Jump to content

Talk:3D optical data storage: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Implementing WP:PIQA (Task 26)
 
(8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talkheader}}
{{talkheader}}
{{WikiProject Computing|class=b|importance=mid|hardware=true|hardware-importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|
{{WikiProject Computing|importance=mid|hardware=true|hardware-importance=mid}}
}}

== citation needed on top of page ==

It seems the citation needed is based on the existing link 31 about Mempile, and their initial 600 GB red-laser disc, that will initially cost $3000 and the media costing about $35-$60 and they'll 'eventually get to 1 TB' with red Laser, and possibly up to 5TB with blue laser. Of course, it was just a news article, so the '2010' deadline may come and pass with no drive from mempile, only time will tell if they can really mass produce this technology. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.191.101.81|66.191.101.81]] ([[User talk:66.191.101.81|talk]]) 20:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: Yes I agree: Anyone who reads the article to the bottom will find that this statement is thoroughly referenced via the "commercial" section. I don't think the tag is warranted. '''• [[User:TheBendster|TheBendster]]''' <small>([[User talk:TheBendster|talk]]) 15 March 2008, 19:03 (UTC)</small>

== Colossal Hoax ==

Go to colossalstorage.net they have multiple pages of the SAME RANDOM Technobabble about like 12 fictitious products and references to their patents but ROTFLOL those numbers that they haven't 'simply made up' point to say, for instance [http://www.google.com/patents?id=gWSBAAAAEBAJ&dq=7262893 Samsung's] patent they don't even HOLD despite referencing it as 'one of their patents' fraud Definitely doesn't belong on wikipedia, unless of course wikipedia is supposed to prevent investors from wasting good money after someones attempt to retire unknown in a foreign county. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Kesuki|Kesuki]] ([[User talk:Kesuki|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kesuki|contribs]]) 00:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
: I wouldn't describe Colossal Storage as a hoax. More likely, it's a guy who thinks he has a revolutionary idea, but doesn't quite understand the science properly and is so wrapped up in his own self-belief that he has become increasingly more deluded leading to what you see now. The problem here is that Wikipedia is not supposed to make such judgments without evidence (and contrary to what you might think, WP's purpose is not to protect potential investors). If you can find a good third-party source that gives a critical review of Colossal Storage, then that would allow us to be frank on this matter in the article. Otherwise, we have to stick to the sources available, which unfortunately are sympathetic (and unscholarly) news reports. '''• [[User:TheBendster|TheBendster]]''' <small>([[User talk:TheBendster|talk]]) 15 March 2008, 07:25 (UTC)</small>

== Please stop misrepresenting Call/Recall! ==

Several recent edits have caused disruption to this article by changing the part relating to Call/Recall in two respects:

(i) By adding large numbers of outdated and superfluous references, and

(ii) By misrepresenting the material in their publications.

'''Please stop!'''

With reference to (i), you will see that each company described in the article has 1-3 (usually 2) references. One is a link to its official website, and the other is the most recent published account of their technological position. There is no need for more than that unless it is required in order to properly get a full overview of the technology. In the case of Call/Recall, there is a very recent article in Nature Photonics that gives an excellent overview, so no other reference is necessary. The references that have been added add nothing - they are mostly a year old and based purely on marketing material rather than technological knowledge. Apart from the lack of need for these references, it also makes the article appear biased towards Call/Recall.

With reference to (ii), The Nature Photonics article is quite clear, and states:
:"''The storage capacity can be increased even further by using blue light. ... Before such a disk becomes commercially available, there are still some challenges to overcome. For example, the technology needs inexpensive high-NA lens systems, high-power short-pulse laser diodes and more sensitive recording media.''"

In this section, Call/Recall themselves point out that a feasible blue laser system would require the development of high-power, pulsed laser diodes, as well as a more sensitive medium. They do not state that they have already developed these "more sensitive" materials. They do claim to have "written" using a 405 nm diode laser, but this statement is meaningless without any further details (e.g. how long does it take to write a mark? 1 ns? 1 minute?) To anyone working in the field of nonlinear optics, this is all obvious - there is no existing material with a 2-photon cross-section even close to that required for rapid excitation by existing 405 nm laser diodes. There are also other details, for example, it is not mentioned in the reference that the recording of 1 TB occurred in October 2007, yet the editor insists on putting this date in the article. How do you know it took place in October 2007?

In order to try to come to an agreement, let's discuss the issues here. '''• [[User:TheBendster|TheBendster]]''' <small>([[User talk:TheBendster|talk]]) 10 July 2008, 12:25 (UTC)</small>


== How many years to a product? Vaporware Alert ==

This whole thing reeks like vaporware as everything on this page appears to be very experimental and immature as far as being ready to get boxed up and sold and probably at least 20years of further development ahead which by then something else will probably be the poster child for high capacity optical —Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/209.203.104.177|209.203.104.177]] ([[User talk:209.203.104.177|talk]]) 02:16, 9 September 2008 (UTC)<!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:Hi there. To be honest, I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting here. I do think you need to remember that this is an article about a '''technology''', and not about a consumer product from any specific company though (particularly since one doesn't exist). If you check the definition of [[vaporware]], you will see that it does not apply in this case. A technology doesn't need to be commercially developed for the science and engineering of the subject to be discussed in a Wikipedia article. There are many technologies in early stages of development that have articles ([[List_of_emerging_technologies|here, for example]]). If the lack of a commercially mature product stopped people from studying things, then we would never make any progress! If, on the other hand, you are suggesting that an estimation of required development time be added, then that's problematic since it would constitute [[Wikipedia:No_original_research|original research]] (unless you can find a good source, of course). By the way, 3D optical data storage is very much not the "poster child" of optical storage. If there is one, then it's more likely [[holographic data storage]]. '''• [[User:TheBendster|TheBendster]]''' <small>([[User talk:TheBendster|talk]]) 9 September 2008, 06:09 (UTC)</small>

== How many years to a product? Vaporware Alert ==

This whole thing reeks like vaporware! You've got to be kidding. It takes more than 2 photons to do data storage! <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Urntwrthy|Urntwrthy]] ([[User talk:Urntwrthy|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Urntwrthy|contribs]]) 21:35, 14 February 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Mempile ==

Mempile is no more, it seems (no website, refs all deadlink), so they need to be edited/removed from the page. I'll leave this to someone more interested in this page as I wouldn't want to remove important historical information (and think that mempile should still stay, but with past-tense rather than present) [[Special:Contributions/86.167.49.167|86.167.49.167]] ([[User talk:86.167.49.167|talk]]) 20:57, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

== External links modified ==

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on [[3D optical data storage]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=757879088 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080308232318/http://optics.caltech.edu/~goffbo/papers/EOE_volu.pdf to http://optics.caltech.edu/~goffbo/papers/EOE_volu.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061004055608/http://esto.nasa.gov/conferences/estc2004/papers/a8p1.pdf to http://esto.nasa.gov/conferences/estc2004/papers/a8p1.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070915213301/http://www.tfot.info:80/articles/56/mempile-terabyte-on-a-cd.html to http://www.tfot.info/articles/56/mempile-terabyte-on-a-cd.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}

Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 06:53, 2 January 2017 (UTC)


== Merger proposal ==
== Merger proposal ==

Latest revision as of 04:07, 19 January 2024

Merger proposal

[edit]

Formal request has been received to merge 5D DVD, Fluorescent Multilayer Disc and Digital Multilayer Disk into 3D optical data storage; dated: December 10, 2021. Pinging proposer @TizStriz: Discuss here. Richard3120 (talk) 19:13, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking and redirecting Fluorescent Multilayer Disc and Digital Multilayer Disk to here

[edit]

As I am uncomfortable with adding swathes of unsourced content about a particular commercial realisation to a page that was criticised in the past for its potential misuse as an advertising platform, I have blanked and redirected the pages instead. Interested editors can examine the page histories for the former content there. Felix QW (talk) 10:33, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:3D_optical_data_storage&oldid=1197030122"