Ok sure, but where's the advanced anti scratch device?
100 layers just means more data lost to a single scratch.
Listen, the idea isn't that you'll have a walkman that has every YouTube video you'll ever watch on it.
It's that you'd backup an entire fucking enterprise on one disc. Schedule it daily. Pay the support team to swap the disc out every night. Who needs infrastructure for ransomware, we got DISCS!
I suppose with that much data capacity they could halve the storage and add redundancy. My question is will it only have 1 reading head? That much data is going to take a very long time to read, unless they're doing multiple layers at a time,
With a rate 1/2 you can't expect to correct more than 5.5% of errors.
I am unfamiliar with the math used to calculate that value.
Would it not work like a parity RAID where each sector would have parity bits in a different location on the disc?
I'm not familiar with it either, but I'd say that using RAID on a single disc is silly... There's a good reason it's not a common practice on single HDDs.
A scratch on the disc usually means many scratches on the disc.
Put it in a case like an old floppy disc.
What of you put it on an enclosure that has the disk(potentially even more stacked on top of each other) plus all the hardware needed to read the disk. Then all you would need is to provide power and plug in a data cable.
Or like a UMD or mini disc? Still have to insert it into something to read and write, but the discs themselves are enclosed and protected unlike CDs and DVDs and Blu-ray. Basically they're floppy disks, but instead of magnetic tape inside the shell, it's an optical disc.
I like this and for what it will likely cost I'd hope would have it. Other than scratches, dust, oils from touching, light and other contaminates are the biggest threat to longevity.
Believe it or not, first gen DVD-RAM came exactly like this. But manufacturers cheaped out / wanted the drives to be more easily compatible with CDs. So the caddys were scrapped.
Due to the caddy nature I believe there were plans or limited availability of double-sided disks. That would have made it so much more appealing I think.
Newer discs are way more scratch resistant. I've never heard of a Blu Ray or a current gen game getting scratched.
Here I thought that was because nearly no one uses them anymore. The large volume of folks who didn't coddle their DVDs are Netflix subscribers now, the few people who do still bother to buy movies or games on disc are the folks who care about them, and thus don't leave them on the TV stand to get scratched.
It's a mix of both facts, but the blue part of BluRay is a protective layer that is way better than DVD.
sauce plz?
I can't remember where I first heard or saw it, maybe in an ad on an actual blu ray, but this link confirms it.
Ok sure, but where's the advanced anti scratch device?
100 layers just means more data lost to a single scratch.
Listen, the idea isn't that you'll have a walkman that has every YouTube video you'll ever watch on it.
It's that you'd backup an entire fucking enterprise on one disc. Schedule it daily. Pay the support team to swap the disc out every night. Who needs infrastructure for ransomware, we got DISCS!
I suppose with that much data capacity they could halve the storage and add redundancy. My question is will it only have 1 reading head? That much data is going to take a very long time to read, unless they're doing multiple layers at a time,
With a rate 1/2 you can't expect to correct more than 5.5% of errors.
I am unfamiliar with the math used to calculate that value.
Would it not work like a parity RAID where each sector would have parity bits in a different location on the disc?
I'm not familiar with it either, but I'd say that using RAID on a single disc is silly... There's a good reason it's not a common practice on single HDDs.
A scratch on the disc usually means many scratches on the disc.
Put it in a case like an old floppy disc.
What of you put it on an enclosure that has the disk(potentially even more stacked on top of each other) plus all the hardware needed to read the disk. Then all you would need is to provide power and plug in a data cable.
Or like a UMD or mini disc? Still have to insert it into something to read and write, but the discs themselves are enclosed and protected unlike CDs and DVDs and Blu-ray. Basically they're floppy disks, but instead of magnetic tape inside the shell, it's an optical disc.
I like this and for what it will likely cost I'd hope would have it. Other than scratches, dust, oils from touching, light and other contaminates are the biggest threat to longevity.
Believe it or not, first gen DVD-RAM came exactly like this. But manufacturers cheaped out / wanted the drives to be more easily compatible with CDs. So the caddys were scrapped.
Interesting, do you have a link to a picture?
There is one on the Wikipedia page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD-RAM
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/DVD-RAM_FUJIFILM_disc_removable_without_cartridge_locking_pin.jpg
Due to the caddy nature I believe there were plans or limited availability of double-sided disks. That would have made it so much more appealing I think.
Newer discs are way more scratch resistant. I've never heard of a Blu Ray or a current gen game getting scratched.
Here I thought that was because nearly no one uses them anymore. The large volume of folks who didn't coddle their DVDs are Netflix subscribers now, the few people who do still bother to buy movies or games on disc are the folks who care about them, and thus don't leave them on the TV stand to get scratched.
It's a mix of both facts, but the blue part of BluRay is a protective layer that is way better than DVD.
sauce plz?
I can't remember where I first heard or saw it, maybe in an ad on an actual blu ray, but this link confirms it.