265
Fujifilm pours $64 million into magnetic tape production as AI storage demand surges (www.techspot.com)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
44 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Needless to say, Fujifilm is citing generative AI and other AI-related services as major drivers behind the growing demand for magnetic tape

LTO-10 tapes were released earlier this year, providing a native capacity of 40 terabytes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 46 points 1 week ago (12 children)

Tape is not a new-old technology. Just a hidden tech only bigger companies utilize and the common citizen only comes into contct with as the IT tech of the company.
Cheapest most secure way of doing WORM backups.
S3 can do WORM as well but Tape can't be hacked ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 1 week ago (12 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 28 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Comeback? Tapes never went away. Most long term cold storage offerings are backed by tape

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (9 children)

    cloud backup for anything actually important is just so damn silly

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 week ago (8 children)

    It has it's uses.
    But as any backup solution: Not a singular.
    A proper backup concept has at least 3 copies on at least 2 different medias (types or amount matters only slightly) and one is not at the location of the original.

    Veeam (a backup vendor) has expanded on it with 3-2-1-1-0.
    1 = 1 Backup target is an immutable technology
    0 = 0 errors on the backup (which expects a validation)

    And I honestly like the idea.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (7 children)

    yea no thx

    especially if im paying for it

    ot that im surprised companies would get lazy/cheap

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    You pay either way.
    Up front or over a span of time..
    What matters is what you need from your storage.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    no i mean i would not pay for cloud storage for important stuff

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (4 children)

    Again: It depends.

    I would use it as a storage provider on which I would put an encrypted veracrypt drive (or whatevee is the good stuff).
    Or as an off-site storage provider for my backup.

    As a single atorage site? Nah. Too expensive for my home needs.
    For a business? If you can't afford to drop 1200€ for 3x 4TB SSDs to bring your data backups off-site? Pretty good offering.
    And the immutability is a plus as well.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (3 children)

    and like i said please tell me what said companies are

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (2 children)

    Our clients use S3 as an offsite storage. About 2-3TB (deduplicated is possible) in storage usually.
    Client is small and medium doctor offices.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (-1 replies)