Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!decwrl!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!mimsy!mojo!SYSMGR@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU
From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Data Storage density questions
Message-ID: <0093A8B1.01A78520@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>
Date: 1 Aug 90 16:19:36 GMT
References: <AGLEW.90Jul30145243@oberon.crhc.uiuc.edu> <2684@network.ucsd.edu> <1990Jul31.200043.5189@nlm.nih.gov> <1990Jul31.233407.11825@portia.Stanford.EDU>,<10065@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Sender: news@eng.umd.edu (The News System)
Reply-To: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Organization: The U. of MD, CP, CAD lab
Lines: 9

In article <10065@pt.cs.cmu.edu>, lindsay@MATHOM.GANDALF.CS.CMU.EDU (Donald Lindsay) writes:

>With aluminum platters, the upper limit for RPM is set by the fact
>that high centrifugal forces are bad for the platter lifetime.  I
>suppose we could switch materials, but as David Hinds just pointed
>out, higher RPM makes it harder to get higher bits/inch.

Aluminum is out, glass (yes, glass) covered with something or another
was in. Better data density and cheaper medium, or something like that.