[Inexistence]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/storage/dis...lysts.html

Im going to have to bite the bullet and by drives soon but this makes it hard to do!

[GortWillSaveUs]

As drives get bigger and bigger,..then exposure to data loss rises exponentially!
The need for redundancy will also grow as these drives get larger.
Imagine losing a 60TB drive and the data it holds.

Essentially that would mean at the very least, the most basic of redundancy plans,..you'd need to mirror,..which means you'd need at least 2 identical drives.
But who know what the future holds,...in 5-7 years a LOT Of things could change or be totally obsolete.

That's why,...I don't like the term "future-proofing". But that's another subject.

[twelvebore]

It says 30 to 60TB. I'd believe 30TB by the end of the decade, but not 60TB.

[teaguecl]

I never doubt the ability of technology to improve rapidly. However, in order for that to happen there needs to be demand for it. Is there a demand for 60TB drives? Sure there are huge datacenters that could use them - but that can't possibly be profitable enough to drive the research and development. Even us insanely data hungry XBMC'ers, who seem to want our own private archives of every Movie and TV show we've ever watched, don't really use that kind of storage. Plus, that kind of data storage requires large bandwidth in order to acquire or share it - and broadband speeds (in the US) show few signs of exponential improvement.
So is it possible? Sure. Is there enough demand for it to be worth the effort? I don't know. I'm usually pretty bad at estimating things like this. I thought the 40 megabyte HD I bought for $500 would hold all the data I would ever need the rest of my life

[Inexistence]

I bought 16MB of RAM once for 500 bucks. Had more RAM than anyone I knew!

[solamnic]

Thats close to the 4gb mushkin ddr2 ram i bought many years ago...( it had great timings and thought that would make the difference )