I saw this article today:
http://www.computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/storage/story/0,10801,107360,00.html
" It is a standard "half-height" size, measures 14.8mm wide by 42mm high by 198mm deep and weighs 1.1 kilograms."
When's the last time you saw a 3 inch high hard drive? Why do people still use "1/2 height" and "1/3 height" when standard disk size has so thoroughly changed from 20 years ago?
I think that should have been 148mm and not 14.8mm. It's an optical drive, so it's probably a 5 1/4". Most of those in use are 1/2 height.
I've seen product shots of that drive...it looks like a normal optical drive. In fact, it's basically a DVD+/-RW drive with Blu-Ray capabilities.
((Looks at the 30Megger on the desk))...
You mean we don't use those anymore??
I can answer that question. You know what happens with you make assumptions. You make an ass of u and mption.
While it might seem redundant stating things like that remove any doubt.
Huh?
Perhaps I should have added "in a store."
It's just a random observation that popped into my head. 1/3 height (for hard drives) and 1/2 (for optical) has been the de facto standard height for a long time. Just seems quaint to hear a new product refer to such an old standard.
Apparently I'm easily amused.
It was quaint 10 years ago. Now it's just plain archaic.
heh heh heh, ya, you betcha. Still, this is AF, where the archaic lives on . . . and on and on and . .
I've got 6 full size drives running 24/7/365, powering my server. Those archaic Seagate Elite drives will probably last longer than me. I really don't think I'd say that about any of the 3.5" drives I've got.
dan k
Yeah, but I've still got the drive and controller and disks for a Bernoulli 10mb cart system in an XT in the basement...