Why the Future of Data Storage Is Still Magnetic Tape
It is suggesting there are research that shows it is possible to have 20x times the density of current types, which tops at 15TB. But these research are like battery breakthrough, good in theory but not thought through in practice.<p>While we have a real roadmap, and a working solution of MAMR, much more so than the proposed HAMR from Seagate, that will scale us to 40TB per HDD by 2025, and may be more so given we don&#x27;t really know the limits of MAMR yet, and we manage to put more platter inside a helium drives. Which I don&#x27;t think is possible with HAMR, laser heating plate with helium filled drive has got to fun inside labs.<p>NAND Flash is also dropping in price, the current NAND spot price are already backed to 2016 price or may be even slightly lower. We have Fabs from Toshiba, Samsung and SK Hynix all coming online in 2019, all while 3D NAND are achieving better yields. The &quot;Ruler&quot; that Intel proposed has now standardises and becomes EDSFF, with up to 1PB storage in 1U. All current roadmap suggest we should hit 8PB or 16PB in 1U by 2025.  In terms of 48 Drive in 4U server, HDD offers only 480TB per 1U by 2025. That is 16 to 32 times the density difference comparing to NAND.<p>In a system where information is stored in different drives like black blaze[1] , your reliability reaches a point ( I think, forgive me if I am wrong ) no different to those offered by Magnetic Type. What are the advantage left for using magnetic type? When cost, performance, space, reliability does no longer flavours them?<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.backblaze.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;cloud-storage-durability&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.backblaze.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;cloud-storage-durability&#x2F;</a>