Comments on: The 500,000 GB MP3 Player

By: @MrTrustedGuide

@MrTrustedGuide — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 05:11:15 +0000

with that capacity, it will be able to save my entire collection

By: jas.ken.wer.

jas.ken.wer. — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 00:46:39 +0000

Yeah mp3's will disappear with that much storage. Lossless media players WILL hit the market, and people will have a TB of RAM in their computers because gamers pretty much drive personal pc power nowadays. Then there are scientists at the LHC who will record terrabytes of data per day from that wonderfully monstrous thing. I'm looking for something bigger than my iPod because I'm almost out (looking at the Archos 5 500Gb), and I want all my digital copies of my blue ray collection in the palm of my hand.

As far as I'm concerned, computers and other electronic devices are bottlenecked as they are now.

By: Hildr

Hildr — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 16:02:34 +0000

im holding out for the Tb ipod

By: Bex

Bex — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 07:51:07 +0000

That is the beauty of this technology, the read/write speeds are thos of the electron!

By: Colm

Colm — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:53:00 +0000

this kinda thing will be used by large corporations, data centres, research etc. I still havn't filled my 60gb ipod yet…

By: Ed

Ed — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:47:14 +0000

Two more things about storage:
1: A big holdback in industry is the "idea" that we never have enough space. We get people working on deleting and/or archiving to cd financial and text records. Man hours are still being put into worry over "disk space". Meanwhile, my work email is limited to 100MB; I'm rolling through that many times a year. Disk space has been irrelevant in terms of text and data for years. This experimental technology just sinks it 5'11" deeper.

2: One of these chips at 500 tb will not be enough for a trip to the holodeck (a la Startrek). Movies could be on their way to holoprojected 3d environments combined with tastes and smells or whatever. Could it be on a "pocket device" like an MP3 player, sure, but it will be hooked to my jacked up IMAX quality eyeglasses and my Sensall 1200(tm) full immersion body suit, or wirelessly transmitted to a jack in somebody's brain (not mine thanks.)

I say bring on the storage and lets get creating and experiencing.

Ed

By: DarkMasterHalo

DarkMasterHalo — Fri, 02 May 2008 10:08:44 +0000

Oh and for information, 1 Exibyte = 1024 Petabytes, which 1 Petatype = 1024 Terabytes, so we don't need Ext5 yet. I don't think we will see 1 Exibyte Hard drive soon with the type of hard drive we have now. We will see the 1 Exibyte technology with holographic hard drive. Just check it. I don't trust this technology as if there is a power surge, it destroy any data on it. This is not the case of Sata/IDE hard drive. Corportation will always prefer Real Hard drive as they can retrieve information of a highly damaged HDD.

Take care !

By: DarkMasterHalo

DarkMasterHalo — Fri, 02 May 2008 10:04:13 +0000

We don't need Ext5 yet because Ext4 is supporting 1 Exibyte of volume and file size. Just inform before asking for a new technology that already exist :P. Soon I'll get Fedora 9 on Mai 13, which is with Ext4 support.

By: casper911ca

casper911ca — Thu, 01 May 2008 15:58:16 +0000

Why?
I dont think I even have enough Videos to fill something like that! I only have about 12G of music.

What are you going to store on it? The human genome plus a few other things... like the whole internet, haha.

By: surfed

surfed — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 21:09:06 +0000

That means we have to design a new file-system. ext5 anybody?

By: Jelle De Loecker

Jelle De Loecker — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 09:21:14 +0000

I agree.
Let's forget about the mp3-bit, they only put it there so people could understand how much space it actually is, it can be of so much better use!

I would love to have so much space for my video-editing. Forget about HDV, AVCHD (and the entire x.264 stuff) let's go totally lossless!

By: ultraelectromagnetic

ultraelectromagnetic — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:18:22 +0000

interesting.
can't they come up with a technology that can record every thing that has happened in your life the whole of your lifetime? i wonder how large the file size would be (depends on reached age), coz i'm thinking that's one thing one can put in that kind of storage.
well, anyway, you have these kind of technologies and humanity surely is quickly approaching godhead ala daneel olivaw in the foundation series of i. asimov

hmmm..

By: NightKev

NightKev — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 20:11:53 +0000

Guys, you seem to be stuck on the whole MP3 usage thing. Just because the article writer for some reason mentioned MP3 players, doesn't mean that's the ONLY thing it can be used for.

By: Razor512

Razor512 — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:11:32 +0000

Who cares about a mp3 player that holds that much, unless your an uber pirate you will never afford enough content to fill it.

even todays ipods you cant afford enough content to fill them

By: Randall Gordon

Randall Gordon — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:49:53 +0000

"You all do realize that this will never hit consumer use at all."

Right...and 15 years ago no one could imagine a use for anything beyond 10GB...

I'm already maxing out multiple terabytes of storage with RAW files from my Canon cameras and they're only 8MP. Where are we going to put hours and hours of 3K+ resolution video from next gen camcorders like Red's new Scarlet? 500TB+ would be a godsend...

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:46:32 +0000

First of all, a 500-terabyte MP3 player is stupid. With all that space, go lossless.
Secondly, where are you going to get the money to fill that thing with songs?

It's just not practical. Don't expect to see a 500,000 GB music player anytime soon.

By: Ant

Ant — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 06:12:00 +0000

Will people please calm down! This is *nano-technology*, highly experimental and a long way from being available in high-street stores!

By: andrew

andrew — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 06:11:27 +0000

@ Sean Michael

this is hard storage, like a flash drive, not a spinning disk like in your current hard drive, there are no “seek” speeds, there is just indexing, and with a harddrive that size you can index to your hearts content and not worry about running out of space(which is the current limitation with indexing on current flash drives). OH, and as a side note, I hope this meets with your strict grammar requirements.

By: Squibs

Squibs — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 05:43:36 +0000

The only problem so far arising is clearly fabrication problems, it's only that of the molecular formation of carbon and its use in electrical circuits, it's pretty much a newly introduced technology at this moment, but no doubt will be mastered as it will need to for any staggering technological advances.

People saying "Stooop, stop everything! It's too much storage" Are exactly the type of people that are stopping the ageing of technology. Computers need to step out their infancy and keeping them in diapers is not the way, let the baby walk, let it fall down, but it'll grow along the way and we both will benefit.

People back in the 80's didnt think they would ever use 16MB of RAM (I'm not entirely sure of the amounts back then, I'm only 17) but look at us now, real money bags and technologically inclined people are chewing up 4GB and even 8GB (which I admit, is overkill). So we shouldnt live with the mentality "It's too big", these technologies need tested, proofed and patented before their release anyway rendering this technologies release in at least 2 years? (although we wont see it for longer).

As for read/write speeds, being flash, it should be slower than physical drives but then again, this could be picked up on?

I can only give respect to the likes of Superdonut who stands for something in technology.

Let the baby walk.

By: Guardian

Guardian — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 03:04:05 +0000

Something like this would certainly make some existing technologies like CD's, DVD's, Blu-ray discs completely redundant. In fact, you could probably kiss good-bye to mechanical hard-drives and see a move to mechanical-less plug-in devices like memory cubes in much the same way that we use USB memory sticks today.
Carbon is also a much better conductor than silicon so we could probably expect to see cooler running CPU's etc.

By: Daniel

Daniel — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 02:50:17 +0000

@Asday

You do realise, it would have been better to put a comma after "Good god".

Weird.

By: badcop666

badcop666 — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 01:50:15 +0000

please! no more storage! it only full of all the crap typed by the cranky white guy!

no more **** blog posts! please!

he no more place to put! stop him!

By: pontianak

pontianak — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 01:20:55 +0000

Definitely good for storing porn.

By: Lunatic Experimentalist

Lunatic Experimentalist — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 00:22:57 +0000

The update program for Windows 2020 will need 500,000gbit of memory because all the binaries will be fractally compressed by a quantum computer.

As for the R/W speed – I would expect it to be quite fast. Nanotechnology tends to be highly parallel so it would be like RAID striping hundreds of SSDs.

By: amator40

amator40 — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 00:16:52 +0000

Thank you, Superdonut. And thank you for using proper english and grammar.

The myspace generation (sigh).

By: Acronyms

Acronyms — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:34:20 +0000

Viva the progress!

By: Miguel Benevides

Miguel Benevides — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:14:35 +0000

ton of storage? too much space? WTF?
Do you have any idea how much new information is created each day? And even if we didn't care, sooner or later “they” would convince us that we really need it… I bet that Microsoft's OS around 2020 will need 500.000Gb (memory, of course) just to run a process to update itself.

By: Superdonut

Superdonut — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:09:57 +0000

Let's just hope they'll use that storage for SOUND QUALITY. How about 24bit/96k? instead of CrAPPLE'S ipod. Don't people buying downloads realize they are buying music that won't even sound decent on a crappy home stereo? It's just sickening to think about. There are a couple players out there that support lossless codecs like FLAC or APE but you can't purchase music in that format, which leaves millions STEALING music just to get CD QUALITY, and that doesn't guarantee anything. Have you heard Springsteen's MAGIC--that thing is so horribly compressed that it's unbearable at CD quality on my audiophile home system. I can just hear CrAPPLE ads saying: it holds 14 billion songs (at 32k)!!! A miracle.

Stand up for your sonic rights people! The industry is selling way-below-CD-quality-downloadable-sub-par-sonic-crap for MORE than a CD costs, yet the CD has only one or two decent songs. The industry keeps missing it. Now they are even doing it with Audio Books. (Sound Quality not as important there, but AUDIBLE's highest quality downloads are 64k, and they are selling them for MORE than the actual books, with NO OVERHEAD (except for the actor/reader, and some server space). $20-$50 for a 6-8 hour long book at 64k? That's INTOLERAUDIBLE!! They don't even tell you which translations are the classics. I'm not saying stealing is right, but I am saying the industry has done everything it can alienate itself from the public, and to discourage purchasing by offering lower quality, less selection at HIGHER PRICES.

This technology sounds amazing. Let's insist they use it in a way that conveys the beauty of music, the soul of the voice.

Sincerely,

Superdonut

By: Mr Wright

Mr Wright — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:04:17 +0000

Why are there so many people posting here with absolutely no regard for grammar or spelling?

By: remo

remo — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 22:56:45 +0000

sweet, then i can store my HD porn collection on there.