Timeline for What innovation helped CD-ROM speeds increase exponentially?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 8 at 15:24 | answer | added | camelccc | timeline score: 7 | |
| Oct 17, 2022 at 1:50 | comment | added | user3528438 | @RonJohn The drive is the same 3.5" form factor but inside it the platters are smaller. | |
| Oct 16, 2022 at 16:51 | comment | added | RonJohn | @user3528438 that’s traditionally laptop size, no? | |
| Oct 16, 2022 at 3:42 | comment | added | user3528438 | @RonJohn I thought those are all 2.5" platters. | |
| Oct 15, 2022 at 19:13 | comment | added | TLW | @user3528438 - a lot of hard drive platters are made from aluminosilicate glass, which has a worse specific tensile strength than plastic. Glass has comparable tensile strength to polycarbonate from what I've seen (~35MPa)... at twice the density (2.5 versus 1.2 g/cm^3). Aluminum platters can do better of course. | |
| Oct 9, 2022 at 8:54 | comment | added | RonJohn | @user3528438 3.5" HDDs absolutely hit 10000 RPM. They just cost A Lot, so Seagate, WD, etc only market them to Enterprises. | |
| Oct 6, 2022 at 4:12 | comment | added | user3528438 | It's kind of strange that we allowed 5.25 plastic discs to go beyond 10000rpm while 3.5 hard drives never exceed 7200rpm. | |
| Oct 5, 2022 at 8:41 | comment | added | IMSoP | @MarkRansom You're probably thinking of Constant Linear Velocity. | |
| Oct 5, 2022 at 1:56 | comment | added | Mark Ransom | Are you asking about average speeds or peak speeds? If I remember correctly the rotational speed could change as the head went in or out on the faster drives. | |
| Oct 4, 2022 at 23:43 | comment | added | TLW | Same reason why cd drives never really went above ~48x or so. Too much of a chance of the disk exploding... | |
| Oct 4, 2022 at 22:41 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Oct 4, 2022 at 16:08 | comment | added | IMSoP | I suspect the apparent exponential rise is a red herring, and there were actually a series of step changes, as different problems were overcome. Going from "as fast as necessary for audio" to 2x or 4x may have been trivial; then different approaches to precision and balance were needed. There were many rumours of 12x being the limit above which damaged disks would explode under vibration. | |
| Oct 4, 2022 at 16:01 | history | edited | user3840170 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
punctuation (dashes, non-attributive-hyphens, grocer's apostrophe's), units, tag
|
| Oct 4, 2022 at 15:47 | answer | added | supercat | timeline score: 22 | |
| Oct 4, 2022 at 15:23 | history | edited | Brian H | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited title
|
| Oct 4, 2022 at 15:06 | comment | added | Brian H | @UncleBod Fast SCSI-2 was around by then. Though true that was for high-end computers, not "budget" PC's. | |
| Oct 4, 2022 at 14:52 | comment | added | UncleBod | Don't forget the increase in speed of the receiving end. A late 1980s computer would probably have trouble to do anything useful of 6 MBytes/sec. | |
| Oct 4, 2022 at 14:40 | history | asked | Brian H | CC BY-SA 4.0 |