Toolkit
Story: EMC launches first petabyte array
There is some confusion here. If a 480 terabyte array is $250,000, then how does a 1 petabyte array cost 16 times that? 480 terabytes is only slightly half than 1 petabyte (1024TB). Furthermore, 96 drives at 500GB is less than 48 terabytes (500GB * 96 ~ 48,000GB), ten times less than what was printed. Somewhere, there is an error. And is the array fully 1 petabyte, or did EMC do the old hard-drive switcheroo and simply call it one million "gb", putting its capacity at a mere 1 billion megabytes (fullly 73,741,824 megabytes short of a full petabyte)?
Full Talkback thread
Story: EMC launches first petabyte array
-
Do you guys proofread your articles before posting... Anonymous -
What about redundancy? 480 TB from 96 500gb drives... Blorg -
There is some confusion here. If a 480 teraby... Anonymous -
This article is incredibly poorly written. There... GWCarver -
This article is incredibly poorly written. Th... Anonymous -
Colins email address pops up as mailroomuk@zdnet.c... Karl Julson -
I'm afraid we did include some errors in this piec... Graeme Wearden
Back to: EMC launches first petabyte array



