Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Gina Norman <gina AT vnet.net>]

WRT: info below -- yes!  This is the question I was trying to answer!  So,
to finish out my silly little brain exercise:

Using Bill's "mini-cassette" data capacity of 100K (chosen 'cause it's the
only number we have at the moment):

If I took my 470ish CDs and converted them to MP3s, they'd be 30 gig of
data (plus or minus some).  30 Gig = 32,212,257,420 bytes.  Divide that by
1,024 bytes in on K and you get 31,457,820 K.  Since each cassette
ostensibly holds 100K, divide 31,457,820 K by 100 and you get 314,572.8
cassettes.

So, to convert my 470 CDs to MP3s, then store those MP3s on 100 K
mini-cassettes, it would require 314,572 cassettes.

I think.  (Math is not one of my strongest suits)

That's the odd little data storage conundrum that my brain got stuck in
the other night.

Whew.

Thanks to all and sundry.  And *NO* I am NOT planning on doing this
(though I think I shall rip all my CDs onto my hard drive), I was just
curious about the magnitudes of technology coolness that have happened
since I first started messing with computers.

(I wonder how tall a stack of punch cards they'd be.  [Yes, I know that'd
depend entirely on the way the punch cards were writen])

Now to go on with my plans to "rock out" the alien masses.  Perhaps I'll
start by playing the new flaming lips album "yoshimi battles the pink
robots"... mmmmmmm.... insidious.

Best,

Gina



Bill:
> I also suspect that there was not a standard amount of data that a
> cassette would hold, since it would depend on the speed at which the
> system would convert data from digital to analog and back.

David:
> > My question is, was the tape storing the data bits digitally, or in an
> > analog form? I suspect the later. This would account for the
> > incredibly low density of the media for "data" versus music.

Bill:
> I do remember using my Dad's Sinclair ZX80 with a cassette tape drive
> back in the early 80s, so this question does bring back some memories. I
> couldn't find anything specific on Google in the 15 minutes I searched
> for specific data capacities, although I'm sure that by today's
> standards it ain't much. With my Dad's ZX80 setup you could use standard
> 90 Minute audio cassettes or those special 'computer cassettes' that
> Radio Shack sold. Those were about as long as a 5 minute audio tape and
> cost a lot more than those 90 Minute audio cassettes and supposedly were
> of much higher quality, and at the time I thought they were a royal
> rip-off. Well, according to several sites, there were so-called
> 'minitapes' that could hold about 100K of data, and one site claimed
> that a 90 Minute tape could hold approximately 100 pages of text. By
> today's standard that ain't much and it's several orders of magnitude
> less than the 650-680 MB that a CD-R will hold. Since audio cassette
> tape is an analog medium, I'm sure that there is a lot of overhead for
> error correction due to hissing and other noise problems to content
> with, which would eat into the data capacity.



~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
My brain seems to have a circuit-breaker-like mechanism that, when I get
confused and befuddled by the overwhelming monstrosities of my life,
causes a default to the simplest and most pleasant of thoughts.  Like
Marshmallow Peeps.  I *like* Marshmallow Peeps.

Gina Norman                                      And the only bit that
gina AT vnet.net (me personally)                    really matters:
ginanorm AT nortelnetworks.com (me at work)         http://users.vnet.net/gina
ginathelintqueen AT yahoo.com (me personally, again -- sick of me yet?  ;)
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~;)~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*