>Seagate’s new 3.5-inch drive holds four times as much as

Can't wait to lose all that data when it fails.

You won't be able to afford one and its not a commercial drive
Its for businesses.

That looks like it'd cost approximately $5000.

>>56047249
Samsung's 16TB SSD runs around $4k. I could buy a person for that price.

File: Creed.jpg (56KB, 320x400px)

56KB, 320x400px

i can get you a kid for a lot less

File: 1442517921582.jpg (24KB, 367x358px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 367x358px

>>56047290
>poorfags

>>56047282
Motherfuckin' THIS

>>56047296
make that $35,000 and you will be right on the dot

>>56047282
no drive exempts you from the need to make backups

>>56047863
if the backup fails?

>>56047872
that's why you test your backups, and why you use a 3-2-1 strategy (at least three copies on at least two different kinds of media with at least one copy off-site)

>>56047889
if they all fails?

>>56047249
>3.5"

About fucking time.

>>56047898
then you should worry about escaping the natural disaster that's happening instead of saving your data

>>56047898
What if the world ends?
What if terrorists mow you down with a van?
What if your life was meaningless?

You can't plan for every contingency, stop acting like a cunt.

>>56047872
Restore the other backup.

Nobody in the world getting one of these will get just one of these. It'll be a rackful.

But Seagate really aren't my first choice for SSDs. Interesting to see Micron competing with Samsung in this sector, however.

>large storage arrays, active archives and read-intensive environments
So, slow writes on this one then. Samsung have them beat there for sure.

When the costs of this kind of thing come down, hard disks are dead for good. I am not at this stage sure they'll have long enough to get to HAMR.

File: 24228 - 1doll animal_ears cat_ears fake_liquid green_eyes short_hair silver_hair.jpg (40KB, 472x310px)

40KB, 472x310px

>60TB
reeeee I just want affordable 1-3TB consumer SSD's

>>56047898
Not him but that is very unlikely and that scenario should not be used as a case against any one drive.
>>56047940
>Not preparing for the world ending as a result of being mowed down by a terrorist driving a VW camper
It's like you want your life to be meaningless.

>>56047950
i want to fug dolfie

>>56047863

But getting a seagate is fucking asking for trouble.

>>56047944
>hard disks are dead for good
Yeah, because there's no usecase for a storage device that doesn't need to be powered in order to avoid erasure.

>>56047898
The only way all of them fail at the same time is if the world ACTUALLY ends.

>>56047950
when we get them they'll probably be QLC shit that has no endurance, and they'll still be twice the cost per terabyte of spinning rust

>>56047249
>The 60TB capacity is enough to store 400 million photos or 12,000 DVD movies
I fucking hate metrics like these. What do they consider to be the size of a photo? 60TB is 60 million megabytes, but they claim 400 mil photos? 150kb per photo? fuck outta here.
Also what the fuck is a DVD movie? Do they realize no one knows what those are anymore?
When will they learn that 60TB is an impressive figure on its own without having to resort to shitty comparisons.

File: 23926 - tagme.jpg (622KB, 816x1228px) Image search: [Google]

622KB, 816x1228px

>>56047978
i wish i was a dolfie

>>56048020
But how do we make these numbers relatable to the normies if we don't relate it to low quality mp3 songs or number of excel spreadsheets.
Are you sir, suggesting that we should just report the truth instead of talking down to people

File: 1440262446754.jpg (560KB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

560KB, 3264x2448px

>>56048020
>When will they learn that 60TB is an impressive figure on its own without having to resort to shitty comparisons.
Because that's how the average mactoddler measures things.

Mushkin is the only SSD manufacturer worth a shit. Everything else is garbage.

>>56048228
>nothing but TLC drives
>best anything

2/10

>>56048020
>150kb per photo
You dont save your photos as vga jpegs?

>>56047889

>spare hard drive with a clone of my OS drive right after installation
>backup to 3TB network drive
>backup in a AES-256 encrypted file on torrent called "WikiLeaks insurance 20140808"

I just want 1TB SSDs under $100.

>>56047282
It's an SSD though....

>>56047984
For archival purposes you should be using tape anyway.

>>56049210

>tape
>not Blu-ray

Blu-ray has lower costs of entry, smaller denominations, higher availability, and is far more resistant to environmental conditions than tape. Plus, you can use it in a lot more physical locations. Your dad isn't going to have a fucking tape drive, but he might have a Blu-ray drive.

>>56047249
www.theregister.co.uk/2016/08/10/toshiba_100tb_qlc_ssd/