What is Digg?73 Comments
- Nyaos, on 01/09/2009, -4/+30There was a story on this yesterday on the front page...
- KotZer, on 01/09/2009, -0/+24Related by Keyword BETA!
SDXC memory cards promise 2TB of storage, 300MBps transfer
* 1285 diggs
* Made popular 1 day 3 hr ago
* 207
* www.engadget.com - ninetimes, on 01/09/2009, -2/+17No. There is no 2TB card being released. There is a spec that supports a theoretical maximum of 2TB. Not news.
- Equinox1, on 01/09/2009, -4/+15http://digg.com/hardware/SDXC_memory_cards_promise ...
Buried. - fitzal77, on 01/09/2009, -1/+10Or about 1 (one) 2TB file.
- PeanutCheeseBar, on 01/09/2009, -0/+7Doesn't matter if the secondary submitter ignores it.
- cawpin, on 01/09/2009, -2/+9Related by Keyword.
First story:
http://digg.com/hardware/SDXC_memory_cards_promise ...
From yesterday. - vilago, on 01/09/2009, -1/+7you can NEVER have too much space. its like having too much time or money. totally contradictory.
- inactive, on 01/09/2009, -1/+6Really? A whole gigabyte to a single hard drive? Do you know what the failure rate of those things is! I'll stick with 540mb drives.
- dlogic, on 01/08/2009, -1/+5approx. 6hr to fill it, not bad!!
- khanable, on 01/09/2009, -1/+52tb SD cards?
Awesome.
..but how about some 2tb hard drives first.
Reliable ones, at that.
Please? - thejohnfloyd, on 01/09/2009, -1/+5Ever heard of windows mobile, blackberry or palm? Pretty much all of the devices running those OS have removable media...
- kjk437, on 01/09/2009, -2/+6I'm looking forward to reading your comment again in 20 years.
- ArmandoM, on 01/09/2009, -0/+4I don't think anyone ever said that 640 kilobytes of SD storage should be enough for anyone.
- junml707, on 01/09/2009, -0/+3Someone help me out here. The article says that 2 TB can store "...more than 4,000 RAW images, which is the uncompressed mode professionals use, and 17,000 of the fine-mode most consumers use."
Wouldn't that mean that a SINGLE picture on 'fine-mode most consumers use' would be over 100 megabytes?
(2 TB divided by 17000 pictures = 117 megabytes/picture)
Am I doing my math wrong, or is my camera WAY behind the times??? - fitzal77, on 01/09/2009, -0/+3That was a short announcement with an inaccurate title. This story is more of an explanation, and it is a different article on a different site by a different author.
- meghalc, on 01/09/2009, -1/+4Flash and SSD is the future. Lets forget the platter and move on.
- syndustry, on 01/09/2009, -0/+3one's engadget and one is gizmodo. they ape each others stories...but this isn't a dupe...
- mlaprise, on 01/09/2009, -0/+2old news:
http://www.bokehnews.com/story.php?title=the-sd-as ... - Jonez176, on 01/09/2009, -0/+2Additionally, we are years away from being able to fit 4TB onto a small chip. This new spec just says, "when 4TB comes along, we will be ready." It was merely just a decision to use a different CPU.
- ryan850, on 01/09/2009, -0/+2I do.. How much does this cost?
- altgeeky1, on 01/09/2009, -1/+3Or about 50,000 FLAC files :)
- JamesBondJr, on 01/07/2009, -4/+62TB? That means I could have an iPhone with something like 2TB of storage, that might be enough...
- StormTroopr, on 01/09/2009, -0/+2SDHC supposed 2TB theoretically also.
- psibladeZX, on 01/09/2009, -0/+2Why even bother with hard drives at that point?
- Jonez176, on 01/09/2009, -0/+2OK. Time to set the record straight and give you guys a little computer engineering lesson. This is not newsworthy because it merely means they decided to support a file system better than FAT32. FAT32 is only capable of addressing 2^32 (~4 billion) bytes, which explains the SD maximum of 4GB. The SDHC specification was a desperate attempt for them to be able to address more memory without switching away from the FAT32 standard (which they should have done a long time ago). For SDHC, all they did was switch from byte addressing to sector addressing, which potentially can waste massive amounts of space and should have never been done in the first place. All this news is saying is that they DECIDED to use a different CPU in their memory units that is capable of supporting greater than 2^32 addresses. This technology has existed for a LONG time and it's way overdue.
- SteveMax, on 01/09/2009, -1/+3Every Symbian, Windows, Palm, Blackberry, almost all featurephones, and even most cheap cameraphones/musicphones have a microSD/HC slot. Android is nowhere near being "among the first" to incorporate it
- rythie, on 01/09/2009, -1/+3No it doesn't mean that at all. 2TB SD flash cards are a long way off and the iPhone doesn't even have a SD card slot anyway.
- dartmanx, on 01/09/2009, -0/+2What I'm thinking is that this may actually kill tape backups. Sure, it may take 6 hours to fill the thing, but if you schedule backups for overnight, no problem. And cards take less physical storage space than tapes.
- rusty_g, on 01/09/2009, -0/+2dupe
- fitzal77, on 01/09/2009, -0/+2Good call. That seems like math to me. I would only be able to fit 4 pictures on my current XD card if my photos were 117MB each.
- godsdead, on 01/09/2009, -1/+2How in the hell have we gone from, 1gb.. 2gb ...8gb SD cards, to 2000gb's? that's in insane leap, and a hell lot more storage than i have on my PC at present! and with their compact design, this would be a gigantic leap, what would the price range be on a product of this standard?
- vilago, on 01/09/2009, -0/+1too much.
- Jonez176, on 01/10/2009, -0/+1You completely missed the point of my post, but that's ok because everyone's ignorant on the internet.
- Amazetbm, on 01/13/2009, -0/+1640KB of memory...period. Before your time, I guess.
- mpoulin, on 01/09/2009, -0/+1How much does the little bond hottie that keeps appearing the "True" ad cost?
- Topher06, on 01/09/2009, -0/+1That is fine to spec a card for that capacity, but it reality we won't see cards with this much storage for a 'coons age.
- Mackofalltrades, on 01/09/2009, -0/+1Pfft that maybe could store... My Porn folder of 2007.
- rythie, on 01/09/2009, -0/+132GB is the limit of the SDHC spec. hence this why this is needed.
- searayman, on 01/09/2009, -1/+2well hypotheticaly they could make an ipod or iphone that could be 2 TB if they make soemthign that small with that much memory
- M4tchstickM4n, on 01/09/2009, -1/+2Which was also submitted by another "Power User"
- plaguepony, on 01/09/2009, -0/+1This is a file formatting Spec. Hard drive specs "Support" 16 Exabyes, but no hard drive comes close to that mark.
- hokie47, on 01/09/2009, -0/+11.5 all most there
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8 ... - alpharaptor, on 01/09/2009, -0/+1do i need ANOTHER adapter?
- Timmmm, on 01/09/2009, -0/+1Yeah the specs officially only allow up to 32GB.
- pheyze, on 01/09/2009, -1/+2There was, why is he being dugg down?
- ArmandoM, on 01/09/2009, -0/+1It's already dumb not to have backup solutions for your files.
My data is worth way more than whatever the price of the media it's backed up on is. - rob2oo4, on 01/09/2009, -3/+4Wow, and I remember people raving about a 64mb sd card years ago..
- altgeeky1, on 01/15/2009, -0/+1Yeah, we got that part.
- sstephenson, on 01/09/2009, -0/+1Now if I could just put one in the Wii....
-
Show 51 - 76 of 76 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is