Seagate will bring a 16TB hard drive to market within 18 months

Shawn Knight

Posts: 15,282   +192
Staff member

Cloud-based storage is a popular alternative to maintaining local data backups or as part of a multi-location / off-site strategy, especially if you’re dealing with mission-critical data that’s irreplaceable. Others, however, prefer to keep their data within arm’s reach on high-capacity hard drives.

If you haven’t shopped around for hard drives in a while, you may be surprised at what’s out there. The largest 3.5-inch desktop hard drives currently available from Seagate, for example, offer a whopping 10TB of capacity for less than $500.

In the event that 10TB isn’t quite enough storage and a multi-drive setup isn’t ideal, you’ll be happy to hear that Seagate over the next 18 months plans to ship 14TB and 16TB drives. A 12TB HDD based on helium technology is currently undergoing testing and according to CEO Stephen Luczo, initial feedback is positive.

Most enthusiasts and even some PC manufacturers are now using solid state drives as their primary drive due to the fact that they’re much faster and more power-efficient. What’s more, because they have no moving parts, SSDs generate no noise and are much more durable.

That said, there’s still a sizable market for mechanical-based hard drives as they’re much cheaper than their flash-based counterparts. As such, you’ll typically find them bundled with cheaper manufactured computers or used as storage-only drives in desktops.

Luczo also noted that traditional hard drives are desirable in newer markets like surveillance where they can store large amounts of recorded data.

Seagate isn’t just going after larger-capacity hard drives. As PCWorld notes, the company is also working to increase the minimum capacity of hard drives used in manufactured PCs to 1TB.

Permalink to story.

 
I remember years ago backing up my system on 5.25 floppies ..... the end result filled 2 roller skate cases ..... LOL
Now, it will be more like the entire shoe store!
 
I want to. I mean I really want to, but every time I buy a Seagate HDD, it dies in less than 6 months.

The SSHD is still running after 2 years though.
 
What they really need to do is start getting the pricing down on the older drives... everyone does. Ever since that flood over 5 years ago prices have not gone down on drives like they used to. A 2 TB drive is still the same price as it was before the flood.
 
I remember years ago backing up my system on 5.25 floppies ..... the end result filled 2 roller skate cases ..... LOL
Now, it will be more like the entire shoe store!
I stll remember backing up my personal data to C60/C90 audio cassette tapes. Floppies and stiffies backup was bleeding edge stuff and eye bulging when introduced.
16TB??? I can't even fill up the 1TB HDD storage drive on my desktop, an external 320GB HDD USB drive does it for me... and my 100GB lifetime Google storage which I'm pushing my luck with by using an excessive 25MB.
 
This just in! You can now lose even more of your data in one hard drive failure!

Then stick to your smaller drives taking up more power and space.
2 of these could fit it my server replacing the 5 drives I currently have and would have allowed me to stay on SFF ITX.
 
My 8 bay NAS seems to always be hungry, I've been rolling in 8TB NAS drives which are around $295 and the best price point for me. As I'd need to add two 16TB drives to take advantage of all the space, price is very important. I'd really like to have a year where I didn't have to add drives and spend a fortune doing so.

I work with video for a living so my needs aren't really typical, but I think anyone interested should consider a cloud based backup like $60 Amazon unlimited or a 2nd drive for RAID as losing ALL your data on a single drive is not a good feeling.
 
Then stick to your smaller drives taking up more power and space.
2 of these could fit it my server replacing the 5 drives I currently have and would have allowed me to stay on SFF ITX.
I was making a joke about how unreliable Seagate drives are, but I can see that like most techies, you lack a sense of humor
 
Then stick to your smaller drives taking up more power and space.
2 of these could fit it my server replacing the 5 drives I currently have and would have allowed me to stay on SFF ITX.
I was making a joke about how unreliable Seagate drives are, but I can see that like most techies, you lack a sense of humor
It's not a lack in sense of humoUr, it's the techies fanboyism. If you buy a brand and it works for you, you can't be called a techie if you don't defend it with your life.

I find it interesting that people actually need this amount of space, probably the Diogenes syndrome on UHD movies or years of un-listened lossless quality music they have downloaded through life, that no one will ever revisit or actually watch but for some reason they deserve a magnetic space in their drives.
 
Who's not smart enough to implement a RAID configuration and a backup plan if they're getting drives this size?
For one I am a Seagate fan. I've been down that road and for some reason the drives I had was not reliable enough to put in a RAID configuration. Yet they seemed fine and still continue to function properly as independent drives.
 
Who's not smart enough to implement a RAID configuration and a backup plan if they're getting drives this size?

I'm glad you mentioned both RAID *and* backups. I have to keep saying to people, RAID is not a backup solution, it's a redundancy solution. That's literally what the R stands for. The simple reason is, a RAID will not prevent you from deleting all of your files, or ransomware from encrypting all of them, or your operating system from silently corrupting them.

That's what backups are for.
 
This just in! You can now lose even more of your data in one hard drive failure!
No, but for any peace of mind, you'll just have to RAID 5 them in groups of 16. That does of course, render any advantage a drive of such a high capacity might give you, completely worthless.
 
I'm glad you mentioned both RAID *and* backups. I have to keep saying to people, RAID is not a backup solution, it's a redundancy solution. That's literally what the R stands for. The simple reason is, a RAID will not prevent you from deleting all of your files, or ransomware from encrypting all of them, or your operating system from silently corrupting them.

That's what backups are for.
So to continue what I said in my previous post, you might need as many as another 16 16TB drives for backups... Given that RAID isn't a "backup solution", and balancing that with Seagate's current reliability reputation?
 
Are you seriously going to ignore people getting GTX1080 to play minecraft? You are overestimating people too much.
There are always a few out there, but most who will spend that much on something like this know about RAID.
 
Back