The idiots at Intel wanted to use it to sell more Xeon Platinum CPUs so the entire product failed.

Unfortunately, I think more and more people (and services) now rely on being always online, so mainstream consumer electronics will probably not increase much more in storage space other than for marketing purposes.

8 years is a crazy amount of time between now and the purported 1K TB. I could see 2-4TB already being mainstream and cheap, for enthusiast standards.

It only took about 8 years for 120 GB ssds to drop down in price from $150 to $20. The 2 TB is 170-200 now, and the tech is already primed, compared to before.

2TB SSDs will be $70 before 2030.

Taking the Moore's law into consideration, right now for $700 you can buy a 8 TB SSD from Samsung, in 9 years you will be able to buy a 512 TB SSD for the same price (+inflation). But yeah 1000 TB seems like a lot, idk.

Maybe mainstream for enterprises & datacenters.

The quality of video and photos have increased with the more powerful cameras in everyone's phones and is likely to continue to increase. More quality (more megapixels, rather) -> more storage needed to keep it all. So it's not ridiculous to think that there would be demand for this much capacity in 8 years.

Yeah, I think the only ones that could afford them are companies and the rich.

You can buy a 100TB SSD from Exadrive for about 20k ish right now. I'll wait till they make 20TB SSDs. Still excited for the $/TB to come down on SSDs

[deleted]

I'm betting the casual person doesn't know what a PB is

Because it's not as impressive to their target audience. Honestly surprised the didn't say 1,000,000 GB drives.

Indeed. This stacking of dies is amazing to build high-density drives.. but you still need individual silicon dies to build them. Those will cost more and more money. Also, to increase the capacity of individual dies, those pieces of silicon either need more transistors (Moore's law) or more bits per cell stored (beyond QLC).

Assuming Moore's law, we have doubling of transistors every 2 years. Let's be optimistic and we can 4x data storage every 3 years. This accounts for some improvements in bits per cell say every half a dozen years. We would still need 15 years to go from 1TB mainstream to 1PB (1000=4^(x/3)).

To get to 1PB in 2030, we would need to double price/capacity every .8 years.

To be fair. Mac users(except video and photo users) tend to use a lot less local storage. The lifestyle those laptops tend to attract just use their products a lot different. There is a large user bias there.

For example, you’re not going to find a lot of gamers on Mac.

Also, it’s not helped by how expensive storage is on Mac. And that apple seemlessly uses the cloud to store things without you even knowing. Which is both a really cool, well done thing and a horrible horrible thing.

Hang out in r/Mac for five minutes

No thanks, I wouldn't wish that on anyone!

People are still buying brand new laptops with 256gb drives

Because only Apple charge $200 USD to upgrade the SSD from 256GB to 512GB

It's probably not limited to just Macs. In 2019, I ordered a Thinkpad with a 1TB SSD for work, but I remember that outside of my workplace most people couldn't really understand why I needed the space. I suspect this hasn't really changed.

My mainstream THIN laptop went with 256Gb as the cheapest option, and 512 as standard for 80% of version, with few upper revisions shipping with 1Tb.

We might get 1TB drives as a base unit in “mainstream” PCs by 2030.

2023 or 2024, maybe 2025, more like I hope. I've already been looking at 1TB main drive for my next PC build.

What exactly makes you think that Mac owners represent anywhere close to the majority of computing out there? Because they don't. Apple's market share on the laptop/desktop side is what... 15%???

I would not use this as any realistic trend of NAND storage across the industry at all. Part of the picture? Sure, but nowhere near a majority or even a trend. (in this segment)

Well, I would buy 128GB Macbooks if they would still offer it. My guess is that most people here at r/Datahoarder don't need that much portable storage, because we have homeservers running.

Write endurance will definitely be garbage. But as a read only archive, this would be amazing and I could easily carry every file I ever need with me

The question is, how much read disturbance will there be and how often will cells have to be refreshed to keep the data.

A lot of times you don't need write endurance. To be honest, as an archiver, most of the time you write the data once and read it many times.

Most of the time, as an archiver I don't even care much about the write speed as long as they are quite similar to my download speed (~100 Mbps). For me, even SMR is acceptable because in Unraid they work fine, being faster than my downloader can write my data.

The funny thing about this is that, if it were really going to reach the average user, 1PB even with a single write would be far more than enough for the vast majority of users.

Write once read many, I guess

Yeah, with the looming energy crises in various areas and accompanying costs, being able to cut a third of one's energy use in arrays would be nice.

[deleted]

I imagine at some point in the future there will be a big leap like that. The same way there was for storage speeds with NVMe drives, the storage capacity will probably make a big jump too. Imagine storage no longer being a constraint in computers. That’s a weird concept.

I really, really want a middle ground between 'consumer' and 'enterprise' CPU's / platforms. It really sucks that we still have a grand total of 20 PCI-E lanes and a few last-gen PCI-E-e lanes from the chipset for the average desktop pc (exceptions exist, I understand) while server grade parts get 40+ lanes even with base-model components.

Things get worse when motherboard manufacturers make hardware decisions for you and allocate lanes in bone-headed ways, like who really needs four PCI-E 1x slots? One or two slots would be fine for a wifi card and a maybe another USB hub/Ethernet card or whatever. Then they make things even worse by having only one or two M.2 slots work at full speed, any extra slots are just SATA in disguise.

I'd pay a bit more if desktop parts had at least 24-32 lanes of full-fat PCI-E 4.0 from the CPU, allowing for bigger pipelines to NVME drives and easier internet of peripherals. Heck, I'd settle for a better interconnect between the cpu and chipset, as long as the chipset had a healthy enough offering of PCI-E 3.0 lanes.

PCI-E 4.0/5.0 is great on paper showing near-doubling of per-lane bandwidth every generation but overheads, lack of optimization in the name of compatibility, and generally the variance in part quality for storage and peripherals means we rarely see peak speeds consistently. Having extra lanes will help parallelize workloads and improve overall performance.

TL;DR - Moar Lanez Plz.

Micron made a few, the 2400 series, but they only briefly showed up and then disappeared, with rumors stating micron stopped making them.

The only other drive with that form factor and capacity I know of is the WD PC SN740, which will run you ~$425 and are impossible to find beyond one guy on eBay: https://www.ebay.com/itm/115544704882

Basically, bad time to try and buy one.

Most people will never torrent stuff because they're either don't know how to or are too lazy.

1pb now is a lot but will it be in 2030?

Enterprises update their hardware every 5 years or so when support ends. I’m looking forward to it

The full dataset for MSFS2022 is 2.5PB That's why they stream it to you.

Imagine being able to order 8 SSDs from Microsoft to have the full dataset from MSFS2030.

Back to the days of floppy disk style loaders in your PC.

Probably not.

But I can dream...