644 It sure sounded like she said that a bit was a byte. Watch the video again.
@@bite-sizedshorts9635Pay attention to all of the words around that point. Listen to her explanation for why she's interchanging petabits and petabytes. She EXPLAINED it FFS. Check the transcript.
I think the problem is she says ‘a bit >is< the same as a byte’ but the transcript says ‘a bit >isn’t< the same as a byte’. I think she just misspoke and it wasn’t caught in the edit.
@@OrangutanSquashI think it's definitely her accent rather than misspeaking. After all, the whole sentence is redundant if a bit is a byte.
Dear @Sabine (In the interest of clarity) the CDS/DVDs didn't die because they were superseded by HDs (HDs were there already.. and they always had more capacity than CD/DVDs). CD/DVDs were media storage external to the PCs, and in that sense they were replaced by flash-drives, (or pen drives, or whatever people call them in their respective countries). And (OMG... this one was worse...) a bit is not the same as a byte. A byte is an arrangement of 8 bits.
Gosh. You'll be saying that a nibble is half a bite soon. Pluto is a planet, a KB is 1024 bytes and a nibble is 4 bits.
Personally, I want to see the storage devices they had in Babylon 5. They appeared to be clear Octahedron shapes that fitted into the palm of your hand. If, in the present day, we have worked out a way to store data in multiple layers and access those layers by a laser; Perhaps I will get to see it in real life. Encasing, the device, in a scratch proof diamond would be a plus.
th-cam.com/video/DX8SspfeiXI/w-d-xo.htmlsi=qQ1Sk20N1JhHjjZn&t=63
You are a star @ party’s:). In the interest of clarity:)
"and [HDs] always had more capacity than CD/DVDs" weeeelllllll, not "always". When data CDs were first released in 1986 their 650MB size dwarfed the 10 to 20MB hard drive sizes of the day. CD-R came out in 1988 when hard drives were about 40 to 64 MB. It wasn't until about 1995 that computer hard disks passed the 650MB mark. So for about the first decade CDs were bigger than hard disks.
And Sabine knows full well the difference between a bit and a byte. You didn't listen carefully to what she said.
Remember ZIP drives? And Sony Mavica floppy disk storage cameras? I had both.
@@cornwallav8rJaz drives!
"What do we want?"... man that intro was jarring but the punchine was worth it 🤣😂🤣😂
At 1:54 Sabine makes a factual error in saying that USB flash drives use magnetic storage media. That is obviously incorrect. USB flash drives, as with all SSD drives, are semiconductor storage media which use NAND memory cells.
I worked in storage pretty much my whole career, and multi-layer optical has been worked on since at least the mid 1980s. The hold up has always been commercializing it. Frankly I hope this time they can make it happen, because my 2 x 6 TB HDDs are also filling up.
Time to buy an 18 TB disk. 😂
my 3x 18tb hdd are also filling up. Not to mention my other two 16 tb drive and 14tb....:D😁
@mormacfeyholly cow!!! that's how much storage you have? And I thought my 150tb was much.
@@swifty1969 what data types are you storing?
music, video, pics...you know the usual.
Knew it was a good idea to hold on to my cd collection
@1:52 It is my understanding that flash memory uses a static charge that is insulated by SiO2 to store data. The voltage in each cell is carefully controlled and voltage is measured to determine the cell's data.
You missed 25 years. Hyper CD-ROM with an initial capacity of 1 Petabytes (1000 TB) and a theoretical capacity of 100 EB (1 million GB) was invented by romanian scientist Eugen Pavel in 1999.
1:55 In flash drives there is nothing magnetizable. The info is stored in a charge of a very long lasting capacitors. Frau Hossenfelder didn't bother to learn the hardware.
Whatever happened to the crystal research? Some people were looking into storing data inside crystals like they used in Babylon 5.
Excellent! Hopefully this can serve as a long term solution for data archival and be available at some point commercially.
100gb M-discs were all the rage but now I hear the discs aren't as great as the archival grade they were stated to be.
This is so cool! Thanks for making me aware!
I knew it! RED DWARF was right! They stored Holly on a massive disk! It must have been one of these!
I'm old enough to have grown up with cassette tapes 😂 so I remember
I remember reading about this disc technology about 18 years ago and it was known as Holographic Versatile Disc.
DVD was the precursor to this because DVD introduced the idea of layers to use the volume depth of the disc to store data.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_Versatile_Disc
As a film maker, I still have clients that prefer their finished video loaded on to a Bluray or Std. def. DVD. This allows them to choose from the opening menu whether they would like to "Play Video" or simply go to a different section of the film. Also, a DVD player is easily connected to their TV which is not always the case with a drive of some sort.
I worked as a computer service tech when the 1st Gigabyte HDD came to market. I remember our head tech looking at one and saying, "Why would anyone ever need a whole Gigabyte?" (also, this was when every new CD drive was a 2x speed 3x and so on)
4:29 the most important is how reliably can store the data in long periods of time
@@doesnotcompute6078 I wonder what would we know about middle ages if they used 30 year storage
@@dmitripogosian5084 Indeed, tales and songs around the camp fire proved to have greater endurance - albeit with some data corruption.
@@doesnotcompute6078 I have a lot of DVD and CDs that still work that are far older than a decade. And reading old files formats are generally not a problem. Not is the context of running fairly mundane stuff. Software can be a bit more tricky. But hay. Even most of the old software can be run on modern computers. You may have to tinker a bit with your OS or use emulation. But you can almost always get it running if put just a little effort in.
And is not that odd. A lot of people are in the preservation of software. Often the biggest optical is the ones that own the copyright of that software. Many of those do not interest or even want you to run your old software. So make it hard to do so. This phenomenon is more common with more modern software. Always online requirements and such is rare in software that an older than a decade. But it is become a bigger and bigger problem.
@@doesnotcompute6078 If CDs die within 5 years, then my 30+ year old SEGA CD collection must be ghosts or something right now...
1:15 For info, the "some kind of plastic" was polycarbonate.
I love collecting movies so this news excites me as both a collector AND avid proponent of archiving!
I still use bluray disks for long term video footage storage. Big name hard drives failed me but bluray disks newer failed me. But storage bins are growing. This would be nice thing for us if they come to consumer level.
"In modern flash drives the information is stored in little magnetizable" - no, not how flash storage works. It's charge state stored in floating gate MOSFETs.
2:33 A bit is _not_ the same as a byte. A bit (short for BInary digiT) is the smallest unit of information and can have only two values. A byte is a group of 8 bits that as a unit can have 256 values. Bit is abbreviated with a lowercase b, while byte is abbreviated with a capital B. For example, 8 MB is 8 megabytes, but 8 Mbps is 8 megabits per second.
She literally said a bit isn't the same as a byte, and then gave her justification for playing fast and loose with the capacity. Do you seriously think a physicist needs your explanation of a byte?
@@stargazer7644She literally said “A bit is the same as a byte”, which is incorrect.
@@WolfsToob That may be what you heard, but that is not what she said. Listen to all of what she said. Does the rest of it make sense with that interpretation? If you still aren't sure, turn on the transcript. She said a bit ISN'T the same as a byte. That's why she then explained herself. Listening/reading comprehension sure isn't what it used to be. Just as you didn't pay attention to the rest of what I wrote. Do you really think a physicist wouldn't be familiar with bits and bytes?
@@stargazer7644 What video are you watching? Again, she literally said a bit is the same as a byte, and made no explanation to back that up. Also, a physicist is NOT a computer scientist, they are completely different fields of study. So your argument is moot.
@@WolfsToobF'ing trolls. And upvoting your own posts makes you look like a fool.
This type of technology was available 20 years ago. It never became commercially available because they wanted to exhaust the market for standard DVDs first, and the prices wanted would be prohibitive. But then the trend shifted back to hard drive storage because of their increased capacity, portability, affordability and perceived better security. They were talking about having the entire Star Trek franchise on one disk, and even greater technology was in the works before it was abandoned. Oddly enough the old CD/DVDs if looked after would well outlast the hard drives and SSD of today. Modern PCs don't even have players for them but if you have an old portable maybe you can.
I've heard of a similar technology at least 10 years ago. And by the looks of it - they still have ways to go before they have a marketable product.
Your entire description of what CDs are makes them (and me) sound a lot older than they (and me) actually are.
Is that how you cope with aging? Denial?
@@martinm6368
a shiny, spinning disc will always seem futuristic for me, even if a pinkynail-sized micro SD card holds 100x the amount of data
Correct me if I'm wrong but Flash drives and SSDs don't have magnetized cells. The unit cells store electric charge. It's basically either
DRAM: A transistor with a capacitor on one port. The capacitor stores charge that can be read out as current when the transistor is switched on.
Flash: A field effect transistor with an additional floating gate. On that floating gate charge is stored or removed (via electron tunneling). That charge modifies the threshold voltage needed to turn the transistor on or off.
What you are thinking of is FeRAM (Ferro Electric RAM). It's similar to DRAM but uses a ferro electric gate. It's faster than Flash and longer lasting however its storage density is far lower and it's much more expensive.
I thought the same thing =)
you are correct
So what is the most cost effective way to store archival data being there's a tradeoff no matter what medium one uses to record and store data?
@@kokoleka808 it depends for how long you want to reliably be able to read them, dried DNA and holographic crystal edition are rather cost effective for century long storage, but they are not exactly cheap yet
@@kokoleka808Mechanical storage is going to last the longest.(Old school stamped CDs, Craving Pictures in stone). CD-R have a organic dye the will degrade rather fast (Ever try to read a cd-r you made in the late 90s?).
I still have the original bubble from my first spirit level which Mr Stephenson was kind enough to present to me after trialling his Rocket in 1829.
Back in those day's 'Bytes' were just a pastie with a mug of tea...and a terror bite was a pastie with a maggot in it!
The problem with CDs was how they were used to read and write and how easily they were to scratch. If that gets solved, they will make a comeback. Other than that, they're only as good as the Floppy Drives Data Centers use to backup their data.
Storage has stalled and this really needs to come out. I remeber back in the day when you had a 700mb cdrom but your hard drive was only 170mb. Crazy times.
has it? ssd's have been getting much faster, with more storage, all for cheaper every year. HDD's went from expensive, to very cheap for massive amounts of terabytes.
I remember that as well! My first computer had a 500 MiB HDD. It ran Windows 95. You had to burn discs if you wanted to have more storage space 🤣 (There were also floppy disks but those were a joke - a little over 1 MiB.) But in those days your modem was slow a.f. and digital cameras were relatively low-res, so you didn't need as much space I guess, as there was no way to get that much data. Nowadays you have to have many GiB to install the latest bloated version of Windows.
@@awesomedavid2012 It seems like it's been $100 or so for a few terabytes for a long time (more expensive for SSD). But since you say it's improved ("very cheap for massive amounts of terabytes") I guess I'll have a look at the current situation...
Storage has stalled? I have petabytes stored on 30 TB SSD drives.
@@stargazer7644 Most of us can't afford that, and the price per storage hasnt gotten cheaper in the past decade now that SSDs have taken over and often are a requirement for games
I remember reading about this multilayer method many years ago, starting to come out finally !
Cheers
They already did multi layer They just upped it from 2 to 10x
As far i remember bd have up to four layers.
In flash memory the data is stored as an electric charge due to quantum tunneling. Is not magnetic as a hard drive.
Great video!
My first computer had 1kb of volatile memory, it was a Sinclair ZX81 in 1981.
You could add a ram pack of 64KB but who would ever need this much memory?
It started me a journey.
I've often wondered if we could increase the capacity of dvd and bluray. Imagine getting an entire tv series on one disc, that really would scare the streaming services.😁
I would love to see that!
There are dual layer / dual sided DVDs that could store 8+ hours of video
Would it? Have you considered the cost of distribution? The costs of digital communication in terms of price per unit bandwidth is dropping all the time, and there is no obvious end in site. What is more, as wireless communications become more iniquitous, then you can access the content anywhere, any time. You can change your mind, watch something on a whim and don't have to worry about filing your physical media so that you can find it again. Streaming allows you to search too by any number of different means. Developments in AI is going to make media more dynamic, and tailor content to individuals.
If it's compressed down you can already fit several seasons or a whole series on a bluray, it might not be quite streaming quality but it would be way better than DVD.
Should be possible, GD-ROMs are just 1.2GB CDs, there are also 1.2GB CDs on amazon today which is almost 2x the standard 700MB CD. so if we could double CD sizes, then I imagine DVDs and blu-rays could be doubled the same way too.
With the "Smaller and More Powerful" in full bloom on this recording device, If it works out as well as the creation of the floppy disk and then the hard CD/DVD, this will be as revolutionary. I envision 1 inch disks or sticks or info layered cubes holding medical or encyclopedia sets, movie series with recording / decimating 1/4 pocket size devices. Even quick change detailed info. to tell self operating machines how to transverse distances or preform operations on living beans. In future, if miniaturized enough, how about on person hearing aid sized ready available info. The wide use of such devices could bring in "A Brave New World" for the better. :)
We used to have encyclopedias on CDs back in the 1990s.
Great info! Thanks!😊
Just as an FYI, Blu-Ray is the current optical storage standard; one needn’t look back to DVDs. Also, the spelling “disk” refers to mechanical-/physical-based data encoding/retrieval, while “disc” refers to wave-privileged media, such as optical discs (as spelled on the IEEE standard logo for the “Compact Disc”).
remember optical storage? I remember tape cassettes and even 8 track tapes and later when blank cd media was about $8 per disk, which is about $15 today
I've gone back to vinyl, sounds _so_ good with good hardware and audiophile-wax.
The first blank CD-ROMs I saw were $13 each. Now I have boxes of 100 that cost only about 10 cents a disk.
Tape storage has made somewhat of a comeback for cold storage sites. I think if they managed to get even in the high TB of data on disks and it was somewhat fast read and write, there would be interesting impacts to backup sites as well. But I think disk media needs to pick back up. Physical media entertainment is slightly more of a hassle but it has its cathartic moments as well. Having the special feature, bloopers, and games on a disc was sort of special. Heck we even bright back VHS tapes so that we can play movies for our kids and have a hard stopping point rather than a streaming service where either it keeps going or you have a title screen stay on. Plus the commercials are so 90s and I love the nostalgia. And if you play them enough your kids inherit some of that nostalgia
Tape never left. Tape is now, and always has been, the most cost effective backup media.
The last proper optical disk was the M Disc, via an M Drive. Instead of using optical/chemical imprinting, it actually burnt a bit on the disk. Good for at least 100 years. There were disks in their own protective shell, which was a good ideal. Let us hope anything newer can be holistic and everywhere.
I remember when an 80 column by 12 row punch card was "state-of-the-art" data storage (YES, I'm that old!), along with 7 track magnetic tape. Someday, we'll be storing data at the sub-atomic level, 0's and 1's being determined by the direction of spin of the electrons.
It's kind of pedantic, but it's more correct to say _storage_ instead of _memory_. Memory typically means ephemeral storage where computer programs and data are stored while the program is running. And "storage" implies persistence, aka retains the data without needing power.
If you want to be pedantic: Be properly Pedantic. Definition - Memory: the faculty by which the mind stores and remembers information.
So if we want to be pedantic: We use Memory in a Storage Device to Store our Data for future retrieval and use. But the underlying technology is a Memory Technology; we have several of those by the way.
1. Punch Cards - Punch out patterns into a card, stick it into the machine and it reads back the data.
2. Optical Media - You are basically setting an impression into a piece of plastic or state shifting material (for re-writable disks usually, single use disks are a write and set once type affair). So basically... it's a fancy punch card.
3. Magentic Memory - Drum Drives, Tape Drives, Floppy Drives, and Hard Disk Drives all fall under this.
4. Flash Memory - Basically an Electron trap where you are checking the charge state of a cell, and using a small circuit to reset that bit each time you read from it.
5. Resistive Memory - ReRAM/3D-Xpoint are terms you can look up. Basically alter the resistance of the cell and you alter what will be read back, which sets your bit state. Pretty cool tech, but - never really found it's stride before Flash Media improved and got dirt cheap.
@@formes2388Incorrect. Computer memory is not the same as human memory, just as a computer mouse is not a mammal. "Memory" and "storage" have distinct meanings when talking about where data is saved. Their definitions are well established, and using the wrong term is confusing. Over half a million people so far have now been taught that "compact disks" (incorrectly spelled) are a type of memory. They are not.
Thank God no one is being pedantic on this and no one is making correctional statements upon correctional statements.
To this day, I cannot understand why the Holographic Versatile Disc (HVD) was not introduced, apart from the fact that it was developed during the war between Blue-Ray and HD-DVD and the companies decided that there was no point in investing in a newer medium because they had bled money on the previous war on media standards. Unfortunately, several times in the history of technology, better solutions have lost out to the economics of money.
The HVD was stillborn because of the rush to ditch most physical media in favor of the "cloud" which was gathering steam when it was being developed. Thumb drives and SD cards took care of whatever local storage needs still remained and were more compact and easier to use although not as cheap per byte nor as archival.
Can we say “Betamax?
Lol I love her dry humour...I am a fan Sabine 😂
As someone who has been using optical media for a quarter of a century, announcements of amazing theoretical leaps forward in storage capacity like this go back decades and are like breakthroughs in fighting cancer: each time I see one I say to myself 'You'll never hear about this again'.