Talk:Mark Kryder

message: What is MTC? This article needs to be scrubbed to readable by a general audience, which means that acronyms need to be expanded.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.192.168.245 (talk) 18:20, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ambiguities

message: I'm not seeing any evidence this place is real. The link goes to Des Moines, Iowa. 198.6.33.13 (talk) 16:05, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverting to Portland, maybe it was vandalism? 198.6.33.13 (talk) 16:08, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Iowa City, Oregon

message: This page gives the SciAm article as a citation that "magnetic disk areal storage density doubles annually". But the SciAm article does not say that. The SciAm article gives two figures: 
# "Inside of a decade and a half, hard disks had increased their (areal) capacity 1,000-fold". (100 Mbit/in^2 in 1990 to 100 Gbit/in^2 in 2005). That gives a doubling period of 1.505 years: 2^(15/1.505) = 1000
# "Since the introduction of the disk drive in 1956, the density of information it can record has swelled from a paltry 2,000 bit/in^2 to 100 Gbit/in^2 .... That represents a 50-million-fold increase." From 1956 to 2005 is 49 years. This gives a doubling period of 1.916 years: 2^(49/1.916) = 5 * 10^7
So the SciAm article seems to have an unfortunate case of innumeracy. The numbers in that article contradict the article's own byline that "The doubling of processor speed every 18 months is a snail's pace compared with rising hard-disk capacity."
Going with the entire period from 1956 to 2005, we can say hard drive areal density doubles every 2 years (it was slightly faster from 1990-2005 but we take the average).
As for the total capacity (instead of areal density), the graph on this wiki page gives a doubling period of about 1.5 years.
This exactly matches Moore's law for transistors: the areal density doubles every 2 years just like the transistor density, and the total disk capacity doubles every 1.5 years just like the CPU performance does (I suppose because of adding more platters).  Rotiro (talk) 00:46, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not quite. The assumption that the rate had been constant for 49 years, rather than during 1990-2005, is where the problem lies. Clearly during the 34 years of 1956-1990, where the increase was 10M/2k=5k fold, if the doubling time had been constant, that constant would be 34/log2(5000)=2.767 years. The implication is that institutional changes by 1990 resulted in the field adopting a faster learning curve. LeadSongDog come howl! 15:39, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Numbers for Kryder's Law are wrong

message: Increasing by 1000 in 15 years is doubling every 1.505 years but that is slightly longer than the source's Moore's Law doubling every 1.500 years (18 months).  It is only slightly faster if one uses the actual numbers of (110 Gbit/sqin)/(100 Mbit/sqin)to get doubling every 1.485 years.  Either way magnetic areal density progress from 1990 to 2005 is not "flabergastingly" different than doubling every 18 months so if the Moore quote is correct then Moore was probably think in context of doubling every two years.  The doubling of IC performance in 18 months is actually House's Law; it appears the author of the Scientific American source article got his Laws mixed up.  Not sure what to do about the article given an apparent error in the source; right now I just left it alone since doubling every 18 months is flabbergasting when measured against a 24 month standard.  Tom94022 (talk) 19:38, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Numbers for Kryder's Law are Right, but 

message: "To reach 20 terabytes by 2020, starting in 2014, would require an implausibly high Kryder rate of better than 80% per year.[5]"
Given that there's now a 16TB SSD for sale in 2016... is Kryders law now not very much back in play?!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.35.155 (talk) 18:47, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coming back into play 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mark Kryder. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080928142930/http://www.ieeemagnetics.org/Newsletter/August00/index.html to http://www.ieeemagnetics.org/Newsletter/August00/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:42, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified