The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Good grief... one of my HD's has just given up the ghost (well, a few hours ago - hence my absence from the forums for most of the evening), and after only 10 months of use, too. And it has taken with it 30Gb of my files. We're not talking corruption here... we're talking mechanical failure. The heads are clicking, but they ain't moving - so I can't even recover any data with ScanDisk.
Fair enough, it contained nothing of major importance... just my entire 6Gb MP3 collection (which I luckily burned to CD two weeks ago), and all of my game installations. That's the one that hurts most... having to start all those games from scratch again. Fortunately, being within the warranty period, it should be replaced free of charge (no, not by SR) so it shouldn't cost me anything other than installation time.
Anyway, it got me thinking... isn't it about time that computer scientists started to put some serious effort into creating a cheaper, faster, more reliable method of mass storage?
Larger and faster HD's are all well and good, but with larger capacity comes the need for faster access times, meaning higher r.p.m. and more precise head movement, resulting in ever more sensitive devices. Not to mention the extra heat they generate.
HD's have become much more reliable over the years, but being mechanical devices with finely-tuned moving parts, they are *always* going to fail eventually, no matter how careful you are with them. And of course, fate dictates that they will always wait until they are full before they pop their electronic clogs!
So, what can we use instead? The ideal solution with existing technology would be NVRAM (Non Volatile RAM), which can be written and re-written like normal RAM, but won't lose its contents when the power supply is removed - just like console memory cards. True, NVRAM isn't perfect, but with no moving parts and far less heat generated, it's got to be better than sensitive, magnetic media.
But with the price of such RAM, the equivalent of a 30Gb HD would mean only the Queen and Bill Gates could afford them, so that's pretty much ruled out. What else? There isn't much in existing technology really, is there? So, what about future technology?
Not meaning to get on Goatboy's - err - goat... but take, for example, the solutions used in sci-fi shows: the neuro gel packs on Voyager, or the data crystals used in Babylon 5. Gigabytes of information stored in one small crystal, with instant access, no moving parts and no heat generated.
Yes, it may sound like a silly fantasy now, but look at all the other areas where science fact has been driven by science fiction... Space travel (trips to Mars, deep-space probes, space stations), lasers (as tools, weapons, guidance systems), even computers themselves. Computers in sci-fi shows had voice recognition long before the average real-world computer could even have a microphone connected to it, let alone have the power recognise a human voice. In fact, the original Star Trek's computer is still far ahead of what we have today, but we are catching up.
So many areas of computing have moved on in leaps and bounds in the last 30 years or so. By comparison, disk drives - HD's, and especially floppies (when's the last time you used a 3.5-inch floppy disk, apart from as a virus-recovery boot disk?)- are pretty antique by comparison.
In my opinion, we need a new storage medium - and the sooner the better! The whole world is heading towards mass storage, and the more info you have stored, the quicker you need to search it to get what you want. Being mechanical, I think that HD technology will only get us so far, unless it gets a radical design overhaul in the next 5-10 years.
Comments anyone?
Fair enough, it contained nothing of major importance... just my entire 6Gb MP3 collection (which I luckily burned to CD two weeks ago), and all of my game installations. That's the one that hurts most... having to start all those games from scratch again. Fortunately, being within the warranty period, it should be replaced free of charge (no, not by SR) so it shouldn't cost me anything other than installation time.
Anyway, it got me thinking... isn't it about time that computer scientists started to put some serious effort into creating a cheaper, faster, more reliable method of mass storage?
Larger and faster HD's are all well and good, but with larger capacity comes the need for faster access times, meaning higher r.p.m. and more precise head movement, resulting in ever more sensitive devices. Not to mention the extra heat they generate.
HD's have become much more reliable over the years, but being mechanical devices with finely-tuned moving parts, they are *always* going to fail eventually, no matter how careful you are with them. And of course, fate dictates that they will always wait until they are full before they pop their electronic clogs!
So, what can we use instead? The ideal solution with existing technology would be NVRAM (Non Volatile RAM), which can be written and re-written like normal RAM, but won't lose its contents when the power supply is removed - just like console memory cards. True, NVRAM isn't perfect, but with no moving parts and far less heat generated, it's got to be better than sensitive, magnetic media.
But with the price of such RAM, the equivalent of a 30Gb HD would mean only the Queen and Bill Gates could afford them, so that's pretty much ruled out. What else? There isn't much in existing technology really, is there? So, what about future technology?
Not meaning to get on Goatboy's - err - goat... but take, for example, the solutions used in sci-fi shows: the neuro gel packs on Voyager, or the data crystals used in Babylon 5. Gigabytes of information stored in one small crystal, with instant access, no moving parts and no heat generated.
Yes, it may sound like a silly fantasy now, but look at all the other areas where science fact has been driven by science fiction... Space travel (trips to Mars, deep-space probes, space stations), lasers (as tools, weapons, guidance systems), even computers themselves. Computers in sci-fi shows had voice recognition long before the average real-world computer could even have a microphone connected to it, let alone have the power recognise a human voice. In fact, the original Star Trek's computer is still far ahead of what we have today, but we are catching up.
So many areas of computing have moved on in leaps and bounds in the last 30 years or so. By comparison, disk drives - HD's, and especially floppies (when's the last time you used a 3.5-inch floppy disk, apart from as a virus-recovery boot disk?)- are pretty antique by comparison.
In my opinion, we need a new storage medium - and the sooner the better! The whole world is heading towards mass storage, and the more info you have stored, the quicker you need to search it to get what you want. Being mechanical, I think that HD technology will only get us so far, unless it gets a radical design overhaul in the next 5-10 years.
Comments anyone?
Page:
What about Minidiscs? Like CDs, but I expect they're quite reliable. 10 minidiscs = 6.5gigs = £12. But you need readers though.
Good grief... one of my HD's has just given up the ghost (well, a few hours ago - hence my absence from the forums for most of the evening), and after only 10 months of use, too. And it has taken with it 30Gb of my files. We're not talking corruption here... we're talking mechanical failure. The heads are clicking, but they ain't moving - so I can't even recover any data with ScanDisk.
Fair enough, it contained nothing of major importance... just my entire 6Gb MP3 collection (which I luckily burned to CD two weeks ago), and all of my game installations. That's the one that hurts most... having to start all those games from scratch again. Fortunately, being within the warranty period, it should be replaced free of charge (no, not by SR) so it shouldn't cost me anything other than installation time.
Anyway, it got me thinking... isn't it about time that computer scientists started to put some serious effort into creating a cheaper, faster, more reliable method of mass storage?
Larger and faster HD's are all well and good, but with larger capacity comes the need for faster access times, meaning higher r.p.m. and more precise head movement, resulting in ever more sensitive devices. Not to mention the extra heat they generate.
HD's have become much more reliable over the years, but being mechanical devices with finely-tuned moving parts, they are *always* going to fail eventually, no matter how careful you are with them. And of course, fate dictates that they will always wait until they are full before they pop their electronic clogs!
So, what can we use instead? The ideal solution with existing technology would be NVRAM (Non Volatile RAM), which can be written and re-written like normal RAM, but won't lose its contents when the power supply is removed - just like console memory cards. True, NVRAM isn't perfect, but with no moving parts and far less heat generated, it's got to be better than sensitive, magnetic media.
But with the price of such RAM, the equivalent of a 30Gb HD would mean only the Queen and Bill Gates could afford them, so that's pretty much ruled out. What else? There isn't much in existing technology really, is there? So, what about future technology?
Not meaning to get on Goatboy's - err - goat... but take, for example, the solutions used in sci-fi shows: the neuro gel packs on Voyager, or the data crystals used in Babylon 5. Gigabytes of information stored in one small crystal, with instant access, no moving parts and no heat generated.
Yes, it may sound like a silly fantasy now, but look at all the other areas where science fact has been driven by science fiction... Space travel (trips to Mars, deep-space probes, space stations), lasers (as tools, weapons, guidance systems), even computers themselves. Computers in sci-fi shows had voice recognition long before the average real-world computer could even have a microphone connected to it, let alone have the power recognise a human voice. In fact, the original Star Trek's computer is still far ahead of what we have today, but we are catching up.
So many areas of computing have moved on in leaps and bounds in the last 30 years or so. By comparison, disk drives - HD's, and especially floppies (when's the last time you used a 3.5-inch floppy disk, apart from as a virus-recovery boot disk?)- are pretty antique by comparison.
In my opinion, we need a new storage medium - and the sooner the better! The whole world is heading towards mass storage, and the more info you have stored, the quicker you need to search it to get what you want. Being mechanical, I think that HD technology will only get us so far, unless it gets a radical design overhaul in the next 5-10 years.
Comments anyone?
Fair enough, it contained nothing of major importance... just my entire 6Gb MP3 collection (which I luckily burned to CD two weeks ago), and all of my game installations. That's the one that hurts most... having to start all those games from scratch again. Fortunately, being within the warranty period, it should be replaced free of charge (no, not by SR) so it shouldn't cost me anything other than installation time.
Anyway, it got me thinking... isn't it about time that computer scientists started to put some serious effort into creating a cheaper, faster, more reliable method of mass storage?
Larger and faster HD's are all well and good, but with larger capacity comes the need for faster access times, meaning higher r.p.m. and more precise head movement, resulting in ever more sensitive devices. Not to mention the extra heat they generate.
HD's have become much more reliable over the years, but being mechanical devices with finely-tuned moving parts, they are *always* going to fail eventually, no matter how careful you are with them. And of course, fate dictates that they will always wait until they are full before they pop their electronic clogs!
So, what can we use instead? The ideal solution with existing technology would be NVRAM (Non Volatile RAM), which can be written and re-written like normal RAM, but won't lose its contents when the power supply is removed - just like console memory cards. True, NVRAM isn't perfect, but with no moving parts and far less heat generated, it's got to be better than sensitive, magnetic media.
But with the price of such RAM, the equivalent of a 30Gb HD would mean only the Queen and Bill Gates could afford them, so that's pretty much ruled out. What else? There isn't much in existing technology really, is there? So, what about future technology?
Not meaning to get on Goatboy's - err - goat... but take, for example, the solutions used in sci-fi shows: the neuro gel packs on Voyager, or the data crystals used in Babylon 5. Gigabytes of information stored in one small crystal, with instant access, no moving parts and no heat generated.
Yes, it may sound like a silly fantasy now, but look at all the other areas where science fact has been driven by science fiction... Space travel (trips to Mars, deep-space probes, space stations), lasers (as tools, weapons, guidance systems), even computers themselves. Computers in sci-fi shows had voice recognition long before the average real-world computer could even have a microphone connected to it, let alone have the power recognise a human voice. In fact, the original Star Trek's computer is still far ahead of what we have today, but we are catching up.
So many areas of computing have moved on in leaps and bounds in the last 30 years or so. By comparison, disk drives - HD's, and especially floppies (when's the last time you used a 3.5-inch floppy disk, apart from as a virus-recovery boot disk?)- are pretty antique by comparison.
In my opinion, we need a new storage medium - and the sooner the better! The whole world is heading towards mass storage, and the more info you have stored, the quicker you need to search it to get what you want. Being mechanical, I think that HD technology will only get us so far, unless it gets a radical design overhaul in the next 5-10 years.
Comments anyone?
Page: