Western Digital (WDC) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Western Digital (WDC)

WDC 163.58

+0.2%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Jonathan Bird who wrote (8374)	1/3/1998 11:22:00 AM
From: T Bowl	Read Replies (1) of 11057

Aaah, but it's not a 3.5" platter... It's a 3.0" That's where the confusion is... And, that's not exactly the case anyway really(at least on a detailed level). It depends on how efficiently they use the area available on the platter. Take out the spindle and the landing zone wasted area etc.. . DDs with 2.1GB/platter have just slightly differing areal densities due to these losses. Can someone clear it up in a more elegant manner? If you work it out, a 2.1GB 3.5" has typically around 1.5Gb/in^2 areal density. That works out to about 11.5" of useable area on the platter. I'm trying to get a ballpark to see how far along the APM head that was used in the DD was. We commonly refer to the 2.1GB DD heads as 2.1GB heads, but you can't do that simply with the portfolio because of the 3.0" form factor. I should probably refer to it as a 1.5Gb/in^2 head... I'm trying to get that # for the APM head(which to my knowledge is the highest density MR head they've done to date) Hey Gus, GM, Lawrence, anyone. Can't someone shed some light here? Relate 2.5", 3.0", 3.5", 5.25" effective useable area. At least a ballpark. todd

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next