data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a6f85/a6f851c8783074640b3793f84df3eb59585db49c" alt="Technology Technology"
Using A Microscope As A Hard Drive 63
An unnamed correspondent writes: "Nature reports that IBM Zurich is
developing a practical method for
braille hard disks that may eventually be able to pack 60Gbits per square inch, or about four times current disk technologies. I wonder how many moving parts there are with 1024 read heads." Well, they're not really braille; perhaps the analogy to clay tablets made in the article is closer.
So when the power goes out . . . (Score:2)
rewritable? (Score:1)
Ballot replacement? (Score:2)
----
This article was posted 5 days ago (Score:1)
--
again? (Score:3)
Electrical instead of magnetic (Score:2)
As for writing, I am curious about how rewritable it is.
Re:again? (Score:1)
Re:Sketchy (Score:2)
easy joke (Score:1)
Re:again? (Score:1)
Jeremy
The ultimate irony (Score:1)
The ultimate irony would be for these digital copies to be subsequently stored on a disk medium that itself resembles braille. Actually, that would be the penultimate irony. The ultimate irony would be for the disk medium to fail for the same reasons that historical braille systems have failed, but as the blurb points out, this systems is not strictly braille-like.
Re:Yhea, lets go back to the dark ages. (Score:1)
Sorry bub, but the heads in a HD never, ever touch the media. When this does happen it is called a "head crash" and is generally considered to be a Bad Thing(tm) because your HD is now a brick.
Re:Yhea, lets go back to the dark ages. (Score:2)
I love making unfounded predictions based on technology I don't understand!
Please, optical is nice, but how many cd-drives have you worn out in the 3 years or so? I've got 3 of em chalked up, and I've yet to replace HD's...
Optical drives require moving parts as well - and these are just as likely to fail as reader heads on the basis of mechanics. The fact that there is 1024 heads is irrelevant! Have you ever taken statistics? Just because there are more of them doesn't atutomatically increase the rate at which they will fail, that is a property inherent in the device. Sure, if you have 1024 heads it is that much more likely that 1 of them will fail with respect to a system composed of 1 head but if the rate of failure of heads is less than 3 orders of magnitude than that of conventional mechanical devices then these heads would be less prone to mechanical failures.
By the way, In an atomic force microscope the reader heads don't actually come into contact with the source, that's the whole point! They only do so to write to the disc! - which I don't think implements the atomic force microscope aspect of the apparatus itself anyways.
Keep the whoring up, there's lots of jackass moderators that don't understand what you're talking about, and based on statistics they'll be more likely to support your unfounded skepticism than the 2 or 3% who actually understand what the hell this device is.
-An Anonymous Coward Against Unfounded Technical Criticism
Re:Sketchy (Score:2)
Hah hah! Now explain why metal magnets aren't self-shielding.
Ryan
Re:Yhea, lets go back to the dark ages. (Score:2)
Personally, I've never had a CD or DVD drive fail, but that doesn't say that they don't fail. My point being: If my CD drive were to fail, I could just take out the media and it would be fine. With current hard drive technology, if one of the heads fails, and I have something I need on my drive (who here actually has current backups of ALL their files) I would be up shit creek. Using a laser as opposed to a mechanical head greatly reduces the chances of data loss due to drive failure.
Where exactly did you see that "the rate of failure of heads is less than 3 orders of magnitude than that of conventional mechanical devices"?
Atomic forces are electric. (Score:1)
Re:Too Many Moving Parts? (Score:2)
Writing is accomplished by pushing the tine down a little further and scratching the (plastic) surface. Re-writing by heating a small area slightly with a laser so that it softens and surface tension flattens it.
Steve
Re:Sketchy (Score:1)
Re:Sketchy (Score:2)
Basically, the heads are so small and working so fast, that external movement will no more disrupt them than a gently rocking ship disrupts your eye-tracking when you read a book.
The control and sensing electronics would be susceptible to interference just as a current magnetic devices are, but shielding is easy.
Writing is also safe enough. Think of using a pen on shipboard (not in a gale).
Steve
Re:Yhea, lets go back to the dark ages. (Score:1)
Re:Electrical instead of magnetic (Score:1)
Are you sure you didn't think of tunneling effects which can be used for similar devices (remember the STM?)
Re:WORM? (Score:2)
As far as I know, you can do this as often as you like.
It isn't as slow as it sounds, because the areas involved, and the amounts and distances flowing are so tiny.
Re:Yhea, lets go back to the dark ages. (Score:1)
The problem with optical storage is that we are limited by the wavelenghts of the light we are using, as well as the mechanical precision of the optics). At present it seems even good'ol stonage tech like magnetic storage beats optical.
Obviously in order for a product to be marketable it need to have a reasonable MTBF, but I don't see any neccecary reason why fabricating an assembly of multiple probes will be much more fragile than a single probe. Remember they will likly be placed in a single assembly. If they crash, they will do so under the same conditions that a single probe would do so.
I didn't read the Nature article, but... (Score:1)
Re:it's a good thing (Score:1)
Re:digital inline holography microscope (Score:1)
"This document was created with StarOffice 5.1 for OS/2..."
Well, someone had to be using it, I guess - OS/2 would score on the No-Bill-Here-o-Meter, but StarOffice as well! Heroic!
No
Re:Too Many Moving Parts? (Score:1)
On a related note, has anyone else noticed that the claims of IBM's death were a bit premature? They seem to really have re-emerged as a major leader in R&D, and are piling up market leadership points in hard drives and Java tech while making inroads into monitors, back into PCs, and regaining ground lost to Sun, Intel, SGI, and DEC in the big-iron and supercomputing markets.
I don't think IBM is "regaining lost ground" in supercomputing, I think IBM has nearly stolen the show. Take a look at the current Top 500 [top500.org] list of supercomputers and you'll find that IBM built the current champion as well as 2 of the top 3, 5 of the top 10 and almost half of the top 500.
Add to that all of the other cool R&D stuff, plus lots of nifty software innovations (Alphaworks, anyone? [ibm.com]) and the largest consulting and professional services organization in the world and it's pretty clear that Big Blue is very healthy.
So, please, everyone go buy some IBM stock and drive up the value of my options ;-) (yes, I work for IBM, and it's a pretty cool place to work, at the moment).
time to market (Score:1)
what ever happened to NFR (Near Field Recording) drives? I remember them being touted as the next big thing about four years ago
Amorphis
Sumerians developed this years ago. (Score:5)
Re:Yhea, lets go back to the dark ages. (Score:2)
Will journalists ever learn? (Score:3)
Not again! People have constantly been predicting that hard drives and processors would reach a limit in "a year or two", but has it ever happened? No!
In almost all situations, technologies do not just die but gradually evolve and lose the theoretical constraints that everyone was worried about. CDs have grown from storing 600 MB to 4 GB and soon 120 gigabytes.
And on a side note, doesn't this technology seem a lot like CD's? I'd much rather invest in the 120 GB multi-level CDs rather than this "microscopic Braille".
- BBoy doodles
C is for Cookie
Too Many Moving Parts? (Score:3)
On a related note, has anyone else noticed that the claims of IBM's death were a bit premature? They seem to really have re-emerged as a major leader in R&D, and are piling up market leadership points in hard drives and Java tech while making inroads into monitors, back into PCs, and regaining ground lost to Sun, Intel, SGI, and DEC in the big-iron and supercomputing markets. Does anyone know of any really good insights into this in the form of articles, books, etc?
Conflicting statement about performance (Score:3)
The article is available [acm.org] from the ACM [acm.org] in PDF format. A paid membership, or a small one-time fee, is required.
digital inline holography microscope (Score:1)
Magnetic media is still king (Score:2)
When a competing technology starts selling competitive devices (capacity, size, speed, reliability, etc.) at reasonable costs then I'll pay more attention.
On a side note, a little company called BiT Micro [bitmicro.com] manufacturers high performance solid state storage devices in hard drive form factors, though at considerably higher cost.
it's a good thing (Score:1)
Where would we be today if researchers became content with exsisting technology? We could very well still be travelling by steam train and horse and buggy.
I recently read an article [itworldcanada.com] on scientists working on optical solutions for miniturization of computers.
Tiring of hard drives... (Score:1)
(of course, I don't think they should leave us completely, but instead should be replaced on day-to-day use in many applications)
Re:again? (Score:2)
Usually i find it kind of annoying when people point out that something similar was done a month or more ago.... however this was barely 5 days. That is getting on the bad side.
Re:Sketchy (Score:1)
Ohhh... now I remember, they scan the surface of a magnetic disk. I bet there are lots of dangers included in running a magnetic storage device in a computer case, with all the stuff going on inside and all...
Oh wait, we actually use these things right now.
Now imagine the intellectual leap required to apply the same techniques to protect these AFM drives... It blows my mind!
Seriously, do you think scientists would waste valuable years of their lives trying to create devices that would fail under such mundane situations?
Please moderator! Pick me!
- An Anonymous Coward Devoted to Unfounding Poor Moderation.
Re:Yhea, lets go back to the dark ages. (Score:1)
What we need is hard storage (Score:1)
Re:Sketchy (Score:1)
Don't knock the first poster's comment. It's a realistic caveat. The inventors of the scanning tunneling electron microscope won a Nobel Prize for their work, and that was essentially all in the details (i.e. the physical principle behind it is pretty simple). Not that I'm comparing this advance to that, but still, nothing's as easy as it seems.
Re:Electrical instead of magnetic (Score:1)
In principal, it works the same way as a scanning tunneling electron microscope. You have a force which depends strongly on distance (exponentially for the tunneling current in an STM, roughly 1/(distance^6) for the Van der Waals forces in an AFM), and that allows you to measure distances precisely by measuring the variation in forces (or currents).
So to sum up, AFM's operate on electrostatic (sort of) forces between atoms on the surface and in the tip.
near field (Score:1)
There are real resons why media will top out in a few years. The superparamagnetic limit will be reached relatively soon. However, that will still gie us significantly more storage than we currently have.
priorities (Score:2)
This article states that although the new drives may hold many times more bits than today's drives, they will only run at about the same speed. Video editing is bad enough with the drives we have now. What is going to happen when we begin to work with HDTV streams or even uncompressed video?
Re:again? (Score:1)
Then again, perhaps I'm the only one who's sick of these stories.
~Steve
--
Re:Will journalists ever learn? (Score:2)
Well, I'm not gonna argue with you on that one ... sure, there are the laws of physics to be obeyed, but I'm pretty sure those laws said CPU's would max out around 1 GHz .... however, from what the article says, the HDs are now starting to have the same problems CPUs are having - if you make them much smaller, you can't be sure wheter a particular bit really is a 1 or a 0 .... will be interesting to find out how they got around that 3 years from now ....
And on a side note, doesn't this technology seem a lot like CD's?
uuuuh ..... yeah ..... Do you know the scale of your average atom? I'd say this thing (which works on "bits" of < 100 atoms) has a slightly higher capacity than a 120Gb multi-level CD .... RTFA
Re:Yhea, lets go back to the dark ages. (Score:1)
>Any drive in which the heads physically come in contact with the storage media is prone to failure.
You should have worded it like the Godwin's law: As a drive's use grow longer, the probability of a failure approach one if there is physical contacts between heads and the storage media. Any failure will cause the datas stored on the drive to be lost.
Re:Misleading (Score:1)
(although the article didn't clarify wheter this is EEPROM- or Flash-like
With a braille hard drive (Score:1)
But don't let your fan die... (Score:1)
Seriously, if they can manage to iron out the problems that they have with the slow read speed, this looks like it would be a nice solution to the magnetic disc size limitation.
Of course, going from a magnetic read to a 'needle' read means that you will have to buy all of software over again. (Bad reference to the vinyl to cd change-over for music. And yes, it is supposed to be a joke.)
Eric Gearman
--
Wow! Slashdotted already? Please Mirror! (Score:1)
scanning probe arrays (Score:1)
You can read about the details of these wonderful devices in the Applied Physics Letters.
AnHTML [aip.org] version.
ASectioned HTML [aip.org] version
Or download thePDF [aip.org].
Another Article (Score:2)
Sketchy (Score:2)
Yhea, lets go back to the dark ages. (Score:1)
I better encrypt everything on my braille drive... (Score:2)
As a side note, where the hell does everybody park at the Special Olympics?
J
There was also something like that some years ago (Score:1)
WORM? (Score:2)
This would be useful, but only for backup type storage it seems... or a massive database where lots of data gets stored, but little change happens.
Anyone with any insight into this care to enlighten us as to whether this sort of technology could be used for massively rewritable storage?
Re:it doesn't really matter (Score:3)
File Servers
Large Databases
MP3 storage
Digital video editing
Slashdot's Archives.
There are quite a few applications where massive amounts of storage can outweigh the need for speed. If necessity mandates speed and massive storage, buy several Braille drives and set them up in a RAID 0 config.
ahh, the memories... (Score:2)
sec... lost my train of thought.
ah, yes... and the time I used a pickled, held to an old Iron Butterfly album with a piece of duct tape, as a tape drive. And the only thing that kept that from working was that the pickle was just way too soggy. Perhaps I'll revisit this using a Valasic.
CD-ROMs and CD-Rs use microscopes too... (Score:1)
So using a microscope really isn't news. They're just using a different form of microscope.
Re:Clay tablets? A Flinstone's Hard Drive! (Score:1)