Seagate announces 6 TB HDD

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following news: Seagate announces 6 TB HDD[newsimage]http://static.myce.com//images_posts/2013/01/myce-seagate-logo.jpg[/newsimage]
[quote][/quote]
Read the full article here: http://www.myce.com/news/seagate-announces-6-tb-hdd-70372

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

This is great news for people, like me, who rip their Blu-ray movies to HDD for streaming.

Hmmm… price? Oh, wait… let me bend over first.


#3

more capacity is usually always good, but the SMR technology has YET to prove itself as a LONG-TERM storage solution. Remember, many of us are USED to having a hard drive for 3, 5, maybe as long as 10 years with reasonable re-sectoring… and NO catastrophic oopsy-daisy failures of the drives. The new designs including SMR & helium SEALED drives will be meet with consumer backlash if it can’t be proven that these drives can withstand the typical 5-7 year cycle for most consumer use (that’s about when the average consumer would DUMP an entire PC system for obsolescence reasons more than anything). .


#4

6TB does sound nice thougn :wink:


#5

I wonder how much is left after you format it . LOL


#6

[QUOTE=alan1476;2718012]I wonder how much is left after you format it . LOL[/QUOTE]

If it’s more than 5GB I’ll more than happy :bigsmile:.


#7

[QUOTE=vroom;2718013]If it’s more than 5GB I’ll more than happy :bigsmile:.[/QUOTE]

My 1TB Samsung EVO was only 931gb after formatting, so I doubt that a 6TB platter drive wont lose more than 1 full TB after formatting but I may be wrong.:wink:


#8

[QUOTE=alan1476;2718014]My 1TB Samsung EVO was only 931gb after formatting, so I doubt that a 6TB platter drive wont lose more than 1 full TB after formatting but I may be wrong.;)[/QUOTE]

I seriously doubt that you will be wrong.
Also the same capacity is available on my spinpoint F1 1TB HDD, 931GB so I should make that close to 5TB of usable capacity.


#9

[QUOTE=vroom;2718017]I seriously doubt that you will be wrong.
Also the same capacity is available on my spinpoint F1 1TB HDD, 931GB so I should make that close to 5TB of usable capacity.[/QUOTE]

So in essence what we are looking at here is an advertised 6TB drive, that you only get 4.5Tbs of useable space. I am not complaining about 4+ TBs of useable space, I could never use that much space, even if I decided to save my bluray rips for ever before burning them ( which I have all but quit doing, I haven’t burned a bluray disc in a year, but all that aside, I think the manufacturers of these high storage drives should say on the box, ( only 4+ usable space after formatting, it should be a requirement.).:wink:


#10

Calculating…calculating…

A 6 TebiByte (base 10) harddisk would hold 5587.9 GigaBytes (base 2).

That’s probably [I]nearly[/I] enough to hold DukeNukem’s collection of high-definition midget prØn. :stuck_out_tongue:


#11

I thought XP could only recognize up to 2TB. Is that true?


#12

[QUOTE=OhSnApMp3;2718050]I thought XP could only recognize up to 2TB. Is that true?[/QUOTE]
I think that’s 32bit not XP but all [B]64bit [/B]systems can recognize over 2TBs if I am not mistaken. I do believe back in day, Seagate had something called " Extended Capacity Manager" maybe google that and see.:wink:


#13

It would hold approximately 5.6GB of data


#14

[QUOTE=alan1476;2718051]I think that’s 32bit not XP but all [B]64bit [/B]systems can recognize over 2TBs if I am not mistaken. I do believe back in day, Seagate had something called " Extended Capacity Manager" maybe google that and see.;)[/QUOTE]

If I remember correctly, the 2TB partition limit is a limit of MBR-formatted drives, so the 2TB limit applies also in 64bit Windows systems.

You will need to format your drives as GPT (Guid partition table), if you want to have >2TB partitions.


#15

Have we all forgotten that programmers consider a megabyte to be 1024KB and not 1000KB, like most normal people would? And that’s why each GB of drive capacity formats to roughly (or so my calculator tells me) 976MB. Also don’t forget that Windows will reserve a portion of that for it’s own particular uses and you may not see that portion reported as usable capacity.

As far as I’m concerned, the drive manufacturers are not being dishonest at all because they can’t be responsible for how a particular operating system will utilize the raw capacity of their drives.


#16

[QUOTE=pcarey;2718095]As far as I’m concerned, the drive manufacturers are not being dishonest at all because they can’t be responsible for how a particular operating system will utilize the raw capacity of their drives.[/QUOTE]

I agree, it wouldn’t be appropriate for them to make assumptions about how the drive will be used. They should report the raw capacity - by which I mean all capacity that’s available through the drive controller (but not any internal spare sectors that the outside world can’t directly see or use). File system formatting is a higher layer application issue which is outside the scope of what the drive manufacturer can predict or is responsible for.

However, I do object to their misleading definition of a gigabyte. Data has always been properly measured in base-2, unless somebody is selling something. But I understand they have to play this game because if one company does it, the others don’t want their drive to look inferior.