What is Digg?187 Comments
- badjoke, on 10/10/2007, -1/+119Woooah. Tech news. What is this odd, new front page addition?
- sb76117, on 10/10/2007, -1/+102Now it'll suck 16 times more when you lose it.
- luther70, on 10/10/2007, -1/+89More space than my first 5 hard drives combined. The first terrabyte SD should be due out in what 5 years?
- LegendarySock, on 10/10/2007, -14/+93Thats a lot of (portable) porn.
- Lane, on 10/10/2007, -1/+78Could it be that no one wants to pay $700 a movie?
- goldfenix, on 10/10/2007, -7/+69Could somebody explain to me why our SD Cards now hold as much as our next-gen optical (aka DVD) discs?
Seriously, I don't get it. If we can fit 32 gigs in a tiny SD card, why is it that our best of the best optical medias can't hold much more? - aldenhg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+54And yet we can only get 64 GB solid state drives. If you stacked these and put on a notebook SATA interface you'd have one hell of a drive.
- Kappa00, on 10/10/2007, -0/+34Well this is where you would have a change in the way the market was set up. People would bring their sd cards to a kiosk and purchase movies which download on to the sdhc card.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -5/+34so you're happy to spend money on a new SD card but wont replace your ***** old mp3 player?
idiot. - mooninite, on 10/10/2007, -0/+28That's where SDHC comes in.
SD = 16MB - 2GB
SDHC = 4GB - 32GB
You have to have a device capable of reading an SDHC card. Many devices (cameras) have a firmware update to support the larger sizes... Unless the protocol is different I imagine it is just FAT32 support since it's just a filesystem change.
The Nokia N95 supports MicroSDHC cards... imagine a cell phone with 32 gigs. :P - stillasleep00, on 10/10/2007, -1/+27"Imagine popping one of those in your digital camera; you'd never, ever run out of room."
I beg to differ; I shoot RAW format. - weeble, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2532GB is NOT the maximum addressable size of a FAT partition.... 32GB is the Microsoft artificial limitation set on FAT32 because they decided to set it to 32GB. The maximum addressable size of a FAT32 partition is 8TB by default, and if you tweak the cluster size, you can get 16TB (but not recommended). Welcome to the world as defined by Microsoft.... if you use a real OS (ie anything but Windows) and format a 250GB partition (just to pick a random partition size bigger than 32GB) as FAT32, Windows has no problem using the entire 250GB FAT32 partition.
- quomen, on 10/10/2007, -5/+25Porntent Portables
- satzio, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19I think this is the chip that they found in Terminator 2.
- tuzziel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+18from 1 to 32GB in just about 3 years ? Jeebus.. what storage will come next (in like next 3 year) ?
- obliviousfool, on 10/10/2007, -2/+20I'd be afraid of losing it!
- yensed, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17Toshiba makes the HDD's for Zunes and iPods. I wonder if the end is near for HDD based players.
- hackmyballs, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16Digg is the new MTV
- EXreaction, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17Solid State Drives use a different technology than flash cards (or, at least good ones do).
- mrynit, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14now i can swallow 32gb of data easily
- kenvsryu, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14This would go great with the asus eee. Solid state FTMFW!
- jonnypyro, on 10/10/2007, -3/+15toshiba: makin it easier to hide your pr0n
- Lane, on 10/10/2007, -4/+16actually its an secure digital high capacity card, it wont work in regular devices that aren't designed for it so no sticking this into your 10 year old mp3 player. sigh
- Tenoq, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Still too slow to be practical. These are SDHC Class 4, so 4MB/s sustained write. Even if you could adequately stripe the SD cards you crammed into a 2.5" box, you still wouldn't get adequate performance. That, and this type of SD card doesn't have the same reliability or re-write capability of real SSD designed for notebooks.
- 3wiid, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11CycloDS Supports SDHC epic win!
- nirav72, on 10/10/2007, -4/+14I'll take the the-rapist for 400 Alex.
- leethefilmer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1196GBs.
- XIUgraag, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Maybe a few years ago...current flash memory can be used like 5-10 years of continue writing on them.
- aussieNickuss, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Would SD's or MicroSD's have the read/write speed needed for a SATA interface?
- kitsched, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I'm betting that in a few years they'll be a collectible antiquity.
- aussieNickuss, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9I just pulled the MicroSD card out of my phone, just so I could imagine 8GB fitting on such a tiny piece of plastic. Not to mention up to 32GB for something not a whole lot bigger!
- cquinnd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Seriously? Because Moore's Law does not work (the same way) with optical devices.
The current SDHC spec has a theoretical limit of "128 GB in LBA mode (28-bit sector address)".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Digital_card
It has been only a matter of time before the transistor density increased to the point of allowing for higher capacity flash devices.
Optical media, on the other hand, has to be designed with the maximum capacity already specified and manufactured (at least in the lab), to insure that the physical media will be suitable for current and future uses for the objective lifespan of the media.
DVD's have had a specified limit of 17GBs for years now. But nobody makes use of the dual-sided dual-layer design.
HD optical media (HD-DVD and Blu-Ray) have max capacites far ahead of this announced SDHC card release, and their initial capacities were ahead of SD But again, most studios are still content to just use the single layer recording surface for their films
(Double layer gives 30GB for HD-DVD, and 50GB for Blu-Ray)
There have already been multiple diggs posted for "next generation" optical storage media that far exceeds current capacity. But that also require additional cost in new readers/writers and mass production of higher density media to take advantage of the new optical formats and recording methods.
http://digg.com/tech_news/1_Terabyte_DVD_s_
http://digg.com/tech_news/Terabyte_holo-memory_
http://digg.com/tech_news/50_Terabyte_discs_will_have_all_your_porn_on_protein
http://digg.com/hardware/Mempile_Fit_a_Terabyte_on_a_CD
With flash devices like SD, all that is required is changing out the old high density chips, with newer higher density chips, and maybe updating the firmware to reflect the new capacity.
You are comparing Apples and Steaks here (not even apples and oranges, this is an entirely different category of food). - p0tent1al, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6wayy more than that buddy
- cnldelta, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Who gives a damn for crystal based storage anymore. Micro SD for the win!
- steviebaby, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Midget porn takes up less space
- luther70, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Actually if the OS is design right these would be perfect for storing the OS but not data. Even MS bloated OS code would fit nicely on this. In theory the only write you need to do are for the OS updates.
- r3zonance, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6You don't have to "imagine" solid state drives in data centres. IBM already makes 128GB Solid State Disk Drives, each unit supports upto 4x32GB Solid State Disk Packs.
And has a hard disk for backup, in case of power failure, which gets some crazy speed. - OrangeTide, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6My gun takes SD cards...
- tshawkins, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6There is a hack for the iPod mini , that removes the physical Hard Drive and replaces it with a Compact Flash memory module, as well as increasing the battery life, it increased storage. It quite feasible that if apple have used a recognized storage interface like IDE for their memory interface which is also feasible that a hack like this could be made to work.
- satzio, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Oh snap. You all three get diggs. I can't imagine what it would be like to mail someone 32 Gigs of movies and mp3s.
- chubbstar, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6or when it corrupts
- obliviousfool, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4At 700 dollars it would be like losing your hard drive and your wallet at the same time!
- djphatjive, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7HAHAHAHAHAhahahahhaahah Wait what?
- chubbstar, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6yea and a lot of photos to corrupt all at once should anything go wrong.
- EXreaction, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Dugg for "And you could keep your entire music collection on one or two of them."
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+432GB for RAW still holds a lot. Lets say it's 10MB/RAW file. That's about 3000 pictures you can store. Are you going to shoot 3000 pictures in a day? I don't know anyone who would shoot that many pictures in a day on a single camera. To take 3000 pictures, you would need to take a picture about every 10 seconds for 8 hours.
- smackhero, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4yes, the 1's and 0's are actually tiny teeth marks.
- tubalcane, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Sorry but cameras keep improving. My 3 year old D2X creates 20MB RAW files. The Canon 1DsMkIII is 21Mpixel and has a 14-bit A2D so its RAW files are probably around 50MB. This card would only hold 655 images. Professional sports photographers often shoot at 10 frames per second. They could easily take 3000 pictures during one sporting event so they would still need a few of these cards.
- ZMerlin, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Ummm... yep, but there's something about a limited number of write cycles, meaning that the SD Cards are not really suitable for operating systems such as Windows (amongst others) that would constantly write little files to the SD Card. This would make the SD Card fail sooner ran a conventional Hard Drive. If you just wanted to write data to the SD Card, say, a few thousand times, then keep reading it, well then you wouldn't have a problem.
Correct me someone if I'm wrong...? - cquinnd, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Windows PE, or Windows Embedded.
The same concept as most live-cd or specialized boot OS implementations. Dedicate some temporary space in the system RAM for the regular writes and system updates, then write those changes back to the storage device when the system is shut down or on user request... extending the life of the flash media. -
Show 51 - 100 of 183 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is