Technology

Still, it's a good thing if it means energy savings at data centers.

For home and SMB use there's already a notable absence of backup and archival technologies to match available storage capacities. Developing one without the other seems short sighted.

My first seagate HD started clicking as I was moving data to it from my older drive just after I purchased it. This was way back in the 00s. In a panic, I started moving data back to my older hd (because I was moving jnstead of copying) and then THAT one started having issues also.

Turns out when I overclocked my CPU I had forgotten to lock the PCI bus, which resulted in an effective overclock of the HDD interfaces. It was ok until I tried moving mass amounts of data and the HDD tried to keep up instead of letting the buffer fill up and making the OS wait.

I reversed the OC and despite the HDDs getting so close to failure, both of them lasted for years after that without further issue.

Same here. Been burned by SSD's too though - a Samsung Evo Pro drive crapped out on me just months after buying it. Was under warranty and replaced at no cost, but I still lost all my data and config/settings.

I feel the exact same about WD drives and I'm quite happy since I switched to Seagate.

A 2tb SSD can now be bought for 100$ at least.

Black ops 6 just demanded another 45 GB for an update on my PS5, when the game is already 200 GB. AAA devs are making me look more into small indie games that don’t eat the whole hard drive to spend my money on, great job folks.

E) meant to say instead of buying a bigger hard drive I’ll support a small dev instead.

Oh, they'll do compression alright, they'll ship every asset in a dozen resolutions with different lossy compression algos so they don't need to spend dev time actually handling model and texture downscaling properly. And games will still run like crap because reasons.

This picture: brought to you by some bullshit AI

Best I can do is a 3.5'' inch SATA to USB adapter case with one of these tiny SSDs glued in

Aren't a lot of the 2.5" ones already empty space?

How big, and how expensive, would a 3.5" SSD be, if it actually filled enough of the space with NAND chips for the form factor to be warranted?

I know right. Why is this not a thing already? I mean I understand the various U.2, U.3, and EDSFF are great for high density data center installs. We have a 1U box in production that could be as high as 1 PB given current densities with E1.L drives but that’s enterprise level stuff. I just want a huge 3.5 SSD I could put in these pro-consumer level NAS boxes or maybe even one I could build myself for my home lab.

Or the 8k photos of vacation dinners.

I do like that the picture on an article about a 40 TB drive is clearly labelled as 1 TB. Like couldn't they have edited the image?

Seagate Exos is usually ok. Their generic stuff, is sometimes crap, but that's true of all manufacturers, really.

That being said, I'd be nervous with a single huge drive, no matter where it's from. And even as part of a redundant structure, the rebuild times would be through the roof.

You'd still put the 40TB drives in a raid? But eventually you'll be limited by the number of bays, so larger size is better.