Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Danny Allen | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Good and amusing but as others point out, still room for improvement. Surely film came before the photo....and there were more before the flloppy....starting with punchcards and magnetic reels, tapes. Still, good effort though!
The constant change of units makes the chart much less informative than it could have been.
The same goes for using the same color for a minute of music, one photo (what size?) and one MB.
Plus the size of the Flash-drive compared to ... is that a CD, DVD or Blu-ray? One or two layers?
And at first glance it looks like a 2.5" 500GB HD only contains 50 GB. Same for 3.5" 2TB HD.
All because the 'headers' for these suddenly is the size of each unit/colored square, and not the to total capacity, as it is on the rest of the chart.
It's not enough to make a chart that looks nice. It has to present the information in a way that makes more sense than just listing the data.
back when we used floppies we had to be much more selective about what we were going to save. i, too, like that we can store anything and everything we'd ever need to, however i still think there was something to be said for just saving the essentials (even without this crazy amount of personal storage we'd still have ways of accessing any information we'd need; it just wouldn't be on our personal machines). i'll go so far as to say that massive personal data storage capabilities (like multi-terabyte hds) are the reason cloud computing is still only in its infancy.
@witeowl: Cloud computing sounds great to everyone who lives in a big developed area. But for those of us out in the sticks who have to deal with spotty wireless coverage, no land-based options for broadband, and the data caps of satellite the idea of relying on a data connection for our computing isn't the most pleasant prospect.
Then you've got the issue of your data being subject to someone else' mistakes. See the recent Sidekick debacle for a textbook example of why people want to avoid it.
I hate to be a negative Nancy, but they got the color coding wrong in the data... they used the red coloring for MB when they should have used the green for GB.
@PrestonBenz: yes. there are a few other inconsistencies with the way he labeled the data. sometimes the number above the media represents how much the colored blocks are worth, sometimes it represents the total storage of the thing. and with the cd, he just changed the red blocks to count as 100mb each. this man is a huge failure.
Well, what can I say? Simplicity sells.
There's one favorite Gizmodo company whose motto is exactly that.
And you know, the vast majority of computer users don't know much about dealing with wi-fi and servers, so I guess a good number would really pay extra just for the plug and play ability.
I'm only wondering how the one to one connection works... does each USB key + drive pair have an unique identification? Because if so, the signal interception argument makes sense... and is also great for users who don't know their way around configuring wireless routers and stuff...
1) Put wireless USB fob on your key ring
2) Pair it with your desktop
3) Pair it with your laptop
When you're at home, work on items on the USB fob. Save your work, grab your laptop, and go out. Get to work, open your laptop, and start working again. No need to disconnect and reconnect makes your data appear to almost be in the Cloud but without all the privacy concerns and need for constant internet connection. Drivers can be equipped to encrypt the data for local transmission, pairing codes, etc. etc.
The price is rather irrelevant since this is a 1st-gen product, eventually the prices will fall to what they are for USB fobs today, and when they do I will buy one. I'm guessing the dongle is a WUSB dongle since the majority of computers don't have it built-in yet... give it time.
@blash: You only have a 30 foot range. Unless you work from home, you aren't going to be able to access the drive from work, in which case you might as well just transfer the files to your laptop.
@ceilingFANBOY: I said put the wireless USB fob on your key ring. Do you not take your keys with you when you leave the house? Ergo your data comes with you wherever you go without going through the time needed to plug in the USB fob and transfer the files, since you're just working off the fob all the time.
Dunno why my explanation doesn't make sense to you... put 2 and 2 together please.
@blash: But you would still need the hard drive. If you have room for the hard drive, then you probably have room for a cable connecting your hard drive to your computer. That's all I'm saying. Anyway, with the hard drive being wireless, wouldn't that also mean that you would either have to plug in the hard drive to a wall outlet anyway, or take the risk of using a battery operated hard drive that could die in the middle of a file write? How is that any better than just connecting directly to your computer?
@ceilingFANBOY: Who's talking about a hard drive? Take a USB 16 GB flash memory key fob, put a WUSB chip and a LiOn battery on it, and THAT'S IT! Recharging comes from the once-a-week plugging in, induction charging... remember when you didn't have to recharge your dumb cellphone every day because it had a standby time of a month? Oh, but you forgot because you got a smartphone that goes through the whole battery in a day.
@blash: If you don't want to use a hard drive, which is what the article was talking about, and you are only using flash memory which fits on your keys, I don't really see any need for this to be wireless. It would be a lot quicker for the for the computer to connect via a USB plug and more reliable than a wireless connection. About the only use I could see for this is if you could link two or more computers to the same drive at the same time so that you could get sort of a Google Wave or Docs thing going on where multiple people can work on the same document at the same time.
@blash: The wireless technology itself is all I can find a use for. The actual implementation that is being discussed in this article is what I find fault with. Yes, I know that the first few generations of a technology may not necessarily live up to the expectations, but I feel that even with current technologies this could have been utilized in a better manner that would have better encouraged others to invest in R&D for this product. As it stands, it seems useless to the majority of people (if even people on a tech site look at it as useless, what do you think the average person is going to see in the product?). Had they instead marketed it as a tool for allowing multiple people to collaborate on a single document without the need of a network that could either be unreliable or a security risk, I feel they would have been on to something.
This is junk, and whoever buys it is a sucker, when one could get either a good USB (cabled) drive or a network drive. I can't see any situation whatsoever where this would be remotely useful compared to the alternatives
11/29/09
11/29/09
11/29/09
11/28/09
11/28/09
[en.wikipedia.org]
11/29/09
11/28/09
11/29/09
11/29/09
11/28/09
The same goes for using the same color for a minute of music, one photo (what size?) and one MB.
Plus the size of the Flash-drive compared to ... is that a CD, DVD or Blu-ray? One or two layers?
And at first glance it looks like a 2.5" 500GB HD only contains 50 GB. Same for 3.5" 2TB HD.
All because the 'headers' for these suddenly is the size of each unit/colored square, and not the to total capacity, as it is on the rest of the chart.
It's not enough to make a chart that looks nice. It has to present the information in a way that makes more sense than just listing the data.
11/28/09
11/28/09
Obviously, I need to clean out that closet more often.
11/28/09
11/28/09
11/28/09
11/28/09
11/28/09
Anything that you send back in time will blow the recipients minds.
11/28/09
11/28/09
11/28/09
11/29/09
Then you've got the issue of your data being subject to someone else' mistakes. See the recent Sidekick debacle for a textbook example of why people want to avoid it.
11/28/09
11/28/09
11/28/09
I've still got a copy of Windows 2.0 on 5.25" floppies :)
11/28/09
11/28/09
Fail!
11/28/09
11/28/09
11/19/09
There's one favorite Gizmodo company whose motto is exactly that.
And you know, the vast majority of computer users don't know much about dealing with wi-fi and servers, so I guess a good number would really pay extra just for the plug and play ability.
I'm only wondering how the one to one connection works... does each USB key + drive pair have an unique identification? Because if so, the signal interception argument makes sense... and is also great for users who don't know their way around configuring wireless routers and stuff...
11/19/09
1) Put wireless USB fob on your key ring
2) Pair it with your desktop
3) Pair it with your laptop
When you're at home, work on items on the USB fob. Save your work, grab your laptop, and go out. Get to work, open your laptop, and start working again. No need to disconnect and reconnect makes your data appear to almost be in the Cloud but without all the privacy concerns and need for constant internet connection. Drivers can be equipped to encrypt the data for local transmission, pairing codes, etc. etc.
The price is rather irrelevant since this is a 1st-gen product, eventually the prices will fall to what they are for USB fobs today, and when they do I will buy one. I'm guessing the dongle is a WUSB dongle since the majority of computers don't have it built-in yet... give it time.
11/19/09
11/19/09
Dunno why my explanation doesn't make sense to you... put 2 and 2 together please.
11/20/09
11/20/09
11/21/09
11/21/09
11/24/09
11/19/09