this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2024
286 points (88.9% liked)

People Twitter

5339 readers
2787 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 68 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (13 children)

So 10€ for a Terrabyte? How? You can't compare mass-discounted stuff, like cloud, which additionally uses your data for tracking etc., to generate more money, with the consumer focused, single-item storage common a few years ago.

[–] Bassman1805 39 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Yeah apparently I just got ripped tf off with the ssd I just bought.

Storage IS cheap these days, but 1c/GB is not true.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 4 days ago (2 children)

pretty close, though. $99.99 for new 8tb seagate hdd is the lowest/gb i've seen in the last couple years from a major retailer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

I just checked and found an 18tb HDD for $170, so we're there already. I personally would spring for the $210 "enterprise NAS" drive though.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, it's not true yet but it's not another five years away either.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I just checked and 18tb can be had for $170, so we're there already.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Haven't heard of the brand (MDD), but here's the Amazon listing. It claims to have a 5-year warranty, so there's that, but people on Reddit claim they're basically refurbished HDDs w/ wiped SMART data, so YMMV.

I wouldn't gamble on it and would instead get a brand I trust (either WD or Seagate), but it exists.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Cool. My older RAID controller maxes out at 16TB per drive so that wouldn't work for me either way but I did gamble on some rebranded SAS drives from Amazon once and haven't regretted it. Water Panther was the name, recertified WD Enterprise drives I believe. That was over five years ago and they're all still running strong. The shucked Seagates that I bought brand new all self destructed in a matter of months but, to be fair, they were garbage SMR drives that were never meant to leave the safety of their USB enclosures. They do still work but the write throughput is now somewhere between DSL and dialup...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Any reason you're using a RAID controller instead of software RAID? Depending on the RAID level, you could be screwed if the controller dies.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Basically because it's a redundant server I don't really care about that only rarely gets fired up these days, and I have a second, identical controller for exactly the scenario you're imagining.

But really because I'm lazy and depressed and don't have the energy to take on learning something new (to me) like Unraid at this point. The same server does actually run software RAID for all the VMs' solid state boot volumes, just not for the mechanical drives that store content which is all replaceable anyway as it's freely available on Usenet.

Also, this is a personal system. I take much better care of my customers because I am deeply grateful for my 10 hour-per-week "full time" salaried job that I'm incredibly lucky to have in the first place and am currently doing from bed with my dogs right next to me. Well, I will be anyway after I hit submit.

Eventually.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Awesome, I hope you can find a resolution to your depression, but glad to hear you're in a good spot for now.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

That's kind of you to say. Thank you.

[–] Plastic_Ramses 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

https://a.co/d/eLUC1DL

.016 cents per gb. It's pretty close, but i can't really find anything lower and reliable.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Here's an 18tb for $170:

https://www.amazon.com/MDD-7200RPM-Internal-Enterprise-MDD18TSAS25672E/dp/B0C35RT3JC

I wouldn't get it and I'd pay another $30-40 for a brand I recognize, but it does exist.

I also saw an HGST 12TB for <$110. Good brand, not sure about the specific drive.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I checked Amazon and found some 12tb (HGST) and 18tb (MDD) drives for <$10/tb. WD and Seagate are a little over $10/tb, but not by much.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Refurbished 16TB+ HDDs are around that price range.

If you want a new one its sadly twice as expensive.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 40 points 4 days ago (9 children)

This chart is total bullshit on past pricing. Lots of it is wrong. It's especially laughable to think that normal pc owners in 1999 were paying nearly $10,000 for a 20 GB hard drive. Let alone the cost 5 years before that. Lol

[–] GamingChairModel 24 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

To corroborate what you're saying, here's a Compusa ad from 1999. The desktops listed are much cheaper than the $450/GB price and come with, a whole computer around that hard drive.

Plus on page 12, there's an 18GB drive for $300, or $16.67/GB.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago (2 children)

lol nobody had 20gb hard drives as “normal PC owners” in 1999. How old are you?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

People very much had 20GB drives that year. Sure, 8GB, 12GB, 13.6GB we’re more common capacities but any mid to high-end system that didn’t have (near enough) 20GB was bad value and drives bigger than that were available.

[–] Psythik 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'm sure they existed but only on high-end PCs. 20GB drives didn't become the norm for another two years. I remember; I was there.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

I replied to a post saying that nobody had a 20GB system. Sure it was more of a mid to high-end thing, but very much far from nobody.

And I was there too, the low end cheapo PC I got that year had 12GB.

https://vintageapple.org/pcworld/pdf/PC_World_9912_December_1999.pdf

And by 2001 that 12GB got an 80GB companion. Sure, 20GB was some low-end baseline maybe, but I had 12+80 by that year and it was in no way unusual.

Edit: and just checked the Wayback Machine for the local computer shop. The cheapest Celerons had 40GB. In 2001.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

I said no “normal pc owners”. Normal pc owners don’t have high end systems. I didn’t say “nobody”.

2 years in the late 90s early 2000s was a millennia. You can’t compare 99 to 01 in any manner.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago

Old enough that the first PC I built had bunches of dip switches you had to flip around so it would know what to do, depending on what you were putting in it. You ever overclock a cpu by 3Mhz before?

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago

The trouble was less dollar to space in the past as it was dollar to certain benchmarks of space.

[–] bunchberry 15 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It's nice when thing actually go down in price. We need to bring back those days.

[–] recklessengagement 21 points 4 days ago

Maybe if you're getting refurbished drives, sure. But new drives are still more frequently around 0.02-0.05 per GB.

[–] cymbal_king 19 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Someone should let Apple know

[–] aeronmelon 7 points 4 days ago

GroundskeeperWilly.gif

“Tim Cook hears you, Tim Cook don’t care.”

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 days ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I love just straight up lying. I wish it was 1¢ per GB. Maybe the most dirt cheap Chinese off-brand that only has 1/2 of its listed capacity usable because it is a refurb labelled as new. 100€ for a 10TB is insane.

Even going higher capacity to get a lower price per GB, 10TB drives are around 300€. That is 0.03€ per GB. 20TB drives are around 525€. (These are just consumer drives too, enterprise is significantly more expensive for the MTBF ratings) Still 0.026€ per GB. Once you get into ultra high capacity, it starts going up again because of tech limitations.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 days ago

Here you can get 12TB, new, from a trusted German seller, for 129€, which is 1.075 cents per GB.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago

It's lying in the other direction as well. We had a 2GB HDD on our computer in the late 90s that I am very sure did not cost thousands of dollars.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago

I bought a 20TB external hard drive a year ago for 0.015 cents per GB. This was after taxes, so it was technically cheaper.

$301.69/20,000 = 0.0150

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago (3 children)

20y ago $5? No. But also, I’m an apple guy. They fuck you on storage. But I also buy third-party devices so still, no.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago

TBF, everyone fucks you on built-in storage, especially soldered SSDs that can't be upgraded, and I'm very much not an Apple guy.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Dagnet 6 points 4 days ago

So soon it will free! Can't wait

[–] ramenshaman 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Someone do one for the average physical size taken up by 1 GB.

When I was a kid we had a 500 MB drive that was the size of a brick and now we have microsd cards that are 1TB. Pretty wild.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I'm guessing it is based upon this: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/historical-cost-of-computer-memory-and-storage

45 years ago the cost was 567 382,81 for a GB. Now it is 0.01 for a GB.

Although the graph is in TB.

Most likely not based on consumer hardware though.

load more comments
view more: next ›