Loading...
> >

Anyone else drooling over...

2»

Comments

  • nicsttnicstt Posts: 11,715
    Kendall Sears said:
    nicstt said:
    Kendall Sears said:
    Taozen said:
    mmitchell_houston said:
    timmins.william said:

    Having memories of my first computer in the late 80s, with 64 MB of disk space. Partitioned into 2 drives because the OS couldn't handle that much data.

    How the heck did you afford a drive with 64 MB of data storage? Those were OUTRAGEOUSLY expensive back then.

    Not really:

    http://www.jcmit.com/diskprice.htm

    Lots of holes in that chart (as to be expected) especially in the mid-70's to mid-80's region.  Most drives were not available (easily) to the general consumer.  For instance, I had a 10MB drive with replaceable platters (12" diameter, I believe) that had to be put in an enclosure the size of a small chest-freezer with the same style lid as a freezer.  You needed to press a large button (.75 inch or so) to unmount the drive, then another to spin the platters down, then a 3rd to unlock the top.  Then you opened the top, put a circular plastic case over the platters, turned the handle in the middle to release the platters, then you could remove them.  Replacing them was the opposite procedure.  As the drive got older, we had to use a chopstick to press the lid switch (to make it think the lid was closed) and use a car's scissor jack crank handle to start the platters spinning because the motor was getting weak.  These drives were very popular, and I don't see them in the list.  With the right card, these were usable on S100 bus machines all the way down to the Commodore PETs.   At one point we got one working with a VIC-20 using a "user port" card designed to allow PET peripherals on the VIC.

    Kendall

    Damn I loved my Vic20; didn't even consider a hard drive for it; they were science fiction stuff back then. Although, it was only a few years before I got one.

    Just because we got it attached, doesn't mean it was particularly useful.  It only worked with very specific software (written in VIC-Forth).  Also, the processing on the VIC (and the C64) went faster when you turned off the screen.  I had always wanted to try the drive on the C128 since it had the user port as well as CP/M, however, the software support for the CP/M side of the C128 was weak and the motor on the drive failed before we had the chance.

    Kendall

    I've still got an Amiga, a 1500; that has a awe-inspiring 20MB drive. I loved the Commodore machines, very innovative.

  • Subtropic PixelSubtropic Pixel Posts: 2,388

    Those pics of the open cabinets (with the laterally-oriented platters) were probably 3380's or the original 3390's.  If I recall correctly, they had two disk volumes defined per "spindle", and were belt-driven.

    The 3330 and 3350 models were more like the size of washing machines, while 3380 and 3390 were more refrigerator-sized.

  • hacsarthacsart Posts: 2,034
    edited August 2016

    Yep.. those were 3380E's.. we started to upgrade to 3380K's and got bit by the problem with the bearings that seemed to plague a lot of the K units..  eventually went to 3390, but by then I was involved with the install of a set of STK Nearline tape silos..

    Subtropic Pixel said:

    Those pics of the open cabinets (with the laterally-oriented platters) were probably 3380's or the original 3390's.  If I recall correctly, they had two disk volumes defined per "spindle", and were belt-driven.

    The 3330 and 3350 models were more like the size of washing machines, while 3380 and 3390 were more refrigerator-sized.

     

    Post edited by hacsart on
  • SpitSpit Posts: 2,342
    edited August 2016
    nicstt said:
    Kendall Sears said:
    nicstt said:
    Kendall Sears said:
    Taozen said:
    mmitchell_houston said:
    timmins.william said:

    Having memories of my first computer in the late 80s, with 64 MB of disk space. Partitioned into 2 drives because the OS couldn't handle that much data.

    How the heck did you afford a drive with 64 MB of data storage? Those were OUTRAGEOUSLY expensive back then.

    Not really:

    http://www.jcmit.com/diskprice.htm

    Lots of holes in that chart (as to be expected) especially in the mid-70's to mid-80's region.  Most drives were not available (easily) to the general consumer.  For instance, I had a 10MB drive with replaceable platters (12" diameter, I believe) that had to be put in an enclosure the size of a small chest-freezer with the same style lid as a freezer.  You needed to press a large button (.75 inch or so) to unmount the drive, then another to spin the platters down, then a 3rd to unlock the top.  Then you opened the top, put a circular plastic case over the platters, turned the handle in the middle to release the platters, then you could remove them.  Replacing them was the opposite procedure.  As the drive got older, we had to use a chopstick to press the lid switch (to make it think the lid was closed) and use a car's scissor jack crank handle to start the platters spinning because the motor was getting weak.  These drives were very popular, and I don't see them in the list.  With the right card, these were usable on S100 bus machines all the way down to the Commodore PETs.   At one point we got one working with a VIC-20 using a "user port" card designed to allow PET peripherals on the VIC.

    Kendall

    Damn I loved my Vic20; didn't even consider a hard drive for it; they were science fiction stuff back then. Although, it was only a few years before I got one.

    Just because we got it attached, doesn't mean it was particularly useful.  It only worked with very specific software (written in VIC-Forth).  Also, the processing on the VIC (and the C64) went faster when you turned off the screen.  I had always wanted to try the drive on the C128 since it had the user port as well as CP/M, however, the software support for the CP/M side of the C128 was weak and the motor on the drive failed before we had the chance.

    Kendall

    I've still got an Amiga, a 1500; that has a awe-inspiring 20MB drive. I loved the Commodore machines, very innovative.

    I kept my Amiga 4000. Kept a luggable C64. Everything else including 3 other C64's, an Amiga 500, 6 or 7 something, 1200, and 3000 are gone. I really loved my Commodores.

    Haven't loved a computer since, even the Mac I did work on for Saturday Night Live. Yes, I was contracted to interface their Macs with their IBM midrange System 36 back in the nineties. But my boss got to fly to New York to install the equipment and software. :(

    Edited to add 'back in the nineties'.

    Post edited by Spit on
  • namffuaknamffuak Posts: 4,456

    FWIW, I still have my original IBM-PC full-height single-side 160 KB floppy drives that went for $540 each. And the two half-height dual-sided double-density drives I replaced them with two years later. My take is that the PC explosion in the 80s really lit a fire on disk drive design and performance.

  • namffuaknamffuak Posts: 4,456

    For the mainframe trivia buffs - the IBM 3380 was designed as a fixed-block architecture (FBA) device. Then the MVS support staff said count/key/data was so ingrained in the OS that they couldn't work with FBA. So the 3380 ended up with a 32-byte block size and firmware to handle count/key/data. . .If you check the docs on block sizes, record and key lengths you will see that the magic number '32' shows up everywhere. :-)

  • pwiecekpwiecek Posts: 1,598
    nelsonsmith said:

    Can you imagine defragging that thing, or the sheer amount of data you'd be potentially losing if that drive fails?  Not to mention a 60 Terabyte drive would require a 60 terabyte back up.

    The only people I could see really benefiting from that are film editors working in 4 and 6K who could eat up 60 terabytes like you'd give out Halloween candy.

    SSD do not need to be defragged. Defragging is actually bad for them.

  • nicsttnicstt Posts: 11,715
    edited August 2016
    Spit said:
    nicstt said:
    Kendall Sears said:
    nicstt said:
    Kendall Sears said:
    Taozen said:
    mmitchell_houston said:
    timmins.william said:

    Having memories of my first computer in the late 80s, with 64 MB of disk space. Partitioned into 2 drives because the OS couldn't handle that much data.

    How the heck did you afford a drive with 64 MB of data storage? Those were OUTRAGEOUSLY expensive back then.

    Not really:

    http://www.jcmit.com/diskprice.htm

    Lots of holes in that chart (as to be expected) especially in the mid-70's to mid-80's region.  Most drives were not available (easily) to the general consumer.  For instance, I had a 10MB drive with replaceable platters (12" diameter, I believe) that had to be put in an enclosure the size of a small chest-freezer with the same style lid as a freezer.  You needed to press a large button (.75 inch or so) to unmount the drive, then another to spin the platters down, then a 3rd to unlock the top.  Then you opened the top, put a circular plastic case over the platters, turned the handle in the middle to release the platters, then you could remove them.  Replacing them was the opposite procedure.  As the drive got older, we had to use a chopstick to press the lid switch (to make it think the lid was closed) and use a car's scissor jack crank handle to start the platters spinning because the motor was getting weak.  These drives were very popular, and I don't see them in the list.  With the right card, these were usable on S100 bus machines all the way down to the Commodore PETs.   At one point we got one working with a VIC-20 using a "user port" card designed to allow PET peripherals on the VIC.

    Kendall

    Damn I loved my Vic20; didn't even consider a hard drive for it; they were science fiction stuff back then. Although, it was only a few years before I got one.

    Just because we got it attached, doesn't mean it was particularly useful.  It only worked with very specific software (written in VIC-Forth).  Also, the processing on the VIC (and the C64) went faster when you turned off the screen.  I had always wanted to try the drive on the C128 since it had the user port as well as CP/M, however, the software support for the CP/M side of the C128 was weak and the motor on the drive failed before we had the chance.

    Kendall

    I've still got an Amiga, a 1500; that has a awe-inspiring 20MB drive. I loved the Commodore machines, very innovative.

    I kept my Amiga 4000. Kept a luggable C64. Everything else including 3 other C64's, an Amiga 500, 6 or 7 something, 1200, and 3000 are gone. I really loved my Commodores.

    Haven't loved a computer since, even the Mac I did work on for Saturday Night Live. Yes, I was contracted to interface their Macs with their IBM midrange System 36 back in the nineties. But my boss got to fly to New York to install the equipment and software. :(

    Edited to add 'back in the nineties'.

    Had a 500; the 4MB RAM I bought for it cost me £400 (insane huh? Although not as insane as the fact the PC (IBM types) wouldn't manage that much at that time iirc.); I traded it in for the 1500 I still have. The 4000 I bought developed a fault, that took the company months to fix. Never worked properly afterwards, and I ended up moving over to the dark side. I considered a Mac, but desided that I didn't like paying extra for the privilidge; I regretted it for about three or four years, haven't done since that. And yeh a Commodore 64.

    Post edited by nicstt on
  • Kendall SearsKendall Sears Posts: 2,995
    pwiecek said:
    nelsonsmith said:

    Can you imagine defragging that thing, or the sheer amount of data you'd be potentially losing if that drive fails?  Not to mention a 60 Terabyte drive would require a 60 terabyte back up.

    The only people I could see really benefiting from that are film editors working in 4 and 6K who could eat up 60 terabytes like you'd give out Halloween candy.

    SSD do not need to be defragged. Defragging is actually bad for them.

    Only windows style defragging.  The way windows does it is not the only way, nor the most efficient.

    Kendall

  • hacsarthacsart Posts: 2,034
    edited August 2016

    heh.. true that, which is why one got still allocated space in cylinders and tracks, with extents as needed....even if FBA would have made it much simpler..

    namffuak said:

    For the mainframe trivia buffs - the IBM 3380 was designed as a fixed-block architecture (FBA) device. Then the MVS support staff said count/key/data was so ingrained in the OS that they couldn't work with FBA. So the 3380 ended up with a 32-byte block size and firmware to handle count/key/data. . .If you check the docs on block sizes, record and key lengths you will see that the magic number '32' shows up everywhere. :-)

     

    Post edited by hacsart on
  • Consumer573Consumer573 Posts: 282
    wolf359 said:
     

    The  one scene file containing the "Optimus Prime" rig in "Tranformers Revenge of the Fallen" was 30 terabytes
    over at Industrial Light & Magic.surprise

    My current animated film project has consumed a mere 370 gigs of data and we are a little under 35 minutes of finished
    Footage
    Most of this space is being taken by thousands of uncompressed  raw targa frames and  MDD data files that drive my genesis meshes in Maxon Cinema4D....
    angry

     

    Out of curiosity, why are Targas being used?  I thought that was an extinct format created by AT&T that went away when digital TV and higher resolutions came in.

  • SzarkSzark Posts: 10,634
    Kendall Sears said:
    pwiecek said:
    nelsonsmith said:

    Can you imagine defragging that thing, or the sheer amount of data you'd be potentially losing if that drive fails?  Not to mention a 60 Terabyte drive would require a 60 terabyte back up.

    The only people I could see really benefiting from that are film editors working in 4 and 6K who could eat up 60 terabytes like you'd give out Halloween candy.

    SSD do not need to be defragged. Defragging is actually bad for them.

    Only windows style defragging.  The way windows does it is not the only way, nor the most efficient.

    Kendall

    Do you use an external peice of software to defrag, if so which one?

  • Kendall SearsKendall Sears Posts: 2,995
    Szark said:
    Kendall Sears said:
    pwiecek said:
    nelsonsmith said:

    Can you imagine defragging that thing, or the sheer amount of data you'd be potentially losing if that drive fails?  Not to mention a 60 Terabyte drive would require a 60 terabyte back up.

    The only people I could see really benefiting from that are film editors working in 4 and 6K who could eat up 60 terabytes like you'd give out Halloween candy.

    SSD do not need to be defragged. Defragging is actually bad for them.

    Only windows style defragging.  The way windows does it is not the only way, nor the most efficient.

    Kendall

    Do you use an external peice of software to defrag, if so which one?

    The best way to defrag is to use another disk.  I use a custom script to move the files to another disk, when the original disk is empty, the files are moved back.  Depending on how it is done, there are a maximum of 2 writes to each cell, if the original move "clears" the cell, or only 1 write if the original data are simply overwritten.  I do not have Windows active when doing this, it happens from a Linux environment so that "special" or locked files don't halt the process.

    Kendall

  • SzarkSzark Posts: 10,634

    Thanks ok not for the likes of me then. LOL

  • Kendall SearsKendall Sears Posts: 2,995
    Szark said:

    Thanks ok not for the likes of me then. LOL

    A similar thing can be done with Windows Explorer, as long as you don't select the user's "system" areas (registry and such).  You can move all of your files to an external USB disk, then have WIndows copy them back.  A big plus is that you get a Backup copy in the process.  2 advantages for the price of 1 operation.  When you copy them back, NTFS will try to put the files into contiguous blocks as they are written.  Since most of the files that change are "user" files this will resolve a lot of fragmentation.  Don't forget to empty your "temp" folders before copying the files back (don't forget about C:\Windows\Temp).  This will get you even more contiguous space and even less fragmentation.

    Kendall

  • SimonJMSimonJM Posts: 6,076

    And on the subject of backups ... 

  • PetercatPetercat Posts: 2,321
    hacsart said:

    IBM 3330, the keyword was make sure the platter cover (aka cake lid) was firmly attached before removing the disk assembly, and don;t drop it!

    Kendall Sears said:

    Lots of holes in that chart (as to be expected) especially in the mid-70's to mid-80's region.  Most drives were not available (easily) to the general consumer.  For instance, I had a 10MB drive with replaceable platters (12" diameter, I believe) that had to be put in an enclosure the size of a small chest-freezer with the same style lid as a freezer.  You needed to press a large button (.75 inch or so) to unmount the drive, then another to spin the platters down, then a 3rd to unlock the top.  Then you opened the top, put a circular plastic case over the platters, turned the handle in the middle to release the platters, then you could remove them.  Replacing them was the opposite procedure.  As the drive got older, we had to use a chopstick to press the lid switch (to make it think the lid was closed) and use a car's scissor jack crank handle to start the platters spinning because the motor was getting weak.  These drives were very popular, and I don't see them in the list.  With the right card, these were usable on S100 bus machines all the way down to the Commodore PETs.   At one point we got one working with a VIC-20 using a "user port" card designed to allow PET peripherals on the VIC.

    Kendall

     

    Saw a guy lifting one out by the handle when the lid came off. Lid went flying across the room as he swooped down and caught the platters with both forearms before they hit the floor. Never knew an old fat guy could move so fast. Now I'm old and fat, and I envy him.

  • Dreamland ModelsDreamland Models Posts: 386
    edited October 2016
    nelsonsmith said:

    Can you imagine defragging that thing, or the sheer amount of data you'd be potentially losing if that drive fails?  Not to mention a 60 Terabyte drive would require a 60 terabyte back up.

    The only people I could see really benefiting from that are film editors working in 4 and 6K who could eat up 60 terabytes like you'd give out Halloween candy.

    I have 5 SSD drives in my system and have had them for about 3 years.

    The warranty is for 5 years on all of them.

    I am not worried.

    Also have a 2 TB pocket drive that I never leave the house without. Seagate Slim

    23 years of work on it.

    Defrag on my C Drive takes about a half hour. It is 1TB. Also where my Drop Box folder it located.

    Also using Drop Box Pro so all my scene changes are backed to the cloud as soon as I save a version.

    In other words, SSD drives are pretty well time tested.

    At least in my case.

    One quote for the 60 TB drive is about $10,000.00 per unit.

    Not yet available for the average consumer.

    That is 4 times the cost of my system!

    Tom

    Post edited by Dreamland Models on
  • SzarkSzark Posts: 10,634
    Kendall Sears said:
    Szark said:

    Thanks ok not for the likes of me then. LOL

    A similar thing can be done with Windows Explorer, as long as you don't select the user's "system" areas (registry and such).  You can move all of your files to an external USB disk, then have WIndows copy them back.  A big plus is that you get a Backup copy in the process.  2 advantages for the price of 1 operation.  When you copy them back, NTFS will try to put the files into contiguous blocks as they are written.  Since most of the files that change are "user" files this will resolve a lot of fragmentation.  Don't forget to empty your "temp" folders before copying the files back (don't forget about C:\Windows\Temp).  This will get you even more contiguous space and even less fragmentation.

    Kendall

    Oh sweet thanks Kendall

  • RuphussRuphuss Posts: 2,631
    timmins.william said:

    Having memories of my first computer in the late 80s, with 64 MB of disk space. Partitioned into 2 drives because the OS couldn't handle that much data.

     

    telling about memories is like showing cat pics on this forum

  • nonesuch00nonesuch00 Posts: 18,795

    If I cleaned up my storage space usage I probably could get by with 1 GB or maybe not, DAZ & Poser & Unity Asset storage usage grows fast and if I ever start taking pictures again, or heaven forbid, videos, then I'd probably best go with 2GB with 2GB backup or even 4GB. Prices have to come down though 1st.

    I once fried an extremely expensive 4MB bespoke memory board in the early 1990s. I guess that was a technical predecessor of this SSD technology. They just laughed and I didn't get fired. That was a great place to work.

  • CybersoxCybersox Posts: 9,432

    I've posted pics of the punchcard driven IBM 360-20 that was my first computer at NASA.  My first personal computer was the good ol' VIC-20, followed quickly by the C-64 :) 

    And my current mainPC now has over 20TB of storage... 6 internal and the rest in externals... While my ASUS Slate travels with 3 TB in externals...

    So 60TB would sound pretty good if my IT guy would stop telling me how unsafe SSD is as an archival medium... :( 

  • JQPJQP Posts: 526
    Er, I'm drooling now. 60tb, that's what I'm talking about. Too bad it'll be a grand. Just think, I could have two (one for backup) and chuck all my drives. *sighs wistfully*
  • namffuaknamffuak Posts: 4,456

    OF post - feel free to ignore - back in 1976 I had 4 order entry terminals, 3 billing terminals, and 2 program development terminals running on a Burroughs B-3700 under MCP-V (pronounced "Master Control Program 5" and my hatred for Roman numerals in OS versions started there . . .). The B-3700 had 350 KB (yes, Kilobytes) of memory and 100 MB of disk - in 5 modules that combined to a unit 4 foot tall, 4 foot deep, and close to 12 foot long. And we ran batch production on it during the day as well.

    Now my render system has 64 GB of memory and 14.5 TB of disk space, spread over 9 drives. . .

  • mjc1016mjc1016 Posts: 15,001

    Drooling over hard drives is bad for the drives...wet and slobbery drives tend to fail quickly.

  • namffuaknamffuak Posts: 4,456

    FWIW, I priced 2 TB ssd the other day; I can get three 2 TB hard drives for the price of one 2 TB ssd.

    Looks like I'll keep waiting for the price to come down.

    What I'd really like is an IBM DS8100 - but I don't have the room for a two-rack 1.5 ton system, and the cost of a dual-feed 240 volt 50 amp three-phase power hookup would bankrupt me.sad

  • kyoto kidkyoto kid Posts: 42,041

    ...now what would get me drooling is a GPU with 32 GB of HBM2 memory.

  • AJ2112AJ2112 Posts: 1,417

    Wow ! massive drive, would hate to lose all my data, if that drive ever decides to malfunction. 

Sign In or Register to comment.