© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 1
Presented at the THIC Meeting at the STK Bldg 8 Auditorium, 1 StorageTek Dr, Louisville CO 80028
July 22 - 23, 2003
Future Directions for Recording Technologies
Mike LeonhardtStorageTek
1 StorageTek Dr., Louisville, CO 80028-2129Phone: 303.673.5627 FAX: 303.673.7967
E-mail: [email protected]
Agendagoal: update last year’s presentation
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 2
›Technology Progress–Areal Density Trends
›Economic Progress–Price Trends
›Technology/Product Highlights
›Conclusions
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 2012 2017 2022GA Year
Are
al D
ensi
ty (G
b/in
2 )
Parallel Track Longitudinal Tape
Narrow Track Longitudinal Tape
Helical Scan Tape
Magnetic Disk
Optical Disk
Superparamagnetic Effect
Probe Contact Area Viability
Atom Surface Density
Atom Level Storage
Probe
Volumetric
Optical
?
?
?
Tape Demos
Advanced Areal Density Trends - 2002
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 4
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 2012 2017 2022GA Year
Are
al D
ensi
ty (G
b/in2 )
Parallel Track Longitudinal Tape
Linear Tape
Helical Tape
Magnetic Disk
Optical Disk
Superparamagnetic Effect
Probe Contact Area Viability
Atom Surface Density
Atom Level Storage
Probe
Volumetric
Optical
?
?
?
Tape Demos
?
magnetic-basedAdvanced Areal Density Trends
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 5 M. Leonhardt 4-9-02
0.001
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
10000
100000
1000000
1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 2012 2017 2022GA Year
Are
al D
ensi
ty (G
b/in2 )
Parallel Track Longitudinal Tape
Linear Tape
Helical Tape
Magnetic Disk
Optical Disk
Superparamagnetic “Challenge”
Probe Contact Area Viability
Atom Surface Density
Atom Level Storage
Probe
Volumetric
Optical?
?
?
Tape Demos
?
magnetic-based
Advanced Areal Density Trends
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 6 M. Leonhardt 4-9-02
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 7 M. Leonhardt 4-9-02
To 50 Tb/in2
by 2012 ?To 50 Tb/in2
by 2012 ?
To 1 Tb/in2 ?“discrete media”
Multi-Tb/in2
option?
“discrete media”
Multi-Tb/in2
option?To 1 Tb/in2 ?
IBM Corp.
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 9
Storage Subsystem Price Trends(OEM price/equiv. unless otherwise noted; no capacity compression or utilization factors)
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
GA year
Pric
e (O
EM/In
tegr
ator
- $/
GB
)
Tape Drives
Tape Drives + 100 Tapes
Tape Media Only
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - performance
low
average
average
low
Performance Disk Drives (IDC)
Desktop Disk Drives (IDC)
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - capacity
Optical Disk Subsystems (IDC)
M. Leonhardt 1-22-02
2002
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 10
Storage Subsystem Price Trends(OEM price/equiv. unless otherwise noted; no capacity compression or utilization factors)
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
GA year
Pric
e (O
EM/In
tegr
ator
- $/
GB
)
Tape Drives
Tape Drives + 100 Tapes
Tape Media Only
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - performance
low
average
average
low
Performance Disk Drives (IDC)
Desktop Disk Drives (IDC)
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - capacity
Optical Disk Subsystems (IDC)
Disk Systems
M. Leonhardt 1-22-02
2002
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 11
Storage Subsystem Price Trends(OEM price/equiv. unless otherwise noted; no capacity compression or utilization factors)
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
GA year
Pric
e (O
EM/In
tegr
ator
- $/
GB
)
Tape Drives
Tape Drives + 100 Tapes
Tape Media Only
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - performance
low
average
average
low
Performance Disk Drives (IDC)
Desktop Disk Drives (IDC)
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - capacity
Optical Disk Subsystems (IDC)
Disk Systems
Tape Systems
M. Leonhardt 1-22-02
2002
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 12
Storage Subsystem Price Trends(OEM price/equiv. unless otherwise noted; no capacity compression or utilization factors)
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
GA year
Pric
e (O
EM/In
tegr
ator
- $/
GB
)
Tape Drives
Tape Drives + 100 Tapes
Tape Media Only
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - performance
low
average
average
low
Performance Disk Drives (IDC)
Desktop Disk Drives (IDC)
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - capacity
Optical Disk Subsystems (IDC)
Disk Systems
Tape Systems
Optical Disk
M. Leonhardt 1-22-02
2002
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 13
Storage Subsystem Price Trends(OEM price/equiv. unless otherwise noted; no capacity compression or utilization factors)
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
GA year
Pric
e (O
EM/In
tegr
ator
- $/
GB
)
Tape Drives
Tape Drives + 100 Tapes
Tape Media Only
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - performance
low
average
average
low
Performance Disk Drives (IDC)
Desktop Disk Drives (IDC)
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - capacity
Optical Disk Subsystems (IDC)
Disk Systems
Tape Systems
Optical Disk MEMS/Probe
Enhanced Optical Disk
Holographic
New Technology “Guess”
M. Leonhardt 1-22-02
2002
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 14
Storage Subsystem Price Trends(OEM price/equiv. unless otherwise noted; no capacity compression or utilization factors)
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
GA year
Pric
e (O
EM/In
tegr
ator
- $/
GB
)
Tape Drives
Tape Drives + 100 Tapes
Tape Media Only
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - performance
low
average
average
low
Performance Disk Drives (IDC)
Desktop Disk Drives (IDC)
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - capacity
Optical Disk Subsystems (IDC)
“ATA Disk” Systems
Disk Systems
Tape Systems
Magneto-optical Disk
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 15
Storage Subsystem Price Trends(OEM price/equiv. unless otherwise noted; no capacity compression or utilization factors)
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008
GA year
Pric
e (O
EM/In
tegr
ator
- $/
GB
)
Tape Drives
Tape Drives + 100 Tapes
Tape Media Only
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - performance
low
average
average
low
Performance Disk Drives (IDC)
Desktop Disk Drives (IDC)
Enterprise Class disk subsystem - capacity
Optical Disk Subsystems (IDC)
“ATA Disk” Systems
Disk Systems
Tape Systems
Magneto-optical Disk
Revised New Technology “Guess”MEMS/Probe
slip
Holographic
slip
slip
Enhanced optical disk
Magnetic Disk
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 17
› Technology leader (areal density)
› Aggressive storage density growth rate continues but more slowly–100+% CAGR to 60% or less CAGR predicted–Still a “spoiler” for other storage technologies
› Continued areal density progress influenced by superparamagnetic effect–New approaches to media, heads required, applied, in development
• Research claims up to 50 Tb/in2 !?
› Consumer products effect development, market, cost e.g. “ATA-class disk”
› ATA-class (low-cost) disk can support commercial data processing environment–Utilized in StorageTek’s “BladeStore” disk subsystem with fiber channel rates
M. Leonhardt 4-9-02
Magnetic Disk 2
› Disk drive product transitions underway–Interface connectivity, speed improvements -- ATA to SATA drive interfaces –Volume reduction -- 3-1/2” to 2-1/2” disks, form factors–New drive class -- Convergence between ATA-class and server-class disk drives
• Increased spin rate, reliability
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 18 M. Leonhardt 4-9-02
Magnetic Tape
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 19
› Technology follower - areal density trend lags disk–Increased defect tolerance–Uses higher media surface area to compete
› Continues to leverage magnetic disk technologies
› Opportunity for more aggressive operating points
› Media improvements are key to advancement
› 1TB cartridge capacity product roadmaps target 2005-2007 –Multi-TB’s planned
› Holding on to cost advantage over other storage subsystems types -- low end under pressure from alternatives
M. Leonhardt 4-9-02
Tape Vs. Disk -- “is tape dead?” -- no!reference: Information Storage Industry Consortium (INSIC) Tape Roadmap 2002
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 20
› 10 year outlook has tape maintaining its competitive position with disk (within a narrowed market)–Present capacity, data rate ratios can be maintained–Slow down in magnetic disk density advances factored in -- 60% CAGR–Continuing disk innovation assumed -- gets tougher 5-10 years out–“Investment in tape R&D required”
M. Leonhardt 4-9-02
282828Data Rate Ratio (Disk/Tape)3.33.33.3Capacity Ratio (Tape/Disk)
TB30.30.03Disk Drive Single Platter CapacityTB1010.1Tape Cartridge Capacity
Unit201120062001Year
Magnetic Tape - Disk Capacity Comparisonreference: 2002 NSIC Tape Roadmap
10
100
1000
10000
100000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Year
Cap
acity
(GB
) Tapedisk - 1 platter 3.5"disk - 2 platters 3.5"disk - 3 platters 3.5"disk - 4 platters 3.5"
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 21
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 22
Magnetic Tape - Disk Data Rate Comparisonreference: 2002 NSIC Tape Roadmap
10
100
1000
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012Year
Dat
a R
ate
(MB
/s)
Disk Drives
Tape Drives
› “Disk drive array on a chip” using nanostructures
› IBM’s “Millipede” takes the lead– Product specifics not known– Claims of 5 -10 GB potential in “Compact-Flash” module sized
unit– Magnetic disk densities and beyond
› 10x transaction rate of performance disk expected
› Between solid state memory and performance magnetic disk in the storage hierarchy
› Small size -- good volumetrics, low power
› Highly parallel, reliable RAID architecture
› Price ?? Availability ??
MEMS-Probe(micro electro-mechanical system)
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 23
MEMS-Probe 2
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 24
Electro
nics
TipArrays
MediaCoating on
Bottom Surface
1 cm
1 cm
2 mm
Electro
nics
Electro
nicsMedia
Sled
Probe Tip Pitch100µ x 100µ
Sled motion - 100µ x 100µ
media
proximalprobe
tip
XYZ movablesuspension
Move media inX or in X-Y
Move probe head inZ and Y orZ and fine Y
Large Array (>1000) of MEMS actuated Tips
Reliability (like RAID)High Data RateLow Access TimeLow Power
Optical Disk
› DVD products continue to create the majority of optical storage revenue–Expect low cost media to remain a major advantage
› Multiple optical formats persist–Create market confusion–Slow product acceptance
› Multiplying technologies (for capacity, data rate) have not been adopted–Consumer product requirements have been met without them–Product cost priorities
Optical Drives WW
Gartner
$275 M “other”
DVD/CD
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 25
Optical Disk 2
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 26
› Sony’s HD-TV DVD (3rd generation) video recorder announced 3/3/03–First device to use blue laser -- “Blu Ray” format–23 GB/disk recordable (re-writable) single layer
› Plasmon’s 30 GB “UDO” drive expected 3Q03– Leverages DVD-like blue laser technology– Commercially oriented– Roadmap to 120 GB
› Small form-factor blue laser drives in development -- Dataplay, others–~1” disks–Hand held electronics applications
Holographic
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 27
› Its potential:– Magnetic disk densities and beyond– Very low cost media -- $10/TB? -- possible removable, re-writable– High capacity (TB’s), – High data rate (100’s MB/s)– Ultra fast search potential (1 Gb/ns!?)
› Page organized -- unique architecture
› Media is key challenge, recent new types - typically using disk form-factor
› Critical component leverage from consumer product R&D
› Multiple drive, media developers– InPhase Technologies -- drive+media ~200 GB WORM– Aprilis --media ~200 GB WORM– 7 other companies world wide have significant holographic efforts
M. Leonhardt 7-29-02
Holographic 2disk form-factor media
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 28
InPhase Technology
Data beam image
InPhase Technologies
Conclusions “the buts…”
© Copyright 2003 Storage Technology Corporation (StorageTek) Page 30
› Magnetic recording is continuing to “cheat” the “limits” - but advancements are getting tougher
› Consumer product R&D benefits technology - but leveraging to the commercial sector is not necessarily easy or always appropriate
› Alternative technologies are closer than ever - but to date, they’ve achieved only limited traction
› We’re poised for change - watch this space!