<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Physical Storage vs. Digital Storage</title>
	<atom:link href="http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/</link>
	<description>The official blog of Mozy Online Backup</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:41:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Gonzalo Álvarez Marañón</title>
		<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/comment-page-2/#comment-1351</link>
		<dc:creator>Gonzalo Álvarez Marañón</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:29:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://70.32.88.217/?p=397#comment-1351</guid>
		<description>Very creative way of representing visually such vast amounts of data.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very creative way of representing visually such vast amounts of data.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Math</title>
		<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-1281</link>
		<dc:creator>Math</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:44:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://70.32.88.217/?p=397#comment-1281</guid>
		<description>The average of 60, 120, 180, 340, and 400 is 220. Could be the source of that number.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The average of 60, 120, 180, 340, and 400 is 220. Could be the source of that number.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anon</title>
		<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-1278</link>
		<dc:creator>Anon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 20:59:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://70.32.88.217/?p=397#comment-1278</guid>
		<description>The MacBook Pro is listed with &quot;entry-level&quot; in italics, as if to emphasize. Can we realize here that 1) No Apple product is entry level, 2) If we were going to pick an entry level computer from Apple, it would be the MacBook, not the MacBook Pro, 3) Most people in the country cannot afford a MacBook (much less a Pro), 4) Apple is NOT the industry leader, and does not attempt to be.

For a standalone institution such as Mozy, I am incredibly disappointed to see such an absurd support for Apple products.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The MacBook Pro is listed with &#8220;entry-level&#8221; in italics, as if to emphasize. Can we realize here that 1) No Apple product is entry level, 2) If we were going to pick an entry level computer from Apple, it would be the MacBook, not the MacBook Pro, 3) Most people in the country cannot afford a MacBook (much less a Pro), 4) Apple is NOT the industry leader, and does not attempt to be.</p>
<p>For a standalone institution such as Mozy, I am incredibly disappointed to see such an absurd support for Apple products.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: design</title>
		<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-1249</link>
		<dc:creator>design</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:42:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://70.32.88.217/?p=397#comment-1249</guid>
		<description>VHS = 3.5 hours? Never heard of a 210 min tape before. Only seen 60, 120, 180, 340 and 400 min tapes. Of course that is only blank tapes, pre-recorded stuff would be cut to the length of the movie.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>VHS = 3.5 hours? Never heard of a 210 min tape before. Only seen 60, 120, 180, 340 and 400 min tapes. Of course that is only blank tapes, pre-recorded stuff would be cut to the length of the movie.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: imbusy</title>
		<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-1224</link>
		<dc:creator>imbusy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:52:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://70.32.88.217/?p=397#comment-1224</guid>
		<description>Nothing about the recording quality was mentioned. In that case a Blu-ray disk is the same size as a DVD, instead of being able to store about 10 times more information. This sucked.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nothing about the recording quality was mentioned. In that case a Blu-ray disk is the same size as a DVD, instead of being able to store about 10 times more information. This sucked.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fionn</title>
		<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-1217</link>
		<dc:creator>fionn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 18:23:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://70.32.88.217/?p=397#comment-1217</guid>
		<description>Looking at the backups at Wikipedia -- they only take just over 3 Terrabytes.   That&#039;s a lot of current knowledge in a very small space.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looking at the backups at Wikipedia &#8212; they only take just over 3 Terrabytes.   That&#8217;s a lot of current knowledge in a very small space.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin H</title>
		<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-1212</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 21:31:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://70.32.88.217/?p=397#comment-1212</guid>
		<description>Now with zooming!

http://seadragon.com/view/ahg</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now with zooming!</p>
<p><a href="http://seadragon.com/view/ahg" rel="nofollow">http://seadragon.com/view/ahg</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hey</title>
		<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-1211</link>
		<dc:creator>hey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:50:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://70.32.88.217/?p=397#comment-1211</guid>
		<description>Nice giant ad for your site... 

the info is already free though</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice giant ad for your site&#8230; </p>
<p>the info is already free though</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jennifer Schaffner</title>
		<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-1210</link>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Schaffner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:46:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://70.32.88.217/?p=397#comment-1210</guid>
		<description>This is great. I suppose the hard part, though, is figuring out how much it will cost to preserve all the good digital data and migrate it forward. Work so far indicates that real digital preservation will cost staggering amounts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is great. I suppose the hard part, though, is figuring out how much it will cost to preserve all the good digital data and migrate it forward. Work so far indicates that real digital preservation will cost staggering amounts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://70.32.88.217/misc/physical-storage-vs-digital-storage/comment-page-1/#comment-1207</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:29:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://70.32.88.217/?p=397#comment-1207</guid>
		<description>Excellent chart. Gives a great visualization of what data actually is! 

As per the mac references, they&#039;re FINE! The whole objective is to give the average consumer a reference point. EVERYONE&#039;S heard of the iPod, it&#039;s not a big deal. WHO CARES?!

Maybe the PC people are just jealous that they don&#039;t hold a candle against Apple when it comes to consumer brand-name recognition.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent chart. Gives a great visualization of what data actually is! </p>
<p>As per the mac references, they&#8217;re FINE! The whole objective is to give the average consumer a reference point. EVERYONE&#8217;S heard of the iPod, it&#8217;s not a big deal. WHO CARES?!</p>
<p>Maybe the PC people are just jealous that they don&#8217;t hold a candle against Apple when it comes to consumer brand-name recognition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
