If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Disappointing hard drive value (was: raw files are HUGE)
Ken Lucke wrote:
Besides, what's the problem? Storage has never been cheaper - I just picked up [yet another] Maxtor 300 GB Firewire/USB drive from Costco for $149, including cables... that's 50 cents a gig. That makes 3 250GB, 1 400GB, and 2 300 GB drives attached to my system. I have surely appreciated the crazy explosion in flash memory capacity, but hard drives are not keeping pace. I was just looking for a drive today and was disappointed that hard drive prices haven't fallen more since I bought my last drive a few years ago. For instance: http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,77543-page,1/article.html "Less than a year ago, a $300, 80GB desktop drive was considered huge; today you can find a 160GB drive for the same price." That was in January of 02'! According to this, between January of '01 and January of '02 capacity doubled to 160 GB while the price remained constant. If that trend had continued, you could now buy a 5 terabyte drive for $300. Instead it's $300 for 750GB. Consulting pricewatch from 4 years ago, I came up with the following annual growth rates: Flash: 138% Hard drive: 32% RAM: 19% For comparison, Moore stated his "Law" at 100% per year in 1965, and at 41% (doubling every other year) in 1975. It is often quoted at doubling every 18 months, which would be 59% per year. Yeah, I'm spoiled. But compared to last century, this one isn't doing so hot. (Except for Flash). For the interested, here's the data I used: Look at pricewatch on the internet archive from 4 years ago: http://web.archive.org/web/20030128022327/http://www.pricewatch.com/ A 120GB drive was $117, and the maximum available size was 250GB. Now, 4 years later, that same $120 will buy you a 400 GB drive and the max available size is 750GB. http://www.pricewatch.com/hard_drives/ So in 4 years, price is basically constant while capacity has gone up by a little more than a factor of 3. Meanwhile, using the same sources, 4 years ago a 256 MB usb flash drive was $75. Today for $79 you get an 8 GB flash. That's a factor of 32! In 2002, 1GB of PC133 RAM would set you back $144. In 2007, for the same price you can get 1 GB ddr2-1066 1gb or 2GB DDR2-400. The cheapest 1GB module now is PC100 for $60. So in 4 years, RAM has only doubled in capacity for the same price. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Disappointing hard drive value (was: raw files are HUGE)
timeOday wrote:
Ken Lucke wrote: Besides, what's the problem? Storage has never been cheaper - I just picked up [yet another] Maxtor 300 GB Firewire/USB drive from Costco for $149, including cables... that's 50 cents a gig. That makes 3 250GB, 1 400GB, and 2 300 GB drives attached to my system. I have surely appreciated the crazy explosion in flash memory capacity, but hard drives are not keeping pace. I was just looking for a drive today and was disappointed that hard drive prices haven't fallen more since I bought my last drive a few years ago. For instance: http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,77543-page,1/article.html "Less than a year ago, a $300, 80GB desktop drive was considered huge; today you can find a 160GB drive for the same price." That was in January of 02'! According to this, between January of '01 and January of '02 capacity doubled to 160 GB while the price remained constant. If that trend had continued, you could now buy a 5 terabyte drive for $300. Instead it's $300 for 750GB. Consulting pricewatch from 4 years ago, I came up with the following annual growth rates: Flash: 138% Hard drive: 32% RAM: 19% For comparison, Moore stated his "Law" at 100% per year in 1965, and at 41% (doubling every other year) in 1975. It is often quoted at doubling every 18 months, which would be 59% per year. Yeah, I'm spoiled. But compared to last century, this one isn't doing so hot. (Except for Flash). For the interested, here's the data I used: Look at pricewatch on the internet archive from 4 years ago: http://web.archive.org/web/20030128022327/http://www.pricewatch.com/ A 120GB drive was $117, and the maximum available size was 250GB. Now, 4 years later, that same $120 will buy you a 400 GB drive and the max available size is 750GB. http://www.pricewatch.com/hard_drives/ So in 4 years, price is basically constant while capacity has gone up by a little more than a factor of 3. Meanwhile, using the same sources, 4 years ago a 256 MB usb flash drive was $75. Today for $79 you get an 8 GB flash. That's a factor of 32! In 2002, 1GB of PC133 RAM would set you back $144. In 2007, for the same price you can get 1 GB ddr2-1066 1gb or 2GB DDR2-400. The cheapest 1GB module now is PC100 for $60. So in 4 years, RAM has only doubled in capacity for the same price. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law That isnt as true with the best after rebate prices. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Disappointing hard drive value
timeOday wrote:
Ken Lucke wrote: Besides, what's the problem? Storage has never been cheaper - I just picked up [yet another] Maxtor 300 GB Firewire/USB drive from Costco for $149, including cables... that's 50 cents a gig. That makes 3 250GB, 1 400GB, and 2 300 GB drives attached to my system. I have surely appreciated the crazy explosion in flash memory capacity, but hard drives are not keeping pace. I was just looking for a drive today and was disappointed that hard drive prices haven't fallen more since I bought my last drive a few years ago. There has been a lot of consolidation in the hard drive industry, resulting in an oligopoly. Without competitive pressures, prices will not decline at the same pace. For instance: http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,77543-page,1/article.html "Less than a year ago, a $300, 80GB desktop drive was considered huge; today you can find a 160GB drive for the same price." That was in January of 02'! According to this, between January of '01 and January of '02 capacity doubled to 160 GB while the price remained constant. If that trend had continued, you could now buy a 5 terabyte drive for $300. Instead it's $300 for 750GB. Consulting pricewatch from 4 years ago, I came up with the following annual growth rates: Flash: 138% Hard drive: 32% RAM: 19% For comparison, Moore stated his "Law" at 100% per year in 1965, and at 41% (doubling every other year) in 1975. It is often quoted at doubling every 18 months, which would be 59% per year. Yeah, I'm spoiled. But compared to last century, this one isn't doing so hot. (Except for Flash). For the interested, here's the data I used: Look at pricewatch on the internet archive from 4 years ago: http://web.archive.org/web/20030128022327/http://www.pricewatch.com/ A 120GB drive was $117, and the maximum available size was 250GB. Now, 4 years later, that same $120 will buy you a 400 GB drive and the max available size is 750GB. http://www.pricewatch.com/hard_drives/ So in 4 years, price is basically constant while capacity has gone up by a little more than a factor of 3. Meanwhile, using the same sources, 4 years ago a 256 MB usb flash drive was $75. Today for $79 you get an 8 GB flash. That's a factor of 32! In 2002, 1GB of PC133 RAM would set you back $144. In 2007, for the same price you can get 1 GB ddr2-1066 1gb or 2GB DDR2-400. The cheapest 1GB module now is PC100 for $60. So in 4 years, RAM has only doubled in capacity for the same price. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law -- The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to minimize spam. Our true address is of the form . |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Disappointing hard drive value
CJT wrote:
timeOday wrote: Ken Lucke wrote: Besides, what's the problem? Storage has never been cheaper - I just picked up [yet another] Maxtor 300 GB Firewire/USB drive from Costco for $149, including cables... that's 50 cents a gig. That makes 3 250GB, 1 400GB, and 2 300 GB drives attached to my system. I have surely appreciated the crazy explosion in flash memory capacity, but hard drives are not keeping pace. I was just looking for a drive today and was disappointed that hard drive prices haven't fallen more since I bought my last drive a few years ago. There has been a lot of consolidation in the hard drive industry, resulting in an oligopoly. Without competitive pressures, prices will not decline at the same pace. Have fun explaining how come you dont get the same effect with flash ram which has the same problem. For instance: http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,77543-page,1/article.html "Less than a year ago, a $300, 80GB desktop drive was considered huge; today you can find a 160GB drive for the same price." That was in January of 02'! According to this, between January of '01 and January of '02 capacity doubled to 160 GB while the price remained constant. If that trend had continued, you could now buy a 5 terabyte drive for $300. Instead it's $300 for 750GB. Consulting pricewatch from 4 years ago, I came up with the following annual growth rates: Flash: 138% Hard drive: 32% RAM: 19% For comparison, Moore stated his "Law" at 100% per year in 1965, and at 41% (doubling every other year) in 1975. It is often quoted at doubling every 18 months, which would be 59% per year. Yeah, I'm spoiled. But compared to last century, this one isn't doing so hot. (Except for Flash). For the interested, here's the data I used: Look at pricewatch on the internet archive from 4 years ago: http://web.archive.org/web/20030128022327/http://www.pricewatch.com/ A 120GB drive was $117, and the maximum available size was 250GB. Now, 4 years later, that same $120 will buy you a 400 GB drive and the max available size is 750GB. http://www.pricewatch.com/hard_drives/ So in 4 years, price is basically constant while capacity has gone up by a little more than a factor of 3. Meanwhile, using the same sources, 4 years ago a 256 MB usb flash drive was $75. Today for $79 you get an 8 GB flash. That's a factor of 32! In 2002, 1GB of PC133 RAM would set you back $144. In 2007, for the same price you can get 1 GB ddr2-1066 1gb or 2GB DDR2-400. The cheapest 1GB module now is PC100 for $60. So in 4 years, RAM has only doubled in capacity for the same price. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Disappointing hard drive value
CJT wrote:
timeOday wrote: Ken Lucke wrote: Besides, what's the problem? Storage has never been cheaper - I just picked up [yet another] Maxtor 300 GB Firewire/USB drive from Costco for $149, including cables... that's 50 cents a gig. That makes 3 250GB, 1 400GB, and 2 300 GB drives attached to my system. I have surely appreciated the crazy explosion in flash memory capacity, but hard drives are not keeping pace. I was just looking for a drive today and was disappointed that hard drive prices haven't fallen more since I bought my last drive a few years ago. There has been a lot of consolidation in the hard drive industry, resulting in an oligopoly. Without competitive pressures, prices will not decline at the same pace. Kinda gotta consider where you shop as well. Right now, a retail-boxed internal 300GB/16MB Maxtor SATA drive (exact model unspecified) would cost me CDN$236(!!!) at Staples... meanwhile my regular retailer sells a 500GB/16MB SATA-II packed only in an antistatic bag, for CDN$169 (they don't even list a 300, but a 250 is $85-$95). That's a lotta extra cash for a cardboard box and "installation instructions". |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Disappointing hard drive value
Also, check your warranties. If Maxtor is anything like Intel you get really
poor warranties with OEM (plastic bag only) items. If you buy a retail CPU and a retail motherboard Intel gives you the warranty through them for 3 years on each. If you go OEM they don't warrant anything and leave it up to the place you bought it. For example an OEM CPU from TigerDirect has a 1 year warranty and it is through them. So make sure that the extra you pay isn't for warranty. Though honestly the price difference still doesn't warrant that. If a drive or CPU or Motherboard is going to fail it would surely do it within a year. Just make sure that you do get a warranty and if it is handled by the place you buy from that you can count on them being in business for at least the length of warranty. TGC Ltd. "Matt Ion" wrote in message news:uNIGh.1221431$5R2.461484@pd7urf3no... CJT wrote: timeOday wrote: Ken Lucke wrote: Besides, what's the problem? Storage has never been cheaper - I just picked up [yet another] Maxtor 300 GB Firewire/USB drive from Costco for $149, including cables... that's 50 cents a gig. That makes 3 250GB, 1 400GB, and 2 300 GB drives attached to my system. I have surely appreciated the crazy explosion in flash memory capacity, but hard drives are not keeping pace. I was just looking for a drive today and was disappointed that hard drive prices haven't fallen more since I bought my last drive a few years ago. There has been a lot of consolidation in the hard drive industry, resulting in an oligopoly. Without competitive pressures, prices will not decline at the same pace. Kinda gotta consider where you shop as well. Right now, a retail-boxed internal 300GB/16MB Maxtor SATA drive (exact model unspecified) would cost me CDN$236(!!!) at Staples... meanwhile my regular retailer sells a 500GB/16MB SATA-II packed only in an antistatic bag, for CDN$169 (they don't even list a 300, but a 250 is $85-$95). That's a lotta extra cash for a cardboard box and "installation instructions". |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Disappointing hard drive value (was: raw files are HUGE)
On Sat, 03 Mar 2007 22:44:15 -0700, timeOday
wrote: For comparison, Moore stated his "Law" at 100% per year in 1965, and at 41% (doubling every other year) in 1975. It is often quoted at doubling every 18 months, which would be 59% per year. Moore didn't state a "law." He made an observation. And the observation was concerning chips, and had nothing to do with hard drives. Trying to compare the density of transistors on chips and aerial density of hardd rives is comparing apples and potatos. -- John Edwards was warned by Democrats in Nevada Thursday that his support for a bill to ban betting on college sports will cost him the state. You have to love Nevada. It's the only place where a personal injury lawyer has the moral high ground. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Disappointing hard drive value (was: raw files are HUGE)
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 14:24:44 -0700, Bill Funk wrote:
On Sat, 03 Mar 2007 22:44:15 -0700, timeOday wrote: For comparison, Moore stated his "Law" at 100% per year in 1965, and at 41% (doubling every other year) in 1975. It is often quoted at doubling every 18 months, which would be 59% per year. Moore didn't state a "law." He made an observation. And the observation was concerning chips, and had nothing to do with hard drives. His observation has been valid for hard drives. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Disappointing hard drive value
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Bill Funk wrote:
On Sat, 03 Mar 2007 22:44:15 -0700, timeOday wrote: For comparison, Moore stated his "Law" at 100% per year in 1965, and at 41% (doubling every other year) in 1975. It is often quoted at doubling every 18 months, which would be 59% per year. Moore didn't state a "law." He made an observation. And the observation was concerning chips, and had nothing to do with hard drives. Indeed. The ''law'' was made out of his observations by the press, I beliveve. Trying to compare the density of transistors on chips and aerial density of hardd rives is comparing apples and potatos. More like apples and fish, really. Arno |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Disappointing hard drive value
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage AZ Nomad wrote:
On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 14:24:44 -0700, Bill Funk wrote: On Sat, 03 Mar 2007 22:44:15 -0700, timeOday wrote: For comparison, Moore stated his "Law" at 100% per year in 1965, and at 41% (doubling every other year) in 1975. It is often quoted at doubling every 18 months, which would be 59% per year. Moore didn't state a "law." He made an observation. And the observation was concerning chips, and had nothing to do with hard drives. His observation has been valid for hard drives. To some degree for capacities. Not at all for interface speeds. And they are not his observations for HDDs, since he did not observe HDDs at all. Arno |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
install xp on new hard drive/transfer of files to new hard drive? | [email protected] | General | 3 | December 18th 05 03:51 AM |
Duplicating files on another hard drive | Cdr | 13 | September 27th 05 09:41 AM | |
Copy ALL Files from CD To Hard Drive | Larry R Harrison Jr | Cdr | 2 | August 12th 05 01:50 PM |
Slow hard drive to hard drive transfer for mpeg files | [email protected] | Storage (alternative) | 8 | July 10th 05 12:15 AM |
Hard drive has bad MBR but files can be seen | Jonathan Zhuang | Storage (alternative) | 2 | September 3rd 03 08:50 PM |